An Exploratory Study in Non-Professional Football on the Perception of Stakeholders about the New Working Professional Profile of Sports Kinesiologist.
Gaetano RaiolaTiziana D'IsantoFrancesca D'EliaGaetano AltavillaPublished in: International journal of environmental research and public health (2022)
In Italy, recent amendments to Legislative Decree n. 36 of 28 February 2021, on sports work, may have made the application of the reform by stakeholders unclear, with the risk of generating further confusion among them. One of the most critical points concerns the possible equivalencies to the professional profile of the kinesiologist, which would be illegitimately recognized even for a different level of education, contrary to the requirements of the European qualification framework. The aim of the study was to understand the perceptions of stakeholders in the world of non-professional football regarding recent legislative provisions. A survey, divided into two sections, was administered to 112 presidents and 112 trainers of non-professional football associations of the province of Salerno. The first section presents five items common for both presidents and trainers, which seek to probe stakeholders' perceptions of the enjoyment, appropriateness, usefulness, and scientificity of kinesiologists. The second section presents five differentiated items. Validity and reliability were calculated. A chi-square analysis (χ 2 ) was performed to test the independence within and between-subjects (trainers and presidents) on their perceptions about the new working professional profile of sports kinesiologist. From the results, it was possible to appreciate a discordance of opinion among stakeholders. Although the majority of presidents and trainers are in favour of introducing such a professional profile ( p < 0.05), contradictions emerge concerning the contribution the new professional profile can make in practice ( p > 0.05). The perceptual contradictions found among stakeholders' responses demonstrate how the complexity of recent regulatory provisions regarding possible equivalencies to the title of kinesiologist have inevitably generated further confusion among stakeholders.