Project 4: Instrumentation

Adventure – what’s it worth?

As an engineer I deal with the precise; everything can be explained logically and measured scientifically.  As an outdoor adventure leader I deal in less tangible issues; get out in the hills it will make a man of you! 

The latter view is common amongst the outdoor community and I know from managing people before and after a period of adventurous activity that they are invariably enhanced by the intervention.  I’ve seen improvements in self confidence, appreciation of the team, communication, and determination, and have used this “fluffy” argument often when fighting for resources to deliver Adventurous Training in the Royal Navy.  However, all the time that little engineer in his overalls at the back of my mind says “prove it”, supporting Neill (2003) who argues for empirical evidence to better assess the effectiveness of a particular programme.  Neill (2011) lists some 26 methods of analyzing the effect of interventions or training programmes on either the individual or the group, and there are many more including subjective and objective combination measures notably in medicine (Harcourt et al, 2003) and sport.  However, few are designed specifically for adventurous activities and some aren’t even optimised so is it worth the effort?

When I’m selling expeditions in schools I offer a life changing opportunity for personal development but can’t really offer a cost-benefit analysis.  Hahn said

I know few boys who do not draw strength, and retrospectively also joy, from an arduous expedition carried out to a definite goal (1959, p.6). 

I think I need a bit more hard evidence to convince parents who are spending in excess of £3000 that their money will be well spent.

Bibliography:

Hahn, K (1959) ‘Dr. Kurt Hahn at the Forty-Eighth Annual Dinner of Old Centralians’, The Central: The Journal of Old Centralians, No. 119, pp. 3-8.

Harcourt, B.T., Wijesinha, M. & Harcourt, G.E. (2003) ‘Subjective and Objective Numerical Outcome Measure Assessment (SONOMA). A combined outcome measure tool: findings on a study of reliability’, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapy, vol. 26, issue 8, pp. 481-492.

Neill, J. (2011) Summaries of Instruments [online] available from: http://wilderdom.com/tools/ToolsSummaries.html [accessed 7/11/11].

Neill, J. T. (2003) ‘Reviewing and benchmarking adventure therapy outcomes: Applications of meta-analysis’, Journal of Experiential Education, vol. 25, issue 3, pp. 316-321.

Neill, J. T., Marsh, H. W., & Richards, G. E. (2001). The Life Effectiveness Questionnaire: Development and psychometrics. Sydney: University of Western Sydney.



Project 3: Self Esteem

Enhancement of personal self esteem: can it be optimised in the adventure environment? 

 

Most of my adventure facilitation experience has been with the military who are pre-disposed to higher self-esteem through training (Hammermeister et al (n.d.) and British Defence Doctrine (1997)), conditioning (although Owens’ research summarised by Patterson-Neubert (2004) suggests that could change if personnel are disaffected by operational experiences), gender (Josephs et al (1992)) as less than 10% of the Naval Service is female, and discipline (Mecca et al, (1989)). 

Most researchers believe self esteem is positively enhanced by adventurous activity, although they have yet to agree on how to measure it, and flag up two key issues regarding optimisation; length of intervention (Hattie et al 1997)), and an individual approach (Bunyan). 

The analysis undertaken by Hattie et al (1997) suggests that longer programmes produce the most positive enhancements.  As facilitators the length of intervention is normally determined for us but if a client really wants to enhance self-esteem, we have evidence to encourage that client to opt for a longer course.

In Chapter 3 of his Thesis, Bunyan states that facilitators need to treat each person as an individual and use a broad range of strategies.  I would argue that this approach is necessary for all training; learning styles vary as much as self-esteem, comfort zone, motivation etc. and we should always be wary of “sausage machine” teaching.  This is not, however, a trivial issue.  There are real challenges and our approach will be influenced amongst other things by the type of participant, their current self-esteem, and the intended outcomes.  Having said that, this is the only influence we have complete control over and to optimise the outcome we must treat everyone as an individual.

Bibliography:

Director of Joint Warfare (Ed) (1997) British Defence Doctrine, London: Caldwell Prince Ltd.

Hammermeister, J., Pickering, M.A., & Ohlson, C.J. (n.d.) Teaching Mental Skills for Self-Esteem Enhancement in a Military Healthcare Setting [online] available from: http://csfprep.army.mil/pdf/WTU_Self_Esteem_JIP.pdf [accessed 26/10/11].

Hattie, J., Marsh, H.W., Neill, J.T., & Richards, G.E., (1997) ‘Adventure Education and Outward Bound: Out-of-Class Experiences That Make a Lasting Difference’, Review of Educational Research, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 43-87.

Josephs, R.A., Markus, H.R., & Tafarodi, R.W. (1992) ‘Gender and Self Esteem’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 63, no.3, pp. 391 – 402.

Mecca, A.M., Smelser, N.J, & Vasconcellos, J. (eds.) (1989) The Social Importance of Self-Esteem, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Neill, J.T. (2008) The Impacts of Outdoor Education Programs Volume 1, Thesis, University of Western Sydney.

Patterson-Neubert, A. (2004) Professor: Military experience affects adolescents’ self-esteem [online] available from: http://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/2004/041104.Owens.Vietnam.html [accessed 26/10/11].

Project 2: Experiential Education

Learning by getting it wrong – safely!

  Transfer your weight back when telemarking

in deep powder, or you will faceplant!

Despite Niell’s definition (2005), Experiential Learning is commonly viewed as “learning from ones mistakes”.  This is valid to a certain extent but I would suggest that we can learn just as much from positive outcomes.  If we have an epic the experience is easier to relive (I can still vividly recall a close shave on Craig Meagaidh a few years ago), and failure invariably forces a rethink.  Throughout education we never look at why we got a particular question right, but we are actively encouraged to ask why we got it wrong.  So perhaps we need more focus on how we can learn from positive outcomes.

Kolb’s model for Experiential Learning (1975) is good but like most models, not entirely perfect.  Commentators have critiqued his theory from a number of perspectives but in my view Kolb doesn’t emphasise reflection strongly enough (Smith (2001) and Greenaway (2002)).  Reflection is the key process in experiential learning at all levels from schoolchildren to managers of business (Daudelin (1996)), particularly if we are to learn from positive outcomes.  In their book, Boud, Keogh and Walker (1994) quote the reflective process as:

·         Returning to experience

·         Attending to feelings

o   Utilizing positive feelings

o   Removing obstructing feelings

·         Re-evaluating experience (p. 27)

Kolb & Kolb (2005) argue that the learning process requires continual movement between reflection, action, feeling and thinking but can we all reflect objectively?  Although tempted to put on rose tinted glasses, this is an area where personal honesty is required.

In my work on expeditions and training courses I use Experiential Learning a lot and put great value on an honest and searching daily reflection where we examine both successes and failures of the day.  I also use regular informal collective or individual reflection.  Reflection then, is the key soft skill for me.

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1994) Reflection: turning experience into learning, Abingdon: Routledge.

Daudelin, M.W. (1996) ‘Learning from experience through reflection’, Organizational Dynamics, vol. 24, issue 3, pp. 36-48.  

Greenaway, R. (2002) Experiential Learning articles and critiques of David Kolb's theory, [online], available from: http://reviewing.co.uk/research/experiential.learning.htm#axzz1a6VhAbhG [accessed 7/10/11].

Keeton, M.T. Sheckley, B.G., & Griggs, J.K. (2002) Efficiency and effectiveness in higher education, Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

Kolb, A.Y. & Kolb, D.A. (2005) ‘Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education’, Academy of Management Learning & Education, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 193–212.

Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R.E. & Mainemelis, C. (1999) ‘Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions’, in Sternberg, R.J. & Zhang, L.F. (eds.) (2000) Perspectives on cognitive, learning, and thinking styles, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kolb. D. A. and Fry, R. (1975) 'Toward an applied theory of experiential learning’, in Cooper, C. (ed.) Theories of Group Process, London: John Wiley.

Niell, J. (2006) Experiential Learning & Experiential Education: Philosophy, theory, practice & resources [online], available from:  http://wilderdom.com/experiential/#Studying [accessed 4/10/11].

Smith, M. K. (2001) David A. Kolb on experiential learning, [online], available from: http://www.infed.org/b-explrn.htm [accessed 4/10/11].

Project 1: Literature Review

Comfort Zone: Model or metaphor?

I’m a Comfort Zone model fan.  Predominant in Military Adventurous Training and Adventure Therapy (Plummer, 2009) for injured Servicemen, the words used to roll off my tongue every time I wanted resources.  Brown’s 2008 articles got me thinking about how I’ve used the model and, importantly, prompted thoughts for the future.

His well researched argument is that stretching Comfort Zones may not maximise learning.  Indeed the trauma involved could even produce a negative outcome and he argues that peak learning requires trust and support to prevail; perhaps I need to create those conditions first.  He also argues that transfer is not a given.  I agree that many people cannot link abseiling with a job interview, and Carlson (1996) provides some additional reading on this issue. 

Brown’s key message though is that Comfort Zones are not “one size fits all” and this is supported by other such as Connolly (2003).  Every individual is different and this concept is expanded further by Fenton who proposes a wider activity range:  

The time has come for the adventure industry to promote positive learning paradigms through, for example, flow, in a broad range of activities, from meditative to physically rigorous, in order to increase self-awareness and self esteem. (2008, p. 90)

I already do but can I do more?  How do I ensure individual experiences for my entire group?  How do I measure peak learning?  Answering these questions present a challenge but I still believe the Comfort Zone framework is valid.  Perhaps the way ahead is Comfort Zone - doctrine not dogma.

     

Brown, M. (2008) ‘Comfort Zone: Model or metaphor?’, Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 3-12.

Brown, M. (2008) ‘The Comfort Zone: Reflection on a taken-for-granted model’, Ki Waho, Spring/Water edition, pp. 28-30.

Carlson, T. (1996) 'Adventure into education: Innovation in teaching in tertiary settings', Google Scholar, EBSCOhost, [accessed 20/9/2011].

Connolly, R. (2003) Pegasus NLP Newsletter [online], available from: http://www.nlp-now.co.uk [accessed 20/9/2011].

Fenton, L. (2008), 'Adventure Education and Csikszentmihalyi's Flow Theory: A Critical Analysis of Stress and Optimal Experience as Learning Tools', Abstracts from the Coalition for Education in the Outdoors Ninth Biennial Research Symposium, Indiana University, 11-13 Jan, USA: State University of New York at Cortland, pp 89-90.

Plummer, R. (2009) Outdoor Recreation: An Introduction, New York: Routledge.

Soft Skills Facilitation: A Personal Viewpoint

Over the years, and particularly recently, I have become very focussed on soft skills and rank delivery of soft skills very high in my priorities in the outdoors. 

The main reason is that I genuinely believe that, if tackled correctly, soft skills can be transferred.  It may not be obvious and a lot of the time our job is to explain or get the participants to consider how they can be transferred, but it can be done.  I’ve seen many examples in the military and also have personal experience of leading a month long expedition to Namibia where soft skills development was paramount.  In short, the participants may never need to abseil again but they will be required to step into the unknown and if we can help each individual develop coping strategies for such occasions then we are doing our job.

This brings me on to a key issue with soft skills transfer.  If you’ve got the participants for a month, there is time to make considerable inroads.  What if you’ve only got them for a week, or a day, or just an afternoon session?  Is there any point in delivering soft skills for such a short period?  I believe there is as it ensures that the soft skills tap remains dripping throughout their experience and subsequent experiences in the outdoors.  Taking Kurt Hahn slightly out of context, we need to spark the fire for others to keep alight.

Could the participants develop in the same way even if we don’t deliver any soft skills as suggested in Baillie’s concept from the 1960s of “letting the mountains speak for themselves”?  I think they probably would but it would be a slower process and arguably less constrained.  Essentially, we would have less control over the outcomes.  From personal experience, I’ve noticed that some participants need lots of my time whereas others seem to get it without a lot of interaction; this latter group seem to fit Baillie’s concept.

For me as part time a freelance leader, I’m in the fortunate position to pick and choose what I do.  I enjoy soft skills development and hence I’ve targeted that area to enhance my own job satisfaction.