Evaluating the “Optimal Competition Parenting Workshop” Using the RE-AIM Framework: A 4-Year Organizational-Level Intervention in British Junior Tennis

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to utilize the RE-AIM (i.e., reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework to evaluate the national-level scale-out of the Lawn Tennis Association’s “Optimal Competition Parenting Workshop” (OCPW) across a 4-year period. During 2018, 65 workshops were run across the United Kingdom, 1,043 parents registered, and 933 parents attended. Adopting a quasi-experimental design, multilevel analyses revealed significant increases in parents’ (n = 130) task goal orientation and competition tennis parenting efficacy, as well as significant decreases in ego goal orientation and unpleasant emotions. Children’s perceptions of both mother- and father-initiated ego-involving motivational climate and their own ego goal orientation significantly decreased across time. From 2019 to 2021, a further 64 workshops were delivered to 1,110 parents with no significant differences in parents’ satisfaction, enjoyment, instructor evaluation, or transfer intention over time when compared against workshop evaluations in 2018. Overall, the OCPW represents a well-received, practical, and effective brief intervention for enhancing parental involvement in junior tennis.

An integrative review of parent education approaches in sport: Considerations for program planning and evaluation

“…Thrower et al 25 found that the program implementation cost in 2018 was about £15 000, including consultancy fees, printing and promotion expenses, and tutor fees. As an important part of the programs' delivery, three programs conducted a pilot study, 11,25,36 and another two were pilot studies themselves. 14,33 Pilot studies are essential in providing information about the program's delivery and effectiveness and ensuring that any necessary issues are addressed prior to roll-out.…”

“…In 11 studies, programs have been predominantly attended/ completed by mothers. 11,[14][15][16]18,25,32,33,[35][36][37] Meanwhile, there was an example of reporting only the sports organizations. 38 There was a concern about reporting the age of the children/athletes corresponding to the parents participating in the program, which ranged from 5 to 19 years (especially between 13 and 15 years).…”

“…Among the suggestions for improvement, ideas included (a) adaptations for a digital model; (b) improvements in the structure of materials such as videos and quizzes; (c) increased moments for parents to exchange experiences; and (d) changes regarding the clarity of instruction in some tasks. 11,[14][15][16]25,32,35,37,42,43 The maintenance dimension is the only one in which the focal point is both the setting and individual level. According to Holtrop et al, 23 at the setting level, it is helpful to report whether the program is still ongoing poststudy and, if possible, adaptations were made.…”

“…*The article by Thrower et al 25 Note: Inclusion criteria were applied throughout the search process (i.e., identification and screening), whereas exclusion criteria were applied to assess the eligibility of the 35 articles identified as sports parent education interventions.…”

“…Shelton et al 46 ) and any aspects that may lead to dropout (i.e., the irrelevance of the content and lack of time to participate; Thrower et al 15 ). Among the studies that demonstrated dropout data, Hurley et al, 32 Thrower et al, 11,15 and Thrower et al 25 dedicated strategies to listening to parents who did not complete the program (using questionnaires, participant reflective diaries, forms for feedback after each workshop, comments and forum posts on online programs, and e-mails), demonstrating that gaining such information is possible. With such insights, researchers and practitioners will be better positioned to understand cultural and contextual changes that may be needed for program sites and members if they were to transfer to other settings.…”