Should sport and physical activity be a recognised career pathway?
The following comment from Matt Robinson, head of active leisure at Lifetime Training, was published in Leisure Opportunities magazine Issue 702 (24th January 2017):
“I think the notion of distilling the entire vocational system down into 15 technical routes is highly questionable and having Sport and Physical Activity omitted is a significant oversight.
“Technical routes have been described by ministers as those requiring a substantial body of ‘technical knowledge and practical skills’. To me this narrative embodies the nature of people delivering fitness instruction, personal training, GP referral and sports coaching activities. We can’t simply ignore these professions. They’re the ones delivering the governments targets of helping the population to become more active, and the potential consequences of not offering quality training opportunities could be potentially disastrous.
“Not being one of the sectors discussed in schools could mean certain roles and pathways become anonymous within the career and guidance system. This could lead to further skills and talent shortages taking the sector backwards at a time when we’ve made significant progress in bolstering professional standards.
“In fact, the plan separates out academic and technical options implying if you follow the technical route, you’re not academic and vice versa. Although the plans do state there will be a degree of free-flow between the two it doesn’t seem a focus and in truth the two options should be of equal standing.
“We must push for Sport and Physical Activity to be recognised as a technical pathway. The fact it has been overlooked reinforces the importance of CIMSPA and having a chartered institute with status recognised, trusted and understood by those external to our industry.”
Read the Leisure Opportunities article in full: Pp 10-11.