![]() |
If you take people to the mountains for their 'development' why
not use a vehicle for development rather than a vehicle for learning? |
![]() HELP |
OUTDOOR TOUR |
|
Mallory's brief answer to the journalist's question, 'Why do you wish to conquer Everest, Mr. Mallory?' is part of a long history of non-explanations about the appeal of challenging outdoor activities. The early alpinists in the nineteenth century were thought to be quite mad. Many of these pioneers realised the difficulty of providing convincing explanations of their eccentric pursuits, so they carried out scientific projects alongside their mountaineering. According to Walter Unsworth 1 this brought some 'respectability' to their seemingly 'mad' activities (while leaving the question 'Why climb?' unanswered).
When climbing a mountain is part of an educational or training programme the basic purpose is usually expressed as 'personal growth' or 'personal and social development'. There may also be additional and more specific purposes, but it is generally believed that 'development' (of some kind) is what you get from climbing a mountain. You can put this to the test. Spend the day on top of the Old Man of Coniston (or any other hill surrounded by outdoor centres), and ask passers-by why they're there. After the usual banter, and a little more probing, you will find many answers that end with 'development': personal development, group development, team development, management development etc. You will find few (if any) answers that mention 'learning'. If you were to investigate further, and were to ask to see the brochure that describes how their 'development' course works, you will probably quickly spot a learning cycle. If it happens to be Kolb's learning cycle (apparently still the most popular model) you might find that on their return from their 'concrete experience' these tired walkers will be doing some 'reflective observation', 'abstract conceptualisation', and 'active experimentation' - in that order, under the guidance of a group facilitator. If people go into the mountains for development of some kind, they would be far better equipped if the 'vehicle' they are using to enhance their experience is a vehicle for development rather than a vehicle for learning. So if a learning cycle represents the learning vehicle, then what does a development vehicle look like? Kolb has himself provided one answer by adding a 3-dimensional cone (representing development) on top of his better known 2-dimensional learning cycle. If climbing a mountain for 'development', then perhaps a developmental cone would be more useful than a learning cycle. A cone has the added merit that it actually looks like a mountain. The peak of the mountain and the peak of the cone can also both represent 'peak experience'. The term 'peak experience' is usually associated with the work of Abraham Maslow whose triangle resembles Kolb's cone, with the apex/summit/peak representing 'self-actualisation' (a term that sounds almost as clinical as Kolb's 'abstract conceptualisation'). Such jargonistic language is surely worlds apart from the words and the poetry that mountain tops inspire - such as when people see the rising dawn from their mountain top bivouac. If only Wordsworth had been Maslow's ghost writer!
|
|
For all the wordiness of theories of learning and development, it is
important for our practice to be guided by theory. We need something
a little more developed than 'because it's there' and something a
little more 'down to earth' than the academic jargon that threatens
to displace our intuitive and common sense understandings of how
development happens. My own favourite answer comes from a poem
'Children Learn What They Live'. It is more direct and to the point
than any model of learning and development.
It follows from this poem that it is important to get the nature of the experience right. According to the poem, development depends on people experiencing tolerance, encouragement, praise, fairness, security, approval, acceptance and friendship. But where do mountain experiences fit into this picture of how development happens? One conclusion might be that mountains are of little value unless these other experiences have already been encountered in good measure. Such an argument more or less follows Maslow's theory that basic needs must be met first. But I do not like this conclusion because it too readily leads to the view that the mountains should be reserved for the most able and confident, leaving the 'underachievers' and 'inexperienced' behind. Is there not a theory of development that encourages everyone to go to the mountain tops, rather than leaving it to an elite of experienced achievers to come back with tablets (or pieces) of stone, poems, photos, inspiration, etc.? Mountain journeys and other outdoor adventures have long been valued as a means of meeting the developmental need for new experiences. But the need for new experience is just one amongst many developmental needs. Other developmental needs might include: 3
The above list contains similar messages to those presented in the poem. Is it a list that makes sense on a mountain? With a little thought it can be seen how a mountain journey can offer opportunities for all the experiences listed. A mountain journey can also provide none of these experiences. Even worse, a mountain journey can provide the opposite of these experiences, and an overwhelming desire to become a couch potato. 'This doesn't happen in my groups!' you might say. But how do you know? What do you do to increase the chances that these kinds of experiences are enjoyed during a mountain trip (or any other kind of outdoor adventure)? What can you do to check whether some or all participants actually are experiencing what you hope they are experiencing? If it should happen that the outdoor adventure did not provide the broad range of experiences you hoped it would, what can you do to adjust the balance and extend the range of experiences? Perhaps you could use a review session to: How could you do this successfully? Some answers can be found in the articles and publications listed below. 4 But it would be wrong to focus entirely on the reviewing skills that can enhance the quality and effectiveness of adventure-based programmes. Design skills are equally important. Design should also be based on a suitable theory of development if the main purpose of the course is a developmental one. The above list of needs can provide a useful design template, but my own preference is to make creative use of a definition of personal growth from Giges and Rosenfeld. 5 This definition has a definite shape to it, with its mention of growth in four directions: upward, outward, inward and downward. We may each choose to balance these four directions in different ways, but in order to illustrate how this definition can be used as a design tool, I have provided three examples for each direction. |
upward
|
|||
inward
|
outward
|
||
downward
|
|
The four-directional definition of personal growth provided by Giges
and Rosenfeld continues in the following way:
'Personal growth involves increasing the range of perceptions, thoughts and feelings we experience, developing new ways to express them, and making choices and decisions about the direction in which we wish to move.'Both during activities and during reviews we can create opportunities for applying this definition in practical ways. If we simply rely on providing 'new experiences' and following 'learning cycles' or 'processing sequences', we may be doing very little to enhance the quality and effectiveness of courses that are intended to provide 'development'.
SummaryCourses that aim to provide 'development' of some kind are more likely to be effective if they are linked to a down to earth and usable theory of development. 'Learning cycles' are not theories of development: although they may have a useful but limited role even where the priority is development. Reviewing that is informed by a suitable theory of development makes it easier to monitor, enhance and evaluate the effectiveness of programmes that aim or claim to provide opportunities for development. Similarly, programme design and activity design can also be greatly improved by systematically applying suitable theories of development. Learning theory may add 'respectability' to adventure, but without effectively harnessing its power. If we encourage others to climb a mountain for their development, we owe it to them to base our practice on appropriate development theory, rather than basing it on the marginal relevance of a 'respectable' learning theory, or (worse still) basing it on a mind-your-own-business Mallory-style non-explanation such as 'Because it's good for you'. A snappy sound bite no more captures the essence of adventure than does the arcane and clinical jargon of learning theories. But the four arrows model suits me down to the ground, up to the clouds, etc.References(revised since original publication) 1. 'Because It's There' by Walt Unsworth2. 'Children Learn What They Live' from a poster issued by the Scottish Health Education Group and redesigned with permission from Parents Anonymous Inc. 3. This list of needs is drawn from the work of Maslow (1954), Lindgren (1956) and Kellmer-Pringle (1965). Similar needs have been identified by Carl Rogers (1969) as being critical needs to satisfy in order to create the 'freedom to learn'. Also see the author's 'Reviewing Adventures: Why and How?' (1996) (National Association for Outdoor Education) 4. for example: 'Creative Reviewing' (1989) by John Hunt and Penny Hitchin, Groundwork, Cumbria; 'Reviewing Adventure Activities' Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership 10(1); 'Playback: A Guide to Reviewing Activities' (1993) The Duke of Edinburgh's Award and the forthcoming 'Adventure Connexions' (National Association for Outdoor Education) 5. 'The Intensive Group Experience' (1976) by Burton Giges and Edward Rosenfeld, edited by Max Rosenbaum and Alvin Snadowsky, The Free Press, Collier Macmillan, p.87. 6. for example: books by Steve van Matre (Sunship Earth), Joseph Bharat Cornell (Sharing Nature With Children), Geoff Cooper (Russell House Publishing, 1998), and Jeanette Malone (Wild Adventures, AEE, 1998)
For a more recent article about the practical application of development theories, see Roger Greenaway's Reviewing for Development (2004) |
|
Interested in outdoor research?
Subscribe (for free) to the outdoor research discussion list at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/outres.html |
![]() HOME |
![]() HELP |