To engage the young people as co-researchers, we integrated The FA Coaching Cycle Model, as defined by Mooniaruk (2019) with Rowen’s (1981) Cycle Model, as adapted by Ledwith (2015, pp.150 -155) for the Emancipatory Action Research (EAR) Process.  Each stage of the Coaching Cycle Model represented a stage in the EAR process. These integrated stages were built into a coaching strategy. This engaged the co-researchers in physical-cognitive action in exploring barriers to Higher Education. 

The research was facilitated by a FA registered Level 2 Coach, supported by undergraduate student volunteers who acted as ‘animatuers’. The use of football coaching had a dual purpose. Not only did it provide a tool kit for EAR, it also formed an act of mutuality and reciprocation, whereby we share our knowledge of football tactics with the young people in exchange for their knowledge around barriers to HE, (Ledwith 2015, pp150 – 155). Each stage contains several skill development tasks framed as prompts for dialogue around barriers to HE and from where within the community ecosystem they originated. This helps us get a more nuanced picture of the young people’s reality. 



Ethics Statement
The process follows Kemmis’ (2006) Principles of Sustainable Community Research. Therefore, it is sustainable by not being discursive, and that it is morally and socially inclusive, and personally sustainable in the sense that it does not cause physical, intellectual or emotional suffering because of the process or the outcomes. It is environmentally sustainable by avoiding excess consumption of materials and that any kit used is given to the local community at the end of the process, (Ledwith, 2015). Research is gathered at each stage of the Cycle Process by the Peer Researchers or ‘animateurs’. This is collected through dialogical responses to research focused coaching ‘role play games’ captured on film, and feedback questionnaires. The project and associated method are subject to the Ethics Panel review and approval (REF: PSYSOC 335) and safeguarding procedure. Consent is mandatory before any activity and specific photo consent is standard procedure before any co-researchers engage in activities that are recorded on film. Young people and parents are provided with a briefing sheet that outlines the purpose of the project and assurances that they can withdraw. Their data will be kept according to European Union General Data Protection Regulations. The EAR process, using Rowen’s (1981) Cycle Model is autoethnographic (Ledwith, 2015), focusing on stories rather than a data driven approach. Following a peer led codification process, the young people’s stories are examined through thematic analysis software to help identify generative themes. As some young people come from vulnerable minorities, we have decided not to provide a detailed breakdown of ethnicity and to discuss only generic outcomes. 
Eco-Social Mapping
Simple Eco-Social Mapping of Coded Dialogue Responses Across the Eco-System
Note. The co-researchers coded dialogue into core themes which they then organized by mapping across the distinct elements of the eco-system. Some themes are duplicated across several elements, but the map of responses shows the significance of the theme within an element. For example, Parental Responsibilities has been identified as a phenomenon of Space, but it has also been identified as of greater significance within Living, particularly by the female group. The chart shows the significance of each theme to the respective groups, and importantly where the groups see generative themes originating within their eco-system. This is their reality and by taking this study to a deeper level, it would be possible to compare ‘grassroots’ reality with that of privileged white (white privilege with power) institutional culture, thus identifying salient disconnections influencing structural inequalities.
  
This was achieved by a co-researcher led heuristic categorization of the coded dialogue into their definition of the eco-system elements: The Living (Habitus), Space and Place (Geo-social demographics), The Inanimate (Material and Institutional), and Time (the Socio- Political Context in which Incidents Occur). By reducing the data (pieces of glass) to ecological elements, a clearer picture emerged making it possible for co-researchers to identify the points at which the salient codes interact across their ecosystem,  It is the interactions between the elements of the community ecosystem that influence behaviors and choices at a point in time. However, simple heuristics based on a relatively small-scale localized sample, are sometimes criticized as lacking objective accuracy in producing approximations. Or as Hogarth (2012, Chap 12) implies, do ‘people find it hard to accept that simple decision rules can resolve seemingly complex problems’? The purpose here is not to create the optimal solution, should such exist, but to inform the practice knowledge base in making necessary social transformation in Higher Education (HE), (J. T. Richardson et al., 2020). By taking an ecological rationale perspective, the new data (knowledge) can be considered inter-subjectively according to the sets of ecological instances and attributes from which it is developed. Regarding Occam’s Principle: Pluralitas non est ponendasine necessitate - it is useless to complicate the model if there is no need.