PHED 1042 – PHYSICAL ACTIVITY TOWARDS HEALTH AND FITNESS

(Outdoor and Adventure Activities)

Second Article

Learning Through Adventure Education:The Role of an Authentic Process

By Jim Sibthorp, University of Utah, USA

The purpose of this study is threefold: (a) to explore what 18 adolescents learned while
participating in a three week long adventure program, (b) to examine how they learned
while on the program,and (c) to determine what program outcomes they considered
most applicable to their home environments, or which learning is “transferable”. To
address these purposes, 18 participants13–18 years old on 14 different three–week
long sail and dive training courses were interviewed.The study found that participants
learned both hard skills (e.g., sailing and diving) and life skills.They learned these skills
experientially, by observing and receiving feedback from others, by exposure to new
and different persons, and through the authenticity of needing to learn these skills
through the course design. Participants reported that the life skills were most likely to
be applicable after course completion in the home environment. Implications for
research and practice are discussed.

Adventure programs remain popular for recreational, educational, and therapeutic uses,
and a plethora of research supports the notion that participants can develop and grow
from program start to finish(e.g., Hattie, Marsh, Neill, & Richards, 1997). However, how
and why adventure programs are developmental and the long-term impacts of this
observed growth remain less clear. Without a more complete understanding of the
processes behind adventure based learning and the types oflearning that are most
applicable after program completion, designing optimal programs will remain an
enigmatic hit and miss proposition.Despite a number of calls for more process focused
research (Ewert, 1989; Hattie, et al., 1997;Henderson & Fox, 1994; Warner, 1999)
outcome oriented studies continue to dominate the recent published research literature
(Cross, 2002; Garst, Scheider, & Baker, 2001; Glass & Benshoff,2002; Kanters, Bristol,
& Attarian, 2002) and the process based publications that have surfaced,while offering
worthwhile counsel, remain largely ungrounded in research (McKenzie, 2000).Another
looming question for adventure educators involves the issue of learning transfer. Will
the learning that occurs on these adventure courses be applicable in other situations,
many of which are dissimilar from the original learning context? While a number of
theoretical articles have discussed the importance and value of learning transfer (Gass
& Preist, 1993; Gass, 1985), few studies have investigated the participant’s perceptions
of transferable learning.

One reason for this lack of research is the difficulty in documenting the holistic
adventure education process in a meaningful manner using traditional quantitative
measures and methods. Thus, the purpose of this study is threefold: (a) to explore what
18 adolescents learned while participating in a three week long adventure program, (b)
to examine how they learned while on the program, and(c) to determine what program
outcomes they considered most applicable to their home environments, or which
learning is “transferable”.

What Did Students Learn?1. They learned hard skills. Students indicated that they
learned how to dive, sail, and mastered the necessary skills to earn certifications in
these hard skills. An example of a typical response coded into this category is listed
below.Interviewer—What did you learn out of these three weeks?Chad, 18 year old boy
—I learned how to sail. I learned how to work the things on the boat. Kevin taught me
how to work the compressor so that I could check the air while he was working on other
things. Dropping the anchor. Raising the sails. Learning how to drive. Becoming
advanced open–water scuba certified.2. They learned life skills. They learned skills that
they could apply in many areas of their lives such as tolerance for others, interpersonal
skills, conflict resolution, or leadership.Two examples of a typical response coded into
this category are listed below.Interviewer—Can you give me a specific example of one
thing you learned and how you learned it?Vickie, 15 year old girl—I think the biggest
thing I learned about was everyone is different and this does not mean that they are
lower than you or less than you or anything. Just because people were from different
places or brought up different ways—just because some person is rude to you or some
person is shy or whatever—but you just have to be like “well, that is just how they are”
and deal with it.Interviewer—How did you feel about being leader?Todd, 14 year old
boy—I liked being leader. I learned that you can’t tell people to do stuff —or they are
not going to do it. You have to ask—or you have to do it all yourself—which was not
fun. Being a leader made me be a better under-leader. I’m not sure it made me a better
leader, but it made me a better follower.The first time I was leader I just told everyone to
do everything and they didn’t react to me at all. And the second time they were pretty
good about it.How Did Students Learn?1. They learned by doing, through the
experiential method. An example of a typical response follows. Interviewer—How do
you learn best?Jane, 14 year old girl—One-on one, with me and [staff]. I watch him do
it and then I do it. Say I was tying a knot or something, I would watch him do it and then
try it and I probably would not get it the first time.2. They learned through social
interaction and modeling. For example.Interviewer—…How did you feel about being
led?Molly—It was cool because everyone has different styles of leading. One person
would just yell at you and yell at you—do this or do that and another person would kind
of joke with you and get you to do it by making you laugh or something.People have
different methods of trying to get you to do work. It was kind of fun to see them all and
then like figure out which ones you were going to do.Journal of Adventure Education
and Outdoor Learning Vol 3(2), 2003
1523. They learned by getting to know and understand new and different people beyond
their traditional peer groups and by interacting with adolescents from different schools,
cliques,and geographic areas with various backgrounds. Two examples of quotes
coded into this theme are below.Interviewer—So you learned a lot about people?
(follow-up question)Grace, 15 year old girl—I learned a lot about how to interact with
certain kinds of people. I come from an all girl school—I call them cookie cutters, where
everyone is alike. Everything is the same. It gets very mundane—the same
(here)everyone is different. And I really, really liked that. I learned how to deal with
certain types of people. People who had attitudes that I had to work around. I hope
that I can apply that when I get home.Interviewer—What do you think you learned or
gained?Natalie, 16 year old girl—I learned a lot about myself, and how I interact with
other people. I was on a boat with 8 other people. Kind of captive for three weeks.
You learn a lot about yourself and how you relate to other people. How much you take
and how much you give. How much you depend on other people.I learned in general
how different people are. You have kids from military school and boarding school and
public school and private school. A different mix. A completely different mix than I am
used to.In contrast, one student, Samantha, a student who had come with a friend,
explains why she did not learn more about other people.Interviewer—Would it have
been better to not have your friend come with you Samantha, 18 year old girl—Yes, I
think it would have been better if we had both been of different experience [levels] and
then we would have been on different boats, because I really wish that I had made new
friends because I saw the other people really getting along in groups and I wasn’t really
as close to them. I kind of had a friend in the beginning so I sort of did not have to
make new friends.4. They learned because they were forced to learn by the authenticity
of the tasks. An example follows. Interviewer—What made it possible to learn these
things?(follow-up question)Natalie, 16 year old girl—Well, living on a boat makes it. We
were in such close quarters all the time. Then with the diving you have a buddy and
you are always checking on them. And the sailing was like a big thing where everybody
had a job and you were dependent on everyone to do their job to get the boat to
move.And that was a good thing. A backpacking trip is more about yourself. Here it is
more about a team thing. Like you have to be together with your team.5. They learned
because they were forced to learn by the isolation and spatial constraints.For
example.Interviewer—So, is that a good thing (referring to implication that it was
educational to be confined on a boat)?Learning Transferable Skills through Adventure
Education: The Role of an Authentic Process
153Grace, 15 year old girl—Yeah, at times. At times it is like overwhelming like Ahhh
-when you can’t escape or anything. But generally it was a good thing.Everyone has to
learn to deal with things. I just think it is good because we can’t really run away. If you
get in a fight with someone at school you can just be like“Oh, I hate them—just go
away” and just not talk to them. Here you are forced to make-up and work things
out.What Did Students Believe Would Transfer Home?1. The life skills, not the hard
skills, offered the greatest potential to transfer to the home environment. It was easier to
make a direct connection between these life skills and the home environment. Several
examples of quotes supporting this theme are below.Interviewer—What [that you
learned] do you think you might be more useful back home?Nicole, 16 year old female
—I think that the leadership stuff probably is—but I hate being a leader. I always hate
that—because I hate being like you do this,you do this. I think that more than the group
stuff, because the environment at home is still much different than a 45’ space. If there
is a problem, you can still walk away from it. Also, just talking things out with people on
the boat when you are mad at them. I think that helps at home as well... Just learning to
work with people and learning how everyone else functions. Understanding that
everyone has to get along. And that is worth a lot—and you do take it back.Learn to
work at home is easier than if you did not have any of that.Interviewer—I thought you
said earlier that the places were so different…Nicole—I think that they are, but I think
that when you learn to deal with something, even though you might not have to deal
with it at home, you might deal with it differently anyway because you learned a different
way to do it.Interviewer—Do you think it helped you develop as a leader?Betty, 17 year
old girl—It helped me communicate. Like hey, this is what has to be done, and it is
going to get done no matter what. I am going to camp right after this. I am a counselor
in training and this is exactly the type of thing I will need. I didn’t realize how much they
have in common.Interviewer—So you think you might be a little more open minded
about something like that next time?Edith, 15 year old girl—Yeah. Because now when I
think about it, I think it wa not as scary as I say, but if I did it again I would still be very
scared. I hate not having my regulator in my mouth. I would just be more open-
minded.Interviewer—Do you think you will be more open-minded? Or do you think you
should be more open-minded?Edith—I think in some cases I will be more open-minded.
But when it comes to something that I am maybe scared about doing, I’ll remember
maybe that I wan tit more than maybe I am scared. I should just think about it more. It
would have to be a similar situation so that I would be like “oh, I should be more open-
minded.”Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning Vol 3(2), 2003
154Summary and Discussion What was learned? The findings verified that during this
course, which was designed around sailing and scuba diving instruction, the students
learned to sail, to scuba dive, and about related boat living skills. However, this is
neither surprising nor very interesting; outdoor programs have long been based around
the premise of hard skill development and the efficacy of this learning is rarely
challenged. It is the application or transfer of course learning that is most often
questioned. The students also learned transferable life skills. There was support for
learning as it related to tolerance and appreciation of others and group leadership. The
most learned tasks were those relevant and necessary for course participation; this
applies to hard skills as well as those skills generally termed life skills.The heart of this
study, however, was on how the students learned on the adventure course. Not
surprisingly, students reported that they learned through active involvement—or by
“doing” the skills. This is inherent in the instruction on an experientially based program
and, while reassuring,offers little guidance for practice.The social environment was
considered essential and the importance of social learning was valued.The social
environment has long been considered an important aspect of adventure program
process(e.g., Luckner & Nadler, 1997; Walsh & Golin, 1976), and verbal feedback and
modeling, both peer-based coping models and instructor-based mastery models, are
widely accepted modes of efficacy development in skill-based activities (e.g., Bandura,
1997). Peer based modeling is also thought to offer exposure to different behavior
patterns that might allow the introduction to and subsequently the practice of different
behaviors. This peer modeling can foster both positive and negative life skill
development (Elias & Branden-Muller, 1994; Hodge & Danish, 1999). In this study,
students did seem to learn both hard (e.g., diving) and life (e.g., leadership) skills by
watching others succeed and fail and from verbal feedback by staff and peers.The idea
that diverse exposure can aid the development of life skills was reflected through the
underlying theme of the benefits of being “forced” to interact with group members from a
variety of backgrounds. Students associated with people who would not normally have
encountered in their home environments. This connection and increased understanding
seemed to offer a better appreciation of and tolerance for different personality types and
reduce the propensity to make snap judgments about others.The inherent properties of
the physical setting were also considered pedagogically valuable. The physical
environment, as posited by Walsh and Golins (1976), provided an authentic platform
with necessary tasks that required skill development. One prevalent example was the
inherent cooperation required to successfully sail the boat or scuba dive, another was
the role spatial constraints seemed to play on learning.Students mentioned that much of
their learning was due to the spatial constraints of a ship-board program. While some
attention has been given to the concept of group isolation (e.g., Leon, Kanfer,Huffman,
& Dupre, 1994), little is known about the spatial constraints unique to a sailing
program.While sail-based adventure programs are relatively common, only a few
studies have been done onsail training in adventure education (Crane, Hattie, &
Houghton, 1997; Gordon, Harcourt-Smith,Hay, & Priest, 1996; Kaly, 1999), and most of
these studies have looked at outcomes instead of Learning Transferable Skills through
Adventure Education: The Role of an Authentic Process
155targeting differences between sail-based and non-sail-based courses. The idea that
the forced spatial constraints both unique and authentic to sailing facilitate interpersonal
development is worthy of additional study.Since many adventure education programs
are not principally interested in whether or not a student can tie a knot once they leave
the course, it is the transferable skills learned during the course that are potentially
more relevant and valuable to the students after course completion. The interviews
clearly illustrated the potential application of life skills in the home environment and
confirmed the perception that ship-board living, sailing, and scuba diving skills have little
application once participants return home. However, the life skills they have learned,
from personal awareness to leadership to tolerance of others and patience, has
potential to transfer to school, work, and optimal functioning at home.While the idea of
learning transfer and teaching for transfer is a complex and controversial subject(cf.
McKeough, Lupart, & Marini, 1995), several authors have offered guidance on ways to
fosterlearning transfer that are directly applicable to adventure education. Campione,
Shapiro, and Brown(1995) have found that to foster transfer, learning environments
should include (a) students understanding that the program intent is to transfer learning
to another setting, (b) substantial dialogue amongst the instructors, students, and others
to allow for varying perspectives, (c) students continually explaining what they are doing
to others, (d) in depth analysis of whatever is being learned, and (e) students practicing
skills in a context where they will be applied. Most adventure education practitioners
will readily see the parallels between these proposed learning environment
characteristics and characteristics of a well designed outdoor/adventure education
program where students are continually being asked to engage in reflective discourse
and are practicing necessary living skills. In addition, Haskell (2001) elaborates on the
role of conscious, reflective practice.He makes a distinction between conscious
reflection, such as might occur in a structured debrief,and unconscious reflection, such
as might occur through simple repetition. “Simple repeated play,work, and learning
performances are not adequate practice situations” (Haskell, 2001, p. 179).Haskell also
posits that feedback generally facilitates practice and notes that perceived similarity is
important to foster transfer of learning from one situation to another. That is, if a student
sees what they are learning as similar to tasks they do in other environments, the
learning is more likely to be transferred (Marini & Genereux, 1995). Thus, perhaps it is
the role of adventure education programs seeking learning transfer to provide authentic
practice situations that are perceptually similar to life experiences and involve conscious
reflection.While some premises from the conceptual framework used to begin this study
remained relevant throughout, others were poorly supported by the interviews. Despite
some targeted interview questions, there was limited support for the educational value
of either the countries visited or the natural environment. The participants did not seem
to differentiate between “fun” and “forced”activities, as both were generally accepted as
authentic to the nature of the program. Also, while leadership roles were important, the
main focus was on the leading, teaching, and guiding of othersand not on the formal
goal setting and decision making process that most course instructors spentabout an
hour facilitating on any given day. It is possible, despite the intention of these goal-
setting sessions, that the students did not perceive these to be critical to the leadership
role. While such sessions may be valuable in other ways, such as creating a supportive
environment, their importance remains unclear.Journal of Adventure Education and
Outdoor Learning Vol 3(2), 2003
156Implications for Practice and Conclusions Three main implications for practice are
supported by the data.1. Social learning and modeling are critical. As posited by Walsh
and Golins (1976), learning through the co-constructed social environment remains a
primary source of learning on adventure programs.2. Diversity is good. Programs that
are designed to foster meaningful conversation between individuals from different
backgrounds can expand the appreciation and tolerance for others.3. Authenticity in
learning, provided through the physical environment and structure of the program, is
essential to participant growth. Perhaps the most important learning come snot from
success in learning hard skills or from “climbing the mountain” to increased self esteem,
but from the social interaction and the efficacy developed in dealing with the necessary
living tasks inherent in adventure settings. It is the adventure setting that makes the
tasks ” and the isolation authentic and creates an effective microcosm for practicing
valuable, and transferable, life skills.

REFERENCES:

Where do we go from here? As has been the trend in current outcome oriented
research (Garst, Scheider, & Baker, 2001; Glass & Bensh off, 2002; Kanters, Bristol, &
Attarian, 2002), it is time to move beyond global measures (such as self-esteem) to
more targeted outcomes that seem to be more consistent with a courses goals (e.g.,
leadership, tolerance for others, social skills). While the allure of increased self-esteem
is strong and a convincing argument for generalizability to everyday life is appealing,
more targeted multidimensional outcomes are necessary. This will,ultimately, require
the development of more customized, psychometrically valid, outcome measures.In
addition, future research efforts need to address process, transfer, and programmatic
variable such as spatial constraints. Continued examination of the adventure process
with both quantitative and qualitative methods will allow research to continue to inform
adventure based practice and program design.References Bandura, A. (1997). Self
efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.Campione, J.
C., Shapiro, A. M., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Forms of transfer in a community of
learners:Flexible learning and understanding. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, and A. Marini
(Eds.), Teachingfor transfer (pp. 35–68), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.Cross, R. (2002). The effects of an adventure education program on
perceptions of alienation and personalcontrol among at-risk adolescents. Journal of
Experiential Education, 25, 247–254.Crane, D., Hattie, J., & Houghton, S. (1997). Goal
setting and the adventure experience. Australian Journalof Psychology, 49 (1), 6–
13.Elias, M. J., & Branden-Muller, L. R. (1994). Social and life skills development during
the middle schoolyears: An emerging perspective. Middle School Journal, 1, 3–7.Ewert,
A. (1989). Outdoor adventure pursuits: Foundations, models, and theories. Columbus,
OH:Publishing Horizons, Inc.Garst, B., Scheider, I., & Baker, D. (2002). Outdoor
adventure program participation impacts on adolescentself-perception. Journal of
Experiential Education, 24, 41–49.Gass, M. & Priest, S. (1993). Using metaphors and
isomorphs to transfer learning in adventure education.Journal of Adventure Education
and Outdoor Leadership, 10, (4) 18–23.Learning Transferable Skills through Adventure
Education: The Role of an Authentic Process
157Gass, M. (1985). Programming the transfer of learning in adventure education.
Journal of ExperientialEducation, 8 (3), 18–24.Glass, J. S. & Benshoff, J. (2002).
Facilitating group cohesion among adolescents through challenge courseexperiences.
Journal of Experiential Education, 25, 268–277.Gilchrist, L. D., Schinke, S. P., &
Maxwell, J. S. (1987). Life skills counseling for preventing problems inadolescence.
Journal of social service research, 10, 73–84.Gordon, S. Harcourt-Smith, K., Hay, K., &
Priest, S. (1996). Case study of “Blue Watch” on STS Leeuwin.Journal of Adventure
Education and Outdoor Leadership, 13 (1), 4–7.Haskell, R. E. (2001). Transfer of
learning: Cognition, instruction, and reasoning. San Diego, CA:Academic Press.Hattie,
J., Marsh, H., Neill, J. T., Richards, G. (1997). Adventure education and Outward
Bound: Out-ofclass experiences that make a lasting difference. Review of Educational
Research, 67 (1), 43–48.Henderson, K. A. & Bialeschki, M. D. (2002). Evaluating leisure
services: Making enlightened decisions(2nd ed.) State College, PA:
Venture.Henderson, K., & Fox, K. (1994). Methods, measures, and madness:
Possibilities for outdoor educationresearch. In L. McAvoy, L. A. Stringer, and A. Ewert
(Eds.), Coalition for Education in theOutdoors Second Research Symposium
Proceedings (pp. 9–13). Cortland, NY.Hodge, K., & Danish, S. (1999). Promoting life
skills for adolescent males through sport. In A. Horne andM. Kiselica (Eds.), Handbook
of counseling boys and adolescent males. (pp. 55-71). London:Sage.Kaly, P. (1999).
Examining the effects of a ship-based adventure program on adolescent self-esteem
andego-identity development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Florida.Kanters, M., Bristol, D., & Attarian, A. (2002). The effects of outdoor experiential
training on perceptionsof college stress. Journal of Experiential Education, 25, 257–
367.Leon, G. R., Kanfer, R., Hoffman, R., & Dupre, L. (1994/Mar). Group processes and
the task effectivenessin a Soviet-American expedition team. Environment and Behavior,
26 (2), 149–165.Luckner, J. & Nadler, R. (1997). Processing the experience, (2nd ed.)
Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.Marini, A. & Genereux, R. (1995). The challenge of teaching
for transfer. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, andA. Marini (Eds.), Teaching for transfer (pp.
1–20), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.McKenzie, M. D. (2000). How are
adventure education program outcomes achieved: A review of theliterature. Australian
Journal of Outdoor Education, 5 (1), 19–28.McKeough, A., Lupart, J., & Marini, A.
(1995). Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization inlearning. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Miles, M., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data
analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Moote, G., & Wodarski, J. (1997). The acquisition of
life skills through adventure-based activities andprograms: A review of the literature.
Adolescence, 32 (125), 143–167.Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New
York: Harcourt.Walsh, V., & Golins, G. (1976). The exploration of the Outward Bound
process, Denver: Colorado OutwardBound Publications.Warner, A. (1999). Improving
program quality through evaluation. In J. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventureprogramming (pp.299—308). State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.