Reading Data
This evaluation was concentrated on review two set of research studies conducted before and after the Olympic Games in London 2012. The first study was performed by Selvanayagam et al. (2012) before the Olympics Games commenced. The study sought to know the influence of the games in the health sector by performing a content analysis on the areas covered by media during the pre-games in Newham. The research used data as reported in the media regarding the employees, increased activities and personal wellbeing. After the review of 351 articles that met the selection tactics were considered within the analysis (Oettler, 2014). The major proportion of articles supported the hosting of the Olympic Games within Newham whereas about 10 percent of the total articles warned of adverse effects. Their research informed that media report tended to change their orientation on the positivity of well-being and employment towards the Olympics dates (Morse, 2014). Although an increasing trend was noted on the physical activities, research showed that they were insignificant (p=0.146). The capabilities to employ people within the region elevated as the physical activities got promoted among the youth mentioned in the media. However, the media stations did not address the issues of health improved and promotion strategies within the region. In this respect, the researchers concluded that the impact of health reports increased towards the starting of the Games in London 2012. These impacts resorted in terms of physical activity of the people was positive. However, the real nature of impacts arising from the employment and physical activities were estimated. The research recommended progressive evaluation of the exact impacts on the population health as well as the health determinants and inequalities (George & Mawby, 2013; Fussey, 2013).
In another study performed during the London 2012 Olympics, Hall et al. (2015) assessed one of the most apparent issues that arose during the Games. Their research paid a particulate attention to the increasing number of STIs patients especially in London and Weymouth. Using GUMCAD, the researcher collected surveillance data from 33 GUM clinics in London and Weymouth between the year 2009 and 2012. By diagnosing patients of weekly basis, the researcher applied a linear regression models with mixed effect in order to estimate the influence of the games to personal health (Russell, 2016; Bryant, 2015). The nine weeks of Games proceeding were divided into sections incorporating the Paralympics, Olympics, pre, post, and inter games. The study also included the characters of patients visiting during the events. The research found that there were reduced attendances at about 5.6 percent whereas the STIs positive patients reduced by 4.8% where the character profiling were almost similar. This aspect implied that the current (2012) and past (2011) measurements were relatively equivalent at the same time of the years (Durbin, Hughes, & Mason, 2014; Butler, 2015). The researchers concluded that the management of the health clinics rendering series of sex issues was not affected. The information availed by these two studies shows different aims and agendas that relay distant outcomes (Thiel & Grabher, 2015).
Presenting Data
Emergency retention in England during the Olympics where steady rates were maintained (Bell & Gallimore, 2015)
=employment, =physical activity, =overall well-being
The employment, physical activities and wellbeing related to the media reports at different instances during the Olympics and Paralympics
STIs tests at different intervals before the Olympics ended
Using Survey
The purpose of this survey is to collect data aimed at assessing levels, frequency, sport type, and recreation that can be rendered to student who are still below the degree level of study. The questionnaire will comprise of open-ended and closed questions in order to allow you relay information that you can (Wilks, 2014). The first 20 questions have multiples choices where you can tick alongside the answer whereas the other 10 questions can be answered directly depending the personal answer available.
Multiple Choice Questions
Demographics
Where does your age lies within the provided choices?
13-18 yrs
19-24 yrs
25-30 yrs
30-35 yrs
35-40 yrs
40 and above
What is your best education qualification?
Ongoing Diploma
Diploma
Ongoing Degree
Degree
What is your sex?
Male
Female
What is your marital status?
Single
Married
Divorced
Separated
Complicated
Do you have a physical disability?
Yes
No
Activities
Have you ever participated in game competitions?
Yes
No
Which games have you been participating in for the last 1 year?
Football
Running
Handball
Stipple chase
Golf
Volleyball
Basketball
Tennis
Specify others ___________________
Are you adequately supported with resources to play as a student?
Yes
No
How often in a month do you visit you preferred game location to participate or practice?
Once
2 - 4
5 - 7
8 – 9
10- 12
12 and above
Would you like to improve you participation schedules in the future?
Yes
No
If yes, what thing prevents you from maximizing your practice time?
Do you think your learning institution offer enough time to practice in games?
Yes
No
If no, what do you think can be done to increase this time in your institution?
How do you spend your leisure time?
In game
Tours
Holidays
Studying
In work
No plans in most cases
Not sure
Would you advocate for games during your leisure?
Yes
No
Please write down your responses to the following questions.
Why do you think playing is vital in an educational institution that you study in?
What innovative ideas would you recommend to influence change for better playing?
What specific equipment does the gaming sectors you are involved in or would like to be involved need to operate efficient and allow you to proceed successfully?
What are the equipments you would need to facilitate a competitive completion in sports?
Which games would you like to be introduced in your school and why?
Thank you for participating in this information seeking study. We hope to publish our research result for you in the near future in order to help academic institutions in making deciding in the future.
This evaluation has availed various tactics applicable in developing insight of the new topics by collecting data and making information from it. In essence, these research strategies allow people to recreate ways in which knowledge can developed through evidence-based practices (Thiel & Grabher, 2015). For instance, the use of excel to create different version of analysis that depict distinct entity allow a person to determine the problems apparent in one study as well as the intent of another. The London 2012 Olympic depicted that the STIs were not immediate problems enhance a practice implementation to prevent infections (Durbin, Hughes, & Mason, 2014).
References
Bell, B., & Gallimore, K. (2015). Embracing the games? Leverage and legacy of London 2012 Olympics at the sub-regional level by means of strategic partnerships. Leisure Studies, 34(6), 720-741. doi:10.1080/02614367.2014.994553
Brown, G., Smith, A., & Assaker, G. (2016). Revisiting the host city: An empirical examination of sport involvement, place attachment, event satisfaction and spectator intentions at the London Olympics. Tourism Management, 55, 160-172. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2016.02.010
Bryant, C. G. (2015). National art and Britain made real: The London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony. National Identities, 17(3), 333-346. doi:10.1080/14608944.2014.990958
Butler, T. (2015). Phil Cohen 2013: On the Wrong Side of the Track? East London and the Post Olympics. London: Lawrence and Wishart. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research Int J Urban Regional, 39(1), 178-180. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12206_4
Durbin, K., Hughes, K., & Mason, S. (2014). London 2012 Olympics – design and town planning. Proceedings of the ICE - Urban Design and Planning, 167(1), 11-24. doi:10.1680/udap.12.00015
Fussey, P. (2013). Command, control and contestation: Negotiating security at the London 2012 Olympics. The Geographical Journal, 181(3), 212-223. doi:10.1111/geoj.12058
George, R., & Mawby, R. I. (2013). Security at the 2012 London Olympics: Spectators’ perceptions of London as a safe city. Secur J Security Journal, 28(1), 93-104. doi:10.1057/sj.2013.37
Hall, V., Charlett, A., Hughes, G., Brook, G., Maguire, H., Mercer, C. H., . . . Crook, P. (2015). Olympics and Paralympics 2012 mass gathering in London: Time-series analysis shows no increase in attendances at sexual health clinics. Sex Transm Infect Sexually Transmitted Infections, 91(8), 592-597. doi:10.1136/sextrans-2014-051826
Morse, R. (2014). The Hollow Crown:Shakespeare, the BBC, and the 2012 London Olympics. Linguaculture, 2014(1). doi:10.1515/lincu-2015-0015
Oettler, A. (2014). The London 2012 Olympics Opening Ceremony and Its Polyphonous Aftermath. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 39(3), 244-261. doi:10.1177/0193723514541281
Russell, H. (2016). London 2012 Olympics and the Power of the British Trade Unions: A Golden Opportunity? GLJ Global Labour Journal, 7(1). doi:10.15173/glj.v7i1.2786
Selvanayagam, M., Thompson, C., Taylor, S. J., Cummins, S., & Bourke, L. (2012). How might the London 2012 Olympics influence health and the determinants of health? Local newspaper analysis of pre-Games pathways and impacts. BMJ Open, 2(6), 592-597. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001791
Thiel, J., & Grabher, G. (2015). Crossing Boundaries: Exploring the London Olympics 2012 as a Field-Configuring Event. Industry and Innovation, 22(3), 229-249. doi:10.1080/13662716.2015.1033841
Wilks, L. (2014). The lived experience of London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games volunteers: A serious leisure perspective. Leisure Studies, 1-16. doi:10.1080/02614367.2014.993334
