Theories and Concept

Self-esteem

Self-esteem is a term which almost everyone is familiar with, however, many may not actually fully understand it. The first definition of self-esteem was given by William James (1892), who said,

“…feelings of self-worth come from the successes an individual achieves tempered by what the person had expected to achieve.”

James (1892) model,                     Self-esteem = Success 

                                                                     Pretensions

This model suggests that the development of self-esteem will be through personal success or by pretensions. In more recent years self-esteem has been defined by many other researchers, such as, Rosenberg (1965), who said self-esteem was a positive or negative orientation towards oneself (Mitrovic, Todorovic & Markovic, 2012). This links with James (1892) and Elmer (2001) who suggested that self-esteem could be high or low within individuals (Bunyan, 2004; Osborne, 2014). Self-esteem has also been said to include the perceived evaluation of others (Cooley, 1964. Cited in: Neff & Vonk, 2009). Further research has suggested that people who have high self-esteem are likely to have a highly positive global evaluation of themselves. However, people with low self-esteem might define themselves as unfavourable (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger & Vohs, 2003).

How we feel about ourselves can have a huge impact on how to act day-to-day and can influence our lives.

A current model of self-esteem created by Fox (1990) called the Hierarchical Model is broken down into three sub-domains: academic, social and physical all under the main domain of global self-esteem. 

 

Fox (1990) Hierarchical Model. 

If self-esteem is equal in these sub-domains and an individual feels confident in each of these domains, they would be considered to have high self-esteem, which I believe is true because if you feel good about each of these areas then your self-esteem would be good. However if one of these sub-domains is not up to scratch, then it could easily shift how you are feeling about yourself and how to perform in day-to-day life.

How can Adventure Education enhance self-esteem?

Adventure Education and outdoor programmes have been suggested to be beneficial in enhancing self-esteem. A meta-analysis carried out by Hattie, Marsh, Neill and Richards (1997) determined that adventure programmes can have a strong lasting influence on people taking part in them, with regard to self-esteem. This study contradicts a study carried out by Baumeister et al. (2003) who analysed whether self-esteem really did boost performance. The results from his findings suggested that boosting self-esteem alone does not improve academic and physical performance. Laboratory studies have generally failed to find that high self-esteem leads to good task performance. However, they have shown that people with high self-esteem do persist more in the face of failure compared to people with low self-esteem (Shrauger & Sorman, 1977). Baumeister et al. (2012) conclude their review by claiming that self-esteem does not have a large impact on individuals’ performance in an academic condition. However, the outdoor environment has been seen to prove otherwise.

Dowling (1996) stated that self-esteem was the second most targeted intended outcome after co-operation and can be seen in outdoor programmes. When working in the outdoors as an instructor, my initial aim for the group I was working with may not be to improve or enhance self-esteem at first, but by getting the group to take part and do the activity set out it may be a by-product produced by taking part in the activity. This can be seen when you find yourself working with a nervous and unconfident child who does not want to do the activity, but instead of just throwing them into the activity, finding different way's to nudge them into it can really help them build on their trust they have for you and their confidence to do the activity. This can be referred back to Hattie et al's. (1997) meta-analysis in that adventure can have a strong lasting influence on an individual. Adventure has many different pathways to go down to allow an individual to develop their self-esteem.

Just because we fail at something does not mean we are not going to find success; it just means we have to find another way of getting it and not to let it affect how we feel  about ourselves. 

  

References

Baumeister, R., Campbell, J., Krueger, J. & Vohs, K. (2003). Does High Self-Esteem cause better Performance, Interpersonal success, Happiness, or Healthier lifestyle?. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 4. 1-44

Bunyan, P. (2004) Towards the measurement of social self-esteem in the adventure environment. Doctoral thesis, University of Southampton; University of Chichester.

Mitrovic, M., Todorovic, D. & Markovic, Z. (2012). Anxiety and Self-Exteem in students of Sport and Physical Education. Research in Kinesiology. 40. 133-139.

Neff, K. & Vonk, R. (2009). Self-Compassion Versus Global Self-Esteem: Two Different Ways of Relating to Oneself. Journal of Personality. 77. 23-50.

Osborne, R.E (2014). Self-esteem.  Available at: http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?sid=b3cc8966-b023-4aee-8578-8887c65dcafd%40sessionmgr115&vid=10&hid=117&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=ers&AN=93872219 (Accessed: 22 March 2015).

Shrauger, J.S. & Sorman, P.B. (1977). Self-evaluation, initial success and failure, and improvement as determinants or persistence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 45. 784-795

Experiential Learning

Experiential Education

One way facilitators deliver knowledge to a group nowadays is in an autocratic fashion, in that the facilitator (teacher/instructor) is the source of all the knowledge and allows the group the access to this knowledge (Priest & Chase, 1989). However, other aspects of delivering knowledge have been developed and researched, one of which is Experiential learning which has been defined by many researchers. According to Kros and Watson (2004) Experiential learning is,

“a process through which knowledge is created through the transformation of experience”

and by Barrett and Greenaway (1995),

"any kind of learning through experience whether structured or unstructured..."

It can be seen that Experiential learning involves a number of factors that an individual has to take into consideration to get the most out of Experiential learning. Individuals need to make the link between academic knowledge and practical skills and apply this knowledge to real life situations (Bower, 2013). Experiential learning has been documented as the bridge that joins the gap between academic knowledge (hard skill) and interpersonal knowledge such as communication with others (soft skills). 

My personal viewpoint on Experiential education/learning is that an individual gets the opportunity to experience what they are leaning and really feel and understand it. For example, getting a group to plan an expedition is not the same as getting them to carry out an expedition and they would not get as much out of it if they were not to do it. By doing the things they are learning, children and adults are able to get first-hand experience and a real understanding of what they are undertaking. Experiential learning is also adaptive to different learning styles and allows for personal development. 

Kolb (1984) developed the Experiential Learning Cycle (Figure 1), drawing on theories by Lewin, Piaget and Dewey. This theory shows learning through experience and that learning takes place in four stages that are then repeated the more you learn. Each stage represents a different process: the concrete experience – grasping an experience by feeling/doing it; reflection – looking back on what we have done; conceptualization – thinking about what we have done and experimentation -  applying what we have learnt to real life situations. Conflicting literature by Kolb and Fry (1975) said that the learning cycle can occur at any of the four stages, contradicting with what Kolb (1984) had suggested, in which Learning needs to happen with a concrete experience first. 

Figure 1. Experiential Learning Cycle (Kolb, 1984)

The ideas that learning outdoors can bring!

Continuing on from Kolb (1984) and the idea that learning needs a concrete experience, the likes of Experiential learning has been going on through the decades from Baden-Powell who went out to engage children in the environment and show them what it had to offer. He later on developed the Scout Movement, which provided children with the opportunity to learn and experience the outdoors. Another major figure in the outdoor world is Kurt Hahn who was the founder of Outward Bound. These organisations both looked into Experiential learning as a means of ‘bettering’ individuals both psychologically way but in an academic and practical way. More recently an-up and coming educational strategy and teaching method has been developed and is known as Forest Schools, in which teachers take their teaching outdoors. Piaget (1964) suggests that a hands-on learning experience develops different aspects such as behaviour, social and emotional changes within children (Lefmann & Combs-Orme, 2013) thus evidencing the importance for Experiential learning and the effect it can have on childhood development.

When working on placement, I had the opportunity to work within a Forest School where children from Reception to Year 5 would spend one afternoon a week outside the classroom working on the same subjects as they would in the classroom; however they were outdoors in a different environment. By taking the learning outside it brought together many of the values Experiential learning/education has to offer, placing a greater importance on the learner and what they were experiencing that they would in traditional education. During the outside lessons the teachers would not usually come with us, which I saw as a negative, as it was an opportunity for them as the teachers to learn and build on their confidence in taking children outside. This supports research suggesting that the reason teachers are discouraged when taking children outdoor to learn is because they are lacking in confidence and are concerned about health and safety that surround every activity we do with children (Nicol, Higgins, Rossi & Mannioni, 2007). Outdoor facilitators on the other hand have the confidence and outdoor knowledge to take children outdoors; however they lack the academic knowledge that the National Curriculum requires teachers to teach. Due to this I feel if the teachers have the opportunity to take their learning outdoors they should jump at the opportunity and help merge indoor and outdoor education/learning.

When doing further reading, I came across this poem and thought it was quite fitting, in that children learn by the way they live and the thing they do.

Children learn what they live 

If
a child lives with criticism,
she learns to condemn.
If
a child lives with hostility,
he learns to fight.
If
a child lives with ridicule,
she learns to be shy.
If
a child lives with shame,
he learns to feel guilt
If
a child lives with tolerance,
she learns to be patient.
If
a child lives with encouragement,
he learns confidence.
If
a child lives with praise,
she learns to appreciate.
If
a child lives with fairness,
he learns justice.
If
a child lives with security,
she learns to have faith.
If
a child lives with approval,
he learns to like himself.
If
a child lives with acceptance
and friendship, he or she learns
to find love in the world.

(Greenaway, 2004)

References
Barrett, J. & Greenaway, R. (1995).   Why Adventure. Coventry, UK: Foundation for Outdoor Adventure.

Bower, G.G. (2013). Utilizing Kolb’s Experiential learning theory to implement a golf scramble. International Journal of Sport Management, Recreation and Tourism. 12. 29-56.

Greenaway, R. (2004). In search of respectable adventure,  Horizons. Online: http://reviewing.co.uk/outdoor/respctad.htm ( Accessed 22nd March 2015).

Lefmann, T. & Combs-Orme, T. (2013). Early Brain Development for Social Work Practice: Integrating Neuroscience with Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development. Journal of Human Behaviour in the social environment, 23. 640-647.

Kolb, D.A (2015). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. New Jersey, USA: Persons Education.

Kros, J. & Watson, K. (2004). Improving operations management concept recollection via the Zarco Experiential learning activity. Journal of education for business. 79(5). 283-286.

Nicol, R., Higgins, P., Rossi, H. & Mannioni, G. (2007). Outdoor Education in Scotland; A summary of Recent Research. Online: http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/education/OCReportWithEndnotes.pdf ( Accessed: 14th April 2015)

Priest, S. & Chase, R. (1989). The conditional theory of outdoor leadership: an exercise in flexibility. Journal of adventure education and outdoor leadership, 6(2). 10-17.

Smith, M.K. (2010). David A. Kolb on experiential Learning.  Available at: http://infed.org/mobi/david-a-kolb-on-experiential-learning/ (Accessed: 21 March 2015). 

My Personal Philosophy

Me Sky Diving

Philosophy

Adventure Education is well known for its use in personal development through outdoor experiences (Priest & Gass, 1997). This progression in personal development can be seen by facilitators but is rarely evidenced. Adventure Education is taken in and learnt by the use of soft skills and hard skills. Hard skills are the technical aspects of each activity, for example, tying knots for climbing, specific strokes for kayaking, skills that can be easily taught through the use of instruction. Soft skills are recognised as the interpersonal and intrapersonal skills (Priest & Gas, 1997) instilled in people as they grow, for example, effective communication, the ability to work as a team, honesty, integrity etc (Mitchell, Pritchett & Skinner, 2013). I believe that the outdoor adventure world has the ability to develop on many of these soft skill areas and many more if carried out appropriately and effectively.

In 1941 Kurt Hahn and others developed the first outward bound programme, hoping that education in the right form would instil qualities that would ‘better’ young people (Smith, 1997). This idea of bettering people through the use of Outdoor Education has been taken and adapted in many outdoor centres, whether these centres feel they have the skills to instil these soft skills or not. As  an instructor, I have run sessions whereby I only teach the hard skills as I feel these are the easier skills to teach and personally would not know where to begin with instilling soft skills in an individual. However as an outdoor facilitator it is our responsibility to provide environments where participants are able to learn and use the outdoors to help aid in personal growth. By providing the right environment you, as an outdoor facilitator are able to create an area where people are able to communicate effectively, work as a team and be honest with fellow team members; thus working on the soft stills (Smith, 1997). However, for so many outdoor facilitators this does not come naturally. This is where we as the instructors need to assess the needs of the group, work with them on these areas and try not to carry the individuals through the experience but get them to work together to get through it. By letting them to be incontrol, you shift the responsibility and allow for groups to work together and rely on themselves and each other to complete the task.

A model known as the Comfort Zone Model is spoken about within the Adventure Education literature.  A quote by Priest and Gass (1997) sums up the pedagogical approach employed in Adventure Education, 

To maximize safety, adventure professionals structure risk in a manner that causes participants to perceive it as being enormously high, while in actuality it is much lower than perceived and more acceptable as a medium for producing functional change and growth. By responding to seemingly insurmountable tasks, participants often learn to overcome self-imposed perceptions of their capabilities to succeed. (Priest & Gass, 1997, p. 17)

Figure 1. Examples of different Comfort Zone Models, showing that people can be different depending on the situations.

The model is split into three sections: comfort zone, growth and learning zone and Panic zone. The comfort zone in the middle, which is where an individual feels most safe and where most of us operate our day-to-day lives from. Although by definition it is the place we feel most comfortable, we are unable to progress and build upon skills when in the comfort zone, as it consists of the abilities and skills we already do easily (Sandler, 2011; Brown, 2008). It is when we move to the growth and learning zone when we can really build on our skills and abilities within a task. The skills that are just out of our reach when in the comfort zone are located in this zone. They are neither so far away that we fall in to the panic zone but not to close that they are too easy and fall into the comfort zone. The final zone within this model is the panic zone. This is where an individual will become too anxious about the situation they are in and are no longer thinking about what they are doing and panic (Sandler, 2011; Brown, 2008). When in this zone activities are seen as being so tough that individuals does not know how to approach them. People normally feel uncomfortable and discouraged when in this zone and, like the comfort zone, individuals are unable to make progress in this zone (Sandler, 2011; Brown, 2008). 

From experience I have been in the panic zone when skiing in my final year of university, when one of my lecturers decided to take us all down a red run which we were all capable of doing; however when I was at the top I suddenly could not move. I had slid down probably only 3 metres and I could not turn to carry on down. I was STUCK unable to move, so scared I could not listen to what she was saying I was too focused on the fact I was so frightened; it was only when I totally relaxed and just went for it I turned and went down. I ended up falling and sliding down but I did it with a smile on my face and realised it was nowhere near as bad as I had made it out to be and my lecturer was right in that I was capable of getting down it, whether that was on my skis or on my ass I made it down. As outdoor facilitators it is our duty to be able to assess each individual’s level of perceived risk; by doing this we ensure that optimal learning will take place within the growth and learning zone.

Alex Honnold Free Climbing  - Huge Comfort Zones.

The comfort zone model is not suggesting that individuals must become stressed or uncomfortable for learning to take place; however individuals should find healthy risks in what they are doing and push themselves to learn and achieve. Each individual will have different thresholds for each zone as can be seen as an example in Figure 1. It can also differ depending on the situation.  

I believe that the comfort zone model is a good tool for outdoor facilitators to use when working with groups or different abilities and confidence levels as it challenges an individual to step outside their comfort zone and see what they are really capable of, within a healthy acceptable risk environment, ending with them building upon themselves (soft skills), which is what outdoor facilitators intend to achieve (along with the hard skills).

I believe that if there were classes in building upon soft skills and teaching soft skills, they would be hugely beneficial in the work place. However, I think it is our (outdoor facilitators) responsibility to provide the right environments, may they be artificial or natural, to allow individuals to build on personal development. However, in the end it is up to the individual themselves to determine what they really want to gain from adventure, whether it is hard skills or soft skills.

References

Brown, M. (2008) Comfort Zone: Model or Metaphor. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 21(1), 3-12.

Mitchell, G.W., Pritchett, C.C.  & Skinner, L.B. (2013). The Importance of the integration of soft skills into the curriculum as identified by MBA students. Academy of Business Research Journal, 2(17). 87-103.

Priest, S. & Gass, M.A. (1997). Effective Leadership in Adventure Programming. 2nd Edition, USA: Human Kinetics.

Sandler, S. (2011). The Three Zones Everyone Should Know About.  Available at: http://sethsandler.com/productivity/3-zones/ (Accessed: 18^th April. 2015).

Smith, M.K. (1997) Kurt Hahn, Outdoor learning and adventure education. Available at:http://infed.org/mobi/kurt-hahn-outdoor-learning-and-adventure-education/ (Accessed: 21 March 2015).