Session Information
18 SES 04 A, The Story of Icehearts Europe: An Ecosystemic Approach to Shaping the Wellbeing of Children and Young People through Sport (Symposium)
Symposium
Contribution
Led by the International Sport and Culture Association, the multi-million-euro EU4Health funded Icehearts Europe (https://www.icehearts.eu/) is a trisectoral, multistakeholder, multi-country project with 5 pilot and 14 associate countries, which aims to improve mental health and well-being of disadvantaged children and youth in Europe through a pan-European mentoring initiative using sport as a powerful conduit. It is inspired by the 25-year-old award-winning Finnish Icehearts model (Icehearts Finland), which has been designated as a model of best practice by the European Commission (2016, 2021). In Icehearts Europe, there are five pilot implementation countries (DGI in Denmark, SPIN in Estonia, Fútbol Más Espana in Spain, UISP (Italian Sport for All Association) in Italy and SUS (Sport Union of Slovenia) in Slovenia plus 14 associate countries. UCC led a Partnership-Mapping Insight Exercise in Tallinn, which comprised three key ‘insight’ activities, cross-comparing each pilot country’s Iceheart’s implementation ecosystem: (1) Journey Mapping Playshop; (2) World Café Partnership Mapping; and (3) Workshop Interviews with pilots. Data analysis comprised: (a) coding and (b) a two-phase Thematic analysis process. Findings identified six success factors for the implementations of Icehearts Europe in the five pilot countries: Prioritising mentor welfare; Supporting support network; conducting a strong Situational Analysis and Needs Assessment; Maintaining focus on the key Iceheart’s values; Not being afraid to localise and innovate; and intentional planning for sustainability of Icehearts Europe model. The proposed pilots have already diverged somewhat from the Finnish model. Whilst some countries have identified schools as ‘the’ or at least ‘a’ super stakeholder (as is the case in Finland), in others they are not seen as significant. Likewise, some envisage mentors supplying homework support or supervision (as in Finland), but most don’t consider it to be central. Perhaps the greatest divergence between Finnish and ‘European’ models is the issue of the financial sustainability of the proposed programmes, with few being very proactive on this.
References
Chambers, F.C., Sandford, R.A., Hooper, O.R. & Schaefer, L. (2023). Research with Children and Young People in Physical Education and Youth Sport. London: Routledge Hasso Plattner Institute. (2018) ‘The six phases of the Design Thinking process’ [online]. Retrieved on 3rd February 2019 from: https://hpi.de/en/school-of-design-thinking/design-thinking/background/design-thinking-process.html Lipkin, N. (2022). The Good, Bad and Ugly of Empathy. Forbes. Retrieved on 26th May 2024 from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicolelipkin/2022/03/08/the-good-bad-and-ugly-of-empathy/ Roos, J & Victor, B. (2018). How It All Began: The Origins Of LEGO® Serious Play®. International Journal of Management and Applied Research. 326-343. 10.18646/2056.54.18-025.
Update Modus of this Database
The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.