University | Contact | Consider PR3 | Consider PR1/ PR2 |
Alums | Entry Reqs |
Bath | (Adaptive Rowing) | Yes | Yes | AAA | |
Birmingham | Aidan Smith | Yes | Yes | ABB | |
Cambridge | Kate Hurst | Yes | Yes | Jan Helmich | AAA |
Durham | Wade Hall-Craggs | Yes | Maybe | Lily van den Broecke, Rose Linden | ABB |
Hartpury | Will King | Yes | Yes | Scott Jones, Georgia Walker |
2 A levels |
Leeds | Daniel Grant | Yes | Yes | Grace Clough | ABB |
Oxford Brookes | Henry Bailhache-Webb | Oliver Stanhope | 4 GSCE C | ||
Southampton | Oscar Robinson | Yes | Yes | ||
Tees |
Tom Horrocks | Yes | Yes | 2 A levels | |
U London | Hugo Gulliver | Yes | Maybe | James Fox (Brunel) Ben Marsden (RH) | AAB |
Worcester | James Wilton | Yes | Yes | Susannah Barnett | 4 GSCE C |
UK universities might not have the lucrative television contracts or the lavish patrons like the USA, but they do have a long tradition in the sport of rowing. A number of British uni’s have also been the training grounds for some of the country’s preeminent pararowers. Reaching out to the top 30 rowing schools (as I did with the USA research), I’ve identified a number who appear to be receptive to supporting pararowers in their programme. As with the USA post, I intend to keep the table above update as I get additional information about other programmes.
Two universities stood out – Leeds and Birmingham – being especially supportive of the prospect of including pararowers. I’ve also included two universities – Oxford Brookes and Cambridge – who did not get back to me, but do have prominent pararower alums so they are not completely alien to the notion.
For further reference, an explanation to each of the fields in the table at table is as follows:
- Contact = The individual who helped me with information (good number of folks never replied to my email so having someone responsive to an enquiry is a critical first step).
- Consider PR3 = The question was “Would you consider supporting a visually impaired rower (eg. guidance, stroke seat position possibly, VI accessibility) in one of your conventional crews if they met the talent bar?”. Especially given that the question is a bit vague and speculative, the answers tended to bit similarly broad. Roughly, they fell into two categories: (1) “Yes” they would consider a pararower (with various considerations affecting their ability to integrate them), and (2) “Maybe” they would consider a pararower (with generally more prominent considerations constraining their ability to integrate them, usually limited resources in the rowing programme)
- Consider PR1/PR2 = The questions was “Would you consider supporting an individual Pararower training for international competition (eg. World Rowing Cup, World Championships, Paralympics) training with specialized equipment in a single (eg. individual coaching and safety support possibly with volunteers from the school such as retired or interested rowers)?” Especially given that the question is a bit vague and speculative, the answers tended to bit similarly broad. Roughly, they fell into two categories: (1) “Yes” they would consider a pararower (with various considerations affecting their ability to integrate them), and (2) “Maybe” they would consider a pararower (with generally more prominent considerations constraining their ability to integrate them, usually limited resources in the rowing programme)
- Alums = The names of any alum pararowers they did have in their programme (details on these individuals can be found with Google quite readily). Obviously, a programme that has had experience with pararowers will have proven receptivity as well as useful experience.
Pingback: National Junior Indoor Rowing Championships 2020 – Adaptive Rowing UK