This research proposal investigates risk assessment practices within UK school physical education (PE) departments, with particular attention to how PE managers and heads of department train staff to mitigate injury-related litigation. The paper contextualizes risk assessment broadly — including computerized process hazard analysis tools and the analytical distinction between risk assessment and risk management — before applying these concepts to the PE setting. It argues that growing student populations, the importance of physical activity for health, and a rising litigation culture in the UK make systematic risk assessment increasingly urgent. A mixed-methods questionnaire approach is proposed to survey approximately 70 independent schools, with the goal of identifying a best-practices model for safe PE programme delivery.
The paper demonstrates effective use of scope framing: it opens with a broad, domain-general treatment of risk assessment (including software tools and information security) and progressively narrows to the specific context of UK PE departments. This funnel structure is a standard research-proposal technique that situates the study within established scholarship before introducing the novel contribution.
The proposal follows a conventional research-proposal format: background literature review → statement of purpose → multi-point justification of importance → rationale → methodology → appendix. Each section builds logically on the last. The literature review covers both technical risk assessment frameworks and physical activity health research, reflecting the study's interdisciplinary focus. The methodology section is concise but explains instrument choice, sampling strategy, and planned analysis tools, giving readers enough detail to evaluate feasibility.
This research proposal examines the rise of a litigation culture in the UK and how school physical education (PE) departments are equipped to cope with it, particularly in light of professional training provided by management to PE teachers. Because risk assessment training is a management-based programme, the emphasis lies on how the PE manager or head of department manages the risk assessment process.
Risk assessment has reached a new level of importance in the Information Age. The growth of sophisticated networked information systems and distributed computing has created a potentially dangerous environment for private and public organizations. "Critical data — such as from trade secrets, proprietary information, troop movements, sensitive medical records, and financial transactions — flows through these systems" (Hamilton, 1999, p. 69). Consequently, organizations are becoming increasingly concerned with potential exposure and are looking for ways to evaluate their security profile.
Risk assessment software applications allow researchers, managers, and others to perform "what if" analyses of the value of their information and various threats and vulnerabilities (Hyatt, 2002). Different businesses will usually require different types of risk assessment analyses. For example, most industrial applications will probably involve a specific need to identify potential safety hazards in the workplace, whereas the banking industry may require a higher level of sophistication in examining its financial transactions (Hyatt, 2002).
Computerized software tools are assuming increasing significance in conducting process hazards analyses (PHAs) for risk assessment purposes (Hyatt, 2002). These applications have the potential to offer better online presentations and performance to risk assessment teams, as well as providing better documentation and tracking. The chances of something being missed or slipping through the cracks are greatly reduced using this approach.
Early computer-based software for performing risk assessments in an industrial setting was discussed by Gordon et al. in the early 1990s; however, the use of computer software for risk assessment in industrial applications differs from others in that attention must be paid to making it acceptable not only to the immediate user but also for assisting team interaction and performance. There are unique opportunities for the creation of more powerful interfaces in order to maximize the information communication process in these different settings. "The key, then, is to cut through the confusion to find the applications that will work best with your company" (Schmidt, 2003, p. 17).
However, risk assessment is not a purely scientific enterprise (McGarity, 2003). Rather, it is an analytical process that employs "available scientific information on the properties of an agent and its effects in biological systems to provide an evaluation of the potential for harm as a consequence of environmental exposure to the agent" (McGarity, 2003, p. 155). According to McGarity, risk assessment should be differentiated from risk management, which consists of "the actions individuals and regulatory agencies take to reduce or eliminate the risks human beings encounter" (McGarity, 2003, p. 156). The risk assessment process is becoming increasingly important, but it has assumed enormously complex dimensions at the same time.
According to Caroline B. Hamilton, risk assessment involves gathering information about the assets of organizations, including all information assets such as networks, data centers, computers, hardware, software, and data. "It also includes physical assets, such as personnel, network users, the physical facility, and dozens of other organizational resources. The risk-assessment process also includes finding sources for comprehensive threat data, which may be data gathered from internal sources" (Hamilton, 1999, p. 69). Those sources include incident report data, intrusion-detection software, and threat data such as crime statistics, industry standards, benchmarking data, and historical records. Vulnerability data is then matched to determine what combination of asset, threat, and vulnerability could trigger a potential loss; at this point, decisions are made about what safeguards can be implemented to mitigate or eliminate that potential loss (Hamilton, 1999).
According to Nigel Hyatt's "The Advantage of Using Computer Software for Process Hazard Analysis," no software can be successful unless it addresses and meets the requirements of users' end goals. In the case of software for process hazard analysis, these requirements focus on the handling of information in a number of ways: recording; editing; recalling and copying; access to stored information (libraries); updating; transference (exporting and importing); saving; deleting; printing and presentation; and selection and tracking. While several of these functions may be undertaken manually, the task becomes onerous unless computerization is adopted.
Computerization has three major benefits in addition to providing functional aids: consistency of analysis; access to stored data and information on an as-needed basis; and documentation of results that ensures meaningful records are created. Although the performance of good process hazards analyses should not be restricted by time considerations, software can greatly improve productivity and efficiency by sharpening focus, saving time, and improving system integrity — all of which can lead to significant cost reductions.
Most industrial risk analyses are, by their nature, qualitative in form. The introduction of risk matrices is an attempt to add some partial quantification. "Because risk is defined as the product of consequence (severity of an incident) and frequency (likelihood), their estimation provides some measure of risk, and therefore the degree of importance" (Hyatt, 2002, p. 137). This type of data is particularly well suited to computerization to assist in identifying the components and categories afforded by risk matrices. According to Hyatt, these can take the form of a pre-designated matrix categorization or a user-defined matrix (3×3 up to 10×10) (Hyatt, 2002).
The purpose of this research project is to investigate the status of risk assessment in UK physical education programmes in order to identify a best-practices model that can be applied in a variety of settings to help mitigate the impact of injuries and the concomitant litigation, using a thoughtful risk assessment approach.
This study is important for three primary reasons: (1) there are going to be more students in the UK staying in school longer in the future; (2) the importance of being physically active and providing a safe environment in which physical education activities are promoted cannot be overstated; and (3) the UK is becoming increasingly litigious concerning tortious personal injuries.
Regarding the first point, according to Cetron and Davies (2001), the under-20 cohort is remaining in school longer and taking longer to enter the workforce than before. "The age at which at least half of young Europeans either have a job or are seeking one has risen from 18 in 1987 to 20 in 1995. EU-wide, 59% of all 18-year-olds in 1995 were exclusively in education or training. The number varied from 27% in the United Kingdom to 88% in Belgium" (Cetron & Davies, 2001, p. 28).
To the extent that physical education teachers can become better informed and trained in the administration of efficacious PE curricula — in a manner that takes into account the findings of previous risk assessment studies — is the extent to which the school will likely avoid costly litigation and the negative public relations associated with the process. More importantly, ensuring a safe physical education environment that is conducive to physical fitness is a fundamental responsibility of PE teachers everywhere.
A relatively consistent finding in the education literature is that curriculum decisions, instruction, and student learning are all affected by the beliefs, attitudes, and values of educators (Kulinna & Silverman, 2000). Even though professionals in physical education, health, and leisure services advocate the benefits of regular participation in leisure time physical activity, they differ in beliefs, goals, and process. It is therefore important to understand to what extent these three related yet different programmes influence the attitudes, behaviors, and participatory levels of students in physical education programmes.
Years of research evidence supporting the relationship between good health and participation in physical activity were recently summarized and published in the United States Surgeon General's Report on Physical Activity and Health (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 1996). The Surgeon General recommended daily participation in physical activity for maximum health benefits because inactivity has been found to be significantly related to coronary artery disease (Araki, Huddleston, & Mertesdorf, 2002).
The Surgeon General's Report (CDC, 1996) indicates that only 40% of adults are physically active, and only 15% participate in leisure time physical activity at the minimum frequency and duration — three times a week for at least 20 minutes — recommended by the American College of Sports Medicine (1991) for maximum health benefits. Furthermore, only 50% of people aged 12–21 engage in regular leisure time physical activity at the recommended frequency and duration. Some researchers report even lower participation levels and exercise intensities. Activity choices most frequently reported by the physically active, regardless of exercise intensity, include running, jogging, or walking; weight lifting; aerobic exercise; bicycling; and swimming or other water activities (Araki, Huddleston, & Mertesdorf, 2002).
One way to better understand participation behavior is to identify individuals' attitudes about or reasons for involvement in physical activities. According to the body of evidence to date, one of the main reasons for university students' and young adults' leisure time physical activity involvement is health and fitness. Other reasons cited include social interaction, competition, and relaxation. Regardless of the reason for involvement, Brynteson and Adams emphasize that participation levels nation-wide are low. Some researchers maintain that university programmes designed to promote participation in leisure time physical activity and positive attitudes toward activity can be effective in helping young adults adopt a physically active lifestyle (Brynteson & Adams, 1993).
Post-secondary programmes specifically designed to educate pre-professionals in fields that either directly or indirectly promote the benefits of involvement in leisure time physical activity also represent a key method for reaching the public with the participation message. More specifically, the manner in which university educators in the three disciplines of physical education, health, and leisure services communicate their participation message to students may determine how effectively and safely those students participate in a physical education regimen (Araki, Huddleston, & Mertesdorf, 2002).
Professionals in the field of physical education, for example, attempt to contribute to the continuous educational process of individuals — covering emotional, social, and physical development — through the medium of human movement. Post-secondary physical education programmes are therefore designed to educate young professionals in the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed for teaching and promoting movement activities. Health professionals primarily focus on change processes that affect general well-being; more specifically, health specialists are involved in teaching, advocating, and administering health change programmes at the individual, organizational, or community level (Simons-Morton, Greene, & Gottlieb, 1995). As such, health professionals prepare students to engage in PE activities and to encourage positive individual behavior change (Araki, Huddleston, & Mertesdorf, 2002).
You’re 64% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.