... in recent decades across various fields, for example in research (Carawan, Knight, ...... group was supposedly camping: âLook what these guys are up to?â.
FOSTERING TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING: A phenomenological study into the lived experience of reflection and transformation in adventure education
____________________________________________________________
Yeong Poh Kiaw BSc (Hons)., M.Ed
Faculty of Education Monash University
A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
October, 2012
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Because I am a storyteller, I sometimes felt the solitariness of writing. When that happened I turned my ear inward to memory. There I heard the host of friends, mentors and writers, tellers and listeners, singers and players I met along my long way….
To my supervisors at Monash University, Dr Brian Wattchow and Dr Trent Brown: Thank you for your thoughtful guidance, constructive feedback, encouragement and support along the way. To the course coordinator of this programme, Dr Allie Clemans and Dr Seah Wee Tiong: Thank you for always being there and the commitment you offered despite the strenuous coordination work needed for such off-campus learning. To my bosses at Republic Polytechnic, Dr Michael Koh and Ms Goy Soon Lan: Thank you for supporting my research and for continuing to support a culture of inquiry. To Outward Bound Singapore and the participants in this inquiry: Thank you for your time, stories, writing and sharing that you so generously has given to me. To the professional editor, Amy Haerse: Thank you for your assistance in editing and proof reading the thesis. To the researchers and writers whose words I have cited in this thesis: Thank you for your insights and wisdom. To my friends and family: Thank you for your love, care and patience. Special mentioned to Lois for your faith in me; Adelena and Josephine for advice on language expressions. To adventure education: Thank you for the many lessons, and the promises of many more to come. To all: Thank you for your inspiration and belief. You granted me the storyteller’s fabulous privilege - to tell a story that will belong to each of us afterwards.
STATEMENT OF SOURCES
To the best of my knowledge and belief, I declare that the work presented in this thesis is original and my own work, except as acknowledged in the text, and that the material has not been submitted, either in part or whole, for a degree at this or any other university.
_____________________________ Yeong Poh Kiaw 10 October 2012
Copyright Notices Notice 1 Under the Copyright Act 1968, this thesis must be used only under the normal conditions of scholarly fair dealing. In particular no results or conclusions should be extracted from it, nor should it be copied or closely paraphrased in whole or in part without the written consent of the author. Proper written acknowledgement should be made for any assistance obtained from this thesis.
Notice 2 I certify that I have made all reasonable efforts to secure copyright permissions for thirdparty content included in this thesis and have not knowingly added copyright content to my work without the owner’s permission.
NOTES ON WRITING STYLES AND THESIS STRUCTURES
In this thesis the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (Sixth Edition) was used as a guide to the presentation and style. It was used to provide consistency and quality in presentation, rather than purely compliance of rules. There were times in the study when conventions had to be stretched and even broken in the effort to present leaders’ and learners’ ‘lived’ experiences of adventure education and to provide a text that flows for the reader. This is also done in the spirit of the chosen methodology, to present the narratives through a novella. This mainly refers to the presentation of text in the section of chapter six ‘re-telling teaching and learning stories’, and chapter seven ‘plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education’. In addition, I should note here that there are few doctoral and master dissertations that used a phenomenological approach in Outdoor Adventure Education, and I have adapted some elements of the structure from those that have worked well in the few that I have reviewed. For example, the inquiry matrixes, the use of single case studies and the use of plausible insights have been adapted from Wattchow (2006). Some elements of narrative, plausible insights and the use of in-depth phenomenologically based interviewing were informed by Mullins (2007). Henderson’s (1995) dissertation gave the inspiration on story and the use of a novel depiction of leader/learner voices quotations (side-by-side). They have all been very good sources of guidance for the formation, organisation and presentation of this thesis, and I discuss them further in the appropriate sections of the thesis.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
10
CHAPTER ONE: THE QUEST OF TEACHING FOR CHANGE
12
An overview of the inquiry The guiding research question
19 22
CHAPTER TWO: THE YARN OF THE STORYTELLER
27
Message from the mountain I saw my own ghost The phantom leader Adventure in the concrete jungle Thirst for knowledge
31 34 37 41 47
CHAPTER THREE: THE TALE OF LEARNING IN ADVENTURE EDUCATION The fundamentals of adventure education Historical context and philosophical roots Adventure education as transformative education Key constructs in adventure education Experience as reflective learning Reflection as meaning making Teaching and leading as fostering changes Opening the adventure educational ‘black box’ CHAPTER FOUR: THE JOURNEY INTO THE ADVENTURE EDUCATION ‘BLACK BOX’ Exploring ‘black box’ through the phenomenological lens Being-in-the-world Lifeworld existentials Constructing conceptual lenses for lived experiences Summary: Grabbing hold of a moving target CHAPTER FIVE: RESEARCHING HUMAN LIVED EXPERIENCES Representing lived experiences Narrative and human experience Learning, talking, writing and imagining stories of lived experiences The story is true if ….. Issues of rigor and credibility A sketch of the methods and procedure The research sequence Recruitment of co-storytellers
51 53 55 60 68 68 72 79 93 96 98 100 102 112 114 118 119 120 121 132 140 143 143 145
Collection of story tales Drafting story tales Thematic development of plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education CHAPTER SIX: RE-TELLING TEACHING AND LEARNING STORIES A fictional novella based on real stories - Tile Island Reflection on the development of Tile Island
149 158 160
164 167 228
CHAPTER SEVEN: PLAUSIBLE INSIGHTS INTO THE LIVED-EXPERIENCE OF ADVENTURE EDUCATION My body, my soul First essence: ‘Feeling from the inside to realise self and others’ Second essence: ‘My body being my own teacher’ Third essence: ‘Bodily knowledge and meaning’ Plausible insights: Knowing bodies, awakening minds My community, my growth First essence: ‘You hum and I will hum along’ Second essence: ‘From inner true self to embodied true self’ Plausible insights: Engaging communities, tuning souls My space, my transformation First essence: ‘The landscape of spaces’ Second essence: ‘Creating spaces, engaging possibilities’ Plausible insights: Transforming locations, negotiating sensibilities My stories, my life First essence: ‘What lies within us instead of what lies behind us’ Second essence: ‘Stories and their lessons’ Third essence: ‘Bringing about changes’ Plausible insights: Sharing stories, sculpting lives
234
CHAPTER EIGHT: THE PARABLE OF TEACHING FOR CHANGE
276
Indicators to transformative pedagogy in adventure education
238 239 240 241 242 246 246 248 248 254 256 259 262 267 268 269 270 271
284
REFERENCES
295
APPENDICES
313
TABLES
Table 1
Major philosophical contribution to adventure education
57
Table 2
Valli’s (1997) five orientation of reflection and their content and quality in teaching
92
Table 3
An inquiry matrix for learners’ lived experience of transformative learning in adventure education
116
Table 4
An inquiry matrix for leaders’ lived experience of teaching for change in adventure education
117
Table 5
Summary of research genres
129
Table 6
Toward lived stories data gathering and interpretation sequence
144
Table 7
Learners’ codes and demographic details
156
Table 8
Outdoor Leaders’ code and demographic details
157
Table 9
Frequency of coded responses for types of reflection and transformation 160
Table 10
Frequency of quotes and extracts cited under each of Taylor’s (2009) core elements of transformative approach to teaching
278
Table 11
Summary interpretation of the lived experiences of reflection and transformative learning
281
FIGURES
Figure 1
The person-centred conception of authenticity
88
Figure 2
Cranton and Carusetta’s (2004a) model of authenticity in teaching
90
Figure 3
Visual representation of the development and braiding of conceptual inquiry matrix
97
Figure 4
McDrury and Alterio’s (2003) model of reflective learning through storytelling
268
APPENDICES
Appendix A
(a) Mezirow (1978, 1994) 11-phase of transformative learning (b) Mezirow (1991) four phases of learning (c) Diagrammatic representation of Mezirow’s (1995) three types of reflection, their related actions, transformations and depths of change (d) Diagrammatic representation of Mezirow’s (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumptions
313 314 315
Appendix B
Consent and permission letter from OBS for this research project
317
Appendix C
Explanatory statement of research and informed consent form for learners
318
Appendix D
Explanatory statement of research and informed consent form for leaders
321
Appendix E
(a) Long table analysis of 5-day team building programme experiential texts (b) Long table analysis of 16-day leadership development programme experiential texts (c) Long table analysis of 21-day classic challenge programme experiential texts
324
Appendix F
Semi-structured interview for learners
332
Appendix G
Phenomenological-based semi-structured interviews for outdoor leaders 334
Appendix H
(a) Overview of the three adventure programmes (b) Activity location of the three adventure programmes in and around P.Ubin
339 342
Appendix I
A sample of single case interpretations: OL4
343
Appendix J
Influence strategies shared by participants and outdoor leaders in relation to Taylor’s (2009) core elements of transformative approach to teaching
358
316
327 330
ABSTRACT This phenomenological and interpretive study presents stories of the lived teaching and learning experiences of participants on adventure programmes in Singapore. Although learning in adventure education has been said to be transformational and that outdoor leaders play a crucial role in promoting such learning, there has been little empirical research into the lived experiences of leaders and learners that might provide pedagogical insights into how these transformations take place. The process of adventure learning as a phenomenon has largely assumed to be mysterious, and has been called the adventure education ‘black box’ (Ewert, 1983). Adventure experiences are presumed to be able to lead to transformative-like learning, however no pedagogy for transformative learning on empirical evidence has yet been proposed. Therefore, this study was guided by the following research question: How do the lived experiences of participants and outdoor leaders lead to understanding and promoting transformative learning in adventure education? The study was conducted in two parts. First it critiqued adventure education discourses and demonstrated how in theory and in practice, adventure education has neglected the potential of teaching and learning in three ways: (1) through the misunderstood meaning of ‘experience’; (2) through the undermined role of ‘reflection’ in adventure learning; and (3) through an erasure of the role of outdoor leaders due to the promotion of a universalised adventure education paradigm. Consequently, the transdisciplinary literature of teaching and learning were critiqued through an examination of the existential ground (van Manen, 1990) upon which human experiences are unavoidably ‘lived’. This critique was coupled with a focused review of reflection and transformative learning scholarship to provide a conceptual framework that guided data collection and interpretation in the second phase of the study. Second, the reflective writings of 61 participants enrolled in three separate adventure programmes were reviewed. The courses ranged from 5 to 21 days in duration. Ten participants were selected and interviewed, while four outdoor leaders responsible for the conduct of the adventure programmes were also interviewed to provide perspectives of
10
their own teaching and learning experiences. The written and oral data interpreted produced 14 biographical case studies of people’s responses to adventure experiences. These cases were combined and thematised, as guided by the conceptual framework established earlier, to present a collective lived experience of adventure education in using narrative inquiry and hermeneutics, specifically through stories and storytelling. The resulting research text (van Manen, 1990) is presented as a fictional novella, Tile Island, as part of this thesis to illuminate the “meaning, structure and essence of lived experience(s)” (Patton, 2002, p. 104) of the participants and leaders in adventure education. Revealing the adventure education ‘black box’ through fictional representation uncovers, discovers, freezes, creates or re-imagines meaning and articulation of subsequent knowing. Reflection from the narratives found support to argue for the reinterpretation of meaning inherent within the fundamental constructs of adventure education. The plausible insights also exposed the significance of engaging learners holistically in lived body, lived relation, lived space and time, and lived stories so as to encourage reflection and transformative learning in adventure education. This study contributes, from an empirical basis, insights into the adventure education phenomenon and an understanding of limitations and possibilities of a change-responsive pedagogy of adventure education. In addition, the demonstration of the use of a very novel approach to methodology and (re)presentation of data/findings adds to the small, but increasing, number of studies using emergent methodologies in adventure education discourses. The key aim of such studies is surely to reveal for pedagogical consideration the previously hidden or mysterious innerworld of human subjectivity.
11
CHAPTER ONE: THE QUEST OF TEACHING FOR CHANGE
Other than looks, being slimmer and carrying a beard, am I any different? What had the 21 days done to me? Or was it just a normal 21 days at work? I must really respect the two instructors for taking up this challenge. It was not an easy task. One more day, one more night and finish; I hope I made a small impact in the life of the others who were in this 21 days course, like a coffee bean. I shall take the hot seat feedback critically and see how I can work things out. 21 days almost done. It is time to go back to play with my niece and nephew and eat mum’s cooking once more. =) (extracts from participants’ journal, Par#54, Day 20, 2012) _________________________________
Fostering transformative learning is about teaching for change (Taylor, 2006). It is about offering learning experiences where learners “are seriously challenged to assess their value system and worldview and are subsequently changed by the experience” (Quinnan, 1997, p. 42). Outdoor leaders have always honoured this role in adventure education discourse. But exactly how these teaching and learning experiences happen has remained a mysterious notion and a topic of debate amongst educators and practitioners in the field. The elusive nature of the different meanings that can be attached to the term ‘experience’, the mysterious adventure educational ‘black box’ (Ewert, 1983), and the inattentiveness in the development of adventure education research thus far to investigate what is within the ‘black box’, (i.e. how adventure programmes work; for review see Mckenzie, 2000), now requires careful consideration for a more appropriate research design and an adequate research methodology (Burnard, 1988; Seaman, 2008). This is necessary so that we can make sense of teaching and learning experiences, particularly those experiences that underpin transformative learning. Narrative inquiry, with its unique approach to understanding or researching people’s experience, is perhaps the most suitable choice.
12
Choosing a narrative approach says something about the researcher’s frame of mind and orientation. Narrative inquiries are always composed around a particular ‘wonder’, or ‘research puzzle’ (Connelly & Clandinin, 2000). This is usually called the research problem. Problems, as the term implies, carry with them qualities of clear definability and the expectation of solutions, but narrative inquiry carries more of a sense of a search, a ‘research’, a searching again through the complexity of people’s lived experiences. Narrative inquiry carries more of a sense of continual reformulation of an inquiry than it does a sense of problem definition and solution. It is not the study of what happened, but the meaning people make of what happened (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). Phenomenology, a tradition of research with strong links to narrative inquiry and interpretive research, was selected to illuminate the experiences in this study context. Within phenomenology, the notion of ‘reality’ is accounted for by acknowledging the lived experience of research participants. It is the “study of human experience and the way in which things are perceived as they appear to consciousness” (Langdridge, 2007, p. 10). The phenomenological mode in narrative inquiry attempts to understand human experience as it is lived and told through stories. Phenomenologists draw distinctions between studies that attempt to explore the natural sciences and those that attempt to study human science. Van Manen (1990) illustrates how “for Dilthey the proper subject matter for Geisteswissenschaften [Spiritual Science] is the human world characterized by Geist – thoughts, consciousness, values, feelings, emotions, actions, and purposes, which find their objectifications in languages, beliefs, arts and institutions” (p. 3): The preferred method for natural science, since Galileo, has been detached observation, controlled experiment, and mathematical or quantitative measurement. And when the natural science method has been applied to the behavior social sciences, it has retained procedures of experimentation and quantitative analysis. In contrast, the preferred method for human science involves description, interpretation, and self-reflective or critical analysis. We explain nature, but human life we must understand. (p. 4) Phenomenological sociology has been particularly influenced by the philosophers Edmund Husserl and Alfred Schutz. It is located within the Weberian tradition, which emphasises verstehen, the interpretive understanding of human interaction. It has been
13
shaped by Heidegger’s (1962) concepts of Erkennen and Verstehen, which he relates as two forms of knowledge – theoretical-practical knowledge and the knowledge understanding of human ‘lifeworlds’. Van Manen (1977) reveals the significance of these concepts and their relationship to phenomenology: The word Erkennen refers to the traditional sense of theoreticalpractical knowledge as it is used in empirical-analytical science. Heidegger employs a special use of the term ‘moods’ to clarify the idea of knowledge that is capable of grasping the world – our personal world or the world of cultural experience. Heidegger’s concept of understanding, Verstehen, is closely bound to the concepts of ‘world’ and of ‘disclosure’ or ‘unconcealment’. Disclosures of human lifeworlds are instances of knowledge as understanding. Such disclosures are accomplished by means of a hermeneuticphenomenological method. (p. 215) Heidegger’s ‘lifeworlds’ underscored the importance placed on the inner experience of the person. It is said that “phenomenological inquiry begins with silence” (Psathas, 1973). This ‘silence’ is an attempt by phenomenologists to gain entry into the ‘subjective’ world of their informants (Geertz, 1973) in order to understand how and what meaning they construct around events in their daily lives. It is not the intention of researchers who employ a phenomenological orientation to build abstractions by interpreting the data on the informants’ points of view. Rather, it is to present what the informants take for granted as true (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Phenomenologists believe that multiple ways of interpreting experiences are available to each of us through interacting with others, and that it is the meaning of our experiences that constitutes reality (Greene, 1978). Reality, consequently is “socially constructed” (Berger & Luckmann, 1967). Thus, it may be said that at the heart of the phenomenological tradition, we will find support for letting the experience speak for itself. The phenomenological orientation of this study was committed to examining the lived experience of participants’ teaching and learning encounters in adventure education. In all its original difficulties, ambiguities and complexities (Patton, 2002), this thesis considers the learners’ transformative learning experiences, if any, as well as the outdoor leaders’ teaching and learning experiences, through adventure education programmes in Singapore;
14
and how these experiences may yield important insights into a pedagogy that promotes transformative learning. Despite a growing discourse in the multi-dimensional understanding of the adventure educational ‘black box’ and a pedagogy that professes to be aimed at facilitating experiential adventure learning (see for example Bacon, 1987; Hattie, Marsh, Neil, & Richards, 1997; Luckner & Nadler, 1997; Neill, 2007; Priest, 1996; Priest & Gass, 1997b; 2005a; Schoel, Prouty, & Radcliffe, 1988), many assumptions remain about what elicits learning in adventure education and the role of adventure educators. In particular, ‘reflection’ has been taken for granted as having a key role either in experiential learning or in enabling experiential learning (Dewey, 1938; Gibbons & Hopkins, 1980; Joplin, 1981; Kolb, 1984; Mckenzie, 2003; Priest, 1990; Walsh & Golins, 1976). Also, outdoor leaders have repeatedly been emphasised as critically important in enabling the learner’s outdoor and adventure learning process (Bobilya, McAvoy, & Kalisch, 2005; Kalisch, 1979; Mitten & Clement, 2007; Schumann, Paisley, Sibthorp, & Gookin, 2009). However, there has been little empirical research to inform and clarify these assumptions. Is it possible that the persistence of this gap between practice and theory suggests that the experiential pedagogy employed in adventure education experiences is inherently “too mysterious a phenomenon to fully comprehend” (Conrad & Hedin, 1981, p. 6); or is it possible that the gap can be attributed to inappropriate research design and inadequate research methodology (Burnard, 1988; Seaman, 2008)? These simplified and assumed conceptions of reflection and the leaders’ pedagogical influence continue, despite the emergence within critical approaches to experiential learning studies, suggesting that human experience in reflective learning, and its relations with outdoor leaders, is far more complex and ambiguous (see, for example Baldwin, Persing, & Magnuson, 2004; Brown, 2009; Fenwick, 2001; Hattie et al., 1997; Moon, 1999; Priest, 1999a; Seaman, 2008). Moon (1999) contends, “the reflective capacity varies among individuals and develops with age but also within an educationally stimulating environment” (p. 3). Many outdoor educators and researchers can be accused of assuming that reflective learning experiences are a natural phenomenon dependent solely on the learners’ developmental capacity, and thus neglect the potential influence of context and the learners’ social environment. There is a danger that ‘reflection’ becomes another taken-for-granted,
15
unexamined adventure phenomenon, while it’s fuller meaning and implications lie hidden beneath simplistic approaches, such as ‘the debrief’. Consequently, these assumptions lessen the involvement of outdoor leaders. As practitioners and researchers, we miss the opportunity to fully capitalise on the potential of the leaders’ influence to negotiate learners’ experience. As Hattie et al. (1997) argue, “it is most likely the instructional processes that make the difference to outcomes in adventure programmes (such as challenge, risk taking, feedback, and mutual group support) are similar in regular classrooms….” (p. 77), therefore outdoor leaders “need to more fully appreciate that they are conducting an educational experience” (p. 78). Unless we attempt to carefully reveal the structures and meanings of these lived reflection experiences, and how they are influenced by leaders, adventure education risks “neglecting the parts of a programme associated with specific human behaviours” (Priest, 1999a), and disregarding the socio-cultural component of one’s learning experience (Brown, 2009), which ironically, is the central business of adventure education. Within the literature of adventure facilitation, the leader is often regarded as a guide who helps learners discover their own meaning of the adventure experience by providing an appropriate framework for reflection and discussion (Brown, 2004b). They are responsible to “set up an environment where learning through reflection can take place” (Sugerman, Doherty, Garvey, & Gass, 2000) and assist learners in making connections between the activity and other life situations, so that adventure experiences can be given meaning and be integrated into learners’ lives (Chapman, 1995; Joplin, 1995). Beames (2006) suggests that such unique positioning of ‘teaching’ demands that outdoor leaders be ‘reflective’ in their practice: [outdoor leaders] need to get to know the participants well enough to be able to help them determine just what they are after, and then help them get it, only then will learning have personal meaning for each individual…. (S. Beames, 2006, p. 10) Beames’ approach here is characteristic of a wider rhetoric, whose legacy reflects a prevailing orthodoxy within the discourses of the relationship between teachers, learners, reflection, teaching and learning. For example: Teaching, like any truly human activity, emerges from one’s inwardness, for better or worse. As I teach, I project the condition of
16
my soul onto my students, my subject, and our way of being together. The entanglements I experience in the classroom are often no more or less than the convolutions of my inner life. Viewed from this angle, teaching holds a mirror to the soul. If I am willing to look in that mirror, and not run from what I see. I have a chance to gain selfknowledge – and knowing myself is as crucial to good teaching as knowing my students and my subject….. we need to open a new frontier in our exploration of good teaching: the inner landscape of a teachers’ life…. they are interwoven in the human self and in education at its best, and we need to interweave them in our pedagogical discourse as well. (Palmer & Scribner, 2007, pp. 102-103) Dewey (1933b) states convincingly the very essence of teaching and learning with his simple argument: “the only way to increase the learning of students is to augment the quantity and quality of real teaching” (Dewey, 1933b, p. 36). If we continue to perceive the influence of reflection and pedagogy as “too mysterious a phenomenon to fully comprehend” (Conrad & Hedin, 1981, p. 6), we fail to acknowledge that the entirety of the adventure experience we strive to relate to is far more than an image of our self-posit – we risk failing the true learning potential of adventure education. As educators and leaders we become guilty through projecting our desires upon adventure activities that we consider appropriate to the learning goals of our programmes, claiming that it is only the learners’ adventure experience that matters, and that our role is secondary in facilitating their construction of worthwhile knowledge and sense of personal development, whilst at the same time muzzling the multidimensional, richer and more vibrant reflection experiences and the powerful potential of pedagogical influence. There is rich ground here for inquiry. With these doubts and questions about the educational ‘black box’ in adventure education in mind, this research into the lived experiences of reflection and pedagogical influence, was conceived as occurring in two distinct phases. These phases have been maintained in the presentation of this thesis. The first phase of the research concerned a sustained consideration of the basis of theoretical claims that current adventure education practices can promote reflection and transformative learning. It sought to discover the backgrounds of these claims, whether they have been substantiated by empirical evidence, and how educators have subsequently shaped and controlled the lived experiences of
17
learners participating in adventure programmes as a result of assumptions within this professional theory and discourse. In this introductory chapter, I outline the study and present the guiding research questions and aims. In addition, I signpost the development of a unique methodological response to the challenges of representing people’s lived experiences in adventure programmes. In Chapter Two – The Yarn Of The Storyteller, I discuss how my experiences and professional development as an outdoor educator have influenced the birth and evolution of the research questions, and my position as researcher in relation to the research conducted in this study. Through my stories, Chapter Two also introduces briefly the culture, sites, programmes, and pedagogical practices this research study is situated within. In Chapter Three – The Tale Of Learning In Adventure Education, I critically review the discourses of adventure education as they relate to this study. The aim here is to expose the many assumptions and beliefs that inform the rhetorical or textual claims made by adventure educators about teaching for change. In particular, I focus on how the rhetoric reflects a gap between certain social constructions of adventure learning, and how this gap may be problematic for the possibility of a change-responsive adventure education pedagogy. I discuss current assumptions of the key constructs in adventure education that potentially simplify the complex phenomenon of one’s learning experiences and present the reinterpretation of meaning inherent within these constructs. They are as follows: experience as reflective learning, reflection as meaning-making, and teaching and leading as fostering change. This lengthy and detailed critique is necessary as it examines and challenges some of the most entrenched assumptions in adventure education theory that have, by implication, limited the possibility of more change-responsive pedagogies. In chapter Four- The Journey Into The Adventure Education ‘Black Box’, I develop the phenomenological orientation of this study and present a discussion of the lived experience of adventure learning through the representation of ‘being-in-the-world’ (Heidegger, 1962) and existential structures of spatiality, temporality, corporeality and relationality (van Manen, 1990). This discussion draws upon phenomenological investigations into the experience of teaching and learning in general as there has been very little research into the lived experiences of people in adventure education (perhaps only Brennan, 2008; Davidson,
18
2001) or in outdoor education (see Mullins, 2007; Rea, 2006; Wattchow, 2006). It has largely been assumed that experiences in adventure programmes will somehow ‘magically’ lead to learning outcomes that will see learners change, or be aware of the need for change. No pedagogy for fostering transformative learning based on empirical evidence has yet been proposed. A small number of research studies completed in America (Schumann et al., 2009; Shooter, Paisley, & Sibthorp, 2010; Shooter, Paisley, & Gookin, 2010) have begun to address this gap, and this study strives to build upon this emerging and promising response to pedagogy for change in adventure education, and does so with a particular focus on adventure programmes in Singapore. Collectively the critiques in chapters three and four provided a conceptual grounding for the development of an inquiry framework that was needed to undertake this interpretive study. This framework raised significant queries concerning how adventure experiences are ‘lived’ by participants in adventure programmes and provided structure and consistency for data collection and interpretation. This guided the second phase of the research that involved an inquiry into lived experiences of young adults participating in three different Outward Bound adventure programmes in Singapore. For ease of further reference, I differentiated the deliberate use of the terms ‘study’ and ‘inquiry’. Hence forth, the ‘study’ refers to the entirety of the project, from recalling the formation of research origins, intention and questions, the examination of various literatures of learning, the report of findings and discussion, through to the project’s conclusion and recommendations. The ‘inquiry’ into the lived experiences of specific learners and outdoor leaders with specific adventure programme experiences is situated within, and reflexively is informed by and informs, the overall study.
An overview of the inquiry The reflective writings on adventure education experiences of 61 young adults enrolled in three separate adventure programmes (course duration ranging between 5-21 days) between September 2011 and November 2011 were collected. These ‘experiential texts’ were written during the learners’ actual adventure experiences. These collections allowed a reconnaissance of emerging themes and an intensity sampling (Patton, 2002) of ten learners for personal interviews. The length of time between the completion of reflective writing and
19
the interview was mostly within one month, but there were a few exceptions which took as long as two months. The interviews provided oral data that made it possible to examine memories and meaning making of the learners’ experiences, and permitted in-depth questioning of key anecdotes, ideas and themes first indicated in the experiential texts. To ‘hear the other side of the story’, four outdoor leaders who conducted the adventure programmes which the young adults were involved in, were invited to participate in a series of three separate and distinct interviews, each lasting a duration of up to 40 minutes. This version of in-depth, phenomenologically-based interviewing, referred to by Seidman (1998), aims to have the outdoor leader reconstruct his or her experience in our topic of ‘black-box’ exploration in adventure education. Through recounting their personal experiences of learning ‘received’ and ‘given’ in outdoor and adventure education in their lives, their stories provided a more holistic consideration of influential factors that demonstrate the various levels of depth in reflection and change, as well as transformative learning as a result of experiential learning pedagogy. Some of the outdoor leaders participating in this inquiry were my juniors in the adventure education communities in an earlier phase of my career. In addition, the places and programmes where those experiences occurred were those that I have personally experienced (as outdoor leader and young adult learner) whilst I worked at Outward Bound Singapore. I was thus able to bring my own empathetic observations and reflections of these programmes to the inquiry, as their educator in the ‘classroom’, trainer and mentor in the field and now as a reflective researcher. Though the close relations between myself as researcher and the ‘subjects’ in the study raised potential ethical concerns that may adversely influence data collection and its interpretation, which I address in chapter five, it also created rich possibilities for an empathetic understanding of the subject’s experiences, the context and influential factors where those experiences occurred, and the ability to interpret and write the hermeneutic narratives of experience distilled from the data, as recommended by Payne (2005). These narratives were constructed around the experiences of specific locations in Singapore, namely the island Pulau Ubin, and its surrounding waters. Chapter Five – Researching Lived-Experiences presents the methodological detail of the conduct of the inquiry. I specifically discuss narrative inquiry, storytelling and
20
hermeneutic phenomenology. This is necessary due to the narrative nature of the inquiry and issues relating to the representation of the lived experiences of the participants and outdoor leaders. Justification for the chosen methodological approaches has been supported by discussion on their possibilities and limitations as research methodologies, and how hermeneutic phenomenology was adapted to ‘fit’ the needs of this study. The chapter also includes information on the recruitment and demographics of participants, the inquiry sequence, data collection, interpretation and representation, limitations and ethical considerations. It has been included here as it explains the scope and boundaries of the inquiry. The overall purpose of this data collection, and its analysis, was to inform the writing of a creative fiction novella to represent the lifeworlds of participants and leaders in the Outdoor Adventure Education context and thus to illuminate, where possible, the ‘black box’ of adventure programming. As Beames and Pike (2008) argue: The key, then, is establishing the credibility and realness of the story through the rigorous crafting of events and characters, in order to effectively challenge readers to generalise from the tale and consider cases familiar to them in a new light. (p. 4) The critique of adventure education discourse and literature of reflection and transformative learning, the conceptual development of the matrixes, the consideration of narrative, hermeneutic phenomenology and the declaration of the conduct of the inquiry, led to the presentation of Chapter Six - Re-telling Teaching And Learning Stories. To uphold the spirit of narrative inquiry, a fictional novella, Tile Island, was produced to illuminate the “meaning, structure and essence of lived experience(s)” (Patton, 2002, p. 104) of the participants and outdoor leaders as distilled from the research data. The reflection from the novella and narratives provided support to argue for the reinterpretation of meaning inherent within the fundamental constructs of adventure education as discussed in the earlier chapters. Chapter Seven – Plausible Insights Into The Lived-Experience Of Adventure Education follows through to discuss four interrelated themes emerged from the data. This chapter offers the possibility of plausible insights that bring us in more direct contact with the world. Plausible insight, as van Manen (1990) describes, is insightful description of the way we experience the world pre-reflectively, without taxonomision, classification, or abstraction. It requires the researcher to return their attention, after completing the task of representing the lived experiences of participants in the research text, to the central aim of
21
the research - In this case, an increased understanding of adventure education and to better pedagogical practices. Collectively with the plausible insights derived from these themes, they have revealed the significance of what has been discovered for the possibility of change-responsive pedagogy in adventure education. Finally, Chapter Eight – The Parable Of Teaching For Change provides consolidation to this study with a reflection of what has been exposed in the search for a transformative pedagogy. I consider the implications in a broader context, and recommend some directions for further study, which include a consideration of methodology. These are key contributors to what remains an elusive and unattended scope, but crucially important field if there is to be some restoration of commitment to the fundamentals of teaching and learning for change, the study of narratives and human experiences, and between theory and practice in adventure education. __________________________________ The ultimate purpose of this study was to contribute to the improved practice of teachers and leaders in adventure education. The study has attempted to expose various levels of theoretical, literal, and professional assumptions underpinning the multifaceted and elusive nature of learning that outdoor practitioners, educators and leaders alike claim on behalf of learners’ adventure experiences.
In seeking such an enigmatic ‘change-
responsive pedagogy’, the phenomenological orientation of this study was to create conditions for the objective study of a subjective topic: the consciousness of experiences involving judgments, perceptions, values and emotions which contribute to change in an individual. According to Van Manen (1990), “phenomenological descriptions, if done well, can be compelling and insightful”(p. 8).
The guiding research question One of the challenges in conducting a phenomenological investigation is to arrive at a topic and question that has both social meaning and personal significance (Moustakas, 1994). The essence of the question is “the opening up, and keeping open, of possibilities” (Gadamer, 1975, p. 266). This is only possible if the researcher keeps themselves open in such a way that in this abiding concern of their question they find themselves deeply interested
22
(Moustakas, 1994). Also, especially in phenomenological inquiry, the question must not only be “made clear or understood, it must also be ‘lived’ by the researcher” (van Manen, 1990, p. 44). Van Manen (1990) emphasises that the questioning techniques employed by the researcher-writer need to teach the reader to wonder, to question deeply the core of what is in the question. According to Moustakas (1994, p. 105), a human science research question has definite characteristics: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
It seeks to reveal more fully the essence and meanings of human experiences; It seeks to uncover the qualitative rather than the quantitative factors in behavior and experience; It engages the total self of the research participant, and sustains personal and passionate involvement; It does not seek to predict or to determine causal relationships; It is illuminated through careful, comprehensive descriptions, vivid and accurate renderings of the experience, rather than measurements, ratings or scores.
This study has, at the heart of its interest, to deepen an understanding of teaching and learning experiences in adventure education: how these experiences are ‘lived’ by learners and leaders in the adventure education learning process, and how it might inform us of a pedagogy that is more responsive to teaching for change. Such a complex phenomenon, as I demonstrated in the earlier paragraphs, needs a discovery-oriented method where both researcher and reader need to have an attitude of openness to let the unexpected meaning emerge (Giorgi, 1997). With this in mind, the guiding research question that I posted for this study was: How do the lived experiences of participants and outdoor leaders lead to understanding and promoting transformative learning in adventure education?
This research question, rather than being restrictive as a boundary, guides the research into the mysterious ‘black box’ phenomenon and the relationship between leaders, learners, reflection and transformative learning experiences. The phenomenological question is intended only as a point of departure and as a reference point to return to again and again, so that we can maintain focus on the phenomena being studied (van Manen, 1990). It will be revisited throughout the thesis, and further qualified as the study advances.
23
As I uncover in chapters three and four, very few studies exist in the research literature of adventure education that carefully and diligently consider how lived reflection experiences of participants and the pedagogical influence of leaders interact. Equally, it may be said, few studies exist that examine reflection upon experience to be equally significant as the adventure experience itself. As such this thesis fills a significant gap in the research literature of adventure education. Therefore, the overarching aim of this study is: To consider the meaning, structure and significance of the lived reflection experiences and pedagogical influence of outdoor leaders in adventure education. If this meaning, structure and significance can be interpreted and represented via appropriate and adequate methodological means, then recommendations concerning the pedagogy for an adventure education that may foster transformative learning can be proposed.
Further, this study aimed to sustain a commitment to the research question, research methodology and to do justice to the stories offered by people for interpretation and retelling (Rea, 2008). Livo and Rietz (1986) explain that: ‘Story’ is a universal mirror that shows us the ‘truth’ about ourselves – who and why we are. When we look into this mirror, we see daily routine and mundane circumstances transformed into something profound. ‘Story’ takes the ordinary and binds it into all of human existence, revealing the significance of the trivial. (p. 4) Stories are multi-dimensional. We use them to motivate others, to convey messages and to share experiences. We tell stories to entertain our friends, connect with new people and to make sense of the world around us. As we tell stories, we create opportunities to express views, reveal emotions and present aspects of our personal and professional lives. Frequently we engage in this uniquely human activity in creative ways, and in doing so stimulate our imagination and enhance our memory and visualisation skills. Our ability to communicate, not just our own experiences but the experiences of others, enables us to transcend personal frameworks and take on wider perspectives. Stories, lived and told, have endured as a powerful learning and teaching tool (Jackson, 2007; Paley, 1990); and the contribution can surpass the individual, influencing a larger community and context: Small stories…. can be brought together on the basis of their main characteristic, namely that they are presented as part of a trajectory of interactions rather than as a free standing, finished and self-
24
contained unit. More specifically, a) the events they report have some kind of immediacy, i.e. they are very recent past or near future events, or are still unfolding as the story is being constructed; b) they establish and refer to links between the participants’ previous and future interactions….. including their shared stories. In this way, the stories are not only heavily embedded in their immediate discourse surroundings but also in a larger history of interactions in which they are intertextually linked and available for recontextualisation in various local settings. (Georgakopoulou, 2007, p. 40) But why reflection? Why should ‘reflection’ rather than ‘processing’ or ‘learning’ serve as a guide for this study into the lived experience of adventure education and transformative learning? ‘Reflection’ and ‘meaning making’, as ways of understanding how humans live and relate to new meaning schemas leading to observable change, has attracted considerable attention in recent decades across various fields, for example in research (Carawan, Knight, Wittman, Pokorny, & Velde, 2011), management (Franz, 2010; Gabriel, 2008; Stokes & Wyn, 2007), behavioral studies (Kirk, 2010; Nesbit & Mayer, 2010; Sutin, Costa, Wethington, & Eaton, 2010), nursing or medicine (Brendel, 2009; van der Zalm & Bergum, 2000), professional development (Ajjawi & Higgs, 2007; Higgs & Mcallister, 2007; Shockley, Bond, & Rollins, 2008; Swanson, 2010), and education (Carlberg, 2008; Cilesiz, 2009; Pugh, Linnenbrink-Garcia, Koskey, Steart, & Manzey, 2010; Rowley, 1998). A shared feature of this writing and research is concerned with the cumulative effects of modernity upon our ability to dialogue with our inner self. Failing to reap ‘the wisdom of our inner life’ (Sussman & Kossak, 2011) not only presents issues regarding Hahn’s prediction of social decline (Flavin, 1996) endangering personal and social growth, it also jeopardises the practice of effective teaching (Jay, 2003), which supposedly has a critical role in influencing the growth of the young and the society: We should ridicule a merchant who said that he had sold a great many goods although no one had bought any. But perhaps there are teachers who think that they have done a good day’s teaching irrespective of what [students] have learned. (Dewey, 1933a) Our experiences of reflection in learning are fundamental to how we make sense of the world. Even more than this, Dewey (1938) proposes that education, experience, and life are inextricably intertwined. We are constantly recreating ourselves, learning and adjusting our
25
own identity in the world, through the internal world of self-observation and self-reflection; what Gurdjieff (1963, 1973), Quspensky (1977), and Bennett (1983) call self-witnessing and self-remembering. This inward focusing, this contemplation of our own nature, is what Sussman and Kossak (2011) refer to as ‘the inner life’. For adventure education then, with its stated fundamental roots in experiential pedagogies (Berry, 2011; Hunt, 1999; Miles & Priest, 1990), research into the experiences of teaching and learning has the potential to reveal fresh insight about experience, engagement and participation. Tying the study to the scholarship and literature of reflection and transformative learning also anticipates a sensitivity to a broader discourse of resistance to the fast pace of globalisation, characterised by the emergence of the knowledge economy, social diversity, and complexity in technology that threaten the organic being of human nature in education. This study therefore, is an attempt to synthesise across the disciplines, and therefore increase the possibility of revealing how reflection is experienced by learners, how it is represented in their stories, and how it may be best facilitated by leaders. This thesis strives to make a unique contribution to the discovery of knowledge relating to how transformative learning is ‘lived’ through the pedagogical activities of adventure education. The theoretical critiques of adventure education and its pedagogical practices, the consideration and adaptation of narrative and hermeneutic phenomenology as an appropriate methodological approach, the re-representation of lived experiences through stories, and the subsequent discussion of the implications for the potential of a pedagogy that fosters transformative learning in adventure education is likely to be of interest to practitioners, educators and researchers of outdoor and adventure education, and to all who value experiential approaches to teaching and learning.
26
CHAPTER TWO: THE YARN OF THE STORYTELLER
Wherever a story comes from, whether it is a familiar myth or a private memory, the retelling exemplifies the making of a connection from one pattern to another: a potential translation in which narrative becomes parable and the once upon a time comes to stand for some renascent truth. This approach applies to all the incidents of everyday life: the phrase in the newspaper, the endearing or infuriating game of a toddler, the misunderstanding at the office. Our species thinks in metaphors and learns through stories. (extracts from Peripheral Visions, 1995, Mary Catherine Bateson) _________________________________
In the introductory chapter I wrote of the importance and significance in a study such as this, of writing this research through a narrative-phenomenological lens for the purpose of exploring teaching and learning stories. These teaching-learning process gaps and claims have preoccupied researchers in adventure education, or experiential education, for the past decade (Burnard, 1988; Seaman, 2008). As some members of the research community moved towards post structuralism since early 1980s, where realisation that researchers’ personal histories and stories also have an impact in the way the study is interpreted, examined and narrated, warrants the disclosure and acknowledgement of the researcher’s ‘position’ in view of a ‘true’ and holistic representation of ones’ experiences. The researcher’s life and experience – their reality – is accounted for and viewed as an essential part of discovering what is happening with the phenomenon under study. It is an inherent component of narrative inquiry, and especially so in the phenomenological tradition. Fine, Weis, Weseen & Loonmun (2003) argue that narrative researchers are never absent from the texts they write; it would be inappropriate to view the researcher as a potential ‘contaminant’, something to be separated out, neutralised, minimised, standardised, and controlled. Behar (1993) explains, “We ask for revelations from others,
27
but we reveal little or nothing of ourselves; we make others vulnerable, but we ourselves remain invulnerable” (p. 273); participants are then left carrying the burden of representations as researchers hide behind the cloak of alleged neutrality. Such action is predicated on a ‘clarion renunciation’ of the subjective or personal aspects of experience (Morawski & Bayer, 1995), particularly those of researchers. Stories of the researcher within the research thus act as a way of repositioning, disclosing, and acknowledging choices made about the focus, intent and conduct of the research study (Humberstone, 2004) and the necessary intertwining of the researcher with what is researched. McDrury and Alterio (2003a) similarly point out that our personal and professional experience influence how we use story and storytelling as a learning or research tool. We call the phenomenon of telling, ‘story’, and the inquiry into story, ‘narrative’, “thus, we say that people by nature lead storied lives and tell stories of those lives, whereas narrative researchers describe such lives … and write narrative of experiences” (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990, p. 2). While storytelling can occur spontaneously, the techniques writers use to draw readers into text parallel the ways many storytellers engage listeners in the oral process: for example, words are carefully chosen and arranged, presentation is purposeful in an attempt to capture the attention of readers or listeners, and use of intuition and past experiences or encounters to translate knowledge into words and images that appeal to the intended audience. The idea is that each significant word, or cluster of words, should serve two purposes: first, it should contribute to the meaning of what is to be conveyed; second, it should move the text or story forward in ways that continue to engage the audience or reader. Providing adequate contextual information about the storyteller (the researcher), and making clear how these might influence the development and interpretation of the stories or storytelling can be another useful technique because it helps readers or listeners connect with aspects that are meaningful to the writer as well as the reader or listeners (McDrury & Alterio, 2003a). Besides, it is often said that storytelling is an individual art and requires the storyteller to have knowledge of self, knowledge of storytelling literature or the experiences of those whose story is to be told, and knowledge of the group to whom one is telling the story (Greene & Del Negro, 2010; Lanson, 2011). Storytelling flows from a deep desire to share, the desire to be open about something that has touched one deeply. The choice of story and
28
the manner in which it is told reveal one’s inner self, and vice versa. Only when storytellers show willingness to be vulnerable, to expose their deepest feelings, values, dispositions and connect with the stories being told, can their interpretation and telling of the stories be meaningful and representative. Greene and Del Negro (2010) elaborate this point: A good storyteller is also a vital human being who finds joy in living, and who can reach the heart and mind of a child. Taste and appreciation grow as the storyteller is exposed to art, to music, and to dance; the entire range of feelings, intellect, and spirit comes alive. Good storytellers, like good wine, age well. The words of the story may not change, but what the storyteller brings to the story changes with the experience of living. (p. 92) These thoughts are in congruence with what had been discussed with regard to phenomenological research. In phenomenology, the researcher is not an observer, or a detached third party narrating the experiences of the study participants. Rather he or she is ‘living’ the experiences of the research, intimately involved with the experiences of the study participants (van Manen, 1990; Wattchow, 2006). More than this, Bell (2003) reminds us not to neglect the presence of the researcher, but: to attend to ways that the more-than-human world spoke through participants’ stories. There is a danger … when focusing on the metaphors and storylines that structure human experience, to forget that our words, as David Abram (1996) puts it, emerge ‘from our ongoing reciprocity with the world’. (p. 101) Only when the personal presence of the researcher is made more evident, and their teaching-learning experience of particular places, or cultural contexts, settings and background is clarified, can their words hope to be representative of the meanings and voices of those narratives gathered; a major undertaking of the way in which the inquiry phase of this study was set up. Van Manen (1990) reminds us that to disclose the stories, experiences and histories of the researcher in phenomenology is not to give a biographical or autobiographical account of the researcher’s life, instead it is about giving an account of the lived experiences of the researcher such that he or she can contribute and justifiably aid in interpreting and crafting a description that “reawakens or shows us the lived quality and significance of the experience
29
in a fuller and deeper manner” (van Manen, cited in Patton, 2002, p. 106). In his earlier work, van Manen (1977) highlights that the discovery of knowledge that is verstehen (understanding) is found in sharing a common meaning of mutual history, culture and language of the world as it is lived together; as such, the success of phenomenological inquiry does depend on the level of inter-corporeal and inter-subjective empathetic understanding between the researcher and the researched (Payne, 2005). Humberstone (2004) adds that such reflexive ethnographies make visible the researcher’s personal accounting of moral responsibilities and ethical dilemmas. On these bases, I trust that a careful written account of my stories that demonstrates how I, as the researcher (and storyteller), came to the study, and how I could be well placed to empathetically appreciate, describe, interpret, and represent the stories and experiences of the study participants, would be relevant and meaningful as part of this study. My role as researcher, interpreter, storyteller and writer in this study was made possible by the fact that I had personally lived similar experiences as those of the outdoor leaders and young adult learners in the inquiry. In this chapter, I describe through five short narrative accounts, my formative experiences in adventure education, and my professional development as an outdoor leader and educator. These stories are told to demonstrate my positioning in relation to the hermeneutical task of inquiring into, and representing, the lived experiences of transformative learning of the programme participants and teaching for change experiences of the outdoor leaders in adventure education programmes. This attempt includes detailing contextual information such as the culture, sites, programmes, participants and training pedagogy or practices that are relevant to this research study. The five narratives to follow, my stories, bring together various strands of my professional life as a learner, leader, adventure provider, educator, and researcher. It is not intended to be a detailed story of my entire life, or every adventure experience that I have had before the research commenced; rather these accounts aim to highlight some of those experiences that have raised important personal and professional reflections, and doubts I have posed after many years of involvement in adventure education. It is these reflections and doubts that have led me to this study. These stories have evolved over time with many telling and retellings in sharing and presentations. What follows is a more studied and structured form of telling (which is) attentive to the overall project. These stories are
30
narratives that have both formed a life - my life - and provided context for what I might use to re-form new stories of life. In shaping new stories (re-storying) through narrative inquiry, one builds on theory and practice both in the articulation of clearer understandings and in the implementation of new life patterns.
Message from the mountain “Should I?” I placed the application form right in Tin’s face, forcing her to put down the novel in her hand. “You are still at this?” she raised her head, frowned. “Okay, buddy, look.” She took the form from my hand and continued, “As I said earlier, this is Singapore, not your hometown in Malaysia! There are no jungles, rivers, mountains or whatever it is that you are worrying about!” she squeaked. “So what if you don’t have any prior experience with adventure?” There was an odd silent moment. “In fact you do.” Tin said matter-of-factly. She stepped in close and took hold of my arm. “You went for that 9-day course last year in Sabah. Remember? That was adventure, right?” She stared into my eyes, as if searching for an acknowledgement. I tried avoiding direct eye contact with her, easing her grip to move away from her, “yeah… but that is the point… that was my one and only. And I don’t have any of the skills to lead a group of people in this kind of adventure stuff; I don’t have any experience…..” I felt a sense of embarrassment as I spoke. Tin chuckled. “Come on, that is Sabah, Malaysia. We are talking about Singapore here!” She fixed me with her insistent, “There is NO adventure here in Singapore. I am born and bred here, I know!” She rambled on, “Adventure here is just about on-campus activities, climbing the artificial rock wall, flying down the zip wire, playing some games, that’s about it. It’s not that tough. I’ve been there, done that when I was much younger, like in my secondary school days.” Tin spoke proudly and convincingly, in the hope that I would be persuaded. “Oh, you also did that, right? I remember you were telling me you enjoyed camps so much, and this and that?” Tin questioned. I whispered, “But …” “Moreover” Tin babbled on before I could say more: “You are applying for an instructor job with OBS! Goodness grace!” She cried out loud. “Do you know OBS OUTWARD BOUND SINGAPORE?” She emphasised. “OBS is very famous when it comes
31
to camps and all that. The activities are very safe, and fun! The instructors are like superb.” Tin paused, as if recalling her experiences with OBS. “And you are going to be one of those ‘superb’ instructors, my friend. I will be so proud of you!” She grinned. Sensing that I was going to say another but, Tin intercepted: “Besides, the advert says NO-EXPERIENCE-REQUIRED and TRAINING-INCLUDED.” She pointed at the bold headers typed ‘Be an adventure educator. No experience required; training included’ as she read it out slowly and loudly. She then instructed, “So, don’t think too much, just do it! Send in your resume. Give it a go, who knows, it might change your life forever?!” ……….
This first narrative highlights my earliest recollection of an inner conflict and confusion about my experience in adventure education. I have always remembered this dialogue with Tin, my high school buddy. It was about six months since we had graduated with our diploma in Building and Estate Management some thirteen years ago. I was barely 20 then, and was at a cross road deciding if I should respond to the application invite to be an OBS instructor. I should say Tin is one whom I am indebted to very much for the start of my ‘serious’ involvement with adventure education. If not for her, I don’t believe that I would have come close to unearthing these inner tensions for possible resolutions, especially as to what adventure education meant to me, and what it might be like in Singapore. My personal story with adventure education begins in a clutter of teenage memories of school camp life that are vivid but largely unsorted. I do remember telling Tin that I ‘lived’ for these camp experiences months prior to this conversation, and, to state it mildly, I did not ‘live’ for many days of school and city life since my parents put me in this fast-paced, urbanised ‘concrete jungle’ at the young age of 13, in the hope for ‘better’ education (relative to what my hometown could offer). It is odd that I remember remarkably little of public school. I cannot recall school friends, activities, and interests. Teachers, hardly! Who was I? I do not know. However, my camp experiences: the 100km hike through tarmac and reserves from one end to the other of this vibrant city-state at age 15, my campmates, my first conquest of the 12-meter artificial rock wall tower, and my first water-bound experience while soloing a kayak, are vivid memories. I remember this talk with Tin for its sincerity on my part. She took it all quite lightly though. I meant it and felt misunderstood. I was not grumbling about this 700km squared country-island that is densely populated with some 5 million people. I knew she felt pride and superiority being Singaporean, being in a
32
post-industrial lifestyle, and being in a country that is considered one of biggest economic successes in Asia. Neither was I complaining about and escaping from school and city life; in both of which I had all the privileges bestowed by a comfortable upbringing. I was more celebrating time with adventure and nature, and the adventure, nature person within that comes with a surfacing of self. Oddly, as I recalled now, this brief exchange stands out as a starting point. My joyous experience of camp life was about something concrete, not merely random distraction from something else. I was trying to share a surfacing character and spirit. Sadly, this celebratory focus was all too easily denied. Three years later, my personal identity and beliefs in adventure were more defined, largely attributed to a 9-day Adventure Challenge Course experience. I was nominated to be part of the 30-member student council, and this course was a component of a 3-month long equipping programme. It was held in Sabah, Malaysia. The rustic natural setting, journey-like concept and extended course duration made sharp contrast to those of my previous in-thecamp-man-made-facilities-and-short-3-day camp experiences. I packed, walked, camped, rafted, climbed, sailed, and summited the Low’s Peak (13,455 ft.) - the highest mountain in South East Asia. I was miserable and vulnerable - disturbed by the rudimentary living conditions. I was angry - annoyed over the differences in peoples’ opinions and decisions. I was uncomfortable - distressed over my ability to manage motion sickness for the entire 3day-2-night sailing journey. And I was in despair - paralysed with dehydration and fatigue at some points. I lost weight, appetite, a water bottle, and a pair of sandals. In exchange, I gained muscle, tan lines, mosquito bites, but more than this, confidence, pride, respect, friendship, kinship and perhaps some wisdom. I surfaced realising that I have so much more in me, and was more resilient than I thought I was. I knew there was some level of transformation in me, though I could not aptly describe, or detail it. At the same time, I was amused, yet fearful of the mysterious power of adventure and nature, especially when it was beyond the boundaries of man-made environments. The deepest impression I gathered was that the mountain actually speaks. The mountain spoke through the words of another … Youth is not a time of life: it is a state of mind; it is not a matter of rosy cheeks, red lips and supple knees; it is a matter of the will, a quality of the imagination, a vigour of the emotions; it is the freshness of the deep springs of life. Youth means the predominance of courage over timidity, of adventure over the love of ease. This often exists in a
33
man of sixty more than a boy of twenty. Nobody grows old merely by a number of years. We grow old by deserting our ideals. Years may wrinkle the skin, but to give up enthusiasm wrinkles the soul. Worry, doubt, self-distrust, fear and despair – these bow the heart and turn the spirit back to dust. You are as young as your faith, as old as your doubt; as young as your self-confidence, as old as your fear; as young as your hopes, as old as your despair. (An Excerpt written by B Ullman, The Summit of Years Four Score, recorded in my journal in 1998) Strangely, there were no fun or joyous moments like those I had experienced earlier in school camps. Instead, vivid memories surround incidents, happenings, tough times and deep emotions. My combined adventure experiences left me with an inner tension, a conflict between the idolised images of fun, joyous and ‘victorious’ moments (of school camps) and the harsh realities of losing control, and being stretched physically, mentally and emotionally, by Mother Nature (the 9-day experience). Standing before this decision point, Tin’s assurance and encouragement weighed little as compared to my embodied experiences - my body, my flesh, and my emotions. I felt insignificant as an amateur standing before vast nature, yet I sensed that I now carried something more; a kind of wildness and resilience I found difficult to articulate…..
I saw my own ghost Eight months later I was appointed as an OBS instructor. I recall having this from-zero-tohero kind of pride then. Perhaps it was because of OBS’ status in Singapore – it is perceived as the adventure learning place - or was it because of the kind of rigorous and robust process over months of careful selection through to training, passing the assessment and gaining accreditation. Arguably, OBS then, was the only one to have such a vigorous development programme for outdoor practitioners. I had a busy time playing catch up especially on my hard skills competencies. I was not the most popular trainee when it came to skill-based chores as I am, as Tin would describe, a bookworm. Nevertheless, I fared fine and managed to pull through. Soon I had my own chance to lead groups. I was a junior instructor, at age 21, for many 5-day camps (or ‘courses’ as OBS would insist they be called). I watched many styles of leading and managing groups. For some, the ‘course’ was merely the completion of routines 34
and logistical errands. For others, the experience was a series of fun moments in the present. I remember mud parties over the 100-meter kayak portages. I remember star gazing under the moon light after a long day of hiking. I remember making apple crumble over the field stove alongside amazed and grateful campers. I remember the warmth between staff and camper, and camper and camper that was familiar but now different: now I was part provider and designer of others’ experiences. What they (campers) were to experience depended, in part, on how I crafted the events as they unfolded. I took these responsibilities seriously. I knew that my actions and words would serve as a potential role model for attitudes and behaviors about, in, for and with the natural and social world. I knew that there is a moral agency inherent in the tacit function of leadership, and, though lacking concrete direction, I was curious about and attentive to this role. I suppose I really gave it all some thought. I recollect the tense dialogues I had with my own ghost. ‘Ghost’, that may seem a strange word to use; I use it to represent the ‘spirit’ within us, the other often contradictory voices that exist within our inner beings. It was the part of me asking to simply lead for a good time for all, and the other fighting for the remembrances of the rewards and warmth of that which was beyond fun. There was a swell of comforting thoughts and feelings that brought my whole world into focus. Still, I was an instructor. No big deal. Our job was to be out there to have good time with, and for, a bunch of adolescents. Outdoor enjoyment and a sense of well-being for all was primary, with some learning of technical skills and community living being an inherent part of the agenda. Though I never deliberately stopped to set learning objectives, there was much learning going on. In these formative years of leading I began to realise the difference between an OBS course and the school camps that I used to participate in during public school. Seemingly the intention for participation is different: OBS courses focus on developmental growth individual learning needs and life skills, while school camps seem more concerned with giving everyone an equal opportunity to be out there for some exposure to nature and outof-classroom fun experiences. An OBS course is purposefully structured. Every activity is selected and flows in a sequence such that each inherent objective is built onto another according to physiological and group dynamic development. Courses are rooted in educational philosophy and theories, with careful consideration of risk, environment, liability, group size, course duration and leader involvement. It dawned on me that perhaps my
35
‘transformational’ learning experiences several years ago were not just the work of Mother Nature, credit also had to go to the skillful structuring, flowing and designing of the entire programme. Careful placement and selection of activities as well as pockets or purposeful quiet time meant a great deal to the depth of reflection and subsequently ‘transformation’ and growth of my own learning. I became conscious that my simplistic imagination of how transformational-like learning could be easily achieved in an adventure experience was just some silly and ridiculous thought. The fluidity and mysterious connection between the role of activities, team dynamics, leaders, programme designs and facilitation approach was so interwoven that it is almost impossible to suggest a ‘model’, or to figure a standard way of doing things. I now grasped what Conrad and Hedin meant when they suggested that the experiential pedagogy employed in adventure education experiences is inherently “too mysterious a phenomenon to fully comprehend” (1981, p. 6). Despite this unsettling realisation, one thing was made certain: I, as the appointed leader, have the power to enable and influence the dynamics of learners, activities, team and physical environment (to some extent) for the achievement of purposeful learning that is more than the element of fun. Perhaps that is the reason for the surfacing of my own ghost earlier. My stint as a field instructor was short-lived due to a health condition unexpectedly discovered over a staff training expedition a year into field practice. I was re-designated the role as programme and administrative executive and had less opportunity to touch base with the ground of practice being a group leader and journeying with participants. To compensate, I began to read more purposefully. I became more familiar with the roots of Outward Bound, adventure programming design principles, theoretical methodology and pedagogy. In particular, I distinctly remember staying up all night to finish John Graham’s Outdoor Leadership (1997) whilst preparing the train-the-trainer packages. Graham’s concise text describes the numerous elements which are essential to the making of any leader. A key message from Outdoor Leadership captures the essence of Graham’s leadership principles and my starting point as a leader imbued with educational objectives: Certain attitudes, certain ways of looking at leadership, are essential. They make your role as leader easier and you more effective in it. Attitudes about caring, responsibility, and courage ….. about self-
36
image, self-reliance, listening to your heart, believing in people, valuing practice, and knowing that you’re always in the right place at the right time. (Graham, 1997, p. 15) This succinct message evoked an arrogance that I came to realise as immature. I had begun to feel a sense of glamour as I grew more confident in field practice. I felt I was in a position to decide learning for participants. I had thought I could dictate what I wanted, all for the reason of so-that-they-can-learn-something. If they were late, I cancelled the activity and told them to bear the consequences of their lateness. When they failed to show respect, I reciprocated by having them grasp what it was like to not be given respect. I decided I was in full control of their bodies, minds, relations and spirits, because I was the leader and I knew it all. I caught myself in the act of egotism as a result of the power given being in a ‘leadership’ position. I became aware of another inner ghost emerging. I was ashamed of myself. It was yet another starting point.
The phantom leader I waltzed through the next year as an administrative executive putting on multiple hats: programme designer, resource coordinator, client manager, mentor trainer and administrative officer. There were sunny days, especially those when I had the chance to go outfield, observing seniors or shadowing younger trainers. But most days were gloomy because typical office work was not my cup of tea. There were the responsibilities of engaging in administration follow-up with business partners, functions to attend and outreach to extend leads for business. There was also the task of dealing with demanding stakeholders: negotiating agreements between internal and external customers, persuading trainers in experimenting with new ideas, fighting for more resources to support innovations in a wider range of courses, and many more. These mundane, repetitive administrative chores were times that dragged the most. Field days were more exciting over this period, even though I acted only as a shadow instructor to the leaders of the group. I remembered Graham’s teaching on leadership, about attitudes, and I knew I was constantly searching for the perfect leading strategy; until one fine evening…. It was a quarter past ten. The atmosphere was filled with tension. The clear skyline tinkling with stars did little to sooth these angry and upset young men and women. Cold breeze evaporated instantaneously as they came in contact with the hot burning skins of
37
these young people. The day had been long. The elements were against them all through it. I bet they were all exhausted from the 10-hour paddle. But they seemed ready to fight. The scent of sea salt filled my nostrils as I took in a deep breath trying to calm my racing heartbeat. I was not ready to deal with this situation. Nothing from my twenty-four years life experience could inform how I should proceed. I was anxious and guarded. I gazed into the darkness looking for the expression in their eyes. I caught a few despite the distance. They were a mixture of fear and apprehension. “Let’s feed them first.” Karl whispered into my ears. “And find out who is the ring leader.” I pressed close to his elbow and tiptoed to reach his shoulder in hope that my nervous response could reach only his ears and not anywhere else, “okay, you take over, yeah?” ………. Thirty minutes passed quickly as everyone ate their food packs in silence. Perhaps they are conserving energy for later. Karl, my senior, had acceded to their request for an open-floor discussion in fifteen minutes time. More like a confrontation, I thought. I locked my eyes on the group from a distance, observing their body language for signs of distress, whilst trying to listen in to Karl. He was gathering information from the other instructors leading the group. The conversation centered on group dynamics, a possible influential figure(s) within the group, their progress over the past seven days and the day’s journey. According to Karl, this is the first time in OBS’ 37 years of history that a boycott situation has surfaced. I had thought I was the only one facing this for the first time. With at least sixty of them standing before us now, I felt relieved knowing that I was not alone in this. At eleven sharp Han walked with unhurried ease, yet covered a lot of ground with his long, loose-jointed stride towards us. Alongside him were two others from the group. “I am Han and I speak for the group.” So he is the ring leader. “We want to tell you that we see no meaning in continuing the expedition tomorrow. So we will not paddle.” “Have a seat.” Karl replied gently and gestured for him to sit. “Let’s sit and talk.” Karl took a moment to study the young chap as Han settled down on the field chair. His friends sat beside him. He was confident, composed, articulate and insistent. Indeed a strong influential figure. “We all recognise that it is late; the group is tired; and the group has some concerns.” Karl paused to allow just enough time for Han to take quick mental notes. “Would you like to share with us the group’s concerns?”
38
“We don’t see why there is a need for us to do this.” Han said with a hoarse, flat tone. “First we were made to come for this compulsory 9-day course during our scheduled holiday. Then we were made to pay for it. Fine, we came. It was disappointing that the activities we did were nothing new; many of us had done them when we were in high school. It just does not make sense to us how this long paddling is going to make any difference to our lives, or learn something that we do not already know. Today was a good example. We don’t see why we need to ‘suffer’ to learn.” I could see Han’s persistence under the dim moon light. “I see. We hear you. Now that you are here I guess we don’t have to dwell on the part about this course being held in your holiday and you having to pay for it. I will leave this for your sponsoring organisation to take as feedback for future improvement on course arrangements, would that sound reasonable?” Han took a minute to deliberate on Karl’s question. He then nodded in agreement. “Great. Now let’s deal with the issue at hand then. So the group feels you have been forced into this, and the past seven days’ activities haven’t been novel and there has been no learning value?” “Sort of.” “And as such, what remains in the last two days of the paddling journey would also make no difference, and would not make much sense for you all?” “Somewhat.” “Okay. I think I grasp the issue now. I can empathise with how you and the group are feeling at the moment. We are all tired. It’s almost half past eleven and we have passed our lights-out time. Do we agree that this is not the best time to discuss whether or not we should paddle on tomorrow?” Karl negotiated. Han contemplated. Before he could respond, Karl re-proposed. “I suggest we rest for the night and discuss it tomorrow morning after we have freshened up. What do you think?” Han remained poised. “It will be at ten in the morning then.” He challenged. Damn. He sure knows how to negotiate a deal. It’s not like he is not aware that our daily routine starts as early as six with morning exercise, and of the long distance we need to cover tomorrow. Ten for discussion would mean starting paddling by only noon, which would make it impossible to reach our next campsite by nightfall. He is pushing his luck.
39
“Hmmnn… Han, I can see that the group listens to you.” Karl leaned back on his field chair. “Do you think your request is reasonable, realistic and is in the best interests of your group?” There was an awkward silence. Han fell into deep thought, avoiding direct eye contact. “If it’s okay with you, I would like to share a personal story about a similar situation that I faced.” Karl offered. Han nodded in silence, giving consent for Karl to continue. What follows was an inspiring story about faith and beliefs, and choices and consequences. As I listened, I could feel warmth dancing up my spine. Even though the message was not directed at me at that point in time, I was moved and marveled by Karl’s sharing, of telling his story, and of the lessons behind the tale. What came after was more astonishing. I remember clearly that there was no confirmation that night that we were to meet only at ten the next day. Karl hurried everyone to get some rest as it was close midnight, assuring me that everything would be fine. Despite disbelieving him, I snoozed off quickly as it had indeed been an exhausting day. I was awoken by Karl a few hours later. He pointed towards the place where the group was supposedly camping: “Look what these guys are up to?” By the shoreline, the group was busy preparing and setting up for the day’s paddling journey….. It was a beautiful sight beneath the sunrise. ……….
This is a true account, though the characters are given pseudonyms to protect their identities and in some parts I have used ‘poetic license’ as I could not recollect all of the details. This evening was another starting point for two reasons. I experienced the power of story and storytelling; and I found the perfect leading strategy which I termed as phantom leader. Leading is influence. It was demonstrated at three levels: the lived experience of Karl; Karl’s story to Han; and Han to his group. It was amazing to learn how stories, through the sharing of lived experiences, can teach many lessons, and enable willingness, or change attitudes. Karl’s experiences spoke to him, and his experiences in turn, enabled Han’s (and my own, for that matter) realisation of, and willingness for subsequent learning, attitudes and choices. I am convinced that leadership lies in influencing and in enabling willingness. I learnt later through my post-graduate course on educational leadership that influence is determined by, but not identical to, power and authority. Influence refers to the
40
processes by which power is exercised and authority is legitimated. Influence translates the potentialities of power and authority into the realised action of leadership. The term Influence is sometimes used interchangeably with power in that influence gives power, whereas at other times power is said to create influence (De Pree, 1997; Raven, 1992). As straightforward as they seem to present, these two terms are yet another complex and multi-faced concept (Clegg, Courpasson, & Philliops, 2006; Pheffer, 1981). Here I distinguish between power and influence as follows: Influence is the ability to affect the behaviour of others in a particular direction (Cohen, Fink, Gadon, & Robin, 1992), whereas power is the potential or capacity to influence (Raven, 1965, 1992). It is interesting to recognise how I can express clearly the definition and differentiation between power and influence through theoretical discourse. The interplay between the two in reality however, was not as easy to articulate or observe. Nevertheless, I was certain, that something magical was taking shape about leading, about influencing, and about storytelling - over these three years of work as part programme designer, and part shadow instructor.
Adventure in the concrete jungle My last four years’ service with OBS as deputy, and subsequently head of the Youth Development Unit was an exciting and fruitful one. The responsibilities lay largely in taking a birds-eye view of the overall business operations for the youth market (accounting for approximately S$4 million income): in forward planning of resources, marketing, reporting, business engagement, and other ‘management’ work. These experiences contributed significantly to how I conceptualised the adventure education scene in the concrete jungle that is Singapore. This impression has been the result of frequent dialogues and engagement with school representatives, OBS’ business partners, competitors and prospective clients. It seems odd to include an impression of adventure education in Singapore in this section as it is in fact, still evolving and developing as the scene changes itself. However, I have decided to describe it here as this point was possibly the start for which I gained a degree of clarity and began to make sense of the role of adventure education in Singapore. I can now better articulate an image, but recognise it is the rudimentary response which I have gathered through a cycle of involvement in the adventure education scene as a learner, leader, programme provider, educator and now researcher.
41
I recognised that adventure education (and its discourses), particularly in Singapore and in Asia, were in their relative infancy. Despite being an increasingly noticeable pedagogical alternative in Singapore, there was little, or in fact no known writing to represent the entirety of the adventure education scene in Singapore. I found a few local empirical outcome-based studies, but none critically addresses the ‘local’ adventure state, or how adventure education is practiced in Singapore. This is hardly surprising as prior to the emergence of academic interest, outdoor programming and pedagogies in Singapore was largely practitioner-led and utilised imported approaches to practice. Two organisations arguably ‘lead’ the growth and presence of adventure education in Singapore: the Ministry of Education (MOE), and Outward Bound Singapore (OBS). I found two terms from sociology studies best exemplify the practices of adventure education in Singapore. School-based adventure education can be described, in Loynes’ (1998) terminology as the ‘McDonald’ adventure; and Outward-Bound type adventure education, perhaps as one manifestation of 'Disneyization’ (Bryman, 2004). Loynes’ (1998) idea of McDonald adventure arises from seeing adventure today as a highly marketable commodity where the user can ‘purchase’ adventure according to their desired outcomes, or a set of known outcomes. Loynes likens such trends to the growth of the McDonald’s chain, or the ‘McDonaldization’ phenomenon, a terms coined by George Ritzer (1993). School-based adventure in Singapore exemplifies dimensions characterised by the process of McDonaldization – efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control (Ritzer, 1993). Efficiency is evident with the increasing trend of large numbers of students being put through a multi-activity challenge programme in a relatively short span of time, usually between one or two days (Tay, 2006). Tay points out that such constraints in time inevitably lead adventure education programmes to be more activity-centred rather than learnercentred; the focus of the task at hand therefore is to ensure all students have a chance to try all activities, rather than each student actually encountering meaningful experiences (features of calculability). I can relate to Tay’s points from my personal experiences, as campers, and conversation with schools representatives during my work with Outward Bound had expressed similar concerns. With the core focus being efficiency, predictable and uniform strategies are deployed in that standard programmes are used throughout the various MOE campsites for different profiles groups. This is to ensure that each student
42
receives a ‘standard’ package. This has certainly led to high levels of control measures in relation to the selection, practices and activities offered to learners, which currently is the primary function of the Outdoor Education Unit in MOE. Tay (2006) attributes the emergence of school-based adventure programmes to the camping movement by scout groups in the early 1900s, and traces the institutionalisation of adventure-based outdoor education in state schooling in Singapore to the acquisition of the first campsite under MOE on St. John Island (located off the southern coast of Singapore) from as far back as the 1960s. School-based adventure programmes were moulded more evidently in the early 2000s following the introduction of education policies to encourage all national schools to provide for all their students the opportunity to participate in at least three outdoor camping experiences in their school life (Tay, 2006). This, along with a number of other factors (including governmental support, the set-up of an Outdoor Education Unit in 1999 to provide resources and formulate control policies for schools, the existence of private adventure pursuit groups, and access to more newly established campsites) resulted in the establishment of considerable adventure education presence in Singapore. Though MOE seemingly exerts the strongest influence in the use of adventure in schools, Outward Bound is arguably the foundation of adventure education in Singapore (Martin & Ho, 2009). The idea of an Outward Bound School of Singapore (OBSS) was mooted by Dr Goh Keng Swee in 1967, the then Minister of the Interior and Defence, and adopted as part of the national agenda to building a ‘rugged society’. Lead by two New Zealanders – Hamish Thomas and Al Cameron, the original school was established in December 1967, with the purpose of providing education, leadership and character training. Although the school has been remodelled and renamed Outward Bound Singapore since 1991, this mission still forms the basis of OBS today. Being partially funded by the State in the early days of her start-up, OBS had been the leading provider of adventure programmes in Singapore. Over the past 40 years, more than 200,000 individuals have been, in OBS’s claim, ‘changed for life’ by an OBS experience (Outward Bound Singapore, 2007). Outward Bound’s roots and involvement in the development of adventure education in Singapore have meant that outdoor programming and practices retain a strong presence of adventure and camping traditions from the UK or North America, particularly under the
43
influences of Kurt Hahn - the founder of the Outward Bound movement. Hahn’s core ingredients in an outward bound journey are the Four Pillars – fitness, project, service, and expedition (Sato et al., 2002). Two of which, fitness and expedition, were the main components that guided the practices, nature and structure of OBS adventure programming until 1991, largely due to OBS’s positioning within the political structure to prepare young men and woman for national service. A re-branded OBS has moved beyond the focus of physical training programmes since 1991, and has an added dimension allowing participants to discover and learn values and skills which would be useful in their daily lives, such as selfbelief, leadership and teamwork: “We wanted to make OBS more relevant to the needs of society so that it could play a greater role in nation building and in training the youth of Singapore. We had to find a fun, yet effective way so that our programmes would have impact and meaning,” says LTC Winston Lim Kee Boon, who presently serves as Honorary Senior Consultant, OBS (cited in Outward Bound Singapore, 2007). OBS remained in the limelight and was considered pivotal to nation building: OBS training is vital to our efforts to impart relevant life-skills, good values and positive attitudes to Singaporeans, particularly the young. It is education for life, and an investment in Singapore’s future. (Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, in Tay, n.d.) Since then, OBS have extended their outreach beyond youth development. More innovative approaches were considered and being incorporated into school-based programmes, corporate management training, therapeutic work, social recreation and community bonding efforts, expeditionary learning, both in local and regional areas, as well as young children leadership and team building. Arguably, an outward-bound type of adventure education characterises the phenomena of Disneyization. The term ‘Disneyization’ was devised by Bryman (2004) to parallel Ritzer's (1993) notion of ‘McDonaldization’, and the definition is a deliberate adaptation of that concept. In portraying the principles that the Disney theme parks exemplify, four dimensions of Disneyization are distinguished – theming, hybrid-consumption, merchandising, and performative labour (for review, see Bryman, 2004). These features can be discerned in relation to OBS’s growing use of theming strategies in their programmes and in the deployment of copyright images in merchandising their programmes, souvenirs,
44
products and corporate communications. The differentiation of consumption is also relevant here as it is to do with the ways in which people are encouraged to get on with their ‘consumption projects’ – their adventure experiences - while actually giving the impression that they are doing something else. Performative labor serves to convey a sense that the employee is not engaged in work, but they are adopting a kind of lifestyle such that the participants are not reminded of the world of work and can get on with the happy task of enjoying the adventure, activities, programmes and so on. The smiling, helpful demeanor may also encourage participants’ re-engagement in OBS’ subsequent programmes in its own right. While McDonalization and Disneyization can be seen to complement one another, Ryan (2005) points out that they can be viewed as quite separate phenomena: “McDonaldization is characteristic of a homogenized, Fordist world, with fewer choices and greater cultural imposition, while Disneyization describes better an emerging post-Fordist, heterogeneous world of increasing variety and consumer choice” (pp. 268-269). This distinction, interestingly, concurs with my observation and thoughts about what MOE and OBS presently offer to the local adventure education state. While tributes should be given to their commitment and leading contribution to the presence of adventure education in Singapore, I also consider the phenomena of McDonalization and Disneyization as representative aspects of the adventure education scene in Singapore. In striving to find its own identity, adventure education in this concrete jungle is in turbulent times. The emergence of the McDonalization and Disneyization adventure phenomena reveals Singapore’s shifting sensibilities. Seemingly it has become less British (in its definition of Outward Bound practices), more American (in the area of adapting expeditionary learning concepts striving for ‘ruggedness’ and ‘individualistic’) or even Australian (in terms of place-based learning promoting loyalty and a sense of belonging to the country). Just like Singapore’s uniquely multi-ethnic, diverse and vibrant community within the Asian culture, the hybrid of the various strands, practices and traditions of adventure education philosophies and practices could as well be one that reflects the country-defining, distinctive yet dynamic personality in the region.
45
The telling of this story has served to paint the scene for my decision to switch from being a practitioner for ten years, to now an academic and researcher with Republic Polytechnic. The lack of a regulating body in terms of minimum standards for the practice and nature of outdoor and adventure programmes, as well as limited access to professional development and teacher training in outdoor education (Martin & Ho, 2009) was the primary reason for the initiation of academic development in adventure education in Singapore. The first outdoor and adventure learning programme enrolled students in 2007. There can be little doubt that Republic Polytechnic’s Diploma in Outdoor and Adventure Learning initiative marked a significant milestone for the adventure scene in Singapore. This diploma programme is offered at post-secondary level, and aims to equip individuals with the knowledge and skills to meet the growing needs of Singapore’s outdoor and adventure industry, over a three year engagement. Abdul Kahlid was largely responsible for developing this diploma programme and gaining its initial approval in 2006. From the outset, the curriculum development team questioned British and North American influences, and took into account distinctively local perspectives from a broad range of stakeholders involved in the outdoor and adventure industry. The diploma was constructed based on the following premise: …. to enable graduates to use outdoors and adventure programmes to facilitate inter and intrapersonal development across a diverse range of clients; …. to adopt a multi-disciplinary approach to the study of outdoor and adventure learning. (Kahlid, 2006) This stance signifies the commitment for the future direction of adventure education to be more inclusive and holistic. In an effort to provide a clearer representation of what entails adventure education in Singapore, the diploma adopted Ewert (1989) and Gilbertson et al. (2006) stance on adventure education: Adventure education can be defined as a variety self-initiated activities utilising an interaction with the natural environment, that contain elements of real or apparent danger, in which the outcome, while uncertain, can be influenced by the participant and the circumstance. (Ewert, 1989) When students participate in a structured programme that uses perceived risk to enhance and influence learning, they are participating in more than just an
46
adventure experience, they are participating in adventure education. (Gilbertson et al., 2006) Adventure education has become increasingly popular in Singapore. Though there was no agreement as for a clear description of adventure education within the community, I can agree with the above definition based on my involvement in the industry over the past 17 years, beginning as learner. It is also within this concept of adventure education that I situate this study. My experiences as practitioner have enabled the identification of prominent issues that continually arise within the adventure education context in Singapore. They include: repetitive activities or experiences (all the man-made structures which are used to facilitate activities look the same); duration of courses (limitations of time); compulsory adventure (learners ‘forced’ to participate); mass participation (demand versus supply); and value for money (client satisfaction, quality assurance of programmes). Concepts and ideas from current adventure education discourses seemed inadequate in addressing these concerns. With adventure education becoming more like the McDonalization and Disneyization phenomena, critical questions on outdoor leader development and quality learning experiences came into sharp focus. Now as an academic preparing young practitioners for the future trends of adventure education in Singapore, my concerns surround the question: what would require more, or less of the leaders and learners given this context?
Thirst for knowledge The starting point for this study is my personal inquiry into teaching (leading) and teacher knowledge. In the past twelve years, I have had experience being in different story lines in the adventure educational landscape – as outdoor leader, as leader trainer, and now as leader educator, and as educational researcher. My questions, or ‘research puzzle’, have focused around the broad questions of how individuals teach and learn, of how temporality (as in the context of time) connects with change and learning, and of how structures (as in educational or training structures such as curriculum or programmes) frame our lives. I am interested in learning about the practical knowledge of outdoor leaders, what they know and how they use it; and certainly the central way of understanding their knowledge was an inquiry into the nature of their images of teaching.
47
Teaching concerns the pedagogic practice of teachers, educators, or outdoor leaders (in the case of adventure education). Despite a growing body of increasingly complex critical outdoor education theory reflecting some vigorous debate as to whether experience should be left negotiated by the learners or be instructor-driven (For example Brown, 2002; Hovelynck, 2001a; Loynes, 2002), the role of outdoor leaders has been repeatedly emphasised as critical in enabling the learner’s outdoor and adventure learning process (Bobilya et al., 2005; Kalisch, 1979; Mitten & Clement, 2007; Schumann et al., 2009). The outdoor leader’s ability to influence is the key factor here; it goes beyond the knowledge and ability of technical skills instruction. My learning from the pursuit of a Master’s degree in Educational Leadership informed me that influence tactics and their consequential outcomes have been examined from multiple perspectives over the past twenty years. During this time, several experts in leadership and management studies (such as Ansari & Kapoor, 1987; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1988; Yukl & Tracey, 1992) have made substantial contributions in this area. Surprisingly, this area has not received a large amount of attention in outdoor leadership studies (Hobbs & Ewert, 2008), despite the fact that many researchers have argued that the ability to successfully influence people in their learning is critical to outdoor leadership effectiveness (for example Brymer & Gray, 2006; Graham, 1997; Hayashi & Ewert, 2006; Hobbs & Ewert, 2008). To-date there were limited studies found on influence tactics specific to outdoor leadership (perhaps only work by Schumann et al., 2009). Due to the fact that our knowledge is embodied, and embedded in a culture (Allix, 2003), I realised that considering only the discrete images of teaching (in this study) might lose the holistic sense of an individual person and his or her experiential knowledge. Dewey’s (1938) theory of experience, specifically the notion of interaction and continuity, had also motivated me to reconsider the rationale for a more holistic approach to this inquiry. There is a need - for me, as both an educator and a researcher, to take into account the learners involved in this process, to hear their points of view, to gain insights into their lived experiences, to more effectively capture a holistic view of the adventure leaning process. Consequently, this study hears narrative stories from ‘both sides of the coin’ - the participants, and the outdoor leaders involved in the adventure setting.
48
This study also attempts to provide a contribution to the identifiable gaps in the existing wealth of knowledge which I uncovered in the course of preparation and setting up of a course curriculum. The essence of learning from adventure is the process of making meaning out of experience. Notably, though most adventure learning process models and framework have been generally accepted as the fundamentals in outdoor and adventure literatures, cross discipline researchers (for example Egan, 2002; Fenwick, 2001; Holman, Pavlica, & Thorpe, 1997; Michelson, 1996) have raised critiques, challenging the simplistic representation and their weakness in holistic considerations (more will be discussed in the impending chapter). In recent years, the study of one’s learning experiences in outdoor and adventure education had shifted its focus from outcome-based to more process/contextbased inquiry (for example Mckenzie, 2000; 2003; Shellman & Ewert, 2009; Sibthorp, 2003) which attempts to qualify and explain the learning phenomenon. More empirical studies that address the specific context of leading and learning, such as what was intended for this study, would surely be valuable to provide a clearer understanding of the outdoor and adventure learning process. Therefore, an attempt to synthesise across the disciplines, has the potential to increase the possibility of revealing how teaching and learning is experienced by outdoor leaders and participants and how it is represented in their stories, would be a way to satisfy my thirst for knowledge. This chapter has provided a narrative of my professional development and experiential association with leading and learning in adventure education. It demonstrates how twelve years of experience and thought relating to questions about leading, learning, lived experience and adventure education, has gathered momentum to the point where it could be conceptualised into a doctoral research study, as outlined in the previous introductory chapter. Therefore, this study proceeds with a clear commitment to critique existing assumptions within adventure education that may serve to impact upon lived experiences of teaching and learning, and within a certain context or setting. In addition, I feel compelled to argue the case for a methodological approach that provides the best fit possible for the researcher, the researched, and the adventure experiences implicated in the research. If these aims can be satisfied, then the stories of the lived experiences of leaders and learners can be drawn upon for the development of plausible insights, that allow for a careful consideration of the limitations and possibility of a
49
teaching for change pedagogy for adventure education. As such, this study represents the first doctoral research in adventure education that specifically aims to propose a teachingfor-change pedagogy based on the collection, interpretation and re-representation of empirical data. Studies like this one, and others with similar aims and intentions, are badly needed in a field that has, for far too long, relied upon unsubstantiated claims about the legitimacy of knowledge and experience that result from its pedagogical practices. For a start, a critical review into the discourse of adventure education, reflection and transformative learning, as it relates to this study, would help us unearth some of the most entrenched assumptions and beliefs that may by implication, limit the possibility of a change-responsive pedagogy. This is the task for the next chapter.
50
CHAPTER THREE: THE TALE OF LEARNING IN ADVENTURE EDUCATION
All my life people have asked the question, directly or indirectly, “why in the hell do you climb mountains?” I can’t explain this to other people. I love the physical exertions. I love the wind. I love the storms. I love the fresh air. I love the companionship in the outdoors. I love the reality. I love the change. I love the rejuvenating spirit. I love to feel oneness with nature. I’m hungry; I enjoy eating. I get thirsty; I enjoy the clear water. I enjoy being warm when it’s cold outside. All those simple things are extremely enjoyable because, gosh, you’re feeling them, you’re living them, your senses are really feeling. I can’t explain it. (extract from Petzold's Teton Trails, 1976, Paul Petzoldt) _________________________________
In Chapter One, I provided a brief overview of the focus, aims and methodological approach of this research. In Chapter Two, I discussed how nearly fifteen years of lived experience in adventure education led me to critically question my practices in the field in relation to some of the literature I had been exposed to in my studies and early parts of a professional career as an academic in outdoor and adventure education. My inquest into the literature and scholarship in adventure facilitation appeared to provide some guidance, yet much of my ‘lived’ practice seemed restricted to rhetorical discourse or simplified theoretical representations of adventure education. This discourse acknowledged the mysterious nature of learning phenomena and seemed to idealise the influence of outdoor leaders, whilst at the same time suggesting the possibility that the learning process could be multi-faceted and complex, with possible critical influence by the outdoor leaders. Over the past decades, researchers and practitioners in the field have acknowledged a gap between claims about the powerful, transformational-like learning often witnessed as a result of adventure experiences, the role of outdoor leader in enabling this learning, and the ability of the most common research methods and conceptual models to explain how such
51
learning and teaching occurs (for example, Brown, 2009; Hattie et al., 1997; Kraft, 1990; Mckenzie, 2000, 2003). Ewert (1983) refers to this gap as the ‘black box phenomenon’ and proposes that the multifaceted and elusive nature of the qualities of the experience requires further explanatory understanding of the phenomenon of adventure. It seems that what may be required is a critical examination into the teaching-learning phenomenon within this ‘black box’, and a methodological approach that has the potential to delve into the lived qualities of the adventure education experience. The inappropriate ascription and simplistic view of how transformative learning and teaching for change occurs in adventure education now require a critical analysis and deeper exploration if this study is to work towards offering empirically qualified theoretical conclusions. The purpose of this chapter is to account for the tale of learning in adventure education. This chapter critically examines the assumptions and claims, or textual representation and broad constructions, of transformative learning and teaching for change in adventure education. It outlines the major issues, challenges current practices and raises important questions, which must be answered if we are to understand how we could promote transformative learning. I begin this task by posing two questions: 1.
In the many speculations about the positive changes in learners after their adventure experiences, how and on what theoretical basis might such teaching and learning be constructed, if at all?
2.
Does the emphasis on ‘transformative’ learning within this discourse represent embryonic and authentic learning in adventure education? And, if not, what does it represent?
While a comprehensive review of adventure education would yield much of interest, it is not the main objective here to provide a thorough history of adventure education discourses. Rather, it is to offer textual representations and cultural constructions of teaching, learning and context in which the representations of lived experiences in ‘re-telling teaching and learning stories’ and ‘plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education’ (presented as Chapter Six and Chapter Seven) might critically and reflexively be read. As a pre-text to this, it is necessary to provide a brief overview of the emergence of adventure education and then to focus upon a number of influential developments in
52
adventure education discourses with regard to learning experiences, and by implication, pedagogical practices.
THE FUNDAMENTALS OF ADVENTURE EDUCATION Typically adventure education has been presented in the literature as a branch of outdoor education emphasising the development of interpersonal and intrapersonal skills through experiences that often involve elements of “excitement, uncertainty, real or perceived risk, effort, and interactions with the natural environment” (Raiola & O'Keefe, 1999, p. 46). Views from the UK (Barrett & Greenway, 1995), USA (Ewert, 1989; Priest, 1999b) and New Zealand (Brown, 2009) have all been consistent in claiming that the aim of adventure education is to facilitate the achievement of behavioural change, or the awareness for change (Priest, 1999b), through deliberate use of adventurous experiences. Hunt (1990) proposes three basic tenets upon which adventure education built its philosophy: using experience to enhance the educational process, building moral character, and developing a willingness to take risks. Miles and Priest (1990) add the dimension of a whole person approach (physical-social-spiritual) and the emphasis of change in one’s sense of self (self-realisation): Adventure education involves the purposeful planning and implementation of educational processes that involve risk in some way. The risk may be physical, as in a trip in a mountain wilderness where people may be caught in storms, may become lost or may be injured by falling rocks. It may be social, as in asking someone to expose their fear of speaking before groups or otherwise risk social judgment. The risk may be spiritual, as in placing the learner in a situation where he or she must confront the self or perhaps the meaning of life and death. The defining characteristic of adventure education is that a conscious and overt goal of the adventure is to expand the self, to learn and grow and progress toward the realisation of human potential. (Miles & Priest, 1990, p. 1) Hirsch (1999), in an effort to bring definition to the term adventure education, develops three main types of adventure programming. These definitions attempt to make a distinction between recreational, developmental/educational, and therapeutic types of adventure education. Priest (1999b), however, maintains that these defining aspects were
53
rooted in the primary objective of the educational experience, that it is not necessary to define such boundaries in adventure education. Priest’s assertion to not have any distinctive typology of adventure education may contribute to the confusion and contradiction about the aims and purposes of adventure education in the broader discourse of this field; albeit the fact that development in adventure education, in general, is “influenced by prevailing economic climate, government legislation and an array of human factors” (Bunyan, 2011, p. 6). In very general terms, part of this confusion surrounds attempts to define adventure education as experiential education. Richards (1992), for example, advances that adventurebased experiential education was a subset of experiential education, with defining characteristics such as having an authentic experience, involving reflection, and ultimately developing new ways of thinking: Experiential education is a holistic philosophy, where carefully chosen experiences supported by reflection, critical analysis, and synthesis, are structured to require the learner to take initiative, make decisions, and be accountable for the results, through actively posing questions, investigating, experimenting, being curious, solving problems, assuming responsibility, being creative, constructing meaning, and integrating previously developed knowledge. (Itin, 1999, p. 93) This statement immediately raises important questions such as; are adventure education and experiential education the same thing? If not, what pedagogic relationship exists between them or, in other words, how do they ‘function’ as a form of educative practice? Wurdinger (1994) argues against Richards from the point-of-view that adventure educators “frequently employed teaching strategies that were much more ‘traditional’ than they were ‘experiential’ in nature, and thereby provided theoretical information first and then the opportunity to engage in the practice” (p. 25). Offering a similar position, Hovelynck (2001a) demonstrates the complex nature of defining the practice of experiential education and the philosophy associated with it. He strongly articulates a need to distinguish between forms of active learning that had a didactic style of teaching as their basis and experiential-based adventure education, where experience was used to teach, in a manner that was reflective of the philosophy of experiential education. Despite the absence of a clear, distinctive definition of adventure education, there was broad agreement in the literature that
54
adventure-based education was heavily influenced by the philosophy of experiential education in North America that had the American Outward Bound Process at its base (Hattie et al., 1997; Hopkins & Putnam, 1993; Richards, 1992).
Historical context and philosophical roots The concept of using adventure to enhance education originates from the ancient writings of Plato when he raised the idea that: if risks must be run, should one not run them where success will improve people? (Stonehouse, Allison, & Carr, 2011). In the Republic, Plato (380 BC) discusses the advantages of allowing the young to participate in risk-taking activities for the purpose of learning virtues such as wisdom and courage. This idea is foundational to adventure education and is still being practiced by numerous adventure education programmes today. Other foundational ideas were borrowed from early thinkers in the fields of philosophy and psychology. For instance, adventure education’s learning process relies on Dewey’s (1916, 1938) theories of experience, reflection and education, and the goal of building self-esteem stems from Maslow’s (1962) theory of self-actualisation. The roots of adventure education can be traced back in Europe and America since early 1900 (Prouty, 2007). Kurt Hahn (1886-1974) and Paul Petzoldt (1908-1999), each with his special contributions, are two of the most prominent characters in our history that have influenced modern adventure-based education. Hahn, crowned as a ‘visionary’ (Flavin, 1996; Miner, 1999; Richards, 1999), advocates his philosophy on the education of active and compassionate young citizens via outdoor challenges and adventures. Petzoldt had a handson passion for sharing his deep love for the mountains and adventure (see for example Petzoldt, 1974; 1976; 1984). Hahn’s ideas strongly influence Petzoldt’s desire to educate young people about the art and craft of leading others in the great outdoors. He took direct action in the creation of a very important school focused on the development of young professional outdoor leaders, thereby he is presented as ‘actionary’ (O'Connell, 2011). While Hahn gave us the foundations for adventure-based curriculum (i.e. challenge, learning, compassion, service, and self-growth) (Richards, 1999), Petzoldt gave us the information for the adventure-based profession (technical skills, leadership skills, judgment, environmental responsibility, and safety) (O'Connell, 2011).
55
Notably, the history of adventure education is a history of organisations. Adventure education emerged in the United States in the 1960s as a response to the perceived growing social problems amongst adolescents. Four organisations were central to bringing adventure education programming to the U.S. during the 1960s and 1970s: Outward Bound, National Outdoor Leadership School, Project Adventure, and the Wilderness Education Association (see Attarian, 2001; Miles & Priest, 1999; Prouty, 2007). All played a role in establishing and popularising adventure education. The common cause shared by these organisations was their efforts in striving to treat the malaise of youth by using wilderness and adventurous activity to enhance self-esteem and to assist in moral and character development. Their vision and success stories triggered the rapid growth of adventure education programming both in the U.S. and internationally over the decades that followed. In the 1980s and 1990s there was exponential growth in the adventure education field. There was the rise of experience based training and development programmes for corporate executives; the more refined use of wilderness as therapy work for ‘youth-at-risk’, now called adventure therapy; attempted modification and use of the outdoors as accessible programming for disability groups; and renewed interest developed in the later part of 1990s for women and girls centered programmes. Outward Bound also sparked an initiative called expeditionary learning that took adventure education into schools (see Raiola & O'Keefe, 1999 for more detailed description). The most noteworthy philosophical contributions to adventure education can be credited to four individuals: Plato, Rousseau, Dewey, and Hahn (Wurdinger, 1997). The collective thoughts and ideas of these four men form the philosophical foundations of adventure education, as they provide the philosophical rationale that presents the merits and value of adventure education for society. Table 1. (p. 57) summarises their key contributions to adventure education. Stonehouse, Allison and Carr (2011) trace Plato, a classical Greek philosopher and thinker, to be one who advanced the belief that experience is important when it comes to learning. In the Republic, Plato (380 BC) brings forth the importance of young people participating in physical and risk taking activities for a higher educational purposes. For Plato, the moral value of exercise and sport far outweighed the physical value. Hunt (1999)
56
proposes that Plato’s (380 BC) Republic can be read as a theory of education. Hunt (1999) reveals Plato’s thoughts about the most effective means of teaching young people virtues such as wisdom, bravery, temperance, and justice, all needed to assume the responsibilities of adulthood. Furthermore, Hunt (1999) presents these virtues as the backbone of leadership and responsibility to suggest that young people’s preparation for adulthood and leadership was “best done by being confronted with real life experiences” (p. 116). These ideals are used to strengthen the rationale behind adventure education (Wurdinger, 1997). Table 1. Major Philosophical Contribution to Adventure Education Name Plato
Role Philosopher and thinker (427347 BC)
JeanJacques Rousseau
Educational and political theorist (1712-1778)
John Dewey
Educational philosopher (1859-1952)
Kurt Hahn
Educational thinker and founder of adventure programmes (1886-1974)
Key Contributions 1. Advances the belief that experience is vital when it comes to learning process. 2. Discusses virtues of wisdom, bravery, temperance and justice which can be considered as the backbone of leadership and responsibility. Proposes that to learn how to act courageously, one must be exposed to risk taking (Plato, 380 BC). 3. These ideals are used to strengthen the rationale behind adventure education (Hunt, 1999; Wurdinger, 1997). 1. Purports that physical exercise leads to the development of sound mind, and being pushed physically leads to an ability to overcome stress of life (Rousseau, 1762/1979). 2. Suggests that man is naturally good and that if a child is removed from negative influences of an urban life, he can grow into a moral and productive adult (Bisson, 2009; Smith, 2011). 1. Introduces linkage between experience and learning. Believes learning and understanding is dependent upon experience. (Dewey, 1938). 2. Argues for education of the whole person, not transmission of facts. Suggested growth must be physical and moral, not just intellectual. 1. Understands education as a process of developing the citizenship of an individual (Hahn, 1936; James, 2000). 2. Introduces adventure as a tool to guide moral development of young people. 3. Teach values inherent to risk taking, e.g. courage, sensible selfdenial, tenacity, compassion, and enterprising curiosity (Richards, Hahn, 1960, 1965; 1999).
Rousseau’s contribution to adventure education can be traced to his ‘stages of man’s growth’ where the aims of education were uniquely tailored and guided by the developing child (Bisson, 2009; Smith, 2011). Primarily through his work Emile, or On Education, Rousseau (1762/1979) delivers his treatise on education whereby the importance of experience in education was conveyed. Many scholars in outdoor education have referred to Rousseau’s use of sensory experiences in nature as validation for the need to offer outdoor
57
education experiences to children from a young age (Gilbertson et al., 2006). Perhaps the most often-used quote from Rousseau to rationalise the use of the senses in education of children is: Our first matters of philosophy are our feet, our hands, and our eyes. To substitute books for all that is not to teach us to use the reasons of others… to exercise the senses is not only to make use of them, it is to learn to judge well with them. It is to learn, so to speak, to sense; for we know how to touch, see, and hear only as we have learned. (Rousseau, 1762/1979, pp. 125, 132) Beyond the promotion of sensory and natural exploration of the world by children, Rousseau (1762/1979) also proclaims that a good education should include rigorous physical activities and a close connection with the natural world. John Dewey’s philosophy of education (see Dewey, 1909, 1916) was one that opposed mainstream thinking during his time, which to some extent was a demonstration of venturing into the adventure (Hunt, 1999). Dewey argues that for a person to think at all implies adventure, and the quest for knowledge is itself an adventure, It also follows that all thinking involves a risk. Certainty cannot be guaranteed in advance. The invasion of the unknown is of the nature of an adventure; we cannot be sure in advance. The conclusions of thinking, till confirmed by the event, are, accordingly, more-or-less tentative or hypothetical. (Dewey, 1916, p. 148). Dewey (1938) transforms ‘experience’ from a lay person’s word, into a powerful term in educators’ language and his work helps us have a better understanding of the positive connection between concrete experience and abstract learning. Dewey understands that merely having an experience is not the same as learning from it. Action and thought have to be linked. Back in 1916, he posits, Thinking…. is the intentional endeavor to discover specific connections between something which we do and the consequences which result, so that the two become continuous. Their isolation, and consequently their purely arbitrary going together, is cancelled; a unified, developing situation takes place. (Dewey, 1916, p. 171)
58
He describes how learning transforms the impulses, feelings, and desires of concrete experience into higher-order purposeful action: The formation of purposes is, then, a rather complex intellectual operation. It involves: (1) observation of surrounding conditions; (2) knowledge of what has happened in similar situations in the past, a knowledge obtained partly by recollection and partly from the information, advice, and warning of those who have had a wider experience; and (3) judgment, which puts together what is observed and what is recalled to see what they signify. A purpose differs from an original impulse and desire through its translation into a plan and method of action based upon foresight of the consequences of action under given observed conditions in a certain way… The crucial educational problem is that of procuring the postponement of immediate action upon desire until observation and judgment have intervened… mere foresight, even if it takes the form of accurate prediction, is not, of course, enough. The intellectual anticipation, the idea of consequences, must blend with desire and impulse to acquire moving force. It then gives direction to what otherwise is blind, while desire gives ideas impetus and momentum. (Dewey, 1938, p. 69) According to Dewey (1933a), thinking, or inquiry, contains an element of risk and uncertainty. Thought begin for a person in an attempt to render an indeterminate situation determinate. And the work of thinking – of risking – is done in the actual world of a person. Hunt (1999) purports that Dewey’s notion of the indeterminate situation was the concept that linked him most readily to a rationale for adventure education, despite him being understood by many as the ‘father’ of experiential education. Hunt elaborates, To ask a student to question any aspect of his or her world is to risk many things. The complete security of the settled past is abandoned in favor of an uncertain future opened by inquiry. The exercise of the human imagination is fundamentally an exercise of adventure when it reaches out to an uncertain future. If to think is to inquiry, then to think is to risk being wrong. (Hunt, 1999, p. 121). Kurt Hahn was an innovative, progressive thinker, perhaps best known for his contribution to the development of Outward Bound (see Hahn, 1960, 1965; Stetson, n.d). Over his lifetime, Hahn created three schools and several programmes which were focused on developing righteous, vigilant, and active citizens, who possessed a sense of duty to
59
others and to God. In an effort to respond to ‘declines’ (Richards, 1999) or social diseases, Hahn designed educational programmes that emphasised the role of character, service, challenge, and physical endeavor. Going ‘outward bound’ sought to ensure the survival of five qualities proposed by Hahn: (1) an enterprising curiosity, (2) an undefeatable spirit, (3) tenacity of pursuit, (4) readiness for sensible self-denial, and (5) compassion (Flavin, 1996). Kurt Hahn uses adventure as a tool to get at the values inherent in taking risks; he “revolutionised the teaching of morality and virtues in pre- and post- World War II youth by using adventurous and potentially risky outdoor experiences to develop in them virtues such as compassion, courage and resiliency” (Bisson, 2009, p. 111). Other roots of adventure education trace back to the indirect philosophical and theoretical contributions made by William James (1842-1910), Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Jean Piaget (1896-1980), Eric Erickson (1890-1983), Abraham Maslow (1908-1970), Carl Rogers (1902-1987), and Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862). The contributions made by these individuals have helped inform my perspective of experiential education, however, their contributions to adventure education are viewed as secondary. The historical and philosophical roots of adventure education are relevant to this study as they provide contextual background to the practice of adventure education. This background information reveals efforts made in the past by educators and philosophers to improve our society. Furthermore, the roots of adventure education reveal clues about the current thinking and practices of professionals in adventure education and experiential education. The value placed on risk taking (Plato), the development of the whole person (Dewey) through experiential learning, and the emphasis on physical involvement (Rousseau) and moral development (Hahn) have been helpful as I review and understand the past, present and future of adventure education in the urban setting.
Adventure education as transformative education The centrality of adventure learning in relation to outcomes is such that any deep investigation into these learning experiences will inevitably reveal some perspective changes about individuals and their social, cultural attachments or detachments as a result of the adventure experiences (see for example Gass, 1993; Hattie et al., 1997; Hopkins & Putnam,
60
1993; Nadler & Luckner, 1992; Schoel et al., 1988; Sibthorp & Arthur-Banning, 2004). Boyd and Myers (1988) refer to education with such aims as transformative education: Education must adopt the end-in-view of helping individuals work towards acknowledging and understanding the dynamics between their inner and outer worlds. For the learner this means the expansion of consciousness and the working toward a meaningful integrated life as evidenced in authentic relationships with self and others. This view of education we have called transformative education. (p. 261) O’Sullivan, Morrell and O’Conner’s (2002) explanation of transformative education offers a closer link to that of adventure education. Besides stressing that transformative education is rooted in the expansion of consciousness, they propose an understanding of one’s (self, social, political, vision and dream) about future possibilities is needed for such a shift in one’s consciousness: Transformative education involves experiencing a deep structural shift in the basic premises of our thoughts, feelings and action. It is a shift of consciousness that dramatically and permanently alters our way of being in the world. Such a shift involves an understanding of ourselves and our self locations, our relations with other humans and with the natural world; an understanding of the relations of power in the interlocking structures of class, race, and gender; our body awareness; our vision of alternative approaches to living; and our sense of possibilities for social justice and peace and personal joy. (O'Sullivan et al., 2002, p. 11) The possibility of understanding adventure education through the lens of transformative education introduces the need to review the literature of transformative learning. I find great value in the parallel nature of transformative learning theory and a philosophy of adventure education. These two sets of ideas appear to possess considerable agreement between them as they relate to the value of: reflection in learning arising from experiences, the process dimensions of learning, the role of metacognition, social dimensions and emotions in learning, personal awareness and potential for change in the learner, and reflective learning. In particular, five key authors on the various strands of thought within the research and theory on transformative learning provide an invaluable guide in deliberating the best way to study the adventure education ‘black box’. They are: (1)
61
Paulo Freire (1984) - Transformation as consciousness-raising; (2) Jack Mezirow (1991) Transformation as critical reflection; (3) Larry Daloz (1986) - Transformation as development; (4) Robert Boyd (1991; Boyd & Meyers, 1988) - Transformation as individuation; and (5) John Dirkx’s (1997) – Transformation as soul work, or inner work. In the next few pages, I will introduce each of these thinkers and writers about transformative learning as contributing key ideas that, over time, have built upon each other and culminated in a more detailed and sophisticated understanding of the phenomenon. Transformation as consciousness-raising Paulo Freire’s (1970) idea of transformative learning is about conscientisation or consciousness-raising. This work is guided by a desire for political liberation and freedom from oppression. For Freire, critical consciousness refers to a process by which learners develop the ability to analyse, pose questions, and take action on the social, political, cultural and economic contexts that influence and shape their lives. This process consists of action and reflection in transaction or dialectical relationship with each other (praxis). Freire believes that transformative learning is emancipatory and liberating at both a personal and social level. It provides us with a voice, with the ability to name the world and, in so doing, construct for ourselves the meaning of the world. Freire’s notion of transformative learning is evident in various ways within the practice of adventure education. Perhaps the most similar representation of transformation as consciousness-raising in adventure learning is that of Walsh and Golins’ (1976) Outward Bound Process. Arguably, this interactive and replicable change process is one of the most influential models in the brief history of adventure programming. The Walsh and Golins (1976) model places learners in a prescribed unique physical and social environment, both of which are usually novel to the learners. A series of conditions and events characterised by problem solving tasks are then presented where learners may experience some dissonance but work to overcome the disequilibrium in the group setting. The desired effect of this interaction between environment and overcoming anxiety is mastery, which helps the learner recognises the direction and meaning of their lives through this learning. In this sense, the Walsh and Golins (1976) model mirrors the processes and desired transformation
62
outcomes to that of Freire’s idea. Thus adventure education is a transformational process leading to consciousness-raising. Transformation as critical reflection Although Freire’s influence on Mezirow is clearly evident, Mezirow’s view represents a distinct understanding of what transformation means within the actions of adult learning. Central to Mezirow’s (1991) thinking is the process of making meaning from our experiences through reflection, critical reflection, and critical self-reflection. He eventually named this process perspective transformation (Mezirow, 1978, 1981) to reflect change within the core or central meaning structures (meaning perspectives) through which we make sense of the day-to-dayness of our experiences. Like Freire, Mezirow views knowledge as something that is constructed by the individual in relation to others. The core of the learning process itself is mediated largely through the process of reflecting rationally and critically on one’s assumptions and beliefs. For Mezirow, the outcome of transformative learning reflects individuals who are more inclusive in their perceptions of their world, able to differentiate increasingly its various aspects, open to other points of view, and able to integrate differing dimensions of their experiences into meaningful and holistic relationships (Mezirow, 1991). In this sense, Mezirow considers transformative learning as representing the core of adult development. Mezirow’s (1991) idea of transformative learning is reminiscent of Freire’s (1970) conscientisation, Kuhn’s (1962) paradigm and Haberman’s (1971) domains of learning, as well as that of the constructivists (Kolb, 1984; Piaget, 1972) and social constructivists (for example Vygotsky, 1978). Mezirow’s emphasis is on the ways in which our beliefs and assumptions shape and influence our perspectives, actions, and being in the world (Mezirow, 1991, 2000). Based largely on cognitive and developmental psychology, he proposes an 11phase model of perspective transformation (Mezirow, 1978, 1994) to illustrate how reflection happens within the realm of self. From another point of view, transformation can be seen to be occurring over four phases of learning (Mezirow, 1991, pp. 93-94): elaborating existing frames of reference, learning new frames of reference, transforming points of view, and transformative habits of mind. Mezirow (1995) further differentiates two types of transformation as a result of the types of reflection he proposed earlier (content, process
63
and premise in Mezirow, 1991): straightforward and profound transformation as a result of the types of reflection. In 1998, he further refines his earlier work to present a taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumptions that involve objective reframing and subjective reframing (Mezirow, 1998). In Appendix A I include a brief commentary on (a) Mezirow’s 11phase model of perspective transformation (p. 313); (b) four phases learning (p. 314); (c) types of reflection and their related transformation (p. 315); and (d) the taxonomy of critical reflection (p. 316) to provide more information on these key concepts. Mezirow’s description of critical reflection as impetus for transformation is evident in the emphasis of the role of reflection in adventure and experiential learning. Often, ‘critical thinking’ and ‘reflecting on experience’ are consistently described as the driving force contributing to behavioural changes in adventure learning. Reflection and its critical role in experiential learning has been widely recognised and discussed in a range of learning and teaching practices and ideologies in outdoor and adventure education (Brah & Hoy, 1989; Kolb, 1984; Miller & Boud, 1996; Weil & McGill, 1989a, 1989b). We can be sure that adventure educators believe transformation of an individual comes about as a result of critical reflection. Transformation as development The developmental perspective is implicit in Mezirow’s view of transformative learning; however, in the work of Larry Daloz (1986) this perspective provides a central or organising framework for understanding transformative learning as growth. Daloz (1986) sees our ability to make sense of our experiences as related to the developmental movements of our lives. Daloz’s transformation as development, argues that movement into new developmental phases requires the learner to construct new meaning structures that help them perceive and make sense of their changing world. His explanation of transformative learning depends less on rational, reflective acts and more on holistic and even intuitive processes and in this sense, seems even more oriented to personal change than Mezirow’s theory (Dirkx, 1998). Developmental growth of learners is an implicit outcome in adventure education as well. The impact and effect of experiential adventure education on growth of learners has been researched and most times positive outcomes can be found (Conrad & Hedin, 1982;
64
Neill, 2001; Passarelli, Hall, & Anderson, 2010; Tan, Kahlid, & Kuak, 2007). In fact, personal growth is broadly identified to be the main focus of adventure education programmes (Hirsch, 1999). Transformation as individuation A strand of transformative learning that has received relatively less attention is represented in the work of Robert Boyd (1991; 1988). Boyd’s ideas of transformative learning are embedded within his notion of transformative education. He sees transformation as individuation. His concern is primarily with the expressive or emotional-spiritual dimensions of learning and integrating these dimensions more holistically and consciously within our daily experience of life. According to Boyd, self-knowledge, or knowledge of ourselves and the world, is mediated largely through symbols rather than directly through language. Symbols are powerful images or motifs that hold considerable significance for us because they represent, at an unconscious level, deep-seated issues and concerns that may be evoked through the study of content or subject matter. For Boyd, meaning making involves processes of recognising, naming, and elaborating, within conscious awareness of these images (cited in Dirkx, 1998). The goal of transformative learning is to identify these images that arise within the learning process and to establish an intrapersonal dialogue with them. This dialogue represents a constructive relationship between the conscious ego and the less conscious aspects of the psyche or self. Interestingly, such a process of changing self is commonly identifiable in adventure learning. There have been plenty of studies examining the impact and effect of adventure education on one’s personal effectiveness and self-concept (for example Hopkins, 1982; Klint, 1999; Marsh, Richards, & Barnes, 1986; Richards, Ellis, & Neill, 2002; Shamir, House, & Arthur, 1993; Stogner, 1978; Thomas, 1985). Hattie et al. (1997) conclude through their meta-analysis that facets of self-concept may include independence, physical ability, peer relations, physical appearance, confidence, self-efficacy, family, well-being and many more. It is believed that transformation of the individual - the self, remains a core duty of adventure education.
65
Transformation as soul work Compared to the scholars’ contribution to the conception of transformation already discussed, Dirkx (1997, 2001) suggests a more integrated and holistic understanding of subjectivity, one that reflects the intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual dimensions of our being in the world. Dirkx (2006) contends that transformation of our ‘frame of reference’ (Mezirow, 1991) through reflection is a necessary condition for transformative learning. However, he argues that such shifting of our frame of reference should involve both rational and extra-rational processes, because our beliefs of this consciousness at the forefront derive largely from unconscious inferences that we make from our experiences in and with the world. Dirkx argues that the sets of beliefs that make up our frame of reference vary in the extent to which they represent emotionally charged clusters of relational experiences to individuals. They are the part of one’s ‘shadowy inner world’ (Dirkx, 2001), that part of our being that shows up sometimes as the censor and judge, the parent and the young child, the trickster, the deviant, the man behind the curtain, and whatever other varying personalities seem to reside within the inner world of a ‘being’, forming a kind of community of which one seems to be a part. Often, these ‘beings’ appear through symbolic forms, including story, myths, rituals, dance, poetry, music, metaphor, images, fantasy and dreams. Dirkx believes that if we want to understand what is involved in developing a relationship with the ‘self-inthe-world’, we need to first begin to see this everyday world as an enchanted place, a place of wonder, mystery, and awe. Dirkx explains the distinction of his transformative learning concept, Those of us who take seriously the ‘transformative’ in transformative learning are interested in a kind of ‘deep’ learning that challenges existing, taken-for-granted assumptions, notions, and meanings of what learning is about. In exploring the nature of deep learning, some writers focus on the cognitive, epistemic, and sociocultural dimensions of the process. My interest revolves around a kind of learning that integrates our experiences of the outer world, including the experiences of texts and subject matter, with the experience of our inner worlds. Although my focus is unabashedly on the subjective, the goal is to develop understanding of this subjective world that is
66
fundamentally human and archetypal. (cited in Dirkx, Mezirow & Cranton 2006, p. 126) Dirkx’s work focuses on the ‘community’ of self in ‘place’, situating the importance of seeking to account for the way in which the social, cultural, and embodied, as well as the deeply personal and transpersonal aspects of our being, potentially play out in the process of transformative learning. Mezirow’s transformation as reflection provides a guide as to how we can understand the ‘lived’ transformation that contributes to the aspects of learning that one finds personally meaningful. It is worthwhile to note here that learning experiences that are personally meaningful may challenge at a deep and fundamental level our existing ways of thinking, believing, or feeling. These kinds of learning experiences, at times, may reveal a kind of ‘burning bush’ quality (Dirkx, 2001) or, as Mezirow (1991) describes, ‘epochal’. They are dramatic, profound, and deeply moving, what Mezirow refers to as a “disorienting dilemma”. Dirkx’s notion of transformation offers a new direction for adventure education to consider the soul work of an individual so as to illuminate the kind of transformation that may occurs in adventure learning. His description of transformation further emphasises the need for us to study the lived inner experiences and the role of imagination and fantasy involved in one’s adventure learning experiences. The self in adventure education Together, the integration of the above strands of transformative learning theory with adventure education philosophy underscore the importance of meaning in the process of learning and the role of adults in constructing and making that meaning within the adventure learning experience. Knowledge arises within the social acts of trying to make sense of novel experiences in the day-to-dayness of our lives. To be meaningful, what is learned has to be viewed as personally significant in some way; it must feel purposive and illuminate qualities and values of importance to the person or group. This review also stresses the importance of a dialectical relationship of self and society within the adventure learning experience. The self here refers to a broad understanding of anyone involved in the adventure education setting, be it the learner, or the leader. The self here is active, with a strong sense of agency, acting on and often creating the worlds which it inhabits. It is a reflective, dialogical, expressive, and deeply emotional and spiritual self that constructs and re-constructs itself through experiences of learning. I found this work, or these concepts,
67
bring huge potential in shedding some light, and to illuminate the shadowy, mysterious insides of the ‘black box’ and the complex human phenomenon that is in adventure education.
KEY CONSTRUCTS IN ADVENTURE EDUCATION Adventure education’s views on the learning process place a strong emphasis on hands-on experience and physical activity. This is acceptable as long as it remembers the other half of the equation, which is reflection and the making of connections between what was done and why. This field [refers to adventure education and the educators] is excellent at providing experiences for others, but if individual participants cannot make sense out of their experiences, or connect them to other experiences, this learning process is useless. (Wurdinger, 1997, p. 40) Wurdinger’s quote neatly summarises the three key constructs of adventure education: (1) the premise of an experience; (2) reflection and making connections; and (3) the ability of the educators in assisting learners to make connections from their experiences. These seemingly straightforward and simple constructs proved otherwise as I attempted to describe an image of adventure learning essential for this study. My quest to understand each of these constructs was confronted with contradictions and paradoxes. I realised that it is imperative for me to unpack each of these concepts before a clear picture of adventure teaching and learning may be accounted for. Uncovering the essence of each of these constructs proved to be valuable, as they have served as examples to mark the emergence of a rhetorical interest in the study of the ‘black box’ both in Singapore and in the discourse of adventure education.
Experience as reflective learning Experience as a key construct in adventure education has been consistently referred to as the driving force resulting in a person’s learning or change (for example Boud, Keogh, & Walker, 1985; Kolb, 1984; Weil & McGill, 1989b). Despite its critical role in adventure education, I realised that experience has perhaps not been fully understood, or referred to, as how it could be in most contemporary discourses and practices in adventure education.
68
Kolb’s (1984) description of experience is a good example to begin this critique due to its prominence in the construction of many other learning theories (Holman et al., 1997). Experience as singular, simplistic, external stimuli action David Kolb is recognised for his synthesis of a number of others’ theories, including that of Dewey, Lewin, and Piaget, which he used to author his experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984). Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory emphasises that ‘here-and-now concrete experience’ plays the central role in the learning process. His proposal is that immediate, personal, and tangible experience “is the focal point for learning, giving life, texture, and subjective personal meaning to abstract concepts and at the same time providing a concrete, publicly shared reference point for testing the implications and validity of ideas created during the learning process. When human beings share an experience, they can share it fully, concretely, and abstractly” (Kolb, 1984, p. 21). Kolb’s presentation of experience suggests that experience is to be understood separately from learning, seemingly experience acts only as a trigger to learning. Thus in contemporary adventure education discourse, experience is often understood as a singular, simplistic, external stimuli action. Boud, Cohen and Walker (1993) caution such separation of experience and learning, For the sake of simplicity in discussing learning from experience, experience is sometimes referred to as if it were singular and unlimited by time or place. Much experience, however, is multifaceted, multi-layered and so inextricably connected with other experiences that it is impossible to locate temporally or spatially. It almost defies analysis as the act of analysis inevitably alters the experience and the learning that flows from it. (p. 7) Fenwick (2000) similarly argues, What manner of learning can be conceived that is not experiential, whether the context be clearly educational or not? Experience embraces reflective as well as kinesthetic activity, conscious and unconscious dynamics, and all manner of interactions among subjects, texts, and contexts. (p. 244)
69
Beard and Wilson (2006) add that experience is more than just the action, “experience connect both the action and the sensing or thinking about the action” (p. 17). Cuffaro (1995) emphasises, “action and thought are not two discrete aspects of experience. It is not to undertake an activity and then at its end to contemplate the results. What is stressed is that the two must not be separated, for each informs the other” (p. 62). Drengson (1985) examines the concept of experience and explains the value it provides in the learning process. He proposes that “information does not become knowledge for us until we have made it our own…., until that is, we interact with it, relate it to what we already know, integrate it with our insights, and apply it” (p. 88). Drengson similarly stresses that experience include the thinking and integrating of the action experience. Experience and learning are not to be understood separately. Experience as reflective, social, continuous learning Such a notion is, in fact, not a novel concept. John Dewey is arguably, the foremost exponent of the use of experience in learning. Dewey’s analysis of experience is based on what he terms as “empirical naturalism” (Dewey, 1925, p. 1). Empirical naturalism attempts to make linkages between the human and the natural, the rational and the empirical, and the material and the idealistic. In his analysis, Dewey (1925) distinguishes between two different but interconnected aspects of all experience: its primary and the secondary parts. He describes primary experience as “gross, macroscopic, crude” (p. 6) and essentially “noncognitive” (p. 23). These are raw materials that the world presents to one’s senses. Secondary experience (also called reflective experience), seeks to make precise, microscopic, and refined the materials furnished by primary experience. Secondary experience, says Dewey, can “explain the primary objects, they enable us to grasp them with understanding instead of just having sense contact with them” (p. 7). Such a phenomenon that relates the primary and secondary forms of experience is what Marton and Booth (1997) refer to as appresentation - the manner in which a part of something that is perceived as an external experience can stimulate a much more complete or richer internal experience of the ‘whole of that thing’ to be conjured up. Dewey places further stress on the critical attention one need to pay to such secondary experience, The modern discovery of inner experience, of a realm of purely personal events that are always at the individual’s command and that 70
are his exclusively as well as inexpensively for refuge, consolidation and thrill, is also a great and liberating discovery. It implies a new worth and sense of dignity in human individuality, a sense that an individual is not merely a property of nature, set in place according to a scheme independent of him…. But that he adds something, that he makes a contribution. It is the counterpart of what distinguishes modern science, experimental hypothetical, a logic of discovery having therefore opportunity for individual temperament, ingenuity, invention. It is the counterpart of modern politics, art, religion and industry where individually is given room and movement, in contrast to the ancient scheme of experience, which held individuals tightly within a given order subordinate to its structure and patterns. (Dewey, 1925) For Dewey, experience is both personal and social. He purports that people are individuals and need to be understood as such; but they cannot be understood only as individuals, for they live always in relation to others, they live always in a social context. His writing of experience as an inquiry term in an educational context helps us realise that inquiry into learning needs to approach not only each individual’s learning, but also must strive to understand that learning takes place with others, with a teacher, in a classroom, in a community, and so on. The interaction and situation need to be taken into account (Dewey, 1938, p. 42). Furthermore, Dewey held that continuity is one criterion of experience, that is, the notion that experiences grow out of other experiences, and experiences lead to further experiences. As a construct in educational belief, when we think about a person’s learning in a social setting, or in a school, or as a result of a particular education policy or trend, that this is always part of a larger historical narrative, it is always changing, and it is always going somewhere: …. The principle of continuity of experience means that every experience both takes up something from those which have gone before and modifies in some way the quality of those which come after…. As an individual passes from one situation to another, his world, his environment, expands or contracts. He does not find himself living in another world but in a different part or aspect of one and the same world. What he has learned in the way of knowledge and skill in one situation becomes an instrument of understanding and dealing effectively within the situation which follows. The process goes on as long as life and learning continue. (Dewey, 1938, pp. 35, 44)
71
Dewey posits that education, experience, and life are inextricably intertwined. Thus when one asks what it means to study education, the answer – in a broad sense – is that it is the study of experience; and that this involves the study of educational life stories - for instance, how rituals, metaphors, habits, routines, and everyday actions influence more obvious narratives about learning curriculum and pedagogic strategies. Experience, therefore is a form of representation of one’s life stories. Experience as educational lived stories Adventure educators or researchers should remind themselves that the notion of experience involves a far more complex phenomenon. Experience is both action and reflective learning; it is both personal and social; it is both interaction and continuation; it is education, and it is life stories. Thus, if our aim is to understand the educational experiences of learners, then we need to dive into their lived experiences, their learning stories, their personal and social context, their life. This revelation excites and affirms me, for it has not only identified gaps in contemporary
adventure
educational
discourses;
it
reinforces
the
narrative,
phenomenological approach that I had questioned as an appropriate methodological approach for this study. Such an approach now seems even more relevant as a way to illuminate the adventure education experiences of the leaders and learners involved.
Reflection as meaning making The second key construct in adventure education is reflection. The role that reflection plays in education is currently attracting considerable attention and debate throughout the world. Numerous theorists and practitioners have advocated the use of reflection as a learning tool and have analysed the processes of reflection (Bogo, Regehr, Katz, Logic, & Mylopoulos, 2011; Boud et al., 1985; Butler, 1994; Coutts-Jarman, 1993; Hune, 2009; Mezirow, 1981; Schon, 1983, 1991; van Manen, 1977) but definitions of the concept remain relatively sparse. Knapp (1993) points out how broadly represented the term is in literature, and by doing so offers an appreciation for the complexity associated with the breath of meaning for reflection: The idea of reflection has carried many synonyms in the educational literature. Some of these other words are: debriefing, processing, active processing, critiquing, closure, elaboration, bridging, reviewing,
72
thinking about thinking (meta cognition), critical thinking, facilitating, analysing, publishing, generalising, teaching for transfer, evaluating, interviewing, inquiry, design, and consideration. (p. 17) For the purpose of this study, I have strived to develop a fuller working understanding of reflection in adventure education. I have located three authors whose scholarship has guided my thinking the most. David Kolb’s work was highlighted in this section because of the core contributions he has made to experiential learning theory. John Dewey was selected because of his fundamental contributions to experiential education. And lastly, Jack Mezirow’s ideas were considered in this light because of the influence his work had on adult learning and perspective transformation. Reflection as distinct steps in processing experiences In earlier paragraphs I have briefly discussed the neglect of ‘experience as reflective learning’ in existing adventure education discourse as a result of attempts to simplify discussion of learning from experience. Such bare consideration of experience as singular, simplistic, external stimuli action only, also has had a direct effect on how reflection is currently being considered, discussed, and deployed in practice in adventure education. Reflection is similarly viewed as a separate, singular entity of someone’s learning experience in existing adventure education discourse, largely due to the influence of Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory. I have earlier raised concerns about such a simplistic representation of one’s learning experiences, in particular, the nuanced relationship of appresentation. As an effort to critique and to investigate this more nuanced and complex relationship, I have drawn upon cross discipline studies on reflection discourses and have reviewed selected philosophical literature describing the concept of reflection in adventure education. Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory was among the most frequently referenced where teaching and learning in experiential settings are concerned (Holman et al., 1997). Despite coming under heavy scrutiny for his positioning of reflection as a dialectical opposite to experience, Kolb’s (1984) was recognised for his synthesis of a number of others’ theories, including Dewey’s theory of reflective thought in action and Lewin’s feedback cycle. Essentially, Kolb maintains that reflection exist as a distinct process that operates as part of a four-stage cycle, but he says little about how reflection occurrs for the learner. For Kolb,
73
reflection exists, according to his experiential learning theory, as one of the key processes that helps transform experience. Kolb’s idea of reflection has been adopted by many learning process models frequently found in outdoor adventure literature, such as the Outward Bound process model (Walsh & Golins, 1976), McKenzie’s (2003) Alternative model of student learning (build on Walsh and Golins’ Outward Bound process model), Joplin’s (1981) Five-stage model of experiential education, Gibbons and Hopkins’s (1980) Scale of experientiality, and several experiential learning cycles (Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984; Priest, 1990). These models similarly maintain that reflection exists as a distinct process that operates as part of a process, steps, or cycle that assist learners in processing the information they gather from their experiences. Holman et al. (1997) however, argue against Kolb’s positioning of reflection as distinct step that process experiences. They debate that reflection is part of the experience – not a separate and primary device giving meaning to pure experience. This assertion had been supported by Dewey’s (1933a) writing, that reflection is not separate, but is intrinsic to experience (Miettinen, 2000). More recently, Jordi (2011) purports a reframe of the concept of reflection in experiential learning beyond the rational and disembodied reflective practices. He illustrates how human’s physiological, existential, and social proclivities towards a process of mind-body integration, and therefore the need to reconsider how reflection is being perceived, or considered in experiential learning. His proposal on the nine elements, based upon the characteristic of individual and collective human experiential learning, appeals for a more expansive and integrative conceptualisation of reflection. Reflection as inherent, continuous thinking process of validity testing Dewey (1933a) describes reflection as “an active, persistent and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (p. 107). For Dewey (1933a), thinking and reflective thought came about as the result of a failed experience – an adopted habit or practice that no longer served the individual and which demanded a different resolution. Dewey (1933a) writes, “the origin of thinking is doubt, confusion, perplexity” (p. 21); and, “reflective thought is guided by the search for resolution” (p. 21). Dewey’s idea of reflection, as described in How We Think, suggests that reflection is not a separate and distinct stage apart
74
from experience or thought although reflection seems to arise after experience. For Dewey, thinking is reflection (1933a, p. 107). Dewey holds that our understanding of something comes about via direct relationship and experience with that object. “Reflective thought is encouraged by a direct experience. Persons do not just think at large, nor do ideas arise out of nothing…” (Dewey, 1933a, p. 99). In Dewey’s view, reflection is a five phases formalised thinking process (Dewey, 1933a) and contains none of the non-analytical features to which other writers on reflection refer (for example Dirkx, 2001; Mezirow, 1991). The first phase involves suggestions in which the mind leaps forward to a possible solution. The second phase is intellectualisation of the difficulty or perplexity that has been felt (directly experienced). This is followed by a guiding idea/the hypothesis to initiate and guide observation and other operations in collection of factual material. The next phase sees reasoning or elaboration of the idea or supposition as an idea, and lastly, testing the hypothesis by overt or imaginative action. Reflection for Dewey is part of science and entails proving or disproving a hypothesis (Dewey, 1968). Dewey’s conception of reflection extends beyond the notion of problem solving and includes, to a large extent, a way of thinking and being. The outcome of thinking – the result of reflective activity – for the individual includes a shift in values: “vital inference always leaves one who thinks with a world that is experienced as different in some respect, for some object in it has gained its clarity and orderly arrangement…. Genuine thinking winds up, in short, with an appreciation of new values”. (Dewey, 1933a, p. 100) Reflection as conscious thoughtful action The meaning of reflection came into sharper focus for me with consideration of the work of Mezirow (1991). Dewey’s work on reflection is one of the primary cornerstones for the foundation of Mezirow’s thinking. Mezirow (1991) acknowledges Dewey’s definition of reflection but expands his idea by suggesting that reflection is the validation of prior learning. He defines reflection as “the intentional reassessment of prior learning to re-establish its validity by identifying and correcting distortions in its content, process, or premises” (Mezirow, 1991, p. 15). It involves an awareness of our experience and a critique of what (content) we are perceiving, thinking, feeling and acting upon; a critique of how (process),
75
and the question of why (premise) we have perceived, thought, felt, or acted in such a manner. One distinctive difference Mezirow has in comparison to Dewey’s notion of reflection is that for Mezirow, not a lot of thinking and learning for adults specifically, is reflective in nature. The occasion upon which adults’ learning experiences require them to critique aspects of their prior learning (i.e. to re-evaluate the basis of their action), and therefore to question the truth, appropriateness, or authenticity of that learning is rare according to Mezirow (1991). Socialisation processes tend to firmly establish an individual’s schemas, making it difficult for adults to re-examine these “meaning perspectives” (Mezirow, 1991, p. 41). He further explains that much of the time; adults participate in one of two types of problem solving as part of their thinking activities: non-reflective action or reflective action. Non-reflective action includes habitual and thoughtful action without reflection (for example cooking a meal, or conversing in a foreign language), which in this argument, does not require – or encourage –“appraisal” of the previous learning (p. 107). These are thinking activities, but do not necessarily involve any form of reflection (according to his definition). Reflective action, on the other hand, involves the concept of thoughtful action, or ‘mindfulness’ (Langer, 1989, p. 114). Mezirow (1991) describes Langer’s ‘mindfulness’ as a process or state of being that was characterised by: 1. 2. 3.
4.
Awareness of content and multiple perspectives. Being more likely to be (aware) and have accurate perceptions when attending to the unfamiliar and the deviant, than when attending to the familiar. Welcoming new information, involving oneself in more than one view and focusing on process before outcomes, control over context, and creation of new categories. Valuing a process-oriented education – while mindlessness is associated with goaloriented education. (adapted from Mezirow, 1991, pp. 114-115)
Mezirow’s (1991) transformative learning theory advanced the key idea that reflective learning is an uncommon practice for adults, as it requires learners to wilfully reassess the existing schemas upon which their thinking and action is predicated. I suggest wilfully, because as Mezirow points out, social processes do not readily invite a conscious reexamination of our schemas, or established sets of beliefs. I view this as an uncommon
76
practice among adults in modern life because it requires a degree of self-examination – or as Mezirow puts it, it means reconsidering how an experience might inform previously held truths or beliefs. This act of reconsidering previously held truths is a fundamental component of transformative learning theory, and remains an important point for me to consider throughout the study. Perhaps what was most helpful in focusing my thinking on reflection for this study was Dewey’s idea that reflection comes about as a result of a perplexing situation, and that is flows naturally as a part of the thinking process for the individual. In addition, Dewey’s belief that reflection on experience sets the learner up for a possible shift in values is helpful in the process of making meaning of my study. The concept of mindfulness has added a rich theoretical dimension to this study, and offered an explanation of the deliberate effort of thinking and learning for young adults that others in the literature have not. ‘Mindfulness’, or reflective thoughtful action, due to the inherent demands it places on the learner to perform unhabituated and novel acts and the joint focus on process and content, shared exciting linkages to adventure education. By its very description, ‘mindfulness’, when viewed as Mezirow did, has helped me to identify the possible role reflection plays in adventure education. Mezirow’s concept of mindfulness offers a number of related links that exist between this particular form of reflection and the type of reflection and thinking that is commonly associated with adventure education. Reflection as holistic sense making approach Beyond Dewey, Mezirow and Kolb, other authors in reflection scholarship similarly offered direction to my conception of reflection in adventure education. Sugerman et al.’s (2000) synthesis of reflection literature helped draw the conclusion that reflection is about meaning making. Themes inherent to several definitions of reflection that they consulted inform three key steps in the reflection process: (1) reorganising perceptions; (2) forming new relationships; and (3) influencing future thoughts and actions. Sugerman et al. (2000) suggest that the outcome of these three steps is the process of making meaning, or learning, and that such an outcome is inherent to a definition of reflection. Caine and Caine (1994), through their work on active learning, theorise that individuals uses ‘active processing’ to make sense of experience and draw meaning from events almost
77
constantly. According to them, this process is both conscious and unconscious, and is almost a continual process. An individual consciously, or unconsciously, scans his or her bank of past experiences in order to make sense of an event that is unfolding in the present. Another worthy conclusion to note in Caine and Caine’s theory is that in order for reflection and learning to occur, learners need to be relieved of “threat” (1994, p. 80). This finding may contradict adventure learning theory understood as the Outward Bound Process proposed by Walsh and Golins (1976), and later re-conceptualised by McKenzie (2003). While Caine and Caine highlight the benefits of stress free environments that are conducive to learner openness and aliveness essential to making new connections, common knowledge in adventure education suggests that a modicum of stress promotes learning. While the major work of Dewey, Mezirow and Kolb illuminate the general nature of reflection as a phenomenon in learning, more specific references to reflection in adventure education were made by others (for example Barrett & Greenway, 1995; Hopkins & Putnam, 1993; Nadler & Luckner, 1997; Wurdinger, 1997). Within experiential education, reflection is a common cornerstone to theories and practices of learning. Numerous key points are presented by a variety of authors that have proved especially helpful. The contributions that are helpful to my thinking in the context of reflection in adventure education emerged from the work of Coleman (1976), Gager (1982), Hovelynck (2001b), Jarvis (1987), McKenzie (2003), and Walsh and Golins (1976). For the most part, these contributions provide a historical base of knowledge focusing on reflection in adventure education. My views about reflection in adventure education for this study can therefore be summarised in part with an amalgam of ideas authored by three writers. First I borrowed from Boud, Keogh and Walker’s (1985) previously expressed idea of reflection: “reflection in the context of learning is a generic term for those intellectual and affective activities in which individuals engage to explore their experiences in order to lead to new understanding and appreciations” (p. 1). Second, I worked with Caine and Caine’s (1994) three-part definition of reflection, which incorporates: (a) thinking about educative feedback given to the individual from others, (b) unassisted self-observation, and (c) “an ability to think about one’s thinking, feeling and behavior (metacognition) in relationship to making deep personal changes in one’s person” (p. 160). Lastly, I worked with the social-action idea of reflection that Mezirow (1991) provides, which suggests that “inherent to reflection is a process of
78
interpreting an experience by judging its effect on the authenticity or truthfulness of our ideas” (p. 11). I adopt Mezirow’s (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumptions to represent the aspects of reflection that learners in adventure education are most likely to encounter. These fundamental ideas of reflection serve as a backbone to the development of the conceptual framework which will be described in more detail in chapter four. Lived experience of reflection in adventure education discourses It is important to note here that my review of the literature on reflection revealed few studies that come close to examining the inner, lived experience of reflection for the outdoor education participant. For instance, McKenzie (2003) suggests that through solotime reflection, Outward Bound students ‘learn’ through their senses in a way that appears to supersede traditional cognitive forms of reflection. Davidson (2001) explores the merits of qualitative research as a method for studying the wilderness education of a cadre of boys, and Brewer and Sparkes (2011) propose that only through a narrative approach where bereaved children could reflect on their experiences and share their stories would we understand the meaning of outdoor physical activity in their lives. While it is frequently discussed in the literature, reflection remains an infrequent primary construct in the theory of experiential education research. There is an absence of research that has examined the lived experience of reflection for learners in adventure education. This gap is alarming, since the methodology behind experiential and adventure education relies directly upon reflection in order to help experiences in adventure education become educative and beneficial to the learner. As much as I am anxious about this alarming gap in professional discourse, I am equally excited to learn that there is considerable potential for in depth exploration in the area of reflection in adventure learning, and of alternative inquiry methods possible for us to uncover the lived experiences of reflection in adventure education.
Teaching and leading as fostering changes I have established that the end goal of adventure education is transformative learning. As educators and teachers-alike, outdoor leaders serve an integral role in fostering transformative learning in adventure education (Bobilya et al., 2005; Kalisch, 1979; Mitten & Clement, 2007; Schumann et al., 2009). Beyond the inherent qualities learners bring with
79
them to the adventure experience, outdoor leaders are a significant mechanism perceived to teach for change and to influence learners in making meaning out of their adventure experiences. Fostering transformative learning is not an approach to be taken flippantly, arbitrarily, or without much thought. Many would probably argue that it requires intentional action, a willingness to take personal risks, a genuine concern for the learner’s betterment, and the propensity to draw on a variety of methods and techniques that help create an environment that encourages and supports personal growth. Teaching for change is not easy work: There is incumbent upon the teacher who links education and actual experience together a more serious and a harder business. He must be aware of the potentialities for leading students into new fields which belong to experiences already had, and must use this knowledge as his criterion for selection and arrangement of the conditions that influence their present experience. (Dewey, 1938, p. 76) Transformative learning needs the learners to be actively involved: emotional, spiritually, and cognitively. Here Dewey brings forth the responsibilities on the part of the leader (teacher or educator in his words). This is the design of this study, to explore lived experiences from both lenses. While I imagine the inquiry into the lived experiences of learners and leaders can offer clues to understanding transformative learning in adventure education, and leading up to suggestions and proposal for an appropriate pedagogic approach, I envision review into current adventure facilitation and outdoor leadership literature may be useful in providing some leads. I begin this task by asking the most fundamental question: what is needed out of an effective outdoor leader? Effective outdoor leadership Discussion on effective outdoor leadership is rich and plentiful (see for example Aguiar, 1986; Martin, Cashel, Wagstaff, & Breunig, 2006; Priest, 1986; 1987; Priest & Gass, 1997a; Riggins, 1985; Swiderskl, 1981, 1987). For the purpose of keeping focus, I highlight three studies that have guided my thinking the most. Smith and Penney (2010) theorise an ‘extraordinary’ outdoor leadership approach. Through an exploration of the contemporary theories of leadership and outdoor leadership literature, they have developed a conceptual framework
80
which suggest that “the way leaders prove to be extraordinary in their leadership is in their demonstration of characteristics, values, behaviours and skills drawn from transformational and authentic leadership theories and in particular, spiritual leadership theories” (Smith & Penney, 2010, p. 27). Within their framework exists an important underpinning link to emotional intelligence that has been made across contemporary theories of leadership discussed in their paper. The importance of emotional intelligence and transformational leadership has been highlighted in an empirical study conducted earlier. Hayashi and Ewert (2006) found a number of unique characteristics of outdoor leaders’ emotional intelligence and leadership including adaptability, inspirational motivation, individual consideration, giving freedom for mistakes or failure, adopting a laissez-faire leadership style, contributions of past outdoor experience to the development of emotional intelligence as well as transformational leadership. Glyn Thomas (2004) presents a comprehensive understanding of what is required of a leader. Through his meta-analysis on facilitation literature, Thomas (2004) highlights four key aspects demanded of a leader facilitating adventure experiences: (1) skills-based knowledge focusing on the skills, methods and competencies required to facilitate group processes; (2) an intentional mindfulness and practice grounded in theory where leaders are deliberate about what they are doing and why; (3) person-centred consciousness focusing on the personal qualities of the attitudes and interpersonal relationships between the leader and group; and (4) a critical awareness of the political nature of facilitation and the effects on all participants. The discourses of adventure facilitation and outdoor leadership offer rich knowledge about what is required for effective leadership. The field has also repeatedly emphasised the critical role of the leader in influencing learning. However, the nature of how leaders promote transformative learning is not well understood (Hobbs & Ewert, 2008; Schumann et al., 2009). There is a lack of clear signposts or guidelines that leaders can follow when they try to teach for change. Several authors in adventure facilitation and outdoor leadership have started to investigate influence tactics or strategies through specific influence behaviours (Schumann et al., 2009), trust strategies (Shooter & Norling, 2007; Shooter, Paisley & sibthorp, 2009; Shooter, Sibthorp & Gookin, 2010), authentic approaches (Hobbs & Ewert, 2008) and person-centred dimensions of the leader (Thomas, 2008). These studies,
81
however, are mostly exploratory and lack a more thorough consideration especially in pedagogic approaches of teaching for change. At the core of adventure facilitation and outdoor leadership discourse remains a critical question that many adventure educators ask: how does a leader foster a change in perspective among learners within a theoretical orientation that advocates a learner-centred approach to teaching, free of coercion, and emphasing the educational experience as one that is of learners’ “personal impulse and desire?” (Dewey, 1938, p. 70). To advance, I turn to guidance from the research on fostering transformative learning. Although research on fostering transformative learning has largely been done in the context of classroom settings, their insights provide a useful starting point for this study. Specifically, Taylor’s (2009) six essential components that frame a transformative approach to teaching offer a pillar to my understanding and development of the conceptual framework (detailed in chapter four) for which the interpretation and analysis of the inquiry might be possible. His description, with the addition of key findings from empirical studies, is briefly outlined as follows. Teaching and leading through individual experience The first core element that Taylor (2009) identifies is individual experience. Individual experience, one of the key constructs of adventure learning, naturally forms the primary medium of transformative learning. Individual experience, as we have discussed much in the preceding section, consists of what each learner brings (prior experiences) and also what he or she experiences within the ‘classroom’ itself. Dewey informs us that experience is both personal and socially constructed; in this sense, experience can be deconstructed and acted on through a process of dialogue and self-reflection. Four points about individual experience are noteworthy to highlight for teaching for change. First, a greater life experience, or critical life events, provide a deeper well from which to draw on and react to as individuals engage in dialogue and reflection (Cragg, Plotnikoff, Hugo, & Casey, 2001; Sutin et al., 2010). Second, it is important to recognise what learners are experiencing in their life as they participate in the learning experiences, because these experiences can act as “pedagogical entry points” (Lange, 2004, p. 129). Third, value-laden course content can provide a catalyst for reflection, resulting in greater personal insights on
82
values and actions that may challenge existing meaning perspectives at the personal or sociocultural level (Kiritskaya & Dirkx, 1999). Lastly, intense experiential activities with novel and rugged conditions provoke meaning making among learners by acting as triggers or disorienting dilemmas (S. Beames, 2004; Nesbit & Mayer, 2010). These findings suggest that both prior experiences, and those created during the learning experience provide the gist for critical reflection and dialogue. It is this interdependent relationship between experience and critical reflection that potentially leads to a new perspective. Teaching and leading through promoting critical reflection Taylor (2009) highlights the promotion of critical reflection among learners as the second core element. Critical reflection, a distinguishing characteristic of adult learning, refers to questioning the integrity of deeply held assumptions and beliefs based on prior experience. Learning to be critically reflective is seen by some to rest on “mature cognitive development” (Merriam, 2004, p. 65). Therefore it might be possible to observe learners who are critical reflectors and those who are non-reflectors through Mezirow’s (1991) categorisation of content, process and premise reflection. In another example, Kreber (2004) looks at the levels of reflection using categories developed by Mezirow in relation to three domains of teaching knowledge to conclude that one needs to begin with premise reflection in “order to be more meaningful” (p. 41). Premise reflection in this sense, needs to be engaged sooner, or more often. There are suggestions that critical reflection can be detected through its development. Indicators are proposed, for example in the format of levels, a repertory grid, and coding schemas, to assist educators in assessing levels of reflection (Boyer, Maher, & Kirkman, 2006; Kember et al., 1999; Kreber, 2004). In the case of Kember and colleagues, they offer seven levels of reflection, from habitual action (level 0) to premise reflection (level 7). These studies also demonstrate that identified instructional aids, such as writing both online and in reflective journals can potentially strengthen reflective experiences. Writing provides a means for both reflecting and recording previous thoughts that can be shared with others and returned to and reflected on when most relevant. For educators, realising that critical reflection does not necessarily come naturally (as Mezirow suggests), the demands of the
83
leadership role, in relation to the learning experience of the learners which they find themselves in, become more important and significant. Teaching and leading through purposeful dialogue The third core element suggested by Taylor (2009) is purposeful dialogue with the self and others. Dialogue differs from discussion in the context of transformative learning: “when we have reason to question the comprehensibility, truth, appropriateness (in relation to norms), or authenticity (in relation to feelings) of what is being asserted or to question the credibility of the person making the statement” (Mezirow, 1991, p. 77). Taylor proposes that it is within the arena of purposeful dialogue that experience and critical reflection play out. Ideal conditions for learners to engage in reflective dialogue include the provision of “accurate and complete information”; giving “freedom” and “equal opportunities” to dialogue; encourage “openness to alternative points of view”; demonstrate “empathy and concern”; promote “objectivity” in arguments; develop “context awareness”; and seeking willingness to “accept a resulting best judgment” (Mezirow & Associates, 2000, pp. 13-14). It is important not only to create positive conditions for productive dialogue, but one is to also be mindful of the nature of the dialogue. Research has revealed that dialogue helps identify the learner’s ‘edge of meaning’, a transitional zone, of knowing and meaning making. “It is this liminal space that we can come to terms with the limitations of our knowing and thus begin to stretch those limits” (Berger, 2004, p. 338). As educators it is therefore important to realise that purposeful dialogue goes beyond having an analytical conversation; it involves an acute awareness of learners’ attitudes, feelings, personalities, and preferences over time, and as “signs of change and instability begin to emerge, educators respond accordingly” (Taylor, 2009, p. 10). Shooter and colleagues argue that such positive interpersonal engagement hinges on interpersonal trust (Shooter & Norling, 2007; Shooter et al., 2009; Shooter, et al.,2010). Teaching and leading through holistic engagement Taylor (2009) suggests holistic engagement as the fourth core element in fostering transformative learning. By this he means “encourage the engagement with other ways of knowing – the affective and relational” (p. 10). Symbolic presentational ways of knowing
84
have been increasingly evident in educational discussion over recent years. Some examples are “engagement with music, all the arts, dance, movement and mime, as well as all forms of myth, fable, allegory, and drama” (Davis-Manigualte, Yorks, & Kasl, 2006); online group mediation (Boyer et al., 2006) and cultural autobiographies (Brown, 2006). Presentational or expressive ways of knowing are “about inviting ‘the whole person’ into the learning environment…. the person in fullness of being: as an affective, intuitive, thinking, physical, spiritual self” (Yorks & Kasl, 2006, p. 46). Engaging emotions provides “an opportunity for establishing a dialogue with those unconscious aspects of ourselves seeking expression through various images, feelings, and behaviors within the learning setting” (Dirkx, 2006, p. 22). In addition, by exploring emotional issues with learners, educators can address the dynamics that contribute to resistance in learning and related relational issues, which potentially initiate a process of individuation – that of “a deeper understanding, realisation, and appreciation of who he or she is” (p.18). In adventure facilitation, such engagement is often referred to as ‘creative reviewing’. The principles of reviewing are primarily attributed to the work of Roger Greenaway. Greenaway (1997a) proposes that reviewing is of fundamental importance in adventure education. Reviewing is essentially a way to assist learners to reflect, analyse, make sense, communicate, reframe and finally learn from their experience (Greenaway, 1997b). Greenaway (2004) further argues that engaging learners holistically with their own inner voices and the voices of their peers through reviewing can bring endless rewards. Greenaway’s many publications and website (for example Greenaway, 1993, and http://www.reviewing.co.uk/) provide many interesting ideas and insights into how revisiting the activity can enhance the experience of the learners. Through the provision of various expressive ways of knowing, educators help learners become more aware of their feelings and their relationship in sense making, and help concretise an experience allowing the learner to re-experience the learning experience through expressive representation (Taylor, 2006). Teaching and leading through context awareness Taylor (2009) suggests that developing an awareness of context when fostering transformative learning is about “developing a deeper appreciation and understanding of
85
the personal and socio-cultural factors that plays an influential role in the process of transformative learning” (p. 11). As pointed out earlier, prior experiences of the learners can potentially have a significant influence on practice. Environmentally, one of the most significant contextual issues of transformative learning is temporal constraints. Research suggests that fostering transformative learning is time-consuming (Taylor, 2009). Besides the time needed to ensure learners have the opportunity to reflect and dialogue (with self and with others), there is also the constraint of time schedules. In the outdoors, this is even more evident when leaders often have to deal with dynamic weather and the changing natural environment. The duration of the programme has also proved to have an effect on learners in negotiating learning (Thomas, 1985). It seems that the very conditions for fostering transformative learning, “a democratic process, inclusiveness of agendas, striving for consensus, critical reflection, dialogue” (Taylor, 2009, p. 13), create a high demand for time. Other contextual issues affecting learning could include power relations in group settings (Scribner & Donaldson, 2001); rigid structures imposed (Christopher, Dunnagan, Duncan, & Paul, 2001); and cultural resistance (Whitelaw, Sears, & Campbell, 2004). One can recognise that leaders delineate several kinds of constraints in their ability to be authentic in their teaching, for example mandatory curriculum, assessment demands, group size, availability of resources, department or institutional expectations, and social norms about the role of leaders (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004b). Though we can say that not all of these constraints directly affect relationships with learners, in one sense, anything that influences a leader’s authenticity also influences her relationships. Teaching and leading through authentic relationships According to Cranton (2006, p. 5): “Fostering transformative learning in the classroom depends to a large extent on establishing meaningful, genuine relationships with students”. A sixth element is the importance of establishing authentic relationships with learners (Cranton, 2006; Taylor, 2007). Authentic relationships promote trust building which in turn develops the confidence in the learners to deal with learning on an affective level, where transformation at times can be perceived as a threatening and an emotionally charged experience. Recent research in transformative learning begins to offer insights into the
86
complex nature of transformative relationships (Carter, 2002; Eisen, 2001; Lyon, 2001). Carter (2002) for example, identifies four categories of relationships as significant to midcareer women’s learning at work: utilitarian relationships (in acquiring skills and knowledge), love relationships (to enhance self-image, friendship), memory relationships (of former or deceased individuals), and imaginative relationships (inner dialogue, mediation). Love, memory and self-dialogue relationships have proved significant to transformative learning, with intimate relationships the most significant. Hobbs and Ewert (2008) similarly point out that learners in adventure education have called to our attention the value and importance of authenticity in leadership (congruence between thought, stated values, and action) and the relationship between authenticity and high moral character (honesty and integrity towards one’s beliefs and values). Here authenticity does not just refer to dealing with others, but is in itself required of an individual – a person-centred authenticity (Wood et al., 2008). It is believed that authenticity of the leader, and the ability to establish authentic relationships, allows individuals to have questioning discussions, share information openly, and achieve greater mutual and consensual understanding. Wood and colleagues (2008) present a person-centered model, reproduced in Figure 1 (based substantially on the theory of Rogers, 1959, 1961), in order to develop a measure of dispositional authenticity. Here, authenticity is a tripartite construct defined by BarrettLennard (1998, p. 82) as involving “consistency between the three levels of (a) a person’s primary experience, (b) their symbolised awareness, and (c) their outward behavior and communication” (corresponding to Lines 1, 2, and 3 in Figure 1). This account begins by contrasting actual experience (the ‘true self’, including actual physiological states, emotions, and schematic beliefs; Box A of Figure 1) with the aspects of experience that are presented in cognitive awareness (Box B). Wood and colleagues stress that perfect congruence between these aspects of experience is never possible, and the extent to which the person experiences ‘self-alienation’ between conscious awareness and actual experience (the true self) composes the first aspect of authenticity (Line 1 in figure 1). The subjective experience of not knowing oneself, or feeling out of touch with the true self, is indicative of this aspect of authenticity.
87
Box A. Actual physiological states/emotions/deep level cognitions 1: selfalienation
3: accepting external influence
Box B. Conscious awareness of physiological states/emotions/cognitions
2: authentic living
Social-Environment
3: accepting external influence
Box C. Behavior and emotional expression
Figure 1. The person-centred conception of authenticity
The second aspect of authenticity involves the congruence between experience as consciously perceived and behaviour (Box B). ‘Authentic living’ involves behaving and expressing emotions in such a way that is consistent with the conscious awareness of physiological states, emotions, beliefs, and cognitions (Line 2). In other words, authentic living involves being true to oneself in most situations and living in accordance with one’s values and beliefs. The third aspect of authenticity involves the extent to which one accepts the influence of other people and the belief that one has to conform to the expectations of others. Humans are fundamentally social beings, and both self-alienation and authentic living are affected by the social environment (Schmid, 2005). Introjection of views from others and ‘accepting external influence’ affects both feelings of self-alienation and the experience of authentic living (Line 3). Taken together, self-alienation, authentic living, and accepting external influence compose the tripartite person-centred view of authenticity. While Wood and colleagues (2008) chart out a person-centred conception of authenticity, Cranton and Carusetta (2004a) explore the meaning of authenticity as transformative process. Cranton and Carusetta derive a five-faceted model of authenticity in teaching for transformative learning: 1. 2.
Having a strong self-awareness of who we are as teachers and as people; Being aware of the characteristics and preferences of learners and others, including how they are the same and different from our own;
88
3. 4. 5.
Developing a relationship with learners that fosters our own and their ability to be genuine and open; Being aware of the context and constraints of teaching and how these factors influence what we do and who we are; and Engaging in critical reflection and critical self-reflection on practice so as to be aware of the assumptions and values we hold and where they originate. (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004b)
Cranton and Carusetta (2004a) further develop a unique scheme to analyse transformative learning, reproduced in Figure 2. below. Using grounded theory1, they decipher five categories of authenticity from participants in their study: self, other, relationship, context and critical reflection. This hierarchical framework “conceptualises authenticity” (p. 278) and the coding scheme aligns itself easily with Mezirow and Associate’s (2000) three necessary elements for transformation: context, discourse, and reflection. Within this framework, it is also possible for participants to be in various categories of authenticity simultaneously depending on the context. A constant between these two models, and in the learning and teaching of adventure education as we have uncovered earlier, is that of critical reflection. Mezirow (1998) proposes that critical reflection may be implicit, in that reflection is an inherent, continuous thinking process of validity testing (Dewey, 1933a, 1968). Critical reflection may also be explicit, as when one bring the process of choice into awareness to examine and assess the reasons for making a choice (Mezirow, 1998). Reflection is also a conscious thoughtful action (Mezirow, 1991). It is through reflection that people make meaning of their experiences; where learning happens, and when transformation occurs (Mezirow, 1991, 2000). Taylor (2009) further reinforces that “in essence, by striving for a more authentic practice, the educator is integrating all the core elements of fostering transformative learning” (p. 13).
1
Grounded theory is a qualitative research design in which the researcher generates a general explanation (often in a form of a theory) of a process, action, or interaction shaped by the views of a large number of participants (Creswell, 2007; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
89
Figure 2. Cranton and Carusetta’s (2004a) model of authenticity in teaching
Reflection as the heart of high quality teaching in adventure education In response to the critique presented thus far in this chapter, it seems reasonable to argue that the most important influence on student learning is high quality teaching. Effective education and transformative education consistently point to quality teaching as an ability for teachers to be reflective about practice - a central feature of growth and development in the teaching profession (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004b; Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 1999). Reflection helps leaders develop “the capability and orientation to make informed and intelligent decisions about what to do, when to do it, and why it should be done” (Richard, 1990, p. 509). Essential in a thoughtful approach to teaching, reflection represents one way leaders grow in and learn from their practice. Because in Dewey’s (1933a) words, reflective thought emancipates us from merely impulsive and merely routine activity… enables us to direct our activities with foresight and to plan according to ends-in-view, or purposes of which we are aware … to act in deliberate and intentional fashion … to know what we are about when we act. It converts action that is merely appetitive, blind, and impulsive into intelligent action. (p. 17)
90
Much of the work about reflective practice has been inspired by Donald Schon’s book, The Reflective Practitioner (1983). Schon makes reference to two main processes of reflection in professional practice – reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action. Schon describes reflection-in-action as the interweaving of thinking and action that allows people to deal well with uncertain, unstable, unique, and value-laden situations. Reflection takes place in the midst of action. Reflection-on-action, however, happens after action. Reflection in this case means pausing after an activity to see how it went, to ask what went well, what didn’t, and what could be changed for next time. Expanding on Schon’s ideas about reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action, Killion and Todnem (1991) propose one more way that reflection may take place: reflection-for-action. This process involves thought then action. Here, they assert that reflection is a practical tool for guiding future practice, that it is the desired outcome of both previous types of reflection. We undertake reflection, not so much to revisit the past or to become aware of the metacognitive process one is experiencing (both noble reasons in themselves), but to guide future action (the more practical purpose). (p. 15) Killion and Todnem suggest that all three types of reflection – before, after, and for the sake of future action – are important elements of practice. While the idea of reflecting in, on, and for action is useful for understanding reflection in practice, it can be somewhat misleading for it disconnects what is actually a fluid, iterative, continuous, and perhaps, cyclical process. Grossman and Shulman (1994) describe the reflection on, in and for action as being akin to the processes of pedagogical reasoning. They propose that teachers reflect for action as they engage in curriculum analysis and planning, that they reflect in action during active instruction, and that they reflect on both action and thought as they review and evaluate their practice. The correlation between reflection and pedagogical reasoning suggests that reflection is inherent in all of the intellectual processes of teaching. Several other authors (for example Kember et al., 1999; Valli, 1997; van Manen, 1977; Zeichner, 1994) identify categories of reflection to describe how it looks in real life for professionals. For instance, while van Manen (1977) describes ‘levels of reflectivity’ from the lowest level of reflection involving technical application of knowledge and skills; to midlevel examining assumptions underlying practice; to the highest level emphasising moral and
91
ethical issues. Whereas Zeichner (1994) presents a framework that ties different types of reflection to five traditions in educational reform. He defines the categories as: academic, social efficiency, developmentalist, social reconstructivist, and generic; and emphasises that each of the types derives from different underlying assumptions about the aims of education. These categories to some extent echo the aspects on which professionals could reflect their practices upon. I found Valli’s (1997) identification of five orientations of reflection suitable as an approach to understand the reflective practices of outdoor leaders in adventure education. Valli offers a description of the types of reflection which I personally can resonate with as I recall my experiences as an outdoor leader. Besides, her model encapsulates a holistic approach to the essences necessary for a reflective practitioner. In her model, she proposes a hierarchical approach of reflection, starting from ‘technical’ reflection which involves comparing one’s teaching practice to external guidelines. ‘Reflection in/on action’ involves making decisions about teaching in unique environment situations. ‘Deliberative’ reflection involves weighing viewpoints and research to understand various concerns of teaching. ‘Personalistic’ reflection focuses on personal growth and relationships, the inner voices. Finally ‘critical’ reflection is concerned with social, moral, and political issues. Table 2. summarises Valli’s (1997) five orientations of reflection, and their content and quality in teaching preparation. Table 2. Valli’s (1997) five orientation of reflection and their content and quality in teaching preparation
Type / Orientation of reflection Technical reflection
Reflection-in and onaction Deliberative reflection
Personalistic reflection
Critical reflection
Content for reflection
Quality of reflection
General instruction and management behaviors that are based on research on teaching One’s own personal teaching performance
Matching one’s own performance to external guidelines
A whole range of teaching concerns, including students, the curriculum, instructional strategies, the rules and organisation of the classroom One’s own personal growth and relationships with students
Weighing competing viewpoints and research findings
The social, moral, and political dimensions of schooling
92
Basing decisions on one’s own unique situation
Listening to and trusting one’s own inner voice and the voices of others Judging the goals and purposes of schooling in light of ethical criteria such as social justice and equality of opportunity
OPENING THE ADVENTURE EDUCATIONAL ‘BLACK BOX’ Through review I have found that though there was broad consensus in the literature that definitions of adventure education must include an element of personal growth, attention to how this educational process works and to its resultant impact was scarce, even though it is being increasingly critiqued and challenged. In response to critique of the original purposes of adventure education, Higgins (1996), Loynes (1998), and Bowles (1995) have all suggested that the defining aspects of ‘adventure’ as a means of personal and social development of young people have been ‘under attack’. These authors suggest that professionalism and institutional bureaucracy have been eroding the essential qualities of adventure education and how adventure (education) is defined. Bowles (1995) argues: Adventure and therefore adventure education has certain key ingredients – we may call them essences. Our essences seem to be tied to the following themes and mores: Action, Uncertainty, Extraordinary, Arousal, Movement, Challenge and Exploration…. Therefore a professionalisation process needs to be in harmony with such essences if our subject is to be true with itself…. (p. 15) Bowles (1995) points out that a movement toward professionalisation and standardisation have the potential to alter what was understood to be ‘adventure’ in adventure programmes. My interpretation of these authors’ sentiments is that they view the efforts to make subjective forms of learning more objective and measurable as destructive, and that this practice threatens and erodes the core, subjective nature of adventure experience. Bowles (1995), Higgins (1996) and Loynes (1998) seem to argue on behalf of maintaining the simple and humanistic origins of learning from adventure. Brown (2009) raises our attention that the current conception of outdoor adventure education had been overly focused on individualistic and cognitive approaches which creates problematic binaries between ‘experience-reflection’ and the ‘learner-situation’, he reframes the understanding of learning and knowing in outdoor adventure education from a socio-cultural perspective. Brown (2009) wrote at length on the issues regarding the problematic binary of experience and reflection in current practices; explained and justified from multiple perspectives why the notion of experience cannot simply be separated from reflection. He also proposed to move away from the notion of the learner as an autonomous
93
‘processor’ of experiences, to consider learners in the highly orchestrated community of practice that places learning and observable change within a socio-cultural frame. His work has implication for existing outdoor adventure education theory and practice. As an academic discipline, the study into this mysterious and complex educational ‘black box’ of adventure and outdoor programming is relatively recent; earlier research has often ignored the ‘black box’ (Baldwin et al., 2004; Hattie et al., 1997; Mckenzie, 2000; Rea, 2008), and has preferred investigating what goes in and what comes out of the box rather than what takes place within. The few outcome-based empirical studies (Tan, 2005; Tay, 2006; Wang, Woon-Chia, & Kahlid, 2006) done on the local adventure scene in Singapore similarly offer recommendations for a more appropriate methodology, or informed practice, that provide a full representation of the adventure experience. Coupled with increasing reinterpretation and critiques on adventure education (see for example Bowles, 1995; Brown, 2009; Loynes, 1998; Mckenzie, 2003) and experiential learning process across disciplines (for instance, in Beard & Wilson, 2002; Boud et al., 1993; Rogers, 1996; Seaman, 2008; Tennant, 1997), the notion of looking inwards, into one’s adventure learning experiences has begun to attract interest in recent years. Several examples serve to mark the emergence of a rhetorical interest in the study of the ‘black box’ both in Singapore and in the discourses of adventure education. These examples have been discussed in the preceding chapter and earlier sections of this chapter. In Chapter Two I discussed my personal account and experiences with the ‘mismatch’ of theory and practices; and the emerging ‘new forms’ of adventure education in Singapore as a result of political, environmental contextual issues of cultural representation and social construction and how this demands a need for us to look into the inner workings of adventure to guide our practices in a localised context. In this chapter, I have highlighted the possibility of using cross disciplinary knowledge, specifically research and scholarship into reflection and transformative learning, as alternatives to explain the adventure learning process; and to interpret (or re-interpret) the key constructs of adventure education - that of experience, reflection, and teaching, so as to offer guidance and clarity to the gaps in current discourse. The critique of these examples highlights how ongoing assumptions about teaching-learning continue to limit theoretically, and by implication practically, the possibility of a more complex, multi-faceted role of teaching and learning in adventure education. In
94
addition, it is possible to recognise how the gap between discourse and practice continues to widen. The nascent attention in adventure education to review contemporary representations of experience, reflection and pedagogic approaches, signifies a renewed commitment to reexamine universalist assumptions about knowledge, values and practices that are held throughout education and wider Asian Culture (S. Beames & Brown, 2005; Ho, 2003; Tay, 2006). The education system, of which adventure education is a part, has become crucial in the initiation and recognition of knowledge as problematic (Stikkers, 1980), discourse (Foucault, 1972), relative or narrative (Lyotard, 1984). Educators, teachers, leaders and guides, through their education and training, may themselves have become authorities in this system and perpetuate this establishment. Such a system continues to simplify and objectify the complex phenomenon of human experiences, human life, and the adventure education experiences that are all too easily subsumed in terms like the ‘black box’ or ‘mysterious phenomena’. In the end, if adventure education practice is to advance, we must ask ourselves: what is (or are) the best way(s) to reveal what is in this box, and how would knowledge of what is within this box help us to teach better? To answer these questions the next step is a study such as this one, to consider how teaching and learning experiences in adventure education can be represented and researched, and how reflection upon findings from this work might serve as an inspiration for the inquiry phase of this study. The chapter to follow addresses these topics.
95
CHAPTER FOUR: THE JOURNEY INTO THE ADVENTURE EDUCATION ‘BLACK BOX’
The time of ‘systems’ is over. The time of re-building the essential shaping of beings according to the truth of be-ing has not yet arrived. In the meantime, in crossing to another beginning, philosophy has to have achieved one crucial thing: projecting-open, i.e., the grounding enopening of the free-play of the time-space of the truth of be-ing. How is this one thing to be accomplished? (extract from Contributions to Philosophy, 1999, Martin Heidegger)
_________________________________
In the first chapter of this thesis I introduced the guiding research question and the methodological approaches most likely to permit a credible interpretation and representation of people’s lived teaching-learning experiences in adventure education. In the second chapter I traced the development of my ‘role’ within the research question as a result of my own practices as an adventure educator. And in the previous chapter I discussed how the discourses of adventure education not only represent a widening gap between theory and practice but how they, and the traditional approaches to pedagogy they endorse, challenge and discourage a reflective and transformative pedagogic response to adventure education. Through the analysis of literature from transformative learning and reflective practice, including the small amount of research literature in adventure education, I have raised attention for the critical need to delve deeper into the adventure educational ‘black box’ phenomenon. This critique has informed the development of a conceptual inquiry matrix that illustrates the convergence of a phenomenological orientation with questions concerning teaching-learning in adventure education. This effort is not intended to explain notions of people’s teaching-learning experiences, but rather as a methodological guide to assist in gathering and interpreting data in the inquiry phase of the study.
96
This chapter presents the conceptual lens in the form of an inquiry matrix through the synthesis of ‘transdiciplinary’ (Cronin, 2008) literatures. I first start with a consideration of the exemplificative approach of one-being-in-the-world in the phenomena, coupled with the four existential structures of lived experience in phenomenology – spatiality, temporality, corporeality and relationality (van Manen, 1990, pp. 171-172). Second, resting upon this structure is the professional orientation of the study that combines ‘critical reflection’ (objective and subjective reframing) (Mezirow, 1998) with the qualities of the discursive, social construction of ‘authenticity’ (characterised by self, other, relationships, context and critical reflection) (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004a) and person-centred conceptions of ‘authenticity’ (Wood et al., 2008). At the top most layer I also include consideration through the eyes of learners and leaders - the phases of learning (Mezirow, 1991, pp. 93-94) as a guide to understanding the learning process of a learner from beginning learning through to transformative learning; and reflection orientations (Valli, 1997), for which leaders might possibly engage in as they consider the pedagogic approaches towards being authentic in their effort to foster transformative learning. Figure 3. provides a visual representation of the development and braiding of a conceptual inquiry matrix for this study. rd
3 : Focus lenses through the eyes of learners, and leaders nd
2 : Professional orientation based on authenticity and reflection
Four phases of learning (Mezirow, 1991)
Five reflection orientation in teaching (Valli, 1997)
Person-centered conception of authenticity (Wood. et.al., 2008) key components of authenticity (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004a)
Critical reflection of and on assumptions (Mezirow, 1998)
st
1 : Fundamental Groundwork based on phenomenology orientation
Being-in-the-world (Heidegger, 1962; Merleau-Ponty, 1962) Life world existentials (van Manen, 1990)
Figure 3. Visual representation of the development and braiding of conceptual inquiry matrix
The purpose of this theoretical chapter therefore is to describe, explain and justify the development of this inquiry matrix as a methodological tool, whilst continuing to tease out the gaps and possibilities inherent in the guiding research question as informed by the critique of the transdisciplinary literatures of teaching and learning. Precisely how the
97
inquiry matrix was practically deployed in the data gathering and interpretation is described in the next chapter.
Exploring ‘black box’ through the phenomenological lens The ‘lived’ quality of teaching and learning means that any academic study of this educational ‘black box’ is inexorably linked to phenomenological philosophies. Phenomenology, a philosophical tradition developed in twentieth century European (sometimes called Continental) philosophy, has only been gaining popularity as an educational research method recently (Dall'alba, 2009). Its following has been significant in Canada, largely due to the influence of van Manen’s (1990) introduction of a phenomenological orientation to human science research. Yet it has had limited application in adventure education research, particularly in Asia and Singapore. This is surprising given adventure education’s expressed commitment to experiential learning and interest in human ‘lived experience’, and therefore its potential appropriateness as a methodological approach. Its absence from adventure education literature is perhaps explained through the ongoing positivist, identifiable, measurable outcome-based adventure paradigm, the paradigm of ‘the experience’ rather than ‘experiencing’, a superficial understanding of one’s teaching-learning experience, and a belief that what happens in the adventure education ‘black box’ is inherently too mysterious to study. All of which have been discussed in the previous chapter. Given this, a phenomenological orientation to the lived experience of people in adventure education that utilises a credible, well-thought-out and rigorous methodological approach, provides a plausible avenue for generating new insights, meanings and interpretations of the phenomena being studied. Phenomenology seeks to uncover the meaning of a phenomenon by peeling back the various layers of embodied moral, ethical, social and cultural influences that shape a person’s encounters in and with their world. Phenomenology does not strive to produce new information but rather appropriates and interprets a meaning already implicit to lived experience as its truth (Burch, 1989). Patton (2002) suggests the fundamental question the phenomenological researcher must begin with should always be “what is the meaning, structure, and essence of the lived experience of this phenomenon for this person or group of people?” (p. 104). For this study of the teaching-learning experiences in adventure
98
education, the notion of lived experience and its origin in the human sciences, requires further elaboration in advancing the use of this methodology as means to gather credible interpretations and insights. Phenomenology, as a philosophy, began as a rejection of positivism. It denies the claims that human experience can be objectified into generalised ‘truth’ and the current assumption of solely rational-based inquiry into human experiences. Instead, Sokolowski (2000) claims “phenomenology is the science that studies truth” (p. 185): It stands back from our rational involvement with things and marvels at the fact that there is disclosure, that things do appear, that the world can be understood, and that we in our life of thinking serve as datives for the manifestation of things…. Phenomenology also examines the limitations of truth: the inescapable ‘other sides’ that keep things from ever being fully disclosed, the errors and vagueness that accompany evidence, and the sedimentation that makes it necessary for us always to remember again the things we already know. Phenomenology acknowledges these disturbances of truth, but it does not let them drive it to despair. It sees them just as disturbances and not as the substance of our being. It insists that along with these shadows, truth and evidence are achieved, and that reason finds its perfection in letting things come to light. Reason does not perfect itself in error, confusion, and forgetfulness. (Sokolowski, 2000, pp. 185-186) Although the origins of phenomenology can be traced back to Immanuel Kant (17241804) and Georg Hegel (1770-1831), Vandenberg (1997) regards Edmund Husserl (18591938) as the “fountainhead of phenomenology in the twentieth century” (p. 11). Bound up in the concept of intentionality, Husserl’s body of work (1931, 1977, 1982) formed the basis of contemporary phenomenology: on the ideal, essential structures of consciousness (Brentano, 1973; Moustakas, 1994). His fundamental principle of phenomenology is ‘back to the things themselves’ (Husserl, 1982), to the essences of taken-for-granted experiences which include both subjective and “non-given factors, such as hypothesis, theory, assumption” (Giorgi, 2009, pp. 77-78). Husserl argues knowledge of essences is possible with a temporary suspension (bracketing) of our scientific, philosophical and cultural assumptions of the phenomenon being studied: a procedure he called epoché (Husserl, 1982, p. 20). Thus
99
phenomenology proposes to illuminate and describe experience as it was ‘lived’ in its most essential form. The conceptualisation of ‘lifeworld’ (Husserl, 1969, 1970) is among one of the most valuable contributions from Husserl. Husserl’s lifeworld can be understood as what we experience pre-reflexively, without resorting to categorisation or conceptualisation, and quite often includes what is taken for granted or those things that are common sense. He says: I am aware of a world, spread out in space endlessly, and in time becoming and become, without end. I am aware of it, that means, first of all, I discover it immediately, intuitively, I experience it. Through sight, tough, hearing, etc…corporeal things … are for me simply there … ‘present’, whether or not I pay them special attention. (Husserl, 1969, p. 91) Abram (1996) describes lifeworld as “the world of our immediately lived experience” in its “enigmatic multiplicity and open-endedness, prior to conceptually freezing it into a static space of “facts” (p. 40), and as such “the true task of phenomenology, as Husserl saw it at the end of his career, lay in the careful demonstration of the manner in which every theoretical and scientific practice grows out of and remains supported by the forgotten ground of our directly felt and lived experience, and has value and meaning only in reference to this primordial and open realm” (p. 43). Today, Husserl is most admired for his method - its promise as a new science of being. Through this methodology, disclosure of a realm of being which presented itself with absolute certainty, arising from experience, seemed possible. Husserl saw this method as a way of reaching true meaning through penetrating deeper and deeper into reality. Phenomenology, in this sense, is seen as a movement away from the Cartesian dualism of reality being something ‘out there’ or completely separate from the individual (Jones, 1975).
Being-in-the-world Martin Heidegger (1889-1976), a student of Husserl, raised a deeper question into Husserl’s method of being. Heidegger was not concerned with questions about the nature of individual beings; rather he was interested in the Being of beings – to make sense of our
100
capacity to make sense of things. Heidegger (1962) named human existence Dasein (being there). He argues that unlike other beings (such as animals) which are merely ‘in’ the world, Dasein has a world. To be human is to be fixed, embedded and immersed in the physical, literal, tangible day to day world. Heidegger articulates this entrenchment with the composite, In-der-welt-sein (a ‘being-in-the-world’, a ‘to-be-in-the-world’) (Steiner, 1978). ‘Being-in-the-world’ is about the mode of being human, or the situated meaning of a human in the world. For Heidegger, ‘being-in-the-world’ stood for a unitary phenomenon and needed be seen as a whole: Dasein is an entity which, in its very Being, comports itself understandingly towards that Being… Dasein exists. Furthermore, Dasein is an entity which in each case I myself am. Mineness belongs to any existent Dasein, and belongs to it as the condition which makes authenticity and inauthenticity possible. (Heidegger, 1962, p. 1) Heidegger argues that authentic existence can only come into being when individuals arrive at the realisation of who they are and grasp the fact that each human being is a distinctive entity. Once human beings realise that they have their own destiny to fulfill, then their concern with the world will no longer be the concern to do as the masses do, but can become an ‘authentic’ concern to fulfill their real potentiality in the world. According to Steiner (1978), Heidegger is saying that the notion of existential identity and that of world are completely wedded. To be at all is to be worldly. The everyday is the enveloping wholeness of being. Heidegger’s critique of the ontotheological tradition, his interpretation of Nietzsche’s (1961) work on body and embodied reason, together with his overriding concern for the question of the meaning of ‘Being’ left many legacies for later inquiry into teaching-learning lived experiences (for a brief review see Bresler, 2004; Dall'alba, 2009). In this, Heidegger’s notion of ‘authenticity’ (1962) and his influence upon French thinkers, especially Jean-Paul Sartre’s existentialism (1966) make an interesting story from the phenomenological perspective of the educational subject. Sartre’s emphasis on ‘becoming’ and ‘being-in-theworld’ is spelt out in his famous Being and Nothingness published in 1943 where, taking intentionality as the hallmark of consciousness, he defines it as necessarily consciousness of something (Sartre, 1966). For Sartre, the human mode of existence implies a ‘being-in-the-
101
world’ where the objects of consciousness and consciousnesses themselves cannot exist without each other. Maurice Merleau-Ponty adds another dimension of ‘being-in-the-world’. MerleauPonty (1962) treats the body as subject (rather than object), emphasising that our bodies are part of our subjectivity and the basis for our being-in-the-world. Rejecting both Cartesian dualism and also extreme subjectivism, he compels us to consider the embodied perception and the notion of ‘lived experience’. While he follows Husserlian phenomenology he gives the body a more central role in the lived world, moving away from Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology to an existential phenomenology influenced by Sartre. Merleau-Ponty (1962) argues against the empirical notion of the world and our perception of it. The body, for him, is the subject of action: it is essentially a practical, pre-conscious subject in the lived world that possesses both intentionality and knowledge. The experience of things in the world is lived from an embodied point of view. Thus, the subject is a perceiving body, situated in time, and immersed in the living world. Matthews (1996) explains: For the world as we actually perceive it does not consists of a collection of discrete, atomistic, and fully determinate sense-data, which acquire unity only because it is imposed on them by our own minds. Rather, we perceive the world as already structured and unified: the way in which we perceive a quality, for example, is affected by the sort of background against which we perceive it, or the context in which we perceive it. (p. 90) In the tradition of Husserl, Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty, I take a phenomenological orientation to reveal the essential qualities of teaching-learning experiences that will illuminate the subjective knowledge of what is supposed to be ‘in-the-world’ instead of separating it by objectification.
Lifeworld existentials Van Manen (1990), whose work on the human science of lived experience is evidently influence by Husserl, Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty, made clearer the abstract ‘lifeworld’ and ‘being-in-the-world’ concept. Van Manen (1990) proposes four fundamental existentials which “probably pervade the lifeworlds of all human beings, regardless of their historical, cultural or social situatedness” (p. 101). They are: lived space, lived time, lived body, and
102
lived human relations (pp. 102-106). He reminds us that these four existential “can be differentiated but not separated. They all form an intricate unity which we call the lifeworld – our lived world.” (van Manen, 1990, p. 105). Van Manen (1990) further argues that the four lifeworld existentials have the potential to reveal the essence of human lived experiences. Indeed, his description of the lifeworld existential structure provides a useful means for me in the development of a conceptual framework for the inquiry phase of this study. Lived space Lived spatiality, according to van Manen (1990), is felt space. Van Manen, in his description of felt space, reminds us that our lived space is more than just the ‘mathematical’ space (length, height, depth and distance) we so often relate with. Lived space is “difficult to describe and largely pre-verbal; we do not ordinarily reflect on it” (van Manen, 1990, p. 102). Yet we are aware that the space in which we are in affects the way we feel. For instance, the vast water spaces of the sea may make us feel free but also possibly exposed and small. A novel setting brings us both vulnerability and excitement, and as we get more and more comfortable, the space for us becomes special and possibly a safe haven (home, for example). Lived space, as van Manen (1990) posits, refers us to the world or landscape in which human beings move and find themselves within. Inquiry into the nature of the lived space renders that particular experience its quality of meaning. We can therefore understand lived space as the inner structure of space as it appears to us in our concrete experiences of the world, being members of a cultural group, or a place. In the end, it is often represented in the form of narratives, communicated as our stories and tales of our lived encounters and experiences. Place researchers propose that place is essentially “a centre of meaning constructed by experience” (Tuan, 1975, p. 152) and space is “transformed into place as it acquires definition and meaning” (Tuan, 1977, p. 136). Place is “best applied to those fragments of human environments where meanings, activities and a specific landscape are all implicated and enfolded by each other” (Relph, 1992, p. 37). Expanding on Relph’s (1992) definition, Cameron (2001) proposes that the term ‘sense of place’ brings attention to the individual experience:
103
A sense of place refers to the ways in which people experience the intertwining of meanings, activities and a particular landscape, as well as to the felt sense of belonging to a place that emerges from those experiences. The word ‘sense’ does not refer simply to the physical sense, but to the felt sense of a place and the intuitive and imaginative sensing that is active when one is attuned to, and receptive towards one’s surroundings. (p. 28) On a similar note, Herman (2009), through his interpretation of what is a ‘prototypical narrative’, offers a way where such ‘lived space’ can be recognisable, represented, or be ‘seen’. Herman suggests that a prototypical narrative can be construed as: i.
Situatedness: A representation that is situated in – must be interpreted in light of – a specific discourse context or occasion for telling.
ii.
Event sequencing: The representation, furthermore, cues interpreters to draw inferences about a structured time-course of particularised events.
iii.
Worldmaking / world disruption: In turn, these events are such that they introduce some sort of disruption, or disequilibrium into a storyworld involving human or human-like agents, whether that world is presented as actual or fictional, realistic or fantastic, remembered or dreamed, etc.
iv.
What it is like: The representation also conveys the experience of living through this storyworld-in-flux, highlighting the pressure of events on real or imagined consciousnesses affected by the occurrences at issue. Thus – with one important proviso – it can be argued that narrative is centrally concerned with qualia, a term used by philosophers of mind to refer to the sense of ‘what it is like’ for someone or something to have a particular experience. The proviso is that recent research on narrative bears importantly on debates concerning the nature of consciousness itself. (Herman, 2009, p. 14)
This assumption that place is created from space, positions the individual at the epicentre of place, as a constructor of meaning from space. I unveiled in Chapter Three the role of reflection as the central dynamic in meaning making. To explore the various qualities and aspects of lived space, I made reference to Mezirow’s (1995) types of reflection, their related actions, transformations and depths of change to develop a series of guiding inquiries based on the broad questions of: what was being reflected upon [types of reflection of perhaps an event, situation or setting in the world or experiences of the
104
individual], how was it being reflected [reflection actions]; why was it being reflected as such [the factors in the inner and outer world]; and what meaning(s) derived as a result of this reflection [the ultimate transformative learning achieved]. These broad questions in regards to critical reflection are what I return to throughout the course of the inquiry. Lived time Phenomenology has developed a highly articulated theory of time and temporal experience. The temporality that it describes plays an important role in the establishment of personal identity. Sokolowski (2000) distinguishes three levels of temporal structure: world time, internal time, and consciousness of internal time (pp. 130-133). His description, with my addition of some examples, is briefly summarised as follows: World time: This can be understood as transcendent or objective time, this is the time that we commonly understood or make reference to. “….such time can be compared to the spatiality of the world, the geometric extension that things possess and the local relatedness that they have with one another. Like such space, objective time is public and verifiable…” (p. 130). For example, the adventure programme is three days in duration; we went for a paddling journey that lasted for eight hours; or in the morning we participated in challenge ropes courses, followed by reflecting on the experience for an hour. Internal time: This can sometimes be referred to as immanent or subjective time. Such time “belongs to the duration and sequence of mental acts and experiences, the events of conscious life. Intentional acts and experience follow one another, and we can also call back certain prior experience through memory…” (p. 130) Sokolowski proposes that the way our intentions and feelings are temporally ordered, both in regard to one another and in regard to our present experiences, takes place in this internal time. There might be a possibility that sequencing is present in internal time since one experience can be before, after or concurrent with another, but “such sequence can only be felt rather than be measured” (p. 131). For example, if I can remember seeing the activity yesterday, I can now reenact the perceptions I had then regarding the people, scene, and situations. Unlike world time, they are not public, but private. Conscious of internal time: This step is the awareness of or the consciousness of the first (objective time) and second level (internal temporality). This third level accounts for the self-awareness that the second level alone cannot be accounted for, it “enjoys a special kind of ‘flow’, one different from those in transcendent and internal time…. the special flow that occurs in it, is an absolute…it achieves a
105
kind of closure and completeness” (p. 131). For Sokolowski, internal time consciousness is, ‘more immanent’ than immanent time. It constitutes the temporality of the activities that occur in our conscious life, such as the perceptions, imaginations, remembering, and sensible experiences that we have: “it allows such inner objects to appear as temporally extended and ordered….” (p. 133). Sokolowski further proposes that consequently, the effect of internal time consciousness extends to transcendent objects and to their transcendent time as well. “Internal time consciousness constitutes not only the internal temporality of our conscious life, but the objective temporality of worldly events… it is the core for the temporality of all other forms of intentional constitution” (p. 134). For instance, I could recall and ‘print’ the images of myself (internal time) at the top of the tower which I took three hours to complete (world time). I realised that no matter what, with people around me to support and believing that I can do it, no challenges can defeat me. Sokolowski (2000) further stresses that in phenomenology, the domain of internal time consciousness is the origin of the deepest distinctions and identities, those that are presupposed by all the others that occur in our experience. Furthermore, such time is in the “living present” (p. 136) – the temporal whole at any instant. This living present, as the whole, is composed of moments of ‘primal impression’, ‘retention’ and ‘protention’ (p. 136) which are inseparable. The essence of the idea behind living present is summarised by Linschoten, “the past changes itself, because we live toward a future which we already see taking shape, or the shape of which we suspect as a yet secret mystery of experiences that lie in store for you” (1953, cited in van Manen, 1990, p. 104). With hope and aspiration one has a positive outlook on life to come, but with desperation and lack of faith one may have has lost such perspectives on life. This temporal dimension of past, present, and future situated in the ‘awareness of’, or the ‘consciousness of’ the world time and internal time is what van Manen (1990) refers to as the lived time (temporality): the subjective time as opposed to clock time or objective time. Van Manen is interested in the consciousness of internal time as describe by Sokolowski (2000). To elicit such essence of lived time, I consciously look out for temporality terms commonly used in adventure education. Specifically, I solicit three moments: 1.
‘Flow’ moments where learners wants to be a part of, and feel worthy of repeating the experience by investing time, or additional time in it. “Flow 106
describes a state of experience that is engrossing, intrinsically rewarding and outside of parameters of worry and boredom” (Csikszentmihalyi & Csikszentmihalyi, 1991, p. 150). One of the most common descriptions of the flow experience is that time no longer seems to pass as it ordinarily does. In most situations, it seems to pass much more quickly. People in Csikszentmihalyi’s research have reported that they lost track of time while experiencing flow. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) has concluded that “although it seems likely that losing track of the clock is not one of the major elements of enjoyment, freedom from the tyranny of time does add to the exhilaration we feel during a state of complete involvement” (p. 67). 2.
‘Freezing’ moments where time is ‘frozen’ or ‘captured’ by learners in digital or mental images, where they can later slow time for replay, review and so on. Freezing moments are important for learner’s experiencing transformation because such point-times capture perceptions, scenes, or remembering often ‘used’ for the realisation and internalisation of meaning construction. Freezing moments present meaning that grounded the time at a present point in time, they can be understood as those that Sokolowski (2000) terms as ‘internal time’, or ‘immanent’ or ‘subjective time’.
3.
Teachable moments where unplanned opportunities arise in the programme for which the leader has the ideal chance to offer insight to his or her learners. Teachable moments are generally understood as learning opportunities where leaders capture freezing moments (often due to errors and fear moments) as learners initiated or displayed, supplemented with actions and raised them to the learners’ attention for consideration, or reconsideration for further learning (Hyun & Marshall, 2003). Fleer’s (2010) suggestion of conceptual inter-subjectivity explains how teachable moments work. Conceptual inter-subjectivity is when the leader and the learner are both acting and thinking with the same imaginative act in mind or are participating and thinking within the same activity at the same time. When this happens it is possible for the leader to move in and out of the imaginary situation to discuss the concept with the learner.
These three moments are useful starting points for me to locate lived time experiences from the leaders and learners during the inquiry phase. Lived body A fundamental aspect of one being in space and time foregrounded by the above account is that of ‘bodily’ inherence in a place or a time. Lived body (corporeality) refers to the
107
phenomenological “fact that we are always bodily in the world” (van Manen, 1990, p. 103). The role of the body in learning is obvious: one needs a body in order to experience the world, and to grow (Dewey, 1918, 1988). Gallagher (2005) discusses how embodiment can be understood as the seat of self-consciousness; that embodiment and self-consciousness not only go hand in hand but that embodiment is a very primitive, or fundamental, form of learning; the development of a sense of self and other. O’ Loughlin (1995) explains what it means in education: …. knowledge is not something to be ‘understood’; it is always felt and responded to somatically – that is, in its corporeal materiality. What matters is what is felt knowledge - knowledge as a ‘lived engagement’. Within education, any general typology of the body must take account its gendered or racially marked aspects, yet at the same time, it must also acknowledge that the subject of understanding is precisely the everyday world encountered anew …. …. Experiential exploration is, first and foremost, bodily exploration, and knowing is, above all, bodily knowing…. our most influential models of learning and knowledge rend the seamless web of lived human experience. This experience consists of layers of meaning which constitute our world. Our world is one which subsumes us because in our daily living we do not experience it as separate; it is not a thing and stuff removed from us. But neither is it merely an inhibiting world of convention and repressive social experience as some post-modern feminist theory would suggest. Rather, it is a world of ecological bonds that link people with environment in which human interpenetration with the environment includes experiential links. (pp. 7-8) Since Merleau-Ponty’s (1962) introduction of embodied perception, many contemporary thinkers had started to take interest in the notion of embodiment across various disciplines (see for example Abram, 1996; Butler, 1990; Csordas, 1999; Lakoff & Johnson, 1999; Shusterman, 2000). Lakoff and Johnson (Johnson, 1987, 2007; Lakoff, 1987; Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, 1999) have developed an experiential cognitive model of embodied experience. The model argues cogently for the universality of embodied schemata in making sense of, and thinking and talking about, experience, but it tends to give short shrift to affect and emotions. Gendlin’s
108
work (1962/1997, 1981, 1992) redresses this shortcoming. Gendlin (1962/1997) maintains that “only part of a presently held meaning is symbolised explicitly, a meaning always includes some inexplicit aspects that are not symbolised just then” (p. 65); we can “have the meaning with or without the proper symbols [but we] cannot have the meaning without the sensed feel of it” (p. 67). For Gendlin, this ‘felt meaning’ “functions as an ever-present experienced parallel of all concepts, observations, actions – whatever is meaningful to us” (p. 65). The late David Bohm (1985) spoke of soma-significant as “a new notion of meaning” (p. 72) whereby “any change of meaning is a change of soma, and any change of soma is a change of meaning” (p. 76): the somatic and the significant (meaningful) are inseparable. Shusterman (2004) offers some insights as to how experiential “somaesthetics” (p. 51) sharpening of bodily awareness help reeducate our use of ourselves (control of movements and hence our actions), and our senses (feelings and emotions) in order to enable us to learn more and perform more. He further asserts that experiential somaesthetics, like education, is not so much a matter of working on particular emotions or movements, but of reorganising or retraining ‘habits’ of feeling and movement and ‘habits’ of conduct to which feeling and movement contribute. These soma-significant notions go beyond the changes in brain structure and Gendlin’s idea of felt meaning. Because we are “primarily living bodies” (Shooter, 2003, p. 440), as meaning transforms, so do we. The significance of these points for my understanding of lived corporeality in adventure education is momentous, for they propose adventure experience is about much more than symbolic representations of feeling, or perceiving and following syntactical patterns whose primary function is to represent. Adventure experiences afford fields for bodily action that exercise and extend one’s cognitive capacities and fluencies: but not in the direction of the supposed clarity and distinctness of propositional knowledge, and not in the direction of rational certainty. Seemingly embodied intelligence here is not all about representing; it is also about acting and agency. On an en-active embodied account of human cognition, mind, culture, body and action partake each of the other, co-constructing the only ‘realities’ available to human experience. An en-active approach to cognition seeks, as Thompson (1996) explains, “to avoid reified versions of the inner-outer metaphor by studying cognition… as embodied action”(p. 128).
109
The term ‘embodied’ therefore entails two fundamentally important points: (1) that all cognition results from perceptual-motor capacities and achievements, that are part of our bodily ‘hardware’, whether innate or acquired; and (2) that these capacities are invariably both “embedded in and constituted by their biological, psychological, and sociocultural contexts” (p. 128). The term ‘action’, in turn, maintains that “sensory and motor processes, perception and action, are fundamentally inseparable in all cognition” (p. 128). Lived relation Lived relationality is the relationship “we maintain with others in the interpersonal space that we share with them” (van Manen, 1990, p. 104). I established earlier that within this interpersonal space involves our lived space, time, and body experiences, for our lived world cannot be separated though we can differentiate them via the four existential dimensions of our lifeworlds (van Manen, 1990). Our individual and physical body raises the intricate connection, interaction and relationship between the mind-body and our lifeworld. We form an impression of another person in a corporeal way – through our sensory engagement with them. We understand social and cultural norms by living within a social group and being with them. We interact with others for the opportunities to transcend our selves. We can say that in a larger existential sense, “human beings have searched in this experience of the other, the communal, the social, for a sense of purpose in life, meaningfulness, grounds for living….” (van Manen, 1990, p. 105). I found Scheper-Hughes and Lock’s (1987) the three bodies theory: the body-self, the social body, and the body politic exemplify van Manen’s notion of relations. And perhaps even more, on the intricate relations of us being-in-the-world. The first level is the individual body, which is commonly understood in the phenomenological sense of lived experience as body-self. At the second level of analysis is the social body referring to the representational uses of the body as a natural symbol with which to think about nature, society, and culture. The third level of analysis is the body politic, referring to the regulation, surveillance, and control of bodies (individual and collective) in reproduction and sexuality, in work and in leisure, in sickness and other forms of deviance and human difference. They further explain: The ‘three bodies’ represent, then, not only three separate and overlapping units of analysis, but also three different theoretical
110
approaches and epistemologies: phenomenology (individual body, the lived self), structuralism and symbolism (the social body), and post structuralism (the body politic). Of these, the third body is the most dynamic in suggesting why and how certain kinds of bodies are socially produced. (Scheper-Hughes & Lock, 1987, p. 8) Scheper-Hughes and Lock bring forth the idea that the ways the body-self mediates the world, serving as a lens for interpretation is a critical feature of the social body. Through the use of posture, gesture, clothing, stance, the body is shaped into a symbolic meaning body addressed to the outside world. These meanings are both individual and corporeal. The resources that are used in the course of shaping the body for such symbolic purposes are cultural in nature, and thus, shared across members of a community. In this sense the individual and the community work reflexively upon one another. In adventure education, corporate or structural meanings are embedded in the roles of learners, leaders, or teachers-alike. It is worth reflecting: how do we then use this connection and relationship, this body as a tool for shaping roles? And how do roles shape others’ knowledge of ourselves (Crossley, 1995; Finders, 1997; Goddman, 1959)? Scheper-Hughes and Lock’s (1987) analysis of the body politic similarly raises the reflective question: how are our bodies disciplined by society, in order to share our knowledge, behaviour, and compliance (Cuban, 1998; Giddens, 1984; Grumet, 1988) in adventure education? Clearly, this reciprocity, the continuing moment of connection between perceiving subject and their world, is encapsulated in the description of existence given to us by both Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty as being-in-the-world. For instance, Heidegger describes the self of everyday Dasein as the ‘they-self’: … which we distinguish from the authentic self – that is, from the self which has been taken hold of in its own way. As they-self, the particular Dasein has been dispersed into the ‘they’, and must first find itself… and if Dasein discovers the world in its own way and bring it close, if it discloses to itself its own authentic Being, then this discovery of the ‘world’ and this disclosure of Dasein are always accomplished as a clearing-away of concealments and obscurities, as a breaking up of the disguises with which Dasein bars its own way. (Heidegger, 1962, p. 129)
111
Wattchow (2006) neatly summaries this stance, “therefore we do not experience the world, by being in a relationship from ‘us’ to ‘it’, nor even ‘for’ it, rather our experience of ourselves and of the world can only be encountered from ‘within’ the mutualism and reciprocity of this relationship” (p. 113). Authenticity with self and with others seems to be the root focus in lived relations. In a change-responsive adventure education we extend this challenge to consider how the inherent reciprocity of ‘being-in-the-world’ requires us to skillfully investigate how wild and man-made adventure, inner and outer experiences, interpretation and representation constitute each other. These four existential structures of lived experience – space, time, body and relation – provide the primary ground upon which the professional orientation is constructed through the work of researchers across the fields who have gathered empirical evidence concerning how people respond to changes, or learning. It is to this work, and its significance for this study, that I now turn.
Constructing conceptual lenses for lived experiences Teaching and learning in adventure education remains an elusive conceptual construct largely as the meanings and experiences of people within the ‘black box’ are dynamic, they are always emerging and becoming (Berry & Hodgson, 2011). In general, learning in adventure education has to do with meaningful learning that results in change, or awareness for change (Berry & Hodgson, 2011; Priest, 1999a); while ‘teaching’ in adventure education, put simply is to ‘let learn’ (Heidegger, 1968), such meaningful, transformative-like learning. I have established in the previous chapter that the parallel characteristics between adventure education and transformative education can provide us with a lead in the exploration of the adventure educational ‘black box’. In addition, I have drawn upon four diverse but often overlapping literatures in the earlier discussion. They are: (1) transformative learning theory literature; (2) reflection and reflective practice essays; (3) adventure education and outdoor leadership scholarship; and (4) phenomenological investigations into the character, structure and essence (Patton, 2002) of lived experiences. These literatures bring an interdisciplinary potential to the understanding of the lived experiences of people through adventure education and, in so doing, assists the interpretive process utilised in this inquiry.
112
In Chapter Three I outlined and discussed the key concepts which consider the experience of people in teaching and learning and have preceded, and thus informed, my study. Heidegger insists that we reflect upon what is nearest if we want to learn about something. In What is Called Thinking? Heidegger (1968) asks: “we come to know what it means to think when we ourselves try to think. If the attempt is to be successful, we must be ready to learn thinking” (p. 3). In other words, we need to reflect upon what is nearest to us because those are the things that we take for granted, and yet make up so much of our everyday reality. Heidegger is concerned with ‘learning’ and construes the learner on the model of the apprentice, emphasising the notion of ‘relatedness’ – of the cabinetmaker’s apprentice to the different kinds of wood that sustain the craft. The ‘relatedness’ of the learner-apprentice to his/her craft, or subject that he/she determines, will depend on the presence of a teacher. We explored earlier in ‘being-in-the-world’ and ‘lifeworld’ existential concept, the complexity and reciprocity of such relationship as the first level fundamental groundwork to the inquiry matrix of lived experiences. In particular, authenticity with self and with others struck me as a good starting point to follow-up as the second level of inquiry matrix to explore learners’, and leaders’, lived experiences of transformative learning, and teaching for change, in adventure education. The authenticity framework offered by Wood et al. (2008) and Cranton and Carusetta (2004a) provide a useful guide which I found relevant to the framework for this study. Besides, Mezirow’s (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumptions is one that is integral across the two models of authenticity in teaching and learning. Taken together, the person-centred conception of authenticity mapped out by Wood and colleagues (2008), Cranton and Carusetta’s (2004a) key components of authenticity, and Mezirow’s (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumption, come together to form the framework for the second level of the inquiry matrix. This study has its interest to find out how the lived experiences of learners and leaders lead to understanding and promoting transformative learning in adventure education. It is therefore important to gather lived experiences through the eyes and lives of both perspectives (leaders and learners) due to the roles and positioning they involve in adventure education. While the fundamental ground work of lifeworld and ‘being-in-theworld’ and second level of authenticity and critical reflection serves as our key conceptual
113
lens, it is necessary to consider an additional layer through the eyes of the leaders, and learners. This differentiation in perspectives could potentially unveil the varied nature and types of reflection and transformational learning activities experienced by leaders and learners within the adventure education ‘black box’. I considered Mezirow’s (1991) four phases of learning and Valli’s (1997) five orientations of practitioner reflection as possible avenues to integrate into the first and second level of this framework as lenses through the learners and leaders respectively. The critique in Chapter Three helped me to more clearly understand the dynamics of learning (transforming meaning schemes and meaning making), the function of reflection, and the role required of leaders in adventure education. It is this that made possible, the completion of the inquiry matrix for learners’ (Table 3. p. 116) and leaders’ (Table 4. p. 117) lived experiences of transformative learning and teaching for change in adventure education.
Summary: Grabbing hold of a moving target In the preceding two chapters we have seen how the theories and discourses of adventure education, their consequences in pedagogical practice, have served as a limitation of the full possibilities of realising the adventure educational ‘black box’. In addition, the careful consideration and braiding of the existential ground of human experience and empirical research studies into teaching and learning has led towards the development of conceptual matrixes that offer unique opportunities for this inquiry into the lived experience of transformative learning and teaching for change in adventure education. The contribution of the research discussed above into transformative learning and teaching for change has provided a crucial overlay that ultimately raises important questions regarding the pedagogical activity of adventure education. Without this it would be difficult to make recommendations regarding plausible possibilities for teaching for change responsive adventure education pedagogy. However, it can equally be argued that too much research in adventure education has been conducted in this foreground and has, therefore, remained blinded to the existential qualities of experiences as they are ‘lived’. The development of the conceptual matrix for this inquiry was critical. It provided methodological guidance for both data collection and interpretation, constantly alerting me (as researcher) to how adventure experiences are ‘lived’ by participants through being-in-
114
there, and through the structure of space, time, body and relation. Importantly, it also anticipated questions about how adventure experiences are socially and culturally constructed through pedagogical beliefs, norms, values, habits, assumptions and practices. As such it became a guide not only to ‘listening’, but also to ‘questioning’ – the conduct of critical dialogue within me as I ‘listen’ to their narratives and stories. What remains unresolved, however, is how the findings of data collection and interpretation, using these matrixes as a guide, should be represented. Narrative, storytelling and hermeneutic phenomenology offer considerable potential to address concerns relating to the textual representation of human lived experience, and this is to be addressed in the next chapter.
115
Table 3. An inquiry matrix for learners’ lived experiences of transformative learning in adventure education The person-centered conception of authenticity (Wood et al., 2008)
Awareness of other Relationships Awareness of context Critical Reflection on and of prior four components
Key components of authenticity (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004a)
Selfawareness
Self-alienation
Authentic Living
Fragmentation of self – true self separate from role- self. Recognise catalysts (positive or negative) that give rise to disorienting dilemma. 1.1 Concrete, specific, unquestioned perceptions of others.
Noticing areas in which one feels more comfortable and areas that are more stressful. Struggling to make sense of self as true self. 2.1 Conscious of individual differences and preferences. Struggling to make sense of dealing with others.
1.2 One-dimensional view of relationship with others (leader and peers). Establishes relationships according to rules based on the position of peers or leader. Not concerned with power issues or has not thought about power. 1.3 Context is inflexible. Black-andwhite perceptions of influence of context. Rules and generalisations about the influence of context on learning. 1.4 Content type reflection, thinking back to past experience e.g. ‘what was the experience like?’ ‘how do I manage it?
2.2 Has clearly recognised the nature of preferred relationships with peers and leader and why. Recognition of power issues but not sure how to manage or deal with it. 2.3 Recognition of the many influences of context on learning. Perception of a kind of cause-and-effect relationship between context and learning. 2.4 Process type reflection. Considering the origin of actions. ‘why did I behave this way?’ ‘why the team response in manner?’ ‘why leader say this?’
1.5
Elaborating existing frames of references Beginning Learning
2.5
Negotiating of self and role-self. Can identify where the true self and role-self fit. Still some sense of playing a role. Trying to make meaning of true self and roleself. 3.1 Recognition of others as individuals with unique qualities and working to negotiate and appreciate others as who they are. 3.2 Aware of exercising power, questioning power. Able to recognise a variety of ways of relating to others in different context.
Integration of external influence
Working with the meaning gathered. Deep questioning and challenging of ‘who I am’ and ‘who I am differently in role’. 4.1 Conscious of others’ needs and critical reflection of and on assumptions in relation to how they want/could accept of others’ difference and uniqueness. 4.2 Conscious of role in dealing with others. Engage in dialogue with leader and others about relationships.
3.3 Critical reflection of and on assumptions and critical questions of contextual issues.
Challenging the ‘system’ not running with the herd.
4.3
3.4 Premise reflection-objective reframing action assumptions. Examine the broader implications, that of something individual or group solves. ‘how would it impact the group?’ ‘what are the effects of team’s decision?’ 3.5
4.4 Premise reflection-Objective reframing narrative assumptions. Examine the broader implications, that of something that is communicated to them. ‘From what he said, how would it impact me, groups, and leader?’ 4.5
Learning new frame of reference Four ways of learning (Mezirow, 2000)
116
Open to consider learners or peers belief of self. Work to integrate expectations of others into both true self and role-self. Recognise a need to make changes. 5.1 Complex, multifaceted understanding of others and recognize a need to accept others as individuals with unique qualities. Aware of patterns and trends at the same time. 5.2 Relationships that emphasises the inclusion or consideration of others. Awareness of complexity of relationship with others, critical reflection of and on issues involved in leader-peer relationships. 5.3 Deep struggle with issues related to learning context. Aware of complexity of context, levels of context.
Actualise change. Transformation of self, align with true-self and social required self.
5.4 Critical self-reflection on assumptions. Questioning the application and possibility of narrative and action assumptions to self.
6.4 Critical self-reflection on assumptions. Applying narrative and action assumptions to self.
5.5
6.5
Transforming points of view
6.1 Conscious and deliberate consideration of others preferences, values and qualities and adopt or adjust them to become part of reality. 6.2 Conscious of influence of relationship with leaders and others on own transformational learning or changes.
6.3 Setting one’s self apart from context. A willingness to buck the system if necessary for the better of self and others.
Transforming habits of mind
Transformative Learning
Table 4. An inquiry matrix for leaders’ lived experiences of teaching for change in adventure education The person-centered conception of authenticity (Wood et al., 2008)
Beginning Authenticity
Awareness of other Relationships Awareness of context Critical Reflection on and of prior four components
Key components of authenticity (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004a)
Selfawareness
Self-alienation Fragmentation of self – leader self separate from self. Acceptance of socially constructed view of leader. View leader self as authority. 1.1 Concrete, specific, unquestioned perceptions of others.
1.2 One-dimensional view of relationship with learners. Establishes relationships according to rules based on the position of leader. 1.3 Context is inflexible. Black-andwhite perceptions of influence of context. Rules and generalisations about the influence of context on practice. 1.4 Reflection on general instruction and management behaviors based on teaching norms, e.g. ‘am I talking too fast?’ ‘how do I manage time?’ critical reflection takes the form of ‘content’ reflection – what is happening? 1.5
Technical reflection
Authentic Living
Integration of external influence
Struggling to make sense of self as leader self, noticing areas in which one feels more comfortable teaching and areas that are more stressful. 2.1 Conscious of individual differences and ‘meeting the needs’ of learners with different styles and requirement, mostly in relation to subject area acquisition. 2.2 Has clearly articulated the nature of preferred relationships with learners and why but not connected to personal development.
Negotiating of self and teaching. Still some sense of playing a role while teaching. Trying to make meaning of self and teacher-self. 3.1 Awareness of learning styles and individual differences in general. Recognition of learners as individuals with unique qualities and working to negotiate and appreciate learners as who they are. 3.2 Aware of exercising power, questioning power. Allows for a variety of ways of relating to learners in different context.
Working with the meaning gathered. Deep questioning of ‘who I am’ and ‘who I am as a leader. 4.1 Conscious of others’ level of development and critical reflection of and on assumptions in relation to not only content acquisition but also personal development. 4.2 Conscious of role in personal development of learners. Engage in dialogue with learners and others about relationships.
2.3 Awareness of the many influences of context on teaching and authenticity. Perception of a kind of causeand-effect relationship between context and teaching. 2.4 Questioning teaching and institutional norms. ‘how did my session go?’ ‘how am I growing as a leader?’ ‘did I make a good call?’
3.3 Critical reflection of and on assumptions and critical questions of contextual issues.
Challenging the ‘system’ not running with the herd.
3.4 Content and process reflection on broader issues including leaders, curriculum, influence strategies, rules and organisation. ‘what does authenticity mean?’ ‘how do I choose my teaching style?’ ‘what are my boundaries?’ 3.5
4.4 Content and process reflection on own personal growth and relationship with learners. ‘how did I come to see teaching in this way?’ ‘am I authentic?’ ‘what can I do to change the system?’ ‘what does my inner voice tells me?’ 4.5
Deliberative reflection
Personalistic reflection
2.5
Reflection-in and on-action
4.3
Five ways or orientation to teaching practice (Valli, 1997)
117
Mature Authenticity
Open to consider learners or peers’ belief of leader. Work to integrate expectations of others into both self and leader-self. 5.1 Complex, multifaceted understanding of others and can accept others as individuals with unique qualities but at the same time aware of patterns and trends. 5.2 Relationships that emphasises the development of others. Awareness of complexity of relationship with learner, critical reflection of and on issues involved in leader-learner relationships. 5.3 Deep struggle with issues related to teaching context (e.g. holding standards while respecting diversity). Aware of complexity of context, levels of context. 5.4 Critical questioning of premises underlying conceptualisation of self, other, relationships, and context. ‘why is it important to be authentic?’ ‘why do I care about my relationships with learners? 5.5
Transformation of self, align with leader-self and social required self. 6.1 Conscious and deliberate consideration of learners’ preferences, values and qualities as part strategies to teaching and influence attempts. 6.2 Conscious of influence of relationship with learners on own development of authenticity.
6.3 Setting one’s self apart from context, understanding separation of self from contextual norms. A willingness to buck the system if necessary if it was ‘hurting’ the learners. 6.4 Critical reflection on the social, moral, and political dimensions of leading in adventure education.
Critical reflection
6.5
CHAPTER FIVE: RESEARCHING HUMAN LIVED EXPERIENCES
What matters is that lives do not serve as models; only stories do that. And it is a hard thing to make up stories to live by. We can only retell and live by the stories we have read or heard. We live our lives through texts. They may be read, or chanted, or experienced electronically, or come to us, like the murmurings of our mothers, telling us what conventions demand. Whatever their form or medium, these stories have formed us all; they are what we must use to make new fiction, new narratives. (extract from Writing a Woman’s Life, 1998, Carolyn G. Heilbrun)
_________________________________
The story of this thesis began as an attempt to search, or re-search, for a pedagogy of teaching for change. Talking through and reflecting upon my personal lived adventure education stories in Chapter Two created a sense of wonder and awe (at least for me), for through this inner dialogue, I realised the depth and meaning of adventure education tales goes beyond my limited knowledge and understanding. In Chapter Three, thinking with adventure learning stories shed light upon what may be needed if we are to pry open the lid on this ‘black box’. Imagining with other teaching and learning stories in Chapter Four offered opportunities for the braiding of conceptual lenses; making gazing into the adventure education ‘black box’ possible. In this chapter, I sought a style to tell, or re-tell, stories of adventure teaching and learning experiences, one that is set in human stories of experience; one that would represent the presence of people’s lived experiences and the presence of their lived stories. Narrative inquiry is often employed in studies that work from a broader phenomenological orientation because, as Connelly and Clandinin (2000) say, “experience happens narratively … therefore, educational experience should be studied narratively” (p. 19). Narrative inquiry is about stories lived and told (Connelly & Clandinin, 1994). Narratives guide us through life as we live them, construct and tell them. An important addition for this
118
inquiry is, hermeneutic phenomenology, as it offers the interpretive element to explicate tacit meanings and assumptions in these told stories and texts (Crotty, 1998). The task of this chapter is therefore to establish the style (methodology) and to offer a brief methodological narrative – a textual sketch of the method and procedure for this study. It is hoped that through narrating stories of humans’ adventure education experiences; the discovery of a pedagogy of teaching for change can be made possible.
REPRESENTING LIVED EXPERIENCES The crisis of representation asks the questions: “who is the ‘Other’? Can we ever hope to speak authentically of the experience of the Other, or an Other? And if not? How do we create a social science that includes the Other?” (Lincoln & Denzin, 2000, p. 1050). There can be no straight forward answer to these questions. In the face of this crisis, Coffey and Atkinson (1996) assert that we should make disciplined and principled choices about how to represent and reconstruct social worlds and social actors, social scenes and social action. Making such choices directs how we write our accounts and directs us toward new ways of representing our research endeavors. Lincoln notes: The idea that we can think consciously about presenting and representing the stories we tell proffers and enticing invitation to think reflexively and self-consciously – not just about the fieldwork we do, but also about the means we choose and use to relay our fieldwork tales to audiences. The choice implied in reflexivity leaves open the possibility that we can consciously take our narrative voice and reframe it….. the concept of choice, however, is a powerful one. Choice implies intention. Intention implies a kind of deliberation, and deliberation is at the center of our ‘story’ here: we have choices, and those choices can and will reveal different intentions. (Licoln, 1997, pp. 38-39) In this first part of the chapter, I strive to clarify my choices and intentions of the style selected for this study. This study was conceived as a study ‘in’ as well as ‘of’ the lived experience of teaching and learning. The narrative lens chosen to explore the complex adventure educational ‘black box’ in this study is through thinking of the continuity and wholeness of an individual’s lived experience in a particular chosen setting. I look at the relation and relevance of narrative to human experiences, outline the value of a
119
phenomenological, hermeneutically oriented narrative inquiry and how it may be an appropriate means of researching teaching and learning experiences. I also address specific issues relating to stories told and story texts, and finally present an argument that it is necessary for readers to adopt a participatory orientation and an empathetic reading as listening, to representations of lived experience (Wattchow, 2006).
Narrative and human experience Narrative has depicted experience and endeavors of humans from ancient times: “Human beings think, perceive, imagine, and make moral choices according to narrative structures” (Sabrin, 1986). People make sense of their lives according to the narratives available to them (Bruner, 1987). Narratives necessarily tell the events of human lives, reflect human interest and support our sense making processes. They have the ability to transform our lives and the contexts in which we live (Dyson & Genishi, 1994). Narrative records human experience through the construction and reconstruction of personal stories. Stories are constantly being restructured in the light of new events, because stories do not exist in a vacuum but are shaped by lifelong personal and community narratives. Narrative is also our way of being and dealing with time (Carr, 1986). Narrative illustrates the temporal notion of experience, recognising that one’s understanding of people and events changes. Therefore we should not look upon narrative as separate from real life, but as forming meaningful connections to our life as a whole, our embodied being-in-world, our lifeworlds. Set within human stories, narrative inquiry claims that humans are storytelling organisms who, individually and socially, lead storied lives. People are always tellers of tales. They live surrounded by their stories and the stories of others; they see everything that happens to them through those stories and they try to live their lives as if they were recounting them (Sartre, 1964). Thus narrative inquiry attempts to capture the ‘whole story’ and studies problems as forms of storytelling involving characters with both personal and social stories. The interconnectedness of narrative and human experience means that the study of narrative is the study of lived stories. Consequently, the study of lived stories is the study of the ways humans experience the world. It’s interesting to draw a parallel relationship to the four lifeworld existentials (van Manen, 1990) discussed earlier.
120
According to Bell (2002), narrative inquiry rests on the assumption that we as human beings make sense of random experience by the imposition of story structures on them. People select those elements of experience to which they will attend, and pattern those elements in ways that reflect stories available to us. We should caution ourselves to not think that narrative is an objective reconstruction of life; instead narrative is a rendition of how life is perceived. In this sense, narrative is well suited to addressing issues of complexity and cultural and human centredness because of its capacity to record and retell those events that have been of most influence on us. Narrative allows researchers to present experiences holistically in all their complexity and richness (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Furthermore, authors from a range of backgrounds have suggested stories recalled, or the act of telling stories, function as a means of making sense of experience. These include psychologists (J. Bruner, 1986; 1987; Erickson, 1975; Polkinghorne, 1988), philosophers (MacIntyre, 1981; Ricoeur, 1984), historians (Clifford, 1986; Mink, 1978), anthropologists (E. Bruner, 1986; Rosaldo, 1989), psychoanalysts (Schafer, 1981; Spence, 1982), health professionals (Benner, 1984; Sandelowski, 1991; Taylor, 2000), therapists (B. Hart, 1995; White & Epston, 1990), sports participants (Brewer & Sparkes, 2011; Brymer & Gray, 2009) and educators (Clandinin, 1993; Friend, 2000; Lauritzen & Jaeger, 1997; Mattingly, 1991; McEwan & Egan, 1995; Pendlebury, 1995; Reason & Hawkins, 1988; van Manen, 1991). Such widespread appeal in social sciences helps to promote and justify the use of narrative and storied inquiries into the adventure educational contexts, and into the research design choice selection of this study.
Learning, talking, writing and imagining stories of lived experiences Interest in narrative research across several professions and disciplines is gaining momentum as researchers break through the traditional, generally positivist, boundaries that appear to have constrained them. However, the move towards the use of narrative has also been influenced by a philosophical change of thought towards a more postmodern view with its interest in the individual and acknowledgement of the influence of experience and culture on the construction of knowledge (Sparkes, 2002). There has been a narrative ‘turn’ within the social sciences that is associated with postmodernism, thus opening up possibilities to research social contexts by using narrative as the most appropriate and
121
purposeful form of method and communication. Bochner (2001) suggests narrative inquiry is both a turn away from, as well as a turn toward advancing social theory and social criticism: The narrative turn moves from a singular, monolithic conception of social science toward a pluralism that promotes multiple forms of representation and research; away from facts and toward meanings; away from master narratives and toward local stories; away from idolising categorical thought and abstracted theory and toward embracing the values of irony, emotionality, and activism; away from assuming the stance of disinterested spectator and toward assuming the posture of a feeling, embodied, and vulnerable observer; away from writing essays and toward telling stories. (Bochner, 2001, pp. 134-135) Narrative inquiry is human centred in that it captures and analyses life stories. Stories are reflection of the fact that experience is a matter of growth, and that understanding is continually developed, reshaped, and retold, often informally. Narrative and the stories it records, offers research a way of highlighting those understandings often not able to be revealed by traditional modes of inquiry. The value of narrative to research in teaching and learning resides in the manner in which it frames the study of human experience into an educational research tool (Webster & Mertova, 2007). Unlike many other stories elsewhere, stories that we hear and read in a teaching and learning context are usually intended to help us learn, either directly about the subject matter itself, or about the strengths and shortcomings of the teaching. In that aspect, what makes narratives noteworthy in the context of teaching and learning research is their educational value. McEwan and Egan (1995) note two contributions of narrative to educational research. First, narrative provides an account of the history of human consciousness. The life journey stories of knowledge, discovery and exploratory voyages exemplify changes that have marked our development as thinking beings. For instance, the narrative stories of prominent writers and scholars such as Plato, Rousseau, Heidegger, Dewey, contain accounts of human progress, perfectibility, decline and loss within a framework of culture and worldview. Secondly, at the level of individual consciousness, stories record personal consciousness from infancy, through youth and adulthood, to old age. Stories record our learning through the developmental transformation as we grow. McEwan and Egan maintain that these stories make up the wealth of moral tales in the form of, for example, autobiographies,
122
confessions, biographies, case studies and fables. Dewey’s philosophy of education, as noted in McEwan and Egan (1995), uses narrative. Narrative, in Dewey’s view, gives us an avenue into human consciousness and thus may be a powerful tool in tapping into the complexities of human centredness in a wide range of environments where learning takes place. Other works exploring narrative across the disciplines in social sciences similarly support the trend in the recognition of the importance of narrative in learning. Narrative constructs the outer environment of communication and action, while simultaneously constructing the inner one of thought and intent. Narrative delves beneath the outward show of behavior to explore thoughts, feelings and intentions. And if narrative is fundamental to communication, then the use of narrative as a research method may, for instance, give us a better understanding of teaching, learning and performance in a wide range of environments and may assist in generating more appropriate pedagogic approaches and tools. Further, narrative has implications for our view of the learner. Narrative brings to the forefront features of the learner’s thinking and learning needs that may have been neglected through more traditional research methods. The fundamental human need to recount and explore experience frequently results in the composition of some form of narrative - often a story that describes actions, emotions and outcomes in temporal sequence. Such stories place events in narrative contexts and by doing so assign them particular meanings (Tappan & Brown, 1991). As White (1991) suggests: “narrative might well be considered a solution to a problem of general human concern, namely the problem of how to translate ‘knowing’ into ‘telling’, the problem of fashioning human experience into a form assimilable to structures of meaning that are generally human” (p. 1). Stories and storytelling as the mode of inquiry Allowing leaders and learners to ‘naturally’ share their experiences is the first motivation for the use of stories and storytelling in this inquiry. Lodge (1990) comments that storytelling is “one of the fundamental sense-making operations of the mind, and would appear to be both peculiar to and universal among human beings” (p. 4). Byatt (2000) concurs, “storytelling is as much part of human nature as breath and the circulation of blood” (p. 166). Barthes (1977) echoes this view, saying “it is simply there, like life itself” (p. 79). It is as natural as who we
123
are, and what human being is. Storytelling enables us to tell, to convey, through the language of words, aspects of ourselves and others, and the worlds, real or imagined, that we inhabit. Storytelling is sharing of lived experiences (Green & Del Negro, 2010). Fisher (1989) claims that human beings are inherently story tellers. Humans experience and understand life as a “series of ongoing narratives, as conflicts, characters, beginnings, middles, and ends” (p. 24). Thus all forms of communication can be seen fundamentally as stories, as symbolic interpretations of aspects of the world occurring in time and shaped by history, culture and character. Stockhausen (1992) believes storytelling’s aim is to capture, code, and validate the generative knowledge born of experience, observation and intuition. Van Manen (1991) thinks of storytelling as “a form of everyday theorising” (p. 369). Others agree that we can create and present theoretical accounts through storytelling (for example: Bishop & Glynn, 1999; Clandinin, 1985; Lauritzen & Jaeger, 1997; McEwan & Egan, 1995; Pagano, 1991; White, 1991). McEwan and Egan (1995) observe the power of storytelling and the way it touches individual lives, they comment: “Story deals not just in facts or ideas or theories, or even dreams, fears and hopes, but in facts, theories, and dreams from the perspective of someone’s life and in the context of someone’s emotions” (p. viii). The embodied emotional aspect is one of storytelling’s strengths, and perhaps one reason for its recent resurgence in educational research, given the call for educators to acknowledge, value and draw on the emotional realities of learners’ lives. Furthermore, stories, and storytelling, have the capability to ‘weave the plot’, or put together an assortment of heterogeneous, previously unrelated components (Ricoeur, 1986). A story can be holistic (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990) and situated (Herman, 2009) by nature. Stories, both told or written, are able to cut across divisions and categories to help us understand “by making the abstract concrete and accessible” (Noddings & Witherell, 1991, p. 279). Stories enables us to impose meaning on chaotic experiences within a situated context and, in the process, to find our own voice (Grumet, 1988). Wells (1986) sees story construction as a way to help people to make sense of experience and seek meaning from their lives: Constructing stories in the mind – or storying as it has been called – is one of the most fundamental means of making meaning, as such, it is 124
an activity that pervades all aspects of learning. When storying becomes overt and is given expression in word, the resulting stories are one of the most effective ways of making one’s own interpretation of events and ideas available to others. (p. 194) In this sense, stories allow aspects of a person’s lifeworld to surface through storied scenes. Inherent in the stories, the reader can observe the lifeworld existentials, along with all the elements necessary that contribute to meaning and interpretation (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Also, stories ‘produce’ something because they modulate the time factor and show the effects of time (Ricoeur, 1986). Stories depend on rhythm, accelerations, discontinuities, twists, repetitions, breaks and the like (Carr, 1986), all of which serve to reveal the meaning of the lived experience phenomena (discussed in Chapter Four). Stories can adopt strange chronologies having little to do with standard timelines. Consequently, a story can be a tangle of events, shifting from the past to the present and future. The elements in the story each have their own time frames as they are dependent on the internal temporality of consciousness situated within the story. However, their sequencing creates new links, revealing our lifeworld in making constant efforts to connect or split from one story (or experience) to the other. Stories therefore, in whatever forms they might be, are potentially powerful research tools (Bishop, 1996; Josselson & Lieblich, 1995; McEwan & Egan, 1995; Witherell & Noddings, 1991). They enable us to enter into the worlds of real people involved in everyday situations. For a short time we get to imagine not only what the experiences being recalled might have felt like for the tellers, but to consider how we would think, feel and act if faced with similar situations. In the process of engaging with stories, we construct meaning. Polkinghorne (1988) says, “narrative meaning is created by noting that something is a ‘part’ of a whole and that something is a ‘cause’ of something else” (p. 6). Stories allow us to glimpse the worlds of others and come to know our own world more fully. Since this study is about exploring the lifeworld and gathering lived experiences from people through the recollection of their very personal, embodied encounters, I argue for stories and storytelling as the most appropriate mode of inquiry. Reason and Hawkins (1988) support that storytelling can be viewed as a mode of inquiry because it involves cooperative
125
activity, has a qualitative focus and encompasses holistic perspectives since “existentially we create our own meanings from events” (p. 98). They further advise, “storytelling can be used either to explain or to express; to analyse or to understand” (p. 79). Mattingly (1991) puts it this way: Storytelling and story analysis can facilitate a kind of reflecting that is often difficult to do, a consideration of those ordinarily tacit constructs that guide practice. Stories point towards deep beliefs and assumptions that people often cannot tell in propositional ways or denotative form, the ‘personal theories’ and deeply held images that guide their actions. (p. 236) In general terms, the significance of story for human science, as summarised neatly by van Manen (1990, p. 70) is that: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Story provides us with possible human experiences; Story enables us to experience life situations, feelings, emotions, and events that we would not normally experience; Story allows us to broaden the horizons of our normal existential landscape by creating possible worlds; Story tends to appeal to us and involve us in a personal way; Story is an artistic device that let us turn back to life as lived, whether fictional or real; Story evokes the quality of vividness in detailing unique and particular aspects of a life that could be my life or your life; And yet, great novels or stories transcend the particularity of their plots and protagonists, etc., which makes them subject to thematic analysis and criticism.
Furthermore, Wildemeersch and Leirman (1988) imply, through their proposed form of dialogues, that storytelling can be a mode of inquiry to detect stages of transformation. Applying the lifeworld concept to transformative learning, they propose three stages in the development of transformation: the self-evident lifeworld, the threatened lifeworld, and the transformed lifeworld. Each is characterised by its own unique dialogue. A narrative dialogue is characteristic of the self-evident lifeworld. Narrative dialogue tells a story or describes an action, characterises interpersonal communication and ensures the self-evident character of the lifeworld by affirming and reaffirming our subjective and objective social reality, making our actions seem true and normal. In a threatened lifeworld situation where individuals are
126
confronted with a dilemma, especially those associated with life transitions, transactional dialogue is evident. This kind of dialogue, or telling of experiences, characterises a rational analysis of the evidence and arguments pertaining to alternative viewpoints. The third kind of dialogue, discursive dialogue, often characterises a transformed lifeworld. Here, told stories often involve a “conscious exploration of the relationship between one’s own problematic situation and similar problems related to other places and other themes” (p. 23), giving rise to a new action pattern that is directed by reflection. Their introduction and description of the three dialogues in relation to lifeworld and transformation proves valuable as a justification and guide for storytelling as the mode of inquiry for this study. Ultimately, a story is anything but a linear description. It may reveal the bizarre, focus on the new and allow transitions, twists and turns (Becker, 1998). It can weave in anecdotes and coincidences; it features all tellable events including the mundane and the most surprising. Our lives are “steeped in stories” (Winter, Buck, & Sobiechowska, 1999, p. 21) and always have been. Parkin (1998) notes, “stories, metaphors, myths and legends, together with their relatives – anecdotes, similes and analogies – have all been used as methods for communication and teaching since time began” (p. 1). Before the written word, storytellers passed the cumulative wisdom of cultures from generation to generation. As a way to knowing, storytelling has the capacity to uncover, discover, freeze, create or reimagine meaning and to enable the articulation of subsequent knowing. Stories and storytelling are embraced and celebrated in this study because of their potential and capacity to represent and relive teaching and learning experiences in adventure education. Fictional representations as the research genre As Denzin (1994) suggests, there are possibly as many ways of representing stories as there are of telling stories: “There are several styles of qualitative writing, several different ways of describing, inscribing and interpreting reality” (p. 506). Whatever the choice the researcher makes, Connelly and Clandinin (1990) say the choices made need to be “choices of substance” as they “relate to the purposes of the inquiry” (p. 11). In other words, the researcher needs to ask, which records are most telling? In social sciences, paradigm wars have caused an upheaval that promotes the use of qualitative data in researching social reality and brings into sharp consideration how research is to be put into written forms and
127
communicated (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Sparkes, 2002). Denzin (1997) notes, in narrative research “a text must do more than awaken moral sensibilities. It must move the other and the self to action … *allow+ a radical democratic project that intends humane transformations in the public sphere” (p. xxi). Oliver (1998) further speculates that the outcome of narrative research is a narrative that interweaves setting, characters, and plot to render an explanation, give meaning to some experience, or offer insights into the motivation and purpose behind a chain of events: The researcher seeks students’ or teachers’ stories through interpretation of multiple forms of representation (e.g. individual or group interviews, journals, letters, personal stories, observations, field notes, images, drawings) that will be used to construct a narrative that displays the connection of elements as an unfolding temporal development whose end provides some explanation. In other words, the data are configured into a narrative, or set of narratives, through the use of plot, which give meaning to the experiences of the people involved. (Oliver, 1998, p. 250) These encouragements have inspired me to pursue an approach that would best offer the capacity for us (researcher and reader) to come to know the phenomena that is the focus of this study, to connect with the reality of the learners and leaders, and to appreciate how we can best assist in improving the ‘human condition’ in which they are engaged. Andrew Sparkes’ (2002) Telling Tales in Sport and Physical Activity: A Qualitative Journey serves as a valuable resource. Providing many examples and case studies, he maps out seven research genres for sports and physical activity research, each with their distinct ontology, epistemology, methodology, interest and format. Hopper et al. (2008) offer a table summary of these genres (reproduced in Table 5). From the methodological approaches outlined by Sparkes, I have chosen fictional representation to retell the stories lived in this study as it best fits the purposes and practicalities of this research.
128
Table 5. Summary of research genres Genre: Valued and Implicit Assumptions
What Genre Looks Like and How Judged
Genre
Ontology
Epistemology
Methodology
Format, “research as ….”
Interest of genre
Scientific tale
external realist, reality out there to find Internal idealistic, reality constructed inside person
Objectivist, correspondence with reality Subjectivist, interactive, coherence
Set structure fabula story, ‘measure and compare’ Extensive, closely edited quotes, ‘map view’
Prediction and control (technical) Descriptive understanding and interpretation (practical)
Confessional tale
Researcher’s reflexive study on research process
Process and self-exposed, complementary coherence
Realist tale negotiated with audience, intersubjective
Subjective interpretive and interactive, catalytic
Addendum or ‘as aside’, ‘struggle and personal anxiety’ Performance of lived reality, empathy, ‘virtual reality’
Problematise and demystify messiness (insightful)
Ethnodrama
Autoethnography
Poststructuralist text/reader, internal relative
Memory tied to emotion, embodied attunement
Poetic representations
Emotionally reflexive, internal idealist
Subjectivistic interactional, reader/text impressionistic
Fictional representations
Verisimilitude, ‘rings true’, internal idealist, relativistic
Cohere, shared subjectivity, based on events, authentic story to resonate with reader
Experimental, instrument to measure and predict Researcher-as-instrument, systematic analysis of perceptions Unpack method and ethical issues researcher’s participations’ voices Data translated into script, reaction of audience to script Systematic sociological introspection, through author’s experience and feeling Participative with audience, meaning co-created, poetry using metaphor, etc. ‘being there’, created based on lived experience, author creates a plausible fiction via multiple sources
Realist tale
129
First-person insights, ‘vicarious experience’
Expressive art literary skills and devices, ‘aesthetic feel’ Provoke visceral response, storytelling, ‘stepping into other’s reality’
Social change, silenced realities (lived understanding) Evoking understanding, intimate other (personal)
Embodied and visual, represents how we speak (emotional) Catalytic empathy, larger audience appeal (communicative)
Fictional representation is a form of storytelling used in the social sciences to convey ‘truths’ (the notion of truths in fiction will be discussed in more detail in the next section) and meaning in research. Emerging from this methodology has been the quest for a greater understanding of the lived experience of diverse populations in sport, physical education, or physical exercise for health (Sparkes, 2002). Fictional representation embraces a relativistic ontology in which there exists “multiple, socially constructed realities ungoverned by any natural laws” (Guba & Lincoln, 1989, p. 84). The reality created in a story is a subjective one, and the reader plays a large part in determining the meaning of the story. Ultimately, a shared subjectivity results between the construction of writer and the interpretation of the reader (Sparkes, 2002). Knowledge is uncovered through the recalled experiences, emotions, and feelings of the individual living through an experience. Claims to knowledge in this genre are based on experiences and, although they might not be generalisable, might represent similar experiences for the reader. For the reader the story speaks to truth, as it “creates a verisimilitude for the phenomenon examined” (Hopper et al., 2008, p. 228). I favour fictional representation, specifically creative fiction, for several reasons. First I am able to “disguise individual identities - by creating composite characters” (Angrosino, 1998, p. 101), both based on real situations and in the invention of people, events, and places, thereby addressing ethical concerns inherent in qualitative narrative. This is particularly relevant in a small community of adventure educators in a country like Singapore. In this form, when “factual representation obscures possible alternative interpretations, the explicit use of fiction might be appropriate and evocative … there is a possibility of portraying a complexity of lived experience in fiction that might not always come across in a theoretical explication” (K. Frank, 2000, pp. 482-483). Secondly, Diversi (1998) demonstrates that fictional representations offer the possibility for the researcher to condense experience in a way that altered time and spanned place, yet without losing the voices of the participants in the experience, the threedimensionality of their humanness, and the mystery that surrounds their lived experiences. In this inquiry, participants’ adventure experiences ranging from five to twenty-one days across varied time periods, locations and places. Having the flexibility to shift scenes and alter time zones, while being faithful to the participant and context, is a helpful feature as
130
qualitative research often produces large volumes of data gathered over an extended period of time. Third, Frank (2000) says representing research as fiction “can affect readers at an immediate and emotional level” (p. 483) which in turn will allow reader to understand the research topic more fully. Fictional representation has the potential to bring us, you as reader and I as researcher, closer to the true texture of the lived experience or a more meaningful portrayal than in conventional texts (Banks & Banks, 1998; Diversi, 1998; Rinehart, 1998). Frank further acknowledges how representing research findings in fictional form can provide another valuable analytical dimension to the project, she comments: “in attempting to render a character reliable and believable, I can also learn a great deal about the systems and environment in which this fictive person’s actions become meaningful as well as about my own questions, assumptions, and emotions” (K. Frank, 2000, p. 486); thus allowing researchers to think about the same data in new ways. It has the potential to restructure my ideas about the issues I study. Fourth, creative fictional representations allow the imagination and interpretation of collected data to come together as a holistic representation that is ‘true’ to the phenomenon in study. Even though I may not have the opportunity as a researcher to physically ‘be there’ as participant observer, creative fictional representations make possible the inclusion of my prior extensive experience of having ‘been there’ and my own lived experiences as leader and learner. This is a notion of Angrosino’s (1998) argument: “any appeal to ‘reality’ is limited to the sense that things ‘like these’ happened to people ‘like these’, not in the sense of this being a documentary with a few literary touches around the edges” (p. 101). This move towards creative fiction is supported by Banks and Banks (1998) who challenge social scientists’ claim that ‘being there’ as participant observer is a defining feature of any tale in narrative research for factual evidence. They comment: “facts don’t always tell the truth, or a truth worth worrying about, and the truth in a good story – its resonance with our felt experience, as Walter Fisher says – sometimes must use imaginary facts” (p. 11). Barone (2000) further points out that “artists are less concerned with reconstructing the literal details of a particular incident, setting, etc. – lest (artists would say) it obscures the ‘truth’” (p. 24). Tierney (1998) also emphasises that fictional accounts might portray a situation more clearly than a more standard form of representation. Certainly,
131
because fiction necessarily uses the writers’ imagination and to some extent “vaporises construct validity and sometimes calls into question reliability in research” (Banks & Banks, 1998, p. 17), the challenges that might be mounted against fictional stories’ credibility and authenticity remain open and different from those of non-fictional tales. I will address these challenges and the corresponding strategies regarding trustworthiness of the inquiry in the section header to come: the story is true if…. A final reason for choosing to experiment with fiction is simply the desire to do so. As Krieger (1991) suggests, “rather than asserting that we choose to write in a specific genre because of its superior power to explain the world, it might be more honest just to admit that we are fond of the genre” (p. 21). The challenges, freedom, propinquity and corporeality of creative writing appeal to me. Frank (2000) also comments that “in writing short fiction, I have a certain freedom: I do not have to make any conclusions (yet), I do not need to neatly tie up loose ends or anticipate critiques, and I do not need to claim any authority for myself besides that of a storyteller” (p. 486). Thus, plain desire and a sense of freedom would seem reasons as good as any other for the choice of creative fiction.
The story is true if …. Fictional tale offers a sense of anonymity and relieves the threat of exposing the individual. In addition, it offers an efficient way of accumulating extended time spent on data collection into one fictional representation. It also offers voice to those who ‘cannot’ speak, whether through marginalisation or fear. Conversely, Watson (2003) points out the challenges that come with choosing this form of representation, relating to “methodological integrity and theoretical consistency” (p. 10). Sparkes (1995) similarly points out that the dual crisis of representation and legitimation in qualitative research brings with each style of writing the created conditions for its own criticism. Hopper et al. (2008) go as far to propose that “there might not be a way to judge or evaluate this form of representation because of its subjectivity” (p. 229). Here, I address some of these challenges and recommend that rather than attempting to convince readers of the truth of the accounts in this inquiry drawing on traditional and increasingly challenged authorities and criteria, I settle less for representing reality to more of ‘evoking’ shared understanding of a postmodern culture.
132
Fictional forms are meant to allow “researchers to reach an audience at a more visceral, emotional level that induces experiential learning, a learning that engages and sparks action” (Banks & Banks, 1998, p. 12). These rearranged facts, events and identities “in order to draw the reader into the story in a way that enables deeper understandings of individuals, organisations, or the events themselves” (Tierney, 1993, p. 313) may themselves contradict the nature of fictional creation, where it is often said that all the names, characters and incidents are fictitious and any resemblance to actual persons or events is entirely coincidental. But Tierney (1993) argues that if the story ‘works’ and serves its purpose then it does so from a literary perspective: “such perspectives reframe our analysis away from scientific standards of validity or trustworthiness, and toward more literary definitions of good literature. The reader does not judge the text according to standardised scientific criteria, or with the assumption that the text is meant to explain all such situations. Rather, the reader judges the text in a self-referential manner” (p. 313). Langness and Frank (1978) further expand on how we might judge ethnographic fiction: We judge an ethnographic novel by the quality of the authorial voice, by the aptness or pungency of detail, by the consistency of the characters and their culture, and by the plausibility of their behavior as situations develop in which the reader becomes more equipped to assess the characters’ attitudes and choices. These descriptions must be corroborated by outside reports for us to believe that their reality is substantial, rather than a chimera… (p. 20) In a similar fashion, Booth (1996) makes the plea for the fictional construction of experience as a legitimate research form. He emphasises that standard tests like reliability, validity and replicability are simply not appropriate for judging such fictions. He believes they are better judged by aesthetic standards, by their emotive force, by their capacity to engage the reader emotionally in the story being told, by their verisimilitude and by their authenticity or integrity; for a believable story has a lot of truth in it (Sparkes, 1997). Certainly, this does not mean that the narrative mode of knowing, as opposed to the logico-scientific mode, is the only way to bring truth. According to Bruner (1986), each of these provides distinctive ways of ordering experience and constructing reality. The latter attempts to fulfill the ideal of a formal, mathematical system of description and explanation and deals in general causes, in their establishment, and makes use of procedures to assure
133
verifiable reference and to test for empirical truth. In contrast, Bruner describes the narrative mode of knowing as follows: The imaginative application of the narrative mode of knowing leads instead to good stories, gripping drama, believable (though not necessarily ‘true’) historical accounts. It deals in human or human-like intention and action and the vissitudes and consequences that mark their course. It strives to put its timeless miracles into the particulars of experience, and to locate the experience in time and place (J. Bruner, 1986, p. 13). Bruner warns that to reduce one mode to the other, or to ignore one at the expense of the other, will inevitably fail to capture the rich diversity of thought contained in each. While one verifies by eventual appeal to procedures for establishing formal and empirical truth, the other does not establish scientific truth but verisimilitude. Eisner (1991) similarly debates that works of poetry and literature are not true in the literal sense, but suggest that they can be true in the metaphorical sense. Thus, to restrict truth to literal truth alone is to restrict knowledge to those forms of discourse that can be literally true. Having said that the ‘validity’ and ‘reliability’ of fictional tales can only be supported through the reader’s lens and depend heavily on subjectivity, Frank (2000) believes that there are responsibilities on the part of the researchers or writers to acknowledge the genres they have chosen so that readers are aware of what is being offered to them. Barone (2000) points out, this relates to the manner of fashioning, or modes of fiction, favoured by writers, and those modes will vary greatly in accordance with purpose. Barone (1997) warns against the use of fiction just for the sake of using fiction. For him, the use of fiction is warranted and literary license as wise only “when employed in the service of a legitimate important educational question” (p. 223). A similar point is made by Coffey and Atkinson (1996) when they argue that ethnographic fiction should be used to “construct and convey analyses of social settings and social action that are given particular point or are impossible by other means…. one must be clear that such exercises have an analytical purpose” (pp. 128-129). Understanding the accountability in the choice that I had selected, I made a purposeful, informed and strategic attempt in the preceding sections leading up to this, to justify my choices regarding the use of narrative, storytelling, and creative fiction as the main research methodology for this study.
134
On a side note, I took reference from Watson’s (2003) suggestion that the process of creating a fictional representation may include a review of the literature as a base from which to start. The process incorporates a layering of literature and theory coupled with the presentation of the lived experience through the telling of a fictional story as it emerges from the data. The method used for data collection may include interviews, group observations, literatures, video and others, as long as the choices are based on the purpose of their studies (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). If, like Sparkes (1997), the purpose is to represent or speak for a group of people that might not have the opportunity to speak for themselves, data may come from personal imagination rather than from actual interview data. In this inquiry, there are indeed some participants whom I had not had the opportunity to directly speak with but their voices are within the data artifacts (texts) that they offered. The essence of the thinking and writing then, lays the responsibility upon me as researcher to consciously engage in the activities of imagining with reflexivity and voices. Imagining with reflexivity and voices Hertz (1997) proposes that reflexive researchers do not simply report facts or truths but also actively construct interpretations of their experiences in the field and then question how these interpretations came about through detachment, internal dialogue, and a constant scrutiny of what I know and how I know it: “the outcome of reflexive social science is reflexive knowledge: statements that provide insight into the workings of the social world and insight on how that knowledge came into existence” (p. viii). Thus researchers need to reflect on the political dimensions of fieldwork, the webs of power that circulate in the research process, and how these shape the manner in which knowledge is constructed. Likewise, there is also the consideration on how issues of gender, nationality, race, ethnicity, social class, age, religion and so on, shape knowledge construction. Some also suggest that researchers-as-authors need to indicate their positioning in relation to the research process and the other people involved (Coe, 1991; Richardson, 1992, 1997). Hertz (1997) maintains that since the researcher is an active participant in the research process, it is essential to understand the researcher’s location of self. “In writing, remembering and representing our fieldwork experience we are involved in processes of self-presentation and identity construction” (Coffey, 1999, p. 1). This is the reason why I devoted a chapter in the earlier part of this thesis to write my lived experiences as learner, 135
leader, and educator in adventure education and subsequently as researcher, and to inform briefly the social context of how they shaped me and my role in this inquiry. But Hertz (1997) further notes that reflexivity encompasses issues of voices, particularly when it comes to how, when and whose voices are included in the final text: But voice focuses more on the process of representation and writing than upon the processes of problem formation and data gathering … voice is a struggle to figure out how to present the author’s self while simultaneously writing the respondents’ accounts and representing their selves. Voice has multiple dimensions: first, there is the voice of the author. Second, there is the presentation of the voices of one’s respondents within the text. A third dimension appears when the self is the subject of the inquiry. (Hertz, 1997, pp. xii, xi-xii) Concerned researchers bring foreward key questions regarding who speaks in the text; whose story is being told; and who maintains control over the narrative and, by implication, over the purposes to which the story is put. They raise questions about the “ethics of involvement and the ethics of detachment, the illusions of objectivity and the borders of subjectivity, and the possibilities of collaborative work and the dilemmas of collusion” (Fine, 1994, p. 75). On the other hand, others have argued that the researcher must take the unavoidable responsibility for the final text, which involves interpretation, evaluation, and judgment, and should not attempt to displace it onto the subjects themselves (Geertz, 1988; Gorelick, 1991; Stacey, 1991). I am inclined to the position put forth in Richardson’s (1990) argument, that to still the sociologist’s voice as a writer presents the danger of rejecting the value of sociological insights and also implies that somehow facts can exist without interpretation. Furthermore Olsen (2000) states that “there can be no dodging the researcher’s responsibility for the account, the text, and the voices” (p. 236). Atkinson similarly concurs, “on the contrary, just as the researcher must take responsibility for theoretical and methodological decisions, so textual or representational decisions must be made responsibly” (Atkinson, 1992, p. 52). Since there is no way for those who choose to write in this world to avoid deploying their ‘power’, and seemingly the way to break the silence of the silenced is for the products of research to go beyond traditional and conventional narrative forms (Lincoln, 1993), I took the direction of experimenting with fictional representation. It is
136
hoped that through the inherent nature and potential of creative fictions, I would be able to navigate more effectively, the multiple dimensions of voices to produce, what some researchers (for example Clifford, 1983; van Maanen, 1988) refer to as, multivocal or polyphonic texts, which would speak the ‘truth’ on behalf of all ‘parties’ involved in this inquiry, inclusive ofs: the leaders, the learners, adventure education, yourself (the reader) and myself (the researcher and writer). Hermeneutic as collaborative thinking partner The approach to this research draws much from the interpretive tradition. As such, hermeneutics, the art of interpretation, is being considered as a collaborative partner. Hermeneutics is interpretive and concentrated on historical meanings of experience and their developmental and cumulative effects on individual and social levels. This interpretive process includes explicit statements of the historical movements or philosophies that are guiding interpretation as well as the presuppositions that motivate the individuals who make the interpretations (Barclay, 1992; Polkinghorne, 1983). Allen (1995) describes hermeneutic phenomenology as non-foundationalist, as it focuses on meaning that arises from the interpretive interaction between historically produced texts and the reader. Hermeneutics is central to twentieth century philosophy, and its primary representatives are Martin Heidegger, his pupil Hans-Georg Gadamer and the semiotician Charles Sanders Peirce. Heidegger’s (1962) ‘Being-in-the-world’ brings in two important concepts underpinning the methodology and approach of this study. First, preunderstanding is a structure for being in the world; and second, interpretation is seen as critical to this process of understanding. Heidegger maintains that the desire to interpret the world is an intrinsic human characteristic. Insights gained through the hermeneutic process express personal understandings of human existence. Thus, hermeneutics is not an esoteric occupation with a variety of texts, but rather an important and continual activity common to all human beings. It is our very inability to state the ‘right interpretation’ with any certainty, owing to the ‘hermeneutic circle’ that invites us to enter that circle, to interpret while staying in touch with the universe. Hermeneutic circle is a metaphor for understanding and interpretation. It acknowledges how human interpretation works as an interdependent cycling between
137
wholes and parts. The interpretive process in the hermeneutic circle is a metaphor for understanding and interpretation moves from the parts of experience, to the whole of experience and back and forth again and again to increase the depth of engagement with and the understanding of texts (Polkinghorne, 1983). Kvale (2007) views the end of this spiraling through a hermeneutic circle as occurring when one has reached a place of sensible meaning, free of inner contradictions, for the moment. The hermeneutic circle provides the means by which texts may be interpreted, at the same time it “captures how ordinary people experience and make sense of life” (Odman & Kerdeman, 1999, p. 187). The researcher and participant work together to bring life to the experience being explored, through the use of imagination, the hermeneutic circle and attention to language and writing. The result of this process includes the self-interpreted constructions of the researcher and each participant, thus reflecting many constructions and multiple realities. Allen (1995) stresses the importance of reading and writing as core to the production of meaning in hermeneutic strategy. In fact, as van Manen (1990) suggests, there can be no finite set of procedures to structure the interpretive process, simply because interpretation arises from pre-understandings and a dialectical movement between the parts and the whole of the texts of those involved. What is called for is an obligation to understand the context under the text or dialogue being produced and to bring forth interpretations of meaning. These interpretations arise through a fusion of the text and its context, as well as the participants, the researcher, and their contexts. Smith (1991) describes imagination in hermeneutics as asking for what is at work in particular ways of speaking or acting to help facilitate an ever-deepening appreciation of the world or lived experience. Certainly this calls to attention the ways in which language is used, and an awareness of life as an interpretive experience, and an interest in human meaning and how we make sense of our lives. Madison (1988) adds that to see something in a new imaginative way is to see it other than it has been seen before and to integrate it into a new context. Hermeneutic research demands self-reflexivity, an ongoing conversation about the experience while simultaneously living in the moment, actively constructing interpretations of the experience and questioning how these interpretations came about (Hertz, 1997).
138
Hermeneutic phenomenology as an methodical approach (van Manen, 1990) involves both the careful interpretation of existing texts and the writing of descriptive text that allows the researcher or writer and the reader to interact with the essence of the phenomenon being studied. Van Manen (1990, pp. 30-34) outlines a broad methodical structure of human science research, referring to them as a dynamic interplay among six research activities : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Turning to a phenomenon which seriously interests us and commits us to the world; Investigating experience as we live it rather than as we conceptualise it; Reflecting on the essential themes which characterise the phenomenon; Describing the phenomenon through the art of writing and rewriting; Maintaining a strong and oriented pedagogical relation to the phenomenon; and Balancing the research context by considering parts and whole.
Here, the researcher’s aim is to: Transform experience into a textual expression of its essence, in such a way that the effect of the text is at once a reflexive re-living and reflective appropriation of something meaningful: a notion by which a reader is powerfully animated in his or her own lived experience. (van Manen, 1990, p. 36) In this sense, the biases and assumptions of the researcher are embedded and essential to the interpretive process. The researcher is called, on an ongoing basis, to give considerable thought to their own experience and to explicitly claim the ways in which their position or experience relates to the issues being researched. Van Manen (1990) proposes that the method requires, on the part of the researcher or writer, an ability to be reflective, insightful, sensitive to language, and constantly open to experience. This is the crucial point as such writing may be possible only after an intense quest for understanding of the experience prior to its description. Wattchow (2006) further stresses, “the researcher must come to ‘live’, first and foremost, within the research question, prior to the attempt to transform it into description” (p. 131). Thus empathy with participants and familiarity with the contexts of their experiences becomes a vital component of hermeneutic phenomenology. My various experiences as learner, leader and educator in adventure education therefore, become necessary to the findings of the inquiry
139
which add to the ‘trustworthiness’ of the study with its emphasis on embodiment and pedagogy. Van Manen (1990) further offers tips with regards to writing up lived experience texts which proved extremely helpful for me in the preparation of reading, interpreting and writing up texts and tales: 1. 2. 3.
4. 5. 6.
Describe the experience as you live(d) through it. Avoid as much as possible causal explanations, generalisations, or abstract interpretations. Describe the experience from inside, as it were; almost like a state of mind: the feelings, the mood, the emotions, etc. Focus on a particular example or incident of the object of experience: describe specific events, an adventure, a happening, a particular experience. Try to focus on an example of the experience which stands out for its vividness, or as it was the first time. Attend to how the body feels, how things smell(ed), how they sound(ed), etc. Avoid trying to beautify your account with fancy phrases or flowery terminology. (Adapted from van Manen, 1990, pp. 64-65)
I noted that although the interpretive process continues until a moment in time where one had reached sensible meanings of the experience, free from inner contradictions (Kvale, 1996); this coming to a place of understanding and meaning is tentative and always changing in the hermeneutic endeavor (Caputo, 1987). For that I am mindful to account for my position and trace my movement throughout the research process using the hermeneutic circle.
Issues of rigor and credibility A complete review of issues of rigor in qualitative research is beyond the scope of this study. Here I account for just a few critical points raised by scholars and offer a brief explanation on how these are being addressed in this study. Lincoln and Guba (1985) describe the goal of credibility as demonstrating that the inquiry is conducted in a manner to ensure the topic is accurately identified and described. This is what I strived to achieve in Chapter Three and Four. This critique accounts for a systematic examination to unearth ‘problems’ and ‘gaps’ whilst at the same time offering opportunities for alternate explorations which may more 140
appropriately address the issues and the nature of the inquiry. Lincoln and Guba further advocate several techniques to achieve credibility, from which I have adopted the following for my study: triangulation (in terms of multiple sources of data, multiple investigators, i.e. co-storytellers, and methods), peer debriefing with fellow colleagues at my workplace, engaging in reflexivity throughout the inquiry, and member checks (in process and terminal with the co-storytellers and my project supervisors). Hall and Steven (1991) describe adequacy as occurring when the whole process of inquiry is reflected, relative to the purposes of the study. This may be achieved through use of reflexivity, the construction of texts that are credible to the experience and that can be understood by insiders and outsiders, coherence of research conclusions that reflect the complexity of the situation, and lack of deception. I have attempted to account for these issues both in the earlier section of this chapter and in Chapter Two, justifying the choices of my methodology and how they fit into the purposes of this inquiry. Beck (1993) views credibility lying in how vivid and faithful the description is to the experience lived. Husserl (1970) believes when this occurs, the insight is self-validating and if well done, others will see the text as a statement of the experience itself. Here I have relied on advice from the proponents of hermeneutics to produce sound and reliable texts. For a hermeneutic phenomenological project, the multiple stages of interpretation that allow patterns to emerge, the discussion of how interpretations arise from the data, and the interpretive process itself are seen as critical in contributing to the rigor of the project (Koch, 1995). In the section to come, I briefly outline these stages of interpretation along with the research sequences to give a sense of how interpretation has been ongoing and involved in the entire research process. Finally, several authors (for example: Ellis, 1995; Richardson, 2000; Smith, 1993; Smith & Deemer, 2000) support seeking alternative criteria for judging qualitative inquiry in ways described by Sparkes (1998). As I briefly introduced earlier, the main argument for such a notion lies in the claim that one cannot gain access (via whatever method) to a social reality in ways that are independent of one’s interests, purposes, and languages. As such, reality itself and method alone cannot provide a reference point for sorting out claims for knowledge – or ‘good’ or ‘bad’ research. All we can do, as researchers, is to appeal to time
141
and place contingent lists of characteristics to sort out the good form the not so good. Smith and Hodkinson (2009) comment: Judgments about social and educational research are much more akin to judgments about the quality of works of music, painting, literature, and so on, which depend on time and place contingent lists of characteristics, than they are to the time and place independent ‘connect to reality’ judgments in the physical sciences. (p. 35) Ellis (1995) further adds that: In evocative storytelling, the story’s ‘validity’ can be judged by whether it evokes in you, the reader, a feeling that the experience described is authentic, that it is believable and possible; the story’s generalisability can be judged by whether it speaks to you, the reader, about your experiences. (p. 318) Therefore, the ‘criteria list’ might revolve around issues of aesthetic merit, impact, ontological and educative authenticity, and ethics (Sparkes & Douglas, 2007). Accordingly, the questions one asks about the quality of the research might include: Does it succeed aesthetically? Is it satisfying? Does it invite a range of interpretive responses? Does it create evocative and open ended connection to the data? Does it work? Is it effective in relation to the intended purposes and audiences? Does it evoke emotional dimensions of the participants’ experiences? Does it affect the reader emotionally and/or intellectually? Does it generate new questions about pedagogical issues? Has it raised the level of awareness of research participants? Did the participants in the study have a chance to contribute and share their views as part of the process? Did the participants find the representation of their experiences fair and respectful? Did the narrative representation maintain their anonymity? When conducting hermeneutic phenomenological studies, researchers need to ensure the credibility of the study. It is worthwhile to note that issues of rigor in interpretive inquiry are confusing to discuss, at times, as there is not an agreed upon language used to describe it, or one universal set of criteria used to assess its presence (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). Sparkes (2002) argues that the differences between alternative forms of inquiry, “in terms of their process and products, need to be acknowledged so that each can be judged using criteria that are consistent with their own internal meaning structures and purposes” (p. 199). Consequently, my response to producing a credible research text is situated in the
142
demonstration of honesty (trustworthiness), responsibility (accountability), critical inquiry (reflexivity) and authenticity (verisimilitude) throughout the entire research journey.
A SKETCH OF THE METHODS AND PROCEDURE The first part of this chapter addresses the key methodological considerations of this study. In this section I detail the formal procedures of the inquiry phases in order that the reader may have a good understanding of the participants and the processes that have defined the limits of data collection, interpretation and representation. For the purpose of clarity I have organised them via the following subheadings: (1) the research sequence; (2) recruitment of co-storytellers; (3) collection of story tales; (4) drafting story tales; and (5) thematic development of plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education.
The research sequence Alvesson (2002) warns researchers of the simplistic presentation of research that fails to account for the range of influences that shape the research process. He notes: “blindly following methodological guidelines is totally insufficient for good research, and at least some of the complexities and uncertainties involved must be taken seriously and addressed.” (p. 9). Alvesson proffers a ‘complex’ version of the research process that attempts to convey influential factors such as a pre-structured understanding of the researcher, expectations and assumptions inherent in the researcher, and the social dynamics between the researcher and the participants. I took Alvesson’s recommendations to construct the presentation of the research sequence in Table 6: Toward lived stories data gathering and interpretation sequence (p. 144). This table shows that there were nine distinct phases in the research sequence of this inquiry. Phase A and B refer to the pre-structured understandings that I, as researcher, brought to the inquiry, and have been disclosed and developed in the thesis thus far. The remaining phases of the inquiry are outlined and discussed below in their respective subheadings.
143
Table 6. Toward lived stories data gathering and interpretation sequence Phase A Pre-structured understanding Literature Review (a) Critical review of research and professional literature of adventure education claims about learning, and role of outdoor leaders in enabling learning. (b) Critical review of outdoor leadership scholarship. (c) Critical review of transformative learning, and reflection literature research.
Phase B → Methodology Review (a) Critical review of narrative (story and storytelling) and hermeneutic method (its intentions, structures, potential and limitations). (b) Description scope, sequence and issues of methodology specific to this research project (recruitment, ethical considerations etc).
Phase F ‘Data’ Organisation → Detailed Transcription of Interviews: Transcription completed 50% by researcher, 50% by professional transcriber. All transcripts proofed in detail by researcher. Copies returned to interviewees for checking / alterations. Original experiential texts paired with interview transcripts for the 14 interviewees. (10 learners and 4 leaders).
Phase C Recruitment of co-storytellers → Collection of story tales Phase 1 Purposeful sampling to 117 recruits produces access to 61 experiential text documents written by learners close to the time of the experience. Participants in the inquiry: Group 1: 24 learners + 2 leaders from 5-day team building course Group 2: 29 learners + 1 leader from 16-day leadership development course Group 3: 8 learners + 1 leader from 21-day classic challenge course
Phase G Drafting story tales → A fictional novella produced based on real accounts of experiences. The scenes in the fictional tale are expected to produce plot reliving the adventure learning and teaching experiences of the three adventure education courses. As much as possible the novella provides: (a) Description of place, time and location of events. (b) Selective narrative from the leaders and learners written and oral experiential texts. (c) Brief notation of critical elements of the structures of the experience. (d) Hermeneutic Interpretation by the researcher, which strives to present descriptions of the transformative learning and teaching for change lived-experiences.
144
Phase D Initial data interpretation
→
Long table thematic interpretation of the experiential texts produces: (a) A ‘reconnaissance’ analysis for each of the three subgroups. (b) Targeted recruitment (intensity sampling) of four from each sub group for Phase 2 Interview Group (c) Detailed preparation for interviews both from long table interpretation and learner’s experiential text guided by the inquiry matrix.
Phase H Discussion of plausible insights → Plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education: Thematically combines lessons (interpretations) from the novella to produce four interpretive themed texts that are representative of the leaders and learners experiences of adventure education. Plausible insights are written by the researcher after the presentation of each of the four themed texts. They consider the pedagogical implications of the texts for teaching for change.
Phase E Collection of story tales → Phase 2 10 storying sessions with learners conducted and audio taped for transcription. 12 storying sessions with leaders of these learners conducted and audio taped for transcription. (Each leader went through three separate and distinct sessions as guided by Seidman (1998) phenemenologically-based interviewing technique) Researcher’s observation notes of interviews.
Phase I Consolidation Discussion This space for consolidation discussion completes the research process for this study by summarising the findings of ‘re-telling teaching and learning stories’ and ‘plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education’. The section includes recommendation for the adventure education community in Singapore concerning what will be required for the development and acceptance of a more change-responsive pedagogy.
Recruitment of co-storytellers In Phase C of the research sequence, leaders and learners in the inquiry were drawn from three adventure education courses. Purposeful, criterion sampling was utilised in the shortlisting of the adventure education experience as well as the leaders and learners. Selecting the adventure education experience I developed four criteria in the selection of the most appropriate adventure education experiences. They are: (a) The experience must be one that has developmental-oriented adventure education (as described by Hirsch, 1999) as its core programme focus. (b) The experience must be one that is provided by an organisation that demonstrated a high degree of continuity and expertise. It should be one that is self-contained, and no part of the experience should be outsourced to another party. (c) The experience must be one that is taken in the form of multi-phases and include an expedition component. Expedition is defined here as a small group’s participation in an extended duration of more than eight hours, self-contained, self-directed travel through a wilderness-like environment and including at least one night of a tenting out element. (d) The experience must be one that serves young adults. The basis of these criteria takes into account four major considerations. First, the critical attention of locating developmental oriented adventure education programmes is essential to the research study primarily due to the significantly different focus that can sometimes be associated with recreational, educational and therapeutic programmes (Priest & Gass, 2005b). In this study, I was interested to explore the connection between the general aim of reflection and transformation for adventure education programmes that have broad application to the public, it is not about programmes for specific ‘special needs’ profiles (therapeutic) or educational learning objectives of specific academic institutions. Furthermore, because we are discovering the essentials of teaching and learning, it is definitely about programmes that can offer learning beyond recreational purposes.
145
Secondly, the experience had to be operated by a self-contained organisation to minimise the effects that may be created due to discontinuity. My professional experience suggests that a developmental adventure education programme that aims to accomplish human development goals could not be easily accomplished by out-sourcing components of the adventure experience. The occasional entrance and exit of various leaders in a group can lead to complications and confusion for learners, thus negatively affecting the learners’ reflection of learning experiences. Therefore I located programmes where the leader of the adventure experience would follow through with the learners for the entire duration of the experience. Third, the rationale for having the experience conducted through multi-phases and with an expedition component was due to my interest in studying the experience of reflection, and the leader’s influence strategies across the vast dimensions and conditions of the adventure experience. This setting is one where learner’s distraction is minimised, where there is a resulting focus on the place, the group, the leader and the overall process. Age-related parameters for participation in this inquiry are between 15 to 64 years old. The rationale for such a wide range is based partly upon the current national age recommendation and definition in Singapore for adults (Singapore Department of Statistics, 2007), and human development life span. However, as I reflected on the study intent, I was most interested in working with young adults (18-25 years old), where possible. Two theories of epistemological development – the frameworks proposed by Perry (1970) and Kitchener and King (1981) explain the theoretical assumptions of the chosen range. Both theories postulate a gradual process of development comprising a sequence of epistemological stages that unfold during late adolescence and early adulthood, where reflection and transformative learning activities might be easier to detect. Recruitment of study participants and access to ‘experiential texts’ The four selection criteria for adventure experience necessarily drew me to locate study participants from within those programmes offered by Outward Bound Singapore (OBS), as due to their role and positioning in adventure education in Singapore; OBS is arguably, the only organisation that fulfills all four criteria. Discussion with the senior management of OBS
146
led to permission and consent (see Appendix B. p. 317) to recruit study participants over three identified adventure programmes recommended by OBS: Subgroup 1: 5-day team building course for a service-related company with a total of 29 new staff enrolled (in October 2011), involving two outdoor leaders Subgroup 2: 16-day leadership development course for a government service unit with a total of 60 cadet trainees enrolled (in September – October 2011), involving four outdoor leaders Subgroup 3: 21-day classic challenge course for a statutory board organisation (with international affiliation) with a total of 28 staff members (a mixture of local and international staff members with varying backgrounds) enrolled (in October – November 2011), involving two outdoor leaders Consent agreement of individuals in authority to provide access to study participants at research sites were sought and granted prior to recruitment. A research explanatory statement with informed consent form (Appendix C. pp. 318-320) was sent to each learner in these three programmes through OBS at least a week before the start of their programme. It outlined the study and provided the researcher’s contact details to potential study participants. Participants were informed of the study objectives and intent to minimise any possibility of deception (Sarantakos, 2005). They were given the freedom to decline participation or withdrawal anytime should they wish to. Participants were also given the choice to remain anonymous in their responses. As far as possible, sufficient information about the researcher was made available so that participants may be aware of their engagement with the researcher. Potential participants were asked to indicate their willingness to participate on two levels: 1.
Willing to allow the researcher to quote material from their written texts documenting their experiences of the adventure programmes.
2.
Willing to be considered for selection of a sample group for a personal interview with the researcher as outlined in the research explanatory statement and letter of informed consent. If willing, to include an email address or a mobile number for which the researcher will make direct contact with.
In all, out of a possible 117 learners, 61 of them (subgroup 1 – 24; subgroup 2 – 29; subgroup 3 – 8) responded favourably. All of the learners were young adults between ages of 19 to 35, 16 of which were female and 45 male. Informed consent gave access to 95 documents, or
147
experiential texts (as van Manen calls them), written by these 61 learners during or close to the time of their adventure experiences, and every one of these was incorporated into the study. None of these learners was in any sort of relationship with the researcher that might be considered inappropriate for the conduct of the inquiry. All eight outdoor leaders assigned to facilitate the three courses were likewise invited to participate in this study. Each of them was responsible for a group of 12-16 learners over the entire duration of their course. Ethical practices to minimise possibility of deception were likewise employed. They were briefed by OBS and subsequently by myself, and this was followed-up with the research explanatory statement and informed consent form (Appendix D. pp. 321-323). All eight of them gave consent to be considered for selection for a personal storying session (interview) later. However, in order to match responses with learners to understand the pedagogical choices leaders made, only four of them who had the most number of learners under their care were included: two from subgroup 1, and one each from subgroup 2 and 3. One female and three males, their age ranged between 24 and 38 years old. I considered all these eight leaders as potentially having some level of unequal power relationship with myself as I was their senior in OBS before I left the organisation and had therefore developed some level of familiarity with them. I therefore minimised exposure to this risk by not directly contacting these leaders at the initial stage; instead, extending the invites for their participation through OBS as they were assigned leaders responsible to facilitate the above selected adventure experiences. I requested for OBS to give an initial briefing on my behalf using the research explanatory statement. At that point, the leaders were introduced only to the research intent and purposes. Only with their initial willingness to participate were they subsequently briefed by me and given the copies of the research explanatory statement and informed consent form which included my details on it. The letter of informed consent (for both leaders and learners) clearly stated that participation was on a voluntary basis, and at a level that was acceptable to the individual. It was a condition also that participants could withdraw at any time without penalty. Initially, data was tracked according to course code, participants’ names and initials. However, I later decided to assign a code reference to represent each of the participants.
148
Code references and fictitious names were used to ensure confidentiality in the management and representation of information collected. This minimised risk of identification by any individual in the text or subsequent publication of the research. Permission for the conduct of the inquiry in the way that it has been described above was sought, and granted, by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number CF11/1918 – 2011001089).
Collection of story tales I utilised three kinds of qualitative data (Patton, 2002) in this inquiry: interviews, documents and observations. The first two being the main emphasis, while observations play a lesser role as it was used only during the interviews. These observations were recorded by me in note form during, and shortly after each interview. The researcher, who is involved in closely observing situations for the lived meaning of the participants, is a gatherer of anecdotes (van Manen, 1990). Van Manen (1990) recommends that note taking during interviews can assist the researcher in the analysis stage later, especially in the recovering of living phrases and incidents that give the anecdote a ‘cogent’ power or ‘point’. He further notes the significance of ‘point’ in anecdote: “Without this ‘point’ an anecdote is merely loose sand in a hand that disperses upon gathering it” (van Manen, 1990, p. 69). Van Manen (1990) further reminds us that the notion of ‘data’ is ambiguous within the human science perspective, instead discussion should be about “‘gathering’ or ‘collecting’ lived-experience material of different forms” (p. 53). To be sensitive to this phenomenological interpretation and to be in line with the development of the methodological approach for this study, I shall refer to the ‘data’ in this inquiry as ‘story tales’ from here forth. Learners’ ‘experiential texts’ as bits and pieces of story tales The 95 documents or experiential texts provided broad background material to the inquiry and were also used for a ‘purposeful intensity sampling’ (Patton, 2002) of participants for the personal storying sessions in Phase E. These written artifacts could be in the form of a reflection journal booklet, reflective essay pieces, diary entries, and/or qualitative course evaluation feedback form completed at the end of their course. All of them were duplicated
149
copies forwarded to me by the learners themselves, or collected by OBS on behalf of the learners at the end of their course for the purpose of this study. Ultimately, 23 reflective essays plus one diary entry and 23 course evaluation feedback forms from the 5-day team building course; 6 reflection journal booklets and 29 course evaluation feedback forms from the 16-day leadership development course; and 5 reflection journal booklets plus 8 course evaluation feedback forms from the 21-day classic challenge course, contributed to the 95 experiential texts, totaling close to 450 pages of documents. The consent from participants to use these documents for this inquiry made it possible to complete a long table thematic analysis (Phase D) for each of the subgroups. These are included as Appendix E (pp. 324-331). This preliminary analysis was used in three ways: 1.
As a ‘reconnaissance’ interpretation for each of the three subgroups, to gain an initial insight into broad themes for both individuals and the subgroup.
2.
To assist in a targeted recruitment (intensity sampling) of four from each subgroup for the interview group.
3.
As preparation for interviews by providing both a collective perspective of all of the material and, particularly, a detailed individual reading of the learner’s experiential texts.
The reconnaissance of these experiential texts was a very valuable phase of the research process. It allowed me, as researcher, to acquaint myself with the reflections and opinions of the learners via writings that they had recorded during or close to the time of their experiences. Several themes emerged for each sub group, some common and some different. The long table analysis table coded each of the key statements made in the writings by topic, and for each learner. Collectively, this coding culminated in a broad, but indicative, overview of emerging trends and themes. It was a highly instructive form of preparation for the interview phase of the inquiry as I was more alert and sensitive to question learners in the interviews about subtle differences within and between these emerging broader themes. Due to the time and scope of this study, I was mindful to limit the interview group to a manageable size. I considered a maximum of 12 learners (four from each sub-group), in the anticipation that each storying session would be between 40 and 60 minutes in duration.
150
Four sessions in each sub-group was thought to be manageable in terms of the volume of recorded data that would be produced, whilst providing enough diversity of perspectives and responses as to be indicative of the larger group. Purposeful intensity sampling (Patton, 2002) was used here as it targets “information-rich cases that manifest the phenomenon of interest intensely (but not extremely)” (Patton, 2002, p. 171). This sampling technique is possible through the access of learners’ experiential texts and aimed to collect story tales for the storying sessions (interview phase) that were most likely to yield significant insights into the phenomena being studied, in this case, the learners’ lived experiences of transformative learning in adventure education. I was careful to ensure an interview group that represented a diversity of responses. The storying sessions served largely as a conversational and reflective dialogue based on the inquiry matrix, and an expansion of responses initially written about by the learners in their experiential texts. Storying sessions Leaders and learners met privately with me, in a one-on-one fashion, to share their stories. As the focus for each of them differed slightly, I deployed different approaches to the structure of the storying sessions between the leaders and learners. While learners were engaged in a storying session similar to that of a semi-structured interview (Patton, 2002), leaders’ sessions were done using phenomenological based interviewing themes and sequences suggested by Seidman (1998). However, the aim for both types of storying sessions was the same, to elicit stories about the leaders’ and learner’s memories of their experiences with regard to transformative learning, and teaching for change in adventure education. The inquiry matrix and the learners’ experiential texts were used as guides in the storying sessions with learners. I used the inquiry matrix, along with the learners’ written texts and long table analysis, to prepare some bullet, open-ended questions (semistructured). These questions serve as boundaries to guide the flow of the dialogue. Four broad areas were explored (Appendix F. pp. 332-333): (1) on terminology clarification and understanding of ‘reflection’, ‘meaning making’, and ‘transformative learning’; (2) on events/incidents/stories during the course where they felt they had experienced some level of reflection and transformation; (3) on overall experiences - summing up their lived
151
experiences; and (4) on their outdoor leader. During the session, these guides were placed on the table, seat or the ground nearby for ease of reference for me in initiating dialogue, providing a comprehensible approach across interviews, whilst also allowing some degree of flexibility. The intent was to avoid “fixed and total understating” (Sammel, 2003, p. 163) through a series of question-and-answer sessions whereby a list of rigidly structured questions was used as the main approach. In the preparation for these storying sessions, I remembered Alvesson’s (2002) warning that “interviewers are not simple conduits for answers but are deeply implicated in the production of answers” (p. 115). I strove to be actively engaged and be responsive to the descriptions of experiences by the learners. The learners’ experiential texts were essential for me to adapt the session to each individual (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). A total of ten storying sessions (out of 12) were conducted between November and December 2011. Two participants could not be reached after several attempts and therefore these could not be included in the subsequent analysis. Each session lasted between 38 to 45 minutes and they were conducted at pre-arranged locations as requested by the learners. I opened each session by stating the purpose of the storying session and gathering some basic demographic information before moving into the four broad areas as outlined above. I also invited them to give a fictitious name for which they can be referred to in the story tales. Table 7. Learners’ codes and demographic details (p. 156) shows this detail and provides important information that may assist the reader in placing the data collected from each learner in context. Despite each giving a consented name to be used in story tales, each learner was also given a code to ensure that their data could be reliably identified and tracked throughout the inquiry. The main body of the storying session then flowed through the four broad areas guided by the inquiry matrix, centred on each learner’s narrative re-telling of their memories. Many of the follow-up questions focused on the memories of subjective responses to their experiences as guided by the semi-structured interview (Appendix F. pp. 332-333). At times, I found myself giving time and space for silence as the storytellers stared off into the distance to recall into their emotions, experiences and learning before gathering themselves to speak. I closed each session by asking the co-storytellers if they can pin-point a single component of the programme that was responsible for their learning or change. The choice
152
selection offered were ‘myself’, ‘the group’, ‘the place’, ‘the activity’, ‘the outdoor leader’, ‘the way the outdoor leader facilitated the learning for you’ or ‘others’. I noted similarities and differences between the learners re-telling of stories and events that they had written about in their experiential texts. In many cases, spoken stories in the storying sessions were a close match to their written precursors. For the four outdoor leaders, storying sessions conducted were based on Seidman’s (1998) ‘in-depth, phenomenological based interviewing’. In a similar fashion to what was set up for the learners, this approach uses primarily, open-ended questions and the major task was to build upon, and explore the leaders’ responses to those questions, to assist leaders reconstructing his or her experience within the topic under study. Perhaps the most distinguished feature of this in-depth approach to interviewing is the structuring of a series of three separate interviews with each leader, or co-storyteller. Seidman (1998) suggests it is important that the following themes are adhered to, in order to maintain the integrity of the approach:
Interview One: ‘Focused life history’ – The focus is to put the participant’s (leader) experience in context by asking him/her to talk as much as possible about their personal life history as it pertains to the topic of interest in the time possible. The purpose is to reconstruct early experiences. ‘Why’ questions are often avoided, rather ‘how’ questions are often used to assist the recall and reconstruction of a range of constitutive events from the past (e.g. how did you become an outdoor leader?)
Interview Two: ‘The details of experience’ - The purpose is to focus on the details of the participants’ current experience in the topic area. Asking for opinions are avoided as seeking concrete details of their experience is the key here.
Interview Three: ‘Reflection on meaning’ – Leaders were asked to reflect on the meaning of their experience. ‘Meaning is intended to go beyond satisfaction to address the intellectual and emotional connections between the participants and the topic. In light of the experiences participants have reconstructed, phrases such as: ’how do you understand’, ‘what meaning does it have for you?’, ‘where do you see yourself going in the future?’ might be introduced to the questioning. This interview relies on good foundations being established in the first two interviews, which is to say, the familiarisation the researcher gains with the participants in interview one or
153
two as crucially important and significantly expands on the possibilities offered by single interviews in research. Each of the storying sessions with the leaders was between 40 to 50 minutes duration. They were conducted between December 2011 and January 2012. A guided or focused approached (semi-structured) was adopted (Appendix G. pp. 334-338) and open-ended questions were employed so that the essential themes could be addressed while also allowing the co-storytellers freedom to respond. This was made possible with the assistance of the inquiry matrix. In keeping with the collaborative aims of hermeneutics the sessions were also approached as two-way and conversational in style. The interview sequence followed a basic procedural pattern, with the first two interviews taking place over successive days. Interview three occurred within a period of 5-7 days after interview two to allow adequate time for initial interpretation. As Seidman (1998) suggests, any longer would risk losing continuity and connection between the previous interviews. Table 8 (p. 157) detailed the outdoor leaders’ codes and demographic details. All storying sessions were audio recorded, with the co-storyteller’s (participant’s) permission, to allow for later verbatim transcription and to aid more accurate interpretation. The sessions were transcribed by myself or a professional transcriber (50% each), and I ‘proof’ read each transcript by listening to the interview again (Phase F). Interview transcripts were then sent to each of the co- storytellers with a request that they check the transcript for accuracy. I ensured that codes linking data to identifiable individual had restricted access; these codes were kept in the form of electronic file protected by a password known only to myself. All other information was classified as confidential, and was stored securely in a locked cabinet. All data will be retained for a period of five years as required under standard research and publications practices, and in keeping with the requirements of the Monash Human Research Ethics Committee. At the end of the five year period the data will be destroyed. The full transcripts and matching texts of more than 150,000 words in total underwent a process of organisation and grouping. I adopted an approach similar to that of a ‘typology systems’ (Lofland & Lofland, 1995). I made use of the two inquiry matrixes constructed earlier to solicit written descriptions that best fit the generalised pointers derived through theoretical analysis in the literature review earlier. The matrices layout facilitated
154
comparison and observation of patterns from both the leaders’ and learners’ perspectives. This method of grouping and categorising effectively revealed the depth and complexity of leaders’ and learners’ reflection, and the corresponding causal factors leading to their teaching and learning experiences in adventure education. It also allowed further thematisation and reduction from the earlier 56 descriptive headings to 18 headings. These tales, written and oral, made possible the interpretations of lived experience of the leaders and learners in adventure education. What’s important to note for narrative, phenomenological study, according to van Manen (1990), is that the gathering and analysis of data are “not really separable and they should be seen as part of the same process” (p. 63). In fact, this inquiry was informed from the outset by the learners’ experiential texts, and it goes without saying, that “data analysis begins while the interviewing is still under way” (Rubin & Rubin, 1995, p. 226).
155
Table 7. Learners’ codes and demographic details Learners’ Code Par#2
Consented name for this study Nicole
Adventure course attended
Gender
Age
Race
5-day team building course
F
23
Chinese
Education experiences (Highest qualification/ field/ local or overseas) Degree / accounting / overseas
Par#7
Boonwee
5-day team building course
M
35
Chinese
Degree / mass comm / local
Trainee Station Manager
Par#10
Jianing
5-day team building course
F
23
Chinese
Degree / marketing / local
Executive Officer
Par#11
Yixin
5-day team building course
F
26
Chinese
Degree / Economic services / local
Accountant
- reflective essay pieces - Interview
Par#25
Zik
M
24
Malay
Husaini
M
19
Malay
Diploma/ information technology/ local ‘A’ Level / general / local
Officer cadet
Par#27
16-day leadership course 16-day leadership course
- Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview
Par#29
Andrew
16-day leadership course
M
20
Chinese
Officer cadet
Par#54
Jeremy
21-day classic challenge course
M
26
Chinese
International Baccalaureate/ general/ overseas Degree / mechanical engineering / local
Par#56
Sky
21-day classic challenge course
M
26
Chinese
Trainee instructor
Par#58
Jay
21-day classic challenge course
F
24
Chinese
Degree / electronics, electrical engineering / local Degree / psychology / local
156
Current employment Assistant Manager
Officer cadet
Trainee instructor
Trainee instructor
‘Data’ collected
- reflective essay pieces - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview - reflective essay pieces - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview
- Reflection journal booklet - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview - Reflection journal booklet - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview - Reflection journal booklet - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview - Reflection journal booklet - Qualitative course evaluation feedback form - Interview
Table 8. Outdoor leaders’ codes and demographic details Leaders’ Code OL#1
Consented name for this study HiapIuh
OL#2
Tazen
OL#3
Haizul
OL#4
Peilee
Adventure course conducted
Gender
Age
Race
5-day team building course
M
34
Chinese
5-day team building course 16-day leadership course
M
38
Chinese
M
28
21-day classic challenge course
F
26
Education experiences (Highest qualification/ field/ local or overseas) Degree / mechanical engineering / local
Years of service in OBS 8yrs
Degree / arts / overseas
3.5yrs
Malay
Diploma / chemistry / local
5yrs
Chinese
Diploma / biomechanical / local
4.5yrs
157
Nature of work involved
- instructor (4.5yrs) - deputy head training and development (3yrs) - training consultant for corporate companies (3mths) - instructor (2yrs) - training consultant for corporate companies (1.5yrs) - instructor (3yrs) - training consultant for corporate companies (2yrs) - instructor (4yrs) - team manager (6 mths)
Drafting story tales At the completion of the storying sessions all 22 transcripts were matched with the learners’ experiential texts. In this story drafting phase (Phase G) a fictional novella was produced. Tile Island was necessarily constructed based on real accounts and characters to illuminate lived experiences of the leaders and learners involved in the three adventure experiences on Pulau Ubin, where OBS is based. The story utilises two types of plots, setting and flashback, with scenes shifting to accelerate or emphasise certain critical events/stories that happened during the experiences. It was at this stage that the distinctive structure of representing lived experiences, and the storyteller (me) and co-storytellers’ (leaders and learners) interpretations began to emerge. I earlier outlined some of the further sources of inspiration for this style of representation. The novella is represented in Chapter Six. It was possible to be very accurate, in terms of matching the settings of the co-storytellers’ narratives (for example, a particular happening occurred on a particular day or a particular programme), as I reconstructed the programme details from information provided by OBS and based on my own lived experiences and encounters with these places, and activities both as leader and learner. Besides engaging in reflexivity, I adopted three other strategies suggested by Creswell and Miller (2000) to ensure trustworthiness and authenticity of data: (1) The use of multiple sources of data (experiential texts, interview transcripts, evaluation forms, journal booklets etc) served as a means for triangulation; (2) Member checking was done when transcripts were verified by participants; and (3) peer debriefing was done with my supervisors and several of my colleagues who are familiar with Outdoor Adventure Education and research work. They were invited to read Tile Island for support of authenticity and plausibility, and if the scenes, settings and phenomenon in the novella resonated with theirs. A summarised version of the three adventure programmes is provided in Appendix H (pp. 339-342), so as to provide further contextual detail for the reader. Scenes in the story were constructed from the base of organised ‘data’. I took reference from Seidman’s (1998) recommendation to share the ‘data’ via two basic approaches: (1) developed profiles of individual participants and grouped them in categories that made sense; then (2) studied the categories for thematic connections within and among them.
158
The analysis and interpretation of each single case took ten days, with approximately 3/4 of a day spent on each single case. A sample of one of the single case interpretations is included as Appendix I (pp.343-357). I organised the ‘data’ systematically using three integrating columns:
Authenticity level – record the authenticity level (with guides from the learners’ and leaders’ inquiry matrix), key events, incidents, stories, learning or happening during the adventure course, served to both set the scene and respond to the lived experiences, or event/place that was the setting of the co-storytellers’ narrative descriptions.
Narrative descriptions – these narratives were developed through quotations sorted and selected through repeated readings of each learner’s experiential text and interview transcript with indicative themes and idiomatic phrases. I arranged the quotations around the authenticity level identified using the inquiry matrixes as a guide. In many cases this involved bringing fragments of the experiential text and interview together. In addition, interview conversations would often go back and forth to explore significant memories further, or the co-storytellers would make a statement later in the storying session that enriched a previous account. The sources and timing of each quotation were carefully indicated in the draft document.
Interpretations of lived experience – this part recorded my re-interpretation of the co-storyteller’s lived experience. It is presented as a hermeneutic description. It outlined the main structure and essence of the experience. Considerable time was devoted to drafting and redrafting these texts, for they formed a major ‘backbone’ to the fictional novella presented in Chapter Six. This was done without reference to theory or any other sources. As many of the co-storytellers had had similar experiences, or even shared experiences on the same programme, I became aware of common themes and patterns emerging during the weeks over which the novella was drafted. Even so, each co-storyteller was considered a unique case, and independent descriptions were written and included in the story tale, allowing each voice to speak for themselves, even though some of their experiences might be considered as rather similar. This was vital as it developed the complexity and subtlety of similarities and differences between the co-storytellers.
In an inquiry such as this, where the intent is to search for patterns of phenomena for a number of participants in a range of adventure experiences, it might be necessary to go beyond presenting the story tales as the ‘results’ and discuss the implications of these storied accounts for adventure education. Besides the intent of the study inquiry required
159
interpretation and representation beyond revealing the lived experiences. The aim of the study is also to explore how understanding these teaching and learning lived experiences may lead to the promotion of transformative learning in adventure education. This is the task in Phase H, where plausible insights (van Manen, 1990) were drawn from scenes in the novella to present pedagogical themes informing a teaching for change practice.
Thematic development of plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education The preparation of plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education involved two steps. Firstly, the narrative extracts from the 14 cases were coded (see Table 9). For ease of matching, I sorted the extracts using the inquiry matrixes framework for leaders’ and learners’ lived experiences developed in Chapter Four. In addition, it had already became clear, through the immersion (van Manen, 1990) in the data processing of the interviews and development of novella Tile Island, that leaders and learners spoke about their ‘reflection’ and ‘transformation’ towards authenticity quite consistently, where both experienced a process of self-alienation, authentic living and integration of external influence as they progressed through the days of the programme. In total, 125 extracts were coded. Table 9. Frequency of coded responses for types of reflection and transformation Self-alienation Components of Authenticity / Stages of authenticity
Self-awareness Awareness of others Relationships Awareness of context Critical reflection on and of prior four components Total
Authentic living
Integration of external influence
Technical reflection / reflection-in and –on action Leader 1 0
Elaborating existing frames of reference
Deliberative and personalisti c reflection
Learning new frame of references
Critical reflection
Leader 4 3
Transformin g points of view and habits of mind Learner 7 7
Learner 2 1
Leader 4 0
Learner 4 6
Leader 9 3
Learner 13 14
4 4
6 6
4 2
0 2
8 4
16 5
16 10
22 13
1
2
5
5
4
8
10
15
10
17
15
17
23
43
Total
125
Up to this point, the data had gone through two rounds of grouping and categorising. This was done at two different points in an attempt to gradually reduce and make sense of the vast amount of information collected (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). At Phase D, long table
160
thematic analysis examined 450 pages of documents to elucidate 56 descriptive headings in the note-taking process. A second review at Phase F using typology analysis (Lofland & Lofland, 1995) allowed for a further reduction of the data to and thematisation of 18 headings. I had imagined that this entire process of organizing and theming data would be very time consuming and laborious, however I decided to go through the process without the use of any computer software packages so that I could develop and maintain a close proximately and sense of intimacy with the data. This is essentially required of phenomenological and heuristic research, which not only accepts a degree of subjectivity, but actually demands a deep ‘immersion’ by researchers as they ‘live in the midst’ of the topic (Moustakis cited in Patton, 2002, p. 486). Though van Manen (1990) does suggest that thematic analysis of lived experience descriptions is the way to approach sorting through the experiential data, Wattchow (2006) stresses that “hermeneutic descriptions are not necessarily based upon the frequency of participants’ responses; the single utterance of one participant on one topic might provide a key insight to the interpretive process” (p. 154). Moreover, I remembered that the development of the conceptual inquiry matrixes earlier was benched on the orientations of hermeneutic phenomenological reflection. I was prompted, therefore, to consider using the fundamental structure of lifeworld existentials as a guide to reflect and interpret the responses and narratives. Here, I strove to confirm, challenge and/or extend this structure in terms of our understanding of the theory and practice of adventure education (and of reflection and transformative learning). Four themes emerged, supported by their sub-themes, where various aspects and depths of reflection and transformation in the frequency table above were combined and included. These themes started to take shape more prominently during the process of reading, marking and labeling the narratives or extracts at the single case drafting phase (adapted from Wattchow, 2006) and Tile Island at Phase G. At that point, I was already able to uncover key thematic phrases or aspects emerging from the ‘data’. But these phrases at this stage “only serves to point at, to allude to, or to hint at, an aspect of the phenomenon” (van Manen, 1990, p. 92). Thus, I followed-up with the formulation of emergent themes using “wholistic or sententious approach” (van Manen, 1990, p. 94) where I attended to the text (the novella Tile Island) as a whole and ask, “what sententious phrase may capture the
161
fundamental meaning or main significance of the text as a whole?” (van Manen, 1990, p. 93). A final review looking at the fundamental structure of lifeworld existentials (van Manen, 1990) allowed the associated sub-themes to be clarified and clustered into thematic groups. Then I expressed these meanings through four short, but succinct theme headers that captured the sententious formulation of the lived-experiences of reflection and transformative learning in adventure education: My body, my soul: relating to the lived body and embodied experiences of leaders and learners in their adventure education journey in the creation of self-awareness. My community, my growth: relating to the lived relationality experiences, where interaction with others served as critical learning opportunities for reconsideration of self and ‘real’ self. My space, my transformation: relating to lived spatiality and lived temporal experiences as spaces to surface of a new self. My stories, my life: relating to stories and storytelling in their potential and ability to shape individuals. Each of these themes is outlined in the introductions of Chapter Seven and elaborated further again at the beginning of the presentation of each theme. The second step was the actual writing and representation of participants’ experiences. To ensure anonymity of individuals, roles and incidents in the inquiry, I ensured that no one individuals or single case were represented on its own. Data was presented as accurately as possible, and I clearly indicated in the writing where I, as the author or the researcher, had made any interpretations or assumptions. I also made conscious effort to ensure data sources were duly acknowledged. Language or words that were biased against persons because of gender, sexual orientation, or racial or ethnic group were avoided. I was cautious to maintain the integrity of matching descriptions to the emerging themes while considering my own interpretations. To differentiate these two, for each theme, I first present the voices of the leaders and learners in the novella Tile Island and the narrative data. Then I drafted a plausible insight section which considered the significance of what had been revealed in regard to the potential for a-change-responsive adventure education pedagogy. It was from these sources, and with these guides, that I wrote Plausible
162
insights into the lived-experience of adventure education. The final text arranged themes and insights into a meta-narrative sequence that invites the reader to participate in the stories of adventure education where leaders and learners, and possibly you, the reader, progressed through a journey of learning, reflection, and finally transformation.
163
CHAPTER SIX: RE-TELLING TEACHING AND LEARNING STORIES
In the realms of true imagination you can rise up to full height, strength, and vitality. The complexities of daily life – work, enjoyment, and rest – sometimes can seem shriveling, even dead ends. In the story world, a sense of movement toward fulfillment and redemption predominates. When this positive momentum seems lost, leaving you feeling drawn down into many reductions of your life-power, the ‘once upon a time’ mood, which most grand old tales possess, allows you to experience for yourself fresh entry into time. Once brings a sense of immediacy; upon lifts the storyscape up into imagination; a time takes you forward and backward, until you arrive at a point of creative stillness from which the happenings of the story can creatively unfold. You have the power to bring to birth a story that refreshes time, space, and your sense of life and of who you are. (extract from Storytelling and The Art of Imagination, 1992, Nancy Mellon) _________________________________ Phenomenological research aims to ask: “what is the meaning, structure, and essence of the lived experience of this phenomenon for this person or group of people?” (Patton, 2002, p. 104). I explained in Chapter Five of this thesis how this task must be undertaken with great sensitivity to tales, context and setting, and how writing as narrative fiction may bring us as close as is textually possible to representing peoples’ lived experiences of adventure education. Re-telling teaching and learning stories seeks to reanimate the reader in the experiences of the participants in the study, and in their own experiences of adventure education as leader and learner. The writing that follows in this chapter and the next relies upon inner voices, imagination and verisimilitude as much as it does upon stories, dialogues and quotations, and it asks the reader to approach the task of reading as an empathetic listener to what is revealed in terms of the embodied lived experiences of adventure education. There was a conscious effort to ensure that the representation of these stories
164
illuminates the lived space, lived time, lived body, and lived relations aspects of the people involved, through story plot and story narrations. Lived experiences, as I discussed earlier, are often complex, ambiguous and sometimes contradictory; only by revealing the qualities and structures of those experiences that we so often neglect to ‘see’, or even ‘think’, can we hope to reach a position where we can offer a worthwhile consideration of the significance and potential of a change-responsive pedagogy for adventure education. Moreover, numerous adventure programmes have established that ‘letting the experience speak for itself’, where people sort out their own personal insights though personal involvement in the experience, are common occurrences in adventure education (Doughty, 1991). This chapter invites you, the reader, to participate in the realm of story tales and to personally waltz through the experiences of these composite characters through the lens of fictional narrative, such that you will also have the opportunity and personal experience to derive meaning and personal insights, in your own way, as you read their stories. The review and combination of story tales from the 14 co-storytellers made possible the creation of the fictional novella Tile Island. Tile Island speaks through the voices of the leaders and learners to provide a more complex and nuanced understanding of their lived experiences in adventure education. The importance of looking back over incidents in one’s life experience is highlighted by Mason (1994) who identified that incidents can become more significant as connections are made between them, thus raising further questions to explore. The story told is a critical interpretation offered from a commitment by the researcher to tell an actual story, not a freely imagined one. Text voices are actual narratives and accounts complied through careful review and interpretation of the ‘experiential texts’ and storying sessions from the 14 individuals (leaders and learners), for which I have detailed in Chapter Five. The title of the novella is chosen as a metaphoric representation of the context and setting where these stories and experiences occur. Tile Island, located off the north-eastern end of Singapore, has an area of 1020 hectares in the rough shape of a boomerang. Its core geological make up is granite and includes five smaller islands, interspersed by low-lying mangroves and tidal rivers. The tidal rivers were once for prawn-breeding, a forgotten trade
165
on the island as residents slowly migrated to the more vibrant city-state. Dried up prawning farms and the pockets of mud ponds somehow connected all those smaller islands into a single isle. A forgotten backyard for many years, the island’s rustic presence provides a sense of adventure, a getaway, and a sharp contrast to the urbanised and fast-paced lifestyle of the main city-state. This island land/seascape provides a richly textured backdrop to this tale. On the Western tip of the island sits a 45-year old adventure learning center. Being one that is vibrant and providing structured adventure experiences for her visitors, she capitalises on the scenic island site, spreading out over the entire island and its neighboring waters. Powerful enough to stretch one physically and emotionally on its voyage on and around, and placid enough to offer solitude with its serenity, Tile Island dominates the lives of the people who step onto its fertile soil seeking adventure and imparts a vital strength to the four outdoor leaders around whom this tale is built. It provides them with the opportunities to make deliberate teaching or leading choices and decisions in their different ways, over their personal adventure experiences as well as those they had with their learners, with the unprecedented changes that occurred around them, to them, and possibly in them. Tile Island tells the stories of this personal, social and cultural revolution largely through the eyes of Sean, a senior leader with the vision and integrity to understand the extension and inevitable transformation of adventure education beyond a personal journey…… so,
..... into Tile Island ….
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
“
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
_________________________________
Reflection on the development of Tile Island If you had a chance, just one chance, to change the world to how you want it to be, would you take it? And if you did, could you stand the change? Sean, in Tile Island, emerged through the writing process as one of my favorite characters: a humble explorer of the wishful and magical, a devout believer in the power of one’s inner beings. Through his eyes we see the work of adventure on many different types of transformations in the other characters in the narrative. Tile Island demonstrates the complexity of the factors that influence leading and learning in the lives of outdoor leaders and participants. It can be seen that learners are different with their distinct needs and motivations, and that these differences may need to be addressed by leaders in the outdoors in order for learning to take place more effectively, according to the purposes and aims of adventure education. The impact of learning transcends across leaders and learners as they involved themselves in their own adventure education experiences. Dewey reminds us that teaching requires thoughtful action. I was prompted by van Manen with a similar reminder, that “research is a caring act” (van Manen, 1990, p. 5), it requires caring between participants, researcher, and the resulting representation of their lived worlds. In this study, and the conduct of the inquiry, that caring act has been put in place and these have been discussed in the methodological chapter. Before I close this chapter, I feel it is worth commenting briefly upon several methodological aspects of the research conducted in this study. On the writing up of Tile Island Writing a novella has been an entirely new experience for me. I relied on guidance from story writing literatures (for example Aitken, 2003; Baechtel, 2004; Hart, 2011) on how to write a novel? Two key fundamental areas stood out as significant: the plot and the characters. The plot usually begins just before or at a significant moment of crisis or of change, then traces the event, shows how it was resolved and hints at the long-term consequences. Any development in the central character can only be the realisation of potential which was already latent – the character discovers inner strength or uses some
228
known talent to resolve the plot. This copy of Tile Island has been the work of several months of drafting and redrafting. Deliberate and careful attempts were made in the construction of narrative plot and composite characters. Each draft was reviewed, rewritten and reconstructed with close reference to the ‘data’ collected (and the research question and structures) until I felt satisfied that Tile Island was an appropriate response to the research question and goal of this study. I made sure that the establishment and recreation of the setting and scenes in Tile Island sufficiently represent the adventure education ‘world’ as I interpreted through the ‘data’ collected that these settings were significant to the participants’ lived experiences, incidents and their subsequent teaching and learning decisions. These were most evidently found at the opening of each story chapter in the novella. Setting refers most obviously to place, but it is more than this (Baechtel, 2004). It is the physical, emotional, economic, cultural, even the spiritual ecologies within which the stories are constructed. I gathered this information largely through the storying sessions, but also relied on my own recollection of lived experiences in these places and settings. As the study is about pedagogical recommendation, it was clear to me that the main characters of Tile Island would most appropriately be centered on the leaders, while the learners remained as a cast and characters that surface along the way so their voices might still be heard. However, the decision on the lead character amongst the other leaders, Sean, was informed by the ‘data’. Sean (OL#4) stood out as one who could offer the most in terms of time to develop and change during the storying sessions. The stories that he recounted and retold as well as his role positioning in the context also put him at the forefront in terms of the possibility of setting plots and sub-plots for the novella. You (having now read Tile Island) may have realised that each of the story chapters has a specific focus. The first story chapter attempted to illuminate the meaning and significance of the setting. It was centered on Sean as an introduction to the rest of the events and characters to follow. The second story chapter revealed the beginning of the learners’ thoughts, emotions and voices, done through the 21-day course participants. The third and fourth make the linkages between, and exposed the relationship and voices of both leaders and learners over two other courses (5-day and 16-day respectively) in the inquiry. In this
229
way, learners’ experiences over the three different courses have been represented. And finally the last story chapter brought us back to show how transformation and transition of learning occurred for leaders and learners alike. These key focuses have been shaped by the key thematic phrases or aspects that emerged from the ‘data’ at phase G of the study. In the end, writing the novella offered clarity and support (this will be discussed in Chapter Seven) to the key concepts and fundamentals of learning in adventure education, which were discussed in Chapter Three. On methodology and method Proposing
a
narrative-phenomenological
orientation
to
the
interpretation
and
representation of lived experience of reflection and transformative learning in adventure education challenged my conviction and self-confidence as learner, leader, educator and researcher in many ways. As researcher and writer, the start of each new chapter represented a new beginning, a journey that was filled with uncertainty and unique experiments. There were many questions that I asked: how to best articulate my ‘wonder’? How to position myself in this study? How to synthesise and find linkages between the vast literatures and articulate what is relevant to this study? What is the best way to conduct this inquiry? How to sort out the narratives and extracts? How to best retell and represent participants’ stories? How and when to draw out the main pedagogical insights? The nature of such a study indeed requires one to ‘live’ through it to be able to tell it. It took me a tremendous amount of time, effort and commitment, and I must say that without the luxury of taking time off from work for a full six month period for the writing up of the thesis (and this was after the completion of the foreground reading, drafting of the literature review and methodological chapters, and collection of all the experiential data), I could not have imagined how one could become similarly immersed into the topic and method. This has implications for the size and scope of future research studies adopting the same methodological stance. But I must highlight here that such an approach does yield insights for pedagogic practice that it may not be possible to gain through other methods. Choosing stories and storytelling as the mode of inquiry has indeed proven to be helpful in soliciting the lived experiences of the leaders and learners. The stories provided accessible insights into the complexity of the adventure education phenomenon. McDury
230
and Alterio’s (2003b) model of reflective learning through storytelling makes so much sense to me now as I have reflected on this entire journey. Narrative became a way of understanding experience, for the participants and leaders as well as for me as researcher. My excitement and interest in narrative has its origins in my deep interest in the nature and character of experience. With narrative as a vantage point, I have a point of reference, a life and a ground to stand on for imagining what experience is and for imagining how it might be studied and represented in researchers’ texts. In this view, experience is the stories people live. People live stories, and in the telling of these stories, reaffirm them, modify them, and create new ones. Stories lived and told educate the self and others (Connelly & Clandinin, 1994). Though I would not deny that there might be other modes of inquiry that could be useful in soliciting lived experiences, I would argued for stories and storytelling as the best approach where teaching and learning experiences in adventure education could be represented and relived. The development of the inquiry matrixes, semi-structured open-ended question areas, and the phenomenological based interviewing themes (Seidman, 1998) proved to be very useful methodological guides. Their presence during the data collection phase served as liminal boundaries where broad topics could be explored, yet allowing each storying session (interview) to take its own unique form. The inquiry matrixes were especially valuable in the organisation and structuring of representation of lived experiences. Most of the written texts provided by the participants were brief but they offered a good starting point for initial interpretation and organisation. The predominance of participants’ and leaders’ extractions and quotations in plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education (which appear in the following chapter) were drawn from the storying sessions and the novella and, again, it is impossible to imagine the research here as being satisfactory without this component of data gathering and analysis, despite the substantial time and effort needed for this process. The drafting of story tales presented itself as another key element to this study. The process of writing up the 14 individual case studies was time consuming, yet it provided a structure for which a detailed understanding and ‘living’ of each participants’ and leaders’ experience were called upon. It was each of the participant’s stories that made possible the revelation of nuances, complexities, ambiguities and contradictions that constitute a
231
person’s experiences. It was also through these case studies that I experienced the powerful work of imagination, memory and continuity of experiences. It was this process, coupled with the journey of the research to that point, that gave birth to Tile Island, the composite characters, plot, scenes and stories, as well as the subsequent themes that emerged and the pedagogical insights that resulted. The criteria set forth in the selection of adventure education experiences were also beneficial. The four criteria necessarily limited the scope of this study with its boundaries, yet they did not restrict the breadth and depth for diversity. In retrospect, it was beneficial that the eventual recruitment yielded a broad range of profiles, types, objectives and durations of programmes. It is hoped that this variety is adequate to reverberate with the reader and that it is sufficient to encourage consideration of their own pedagogic and research imperatives and circumstances. _________________________________
The best stories are those that most closely depict the actual terrain of lived-experiences. The validity, reliability and trustworthiness of narrative, fictional and other descriptive representations of people’s lived experiences depends largely on the feeling of verisimilitude insofar that the reader gathers a sense of being there (E. Bruner, 1986), as well as a sense of plausibility, where insights into the subculture of practice of the research participants can be revealed. The purpose of presenting the lived adventure experiences of the leaders and learners through fictional novella Tile Island is not for me to summarise their experiences. Rather, it is to elicit further reflection upon the experiences, and encourage observation by the reader, about the nature and quality of adventure education experiences. The importance of reading the novella reflexively would offer you the opportunity to derive your own meanings and ideas about the lived experiences or pedagogical influences in adventure education. The experience of the story’s characters is composite representations and can never speak of the ‘whole’ experience and certainly does not speak for all. At best they serve as representations of experiences from which general encompassing and specific propositional themes can be exposed. Themes provide the guide with clear direction pointing to the study
232
inquiry. The aim of the study is not only to explore how lived experiences of leaders and learners can help us understand transformative learning in adventure education, but also to reveal the possibilities within the less obvious, ambiguous and even contradictory meanings, structures and essences of teaching pedagogies for change. The way forward may be within the most mundane and ordinary aspects of the experiences. This is the precious potential offered here by the chosen methodology. Even though a primary purpose of creative fiction is to offer a narrative for the reader’s own interpretation of Tile Island, it is also my responsibility as a researcher for this study to offer my understanding, analysis and learning from the ‘data’ gathered and the interactions with the leaders and learners involved. This continuing work with and through the parts to make a whole, and then back from the whole to understand the parts of lived experiences of people in more and more detail, is a key feature of the hermeneutic circle. With this, we turn our attention to the themes and insights emerging from the lived experiences of the leaders and learners.
233
CHAPTER SEVEN: PLAUSIBLE INSIGHTS INTO THE LIVED EXPERIENCE OF ADVENTURE EDUCATION
In Chapter Six Re-telling teaching and learning stories, I presented the lived experiences of 14 individuals involved in three separate OBS adventure educational programmes through narrative plots and composite characters in the fictional novella Tile Island. The descriptions and portrayals of participants and outdoor leaders’ lived experiences revealed that the extent to which their encounters and subsequent learning, whether transformational or not, had been framed largely by the activities or challenges they were engaged in, the group make up and dynamics they participated with, and the attitude and willingness of the individuals to be open and receptive to such learning experiences. Tile Island exposed and confirmed Patton’s (2002) proposition that experiences, as they are subjectively lived by each individual, are often complex, ambiguous and contradictory. Fundamental to this study is the possibility of understanding adventure education through the lens of transformative education. Several of the different forms of transformations in adventure education are easy to identify through the novella Tile Island, while others are more subtle. For instance, amongst the participants, the youngest leader Anqi and the other leaders when they were younger, transformation as consciousnessraising (Freire, 1970), development (Daloz, 1986), individuation (Boyd, 1991) and soul work (Dirkx, 1997, 2001) were obvious in their shared learning experiences; whereas transformation as critical self-reflection (Mezirow, 1978, 1981) was more evident for the seasoned outdoor leaders as they progressed into mature authenticity in their leading practices. The coded responses of participants and outdoor leaders were summarised using the inquiry matrix (see Table 9. p. 156), and traced the trend that almost all components of authenticity (self-awareness, awareness of others, relationships, awareness of context and critical reflection on these components) were being lived and experienced throughout the stages of reflection and learning by the leaders and learners as they journeyed through the ‘black box’ of adventure education; and that responses increased from beginning learning to transformative learning and beginning authenticity in teaching to mature authenticity in
234
teaching. This suggests that adventure education does provide opportunities across the learning stages, but the work of transforming individuals is more evident and significant. The characters in Tile Island also established that the ‘self’, be it the learner, or the leader, is a reflective, dialogic, expressive, and deeply emotional and spiritual ‘self’ that constructs and re-constructs itself through experiences of learning, such as we see revealed in the characters of Sean, Anqi and Jay. To be meaningful, the individual needed to view the experience as personally significant in some way. The novella expressed in many circumstances, such as the solo stay for the 21-day participants, or the long paddling trip for the 16-day group, how each individual derived their own interpretation and meaning even though they went through a shared experience. This empirical evidence supports the argument that adventure education can be a kind of transformative education, and that deeper exploration of the adventure education ‘black box’ can be made through the lens of transformative education. In this chapter, I discuss plausible insights into adventure education pedagogy with a particular focus on the lived experience of transformative learning and reflection. The work of this chapter is to present narrative analysis (principally of Tile Island, supported by the ‘data’). It is the transition from the narrative presentation to the narrative analysis which links us back to the central aim and goal of this study. It connects the lifeworld with adventure education, reveals leaders’ and learners’ lived experience in adventure education in greater depth, and discusses consequences for reflection and transformative learning. This task of arranging, (re)presenting and construing the lived experiences of leaders and learners was, at all times, guided by the ‘data’ and the participants’ narratives themselves. This chapter presents four themes to illuminate what is inside the adventure educational ‘black box’. These themes had briefly emerged prior to the writing of Tile Island under the fundamental structure of phenomenology lifeworld existentials. The lifeworld structure was useful as a framework to aid in this analysis. I was able to connect the lifeworld structure to Tile Island, reflecting upon it again, and perhaps more deeply, now in tandem with the research question, to reconsider the fundamental constructs of adventure education. The purpose here is to confirm, challenge and/or extend our understanding of the theory and practice of adventure education, with a particular focus on the roles of
235
reflection and transformative learning. Four significant themes that emerged through this process are as follows: My body, my soul: This theme reveals the lived body, subject of the embodied experiences of the participants and leaders in their adventure education journey. It brings us back to the fundamental assumption of reframing experience as reflective learning. The lived body experience represents mostly, an enabling trigger that is required for leaders and learners to begin knowing, begin learning, begin reflecting, and begin meaning making. Three aspects of body/mind contributed to the significance of this lived corporeality: (1) Realising self and others through the feeling inside the body; (2) The body being the teacher; and (3) The body as a source for meaning making. Lived body creates awareness of self. My community, my growth: The interaction with group members stood out as one that assisted participants and leaders in learning new frames of reference especially in (re)considering the positioning of self within the context, situation and the greater social setting. The significance of this lived relationality in adventure education lay in the opportunities it offers for one’s guarded self to move towards a truer, more open embodied self. Through holistic engagement in meaningful group activity, the self can mature into an embodied true self that is ‘real’ with others, who in turn are ‘real’ with their return action. Lived relationality offers a tuning of self. My space, my transformation: This theme gives tangible form to the concept of lived spatiality and lived temporal experiences, where different forms of learning spaces in adventure education were exposed. The concept of reflection as meaning making is most obviously echoed in this theme. It was found that dialogic, written and silent spaces contributed the most as transitional and transformational reflective learning spaces towards learners’ transformative learning and leaders’ authentic teaching. In this way, space and time were demonstrated as critical components in adventure education where purposeful consideration and set up of learning spaces could ignite the negotiation and reflection of meaning possibilities and sensibilities for both leaders and learners. Lived spatiality and temporality reveal a surfacing of a new self. My stories, my life: Storytelling is about telling and sharing. In the telling of our own stories and our sharing of other stories we are telling or sharing our understanding of the world. Shared stories act as a way of knowing, where sense making about us and our relationship within the group or communities are evoked. These stories provide meaning for the journey and enrich one’s life overall. The power and significance of storytelling lies in its ability to shift
236
learning and temporal events from the past, to present, through to future. Storytelling theory has a close connection to transformative learning theory. Storying enables sculpting of self. Each of these lifeworld themes has implications for the leaders’ and learners’ ability to respond to ‘reflection’ and the corresponding depth of ‘transformation’ that is subjective to the individuals. Thus we as the empathetic, listening reader should keep this in mind as we re-enter the representations of the lifeworld of the leaders and learners. The discussion that follow is organised into these four themes, summary essences of leaders’ and learners’ lived experiences in adventure education, followed by plausible insights (van Manen, 1990) for each theme. Selective ‘data’ extracts and writing highlighted in the summary essences serve dual purposes: (1) demonstrating where some of the composite characters and themes came from, (2) providing my interpretation as researcher-writer of Tile Island. The plausible insights discussion of each theme contributed as the grounded, theoretical work for considering the possibilities of what has been revealed for change-responsive adventure education pedagogy. Similar to the concept of lifeworld, I would like to suggest that these themes “can be differentiated but not separated” (van Manen, 1990, p. 105). This discussion considers the cumulative influence of the various themes and narratives as they unfold. These themes work interactively; sometimes converging, diverging, conflicting previous sections of the text. They allow the collective work of seeing the greater complexity of leaders’ and learners’ lived experiences as they unfold through the meta-narrative. For ease of analysis and discussion, each of these themes is now represented separately.
237
MY BODY, MY SOUL Dewey (1918, 1988) addresses the body as part of his notion of experience and growth. Body offers itself as the subject of one’s embodied experiences. Csordas (1999) suggests that distinction between body and embodiment can be that the former is a material object that occupies space in context; while the latter is a methodological field that is experienced as activity and production. Embodiment therefore is defined as the “integration of the physical or biological body and the phenomenal or experiential body,” suggesting “a seamless though often-elusive matrix of body/mind worlds, a web that integrates thinking, being, doing and interacting within worlds” (Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, in Hocking, Haskell, & Kinds, 2001, p. xviii). Almost all the time in the participants’ and outdoor leaders’ shared stories they consistently recalled and made reference to their embodied experiences, their feelings, emotions and participation in activities that challenged and stretched them over their adventure education journey as starting points for knowing, learning, reflecting and meaning making. This is nothing surprising, because most, if not all experiential adventure experiences, whether in nature or in an enclosed room setting, require that the body be involved. As you would have discovered, Tile Island revealed the nature of ‘experiences' in adventure education as going far beyond Kolb’s (1984) description - singular, simplistic and external stimuli action which separate the body and the mind; instead it is more in line with Dewey’s (1925) proposition, that ‘experience’ is reflective, social, and continuous learning. As evident in the novella, ‘experience’ in adventure education goes beyond concrete action; it is also a form of representation. Tile Island manifests itself through the accumulation and the composite experiences of those that ventured through the place! ‘Experience’ is often a reflective learning space where the impulses, feelings and desires of the concrete experiences have been transformed into higher-order purposeful action (Dewey, 1938). Humberstone (2011) highlights the sentient nature of embodiment by showing how our senses and body give expression for us to ‘know’ at the personal, social and political levels. Her writing, together with the textual reconstructions of participants’ and outdoor leaders’ lived corporeal experiences in the inquiry, have implications and consequences for the possibility of fostering transformative learning in adventure education. Overwhelmingly,
238
the participants’ and leaders’ shared learning stories were centered upon their embodied experiences. It could be said that people ‘feel from the inside’ and ‘feel from the other side’, and that ‘the body’ is their own teacher, if one could pay attention to ‘the body’ as a source of knowledge and meaning. This can be seen in the composite characters of Jay, Joseph and Timothy while on their solo activity. While I do advocate that leaders facilitate learning for the learners, or what some would say ‘teaching to others’ especially in the urban context where we are bound by time and space, I recognise that they are not a cure for all the ills facing humankind or all the goals of education. These and all other lessons in adventure education should be accompanied by the kind of reflection that is inspired by the narratives above, to allow opportunities for learners to attend to their own lived bodily experiences, for it is within ‘the body’ that knowledge resides, and it will offer learning and meaning to the subjective individuals. This is perhaps the motive for letting the mountains/experience speak for itself. To understand the influential character of this theme in this inquiry we must re-enter the participants’ and outdoor leaders’ lifeworld as a learner in their adventure education journey. Interpretation of the ‘data’ suggested three developmental stages: (1) the inner sensory aware learner; (2) the self-management learner; and (3) the bodily-based reflective learner. Though it may suggest that a ‘progression’ through these stages would be ideal, not all participants or outdoor leaders ‘progress’ as learners this way, neither is the transition between these stages necessarily a neat or sequential one. The three different stages are characterised in the following three essences: (1) ‘Feeling from the inside to realise self and others’; (2) ‘My body being my own teacher’; and (3) ‘Bodily knowledge and meaning’.
First essence: ‘Feeling from the inside to realise self and others’ In this essence we witness the mixture of emotions and feelings from within the leaders and learners and its resultant effect on understanding self and others. For all the participants and outdoor leaders, embodied feelings and emotions were where they pointed when asked to share about their adventure experience. This is nothing surprising for one needs a body in order to experience the world and to grow (Dewey, 1918, 1988). This inner sensory awareness was ‘lived’ by all of the participants and leaders in the inquiry as they recollected their embodied experiences, learning and participating in the activities and challenges. New
239
feelings, emotions and situations that they encountered are ones that created opportunities for beginning learning, where individuals experienced self-alienation (Wood et al., 2008) about aspects of self and others as they are ‘feeling it’. The evacuation exercise experiences, for instance, triggered Jay to realise an acknowledgement of her emotions and her relationship with others. Joseph likewise, started to think that ‘no matter how strong you are you will still cry’. In other learners, with novel experiences such as reaching the top of the rock wall and overcoming seasickness, they began to realise their inner strengths and capabilities. One participant shared, Immediately after I completed [the rock climbing] I felt really joyful. It was like, ‘Wow!’ I don’t know. I had this totally exciting feeling. I was like jumping all around. But after that I thought …I did something, it’s like you finish a marathon run. (Par#11.Int.lines 173-175)
This inner sensory aware learner was also found in the leaders’ stories. For Chris, for example, it was his embodied experiences in his early learning and involvement in adventure education that triggered his decision and serious commitment in teaching and leading in adventure education. His subsequent transition and transformation of true-self and leaderself that follows was possible only because of these embodied feelings and encounters. In his words, All these painful pleasant was a mix and match of why I felt that the calling for the outdoor is very strong for me, to actually try to find my place in them and see how they can help me, not only to develop me, but how I can also share with the rest…… because each experience brings about different learning, different feelings or emotions, different fears, different levels of understanding. To me it is just… it is there. I happened to like it as it is. I enjoyed. (OL1.Int lines #1.245-248, 257-259)
Second essence: ‘My body being my own teacher’ For many the inner sensory lifeworld evoked a kind of self-management mechanism, regardless of the consequences. Here we find the participants and outdoor leaders began to demonstrate self-control (telling oneself what not to do) as well as self-direction (telling oneself what to do) as they gathered awareness of self and others through embodied emotions and feelings. Again, responses from all the participants and leaders in the inquiry indicated; in varying degrees, that this kind of self-management (or lack of it) seems to be
240
intimately connected with the body. ‘The body’ tells the individuals what to do (selfdirection), and what not to do (self-control). This phenomenon is observed to happen usually after critical events, where physical and emotional aspects of the individuals were challenged beyond their self-perceived limits. For instance, one of Chris’s participants says ‘when the body fails, the mind takes over.’ Also, reflected in Jay’s journal, was the day she recorded her experiences attempting the blindfold climb. Her embodied sensations of confusion and uncertainty made her realise the importance of the use of other senses, ‘to listen to the right voice, to trust our own instincts and our hearts’. What is noteworthy was the discovery and confirmation that ‘the body’ offered itself as a tool for learning new frames of reference, assisting the individuals in negotiating and making meaning towards their true self and role self. One leader shared: I was very badly bullied and very much casted one side most of the time….I thought that being exposed to adventure then was the best thing that happened to me at that point in time…. when I see kids thinking that they have the worse or thinking that they have the most unpleasant thing happen to them and coming to camps now ... I told myself that what I give to them is the care and concern and the nurturing aspects of me that I can give potentially for them. So that they can leave the camp learning that life is not so bad despite the hardship. (OL1.Int lines.#1. 113, 119-126)
In Chapter Four I discussed how embodiment is a very fundamental form of learning for the development of a sense of self and other. This essence of the body being our own teacher not only endorsed Bohm’s (1985) and Thomson’s (1996) assertion of soma-significant and embodied action, it also offers some light as to why I felt incapable before the vastness of nature, and yet feeling that I had grown as a result of the mountain’s teaching. I was glad that my body had taught me to stay down-to-earth and be a humble learner always.
Third essence: ‘Bodily knowledge and meaning’ The bodily-based reflective learner surfaced here. A few of them who were more reflective in nature offered the insight that ‘the body’ is, in a sense, a microcosm of the world, and thus a laboratory for understanding its meaning. Despite the common perception that knowledge resides in our head, I found, through their lived embodied experiences, that our entire body is the repository for all that we know. The memories of our adventure learning experiences, like our memories of everything else, reside in our body. The body is capable of
241
recollecting the different embodied experiences which are critical for learning and sense making later on. The body remembered the apprehension, the uneasiness, and the tension in the muscles. The body recorded the discomfort, the fatigue and the perspiration that ran down the spine. The body registered the fear, the distress and the racing heartbeat. The body automatically derived the meaning of success, ecstasy and enjoyment after these emotions and feelings. These remembrances endured as ‘true’ sentiments for as long as the body could recall: “yah, you can feel it, it’s real” (Par #11.Int.lines 155). We see so many of such examples in the Tile Island. This is an insight that could not have arisen without attention to embodied knowledge. It triggered critical examination of my own thinking about my body as a source of knowledge and meaning. Participants
Leaders
Despite jetty jumping several times, standing at the platform still chills my spine. (Par#58.R.J)
Second outward bound experience, I went for 9 days…. because I had grown older and I was able to derive meaning, thought more. Think it was the… group and the activities that impacted me. (OL3.Int lines #1. 171-184, 194)
Never liked the outdoors, tanned and sweaty. Still don’t. However, at the end of the 5 days here I am certain there was a sense of achievement albeit the arching muscles. Being out of the comfort zone like this really is a huge step and a test of endurance, patience, understanding and teamwork. (PAR#2.R.E)
I thought about my life journey, there is so much up and down…. So that is where you reflected on life and it is something that you experienced.... It totally makes sense sometimes. (OL2.Int lines #2. 124-127, 148)
Plausible insights: Knowing bodies, awakening minds My body, my soul reveals a bodily lifeworld in adventure education as one that creates awareness of self. The lived bodily notion brought to the forefront the idea of embodied knowing and the critical importance of a whole body engagement: the heart, the mind and the physical body. I would argue that learning in adventure education needs to first engage the heart. The heart allows the surface of emotions, both positive and negative. Emotions form the affective knowledge which we discovered had only but a subset of one’s entire learning experiences. This inner sensing awareness that everyone is capable of having has great significance not only for one to start noticing or to trigger self-alienation, but also to allow movement, patterns and perceptions to form as an individual starts making sense of their emotions and feelings. Such reflection and awareness of inner feelings may only be at a
242
surface level, but these are necessary and crucial to form the ‘bases’ of a higher level of critical reflection later. A parallel reference of such transition and transformation of learning can be made to Krathwohl, Bloom and Masia’s (1973) affective domain of learning. Through five levels of skill, moving through the lowest order processes to the highest, they describe how one reacts emotionally to the awareness of growth in attitudes, emotion and feelings. The surfacing of emotions necessarily engages the mind. The mind is involved in rational and logical reasoning processes as one needs to find reasons to explain their emotions and feelings, thereby it offers itself as the base of cognitive knowledge to the entirety of learning experiences. Bloom (1956) maps out how the recollection or recognition of specific facts (including feelings and emotions), procedural patterns and concepts serve in the development of intellectual abilities and skills. Meaning making and working with meaning is obvious when one tries to take control in negotiating options. As the mind works to decide on a self-management mechanism, reflection on the content, process and premise (Mezirow, 1995) occurs. Consciousness surfaces as one makes decisions on what to do and what not to do. Critical reflection usually happens at this stage for some negotiation and decision to derive. Consciousness translates into action when bodily-based reflections are engaged. The physical body being the foundation and sensation ‘generator’ for the heart, and the mind offers the somatic knowledge. Bodily-based reflection occurs where past feelings or emotions and meaning are triggered or consolidated for new action and views to occur. This is where transformation is most obvious. Simpson’s (1972) psychomotor domain of learning clearly spells out the importance of perception (affective) and set (cognitive) knowledge in the guidance of response for subsequent stages of learning (though focuses on discussion about the learning of motor skills) to occur. This theme explores embodied knowledge as it comes into the consciousness, how one accesses this knowledge, and how one can reclaim the body as a source of knowing. Dirkx’s (1997, 2001) idea of transformation as soul work stood out strongly at this point. The essences of leaders’ and learners’ lived experiences in adventure education supported his argument that our beliefs of consciousness at the forefront derive largely from unconscious inferences that we make from our experiences in and with the world. I now realise why I was
243
able to ‘see my own ghost’, and how this ghost surfaced just at the appropriate times. It was the result of my lived body, as an inextricable contribution to my larger lifeworld. In the earlier critique I affirmed that adventure education is not only about the body, or not only the physical dimension of the self. Yet, as I have discovered through Tile Island and these essences, neither is adventure education only ‘the body’. It is, also the soul. Innate in us is the internal sensing that has great significance not only for how one learns and enjoys adventure but also for how we perceive the quest. Without it, we certainly can see the movement and action on the trails, or in the sea, and hear any accompanying sounds, but internal sensing allows us to feel the journey and our response to it. As educators and leaders, we become learners, not just onlookers, as we breathe along with the participants in the outdoors, feeling the stretch that continues past our sore muscles, feeling the body reacting to fear and anxiety. How important is it that educators and leaders start with themselves, but not end there. How important is it that educators and leaders let the kinesthetic sense take them beyond their own sensations into the world, to recognise their connectedness with others – and that they go beyond sensing the pain they feel (their own or that of others) to acting upon it. How important is it that they engage learners in a holistic approach, one which encourages expressive and multiple ways of knowing (Taylor, 2006, 2009)! I was very much inspired by the words and stories of the leaders as they told of how and why they became a believer in adventure education, and acted upon it. Beyond them, the admiration also comes from educators like Green (1996a, 1996b, 1996c), who are making the connection between the inner somatic sense and social consciousness. Educators have to be prepared to work on their own holistic awareness (Taylor, 2006), to create a learning environment conducive to whole person learning and modeling empathetic connections to and with learners’ experiences. As the ground for lived experiences, for knowing ourselves, our learners, and the world we share, we need to remember that our bodies are involved in thinking and feeling as well as doing, Whether we desire it or not, students live bodily in school…. Such lived experiences may be productive of an "understanding" or educative outcome, but only if we can become aware of our educated bodies. Aesthetic experience, because it focuses on the senses, is particularly well-positioned
244
to aid us in coming to this experience…. an experience which joins intellect and body. (Blumenfeld-Jones, 1997, p. 3)
To sum up, I believe that all of the lessons we ‘teach’ in adventure education – about realising, learning and transforming self – can be taught through and from the perspective of the lived body. Shapiro (1999) gives an example about the “critical pedagogy of the body … where the body/subject as a lived medium becomes part of the curriculum” (p. 142). She describes how she creates choreography in collaboration with her students, helping them use personal memory to create movement while transforming their consciousness of who they are as women. I would even go as far to suggest that it is time to claim education of the lived body as appropriate terrain for not just adventure education, but all of experiential education. The focus is on inner sensory awareness, which is studied by those in the field of somatics. The term somatic is described by Hanna (1988) as a way of perceiving oneself from the “inside out, where one is aware of feelings, movement and intentions, rather than looking objectively from the outside in” (p. 20). The experience begins in education of the senses: seeing, hearing, and feeling from the inside are essential if one is to be an experiential educator or appreciate any learning journey (Humberstone, 2011). So, to be an experiential educator is to be one’s own teacher. To be an experiential educator is to create forms, grounded in lived experience, which express knowledge and meaning – forms that will touch others. That is why I believe that these discoveries from Tile Island and the three existential essences of the lived-body revealed here are ones that we must teach young people who will be the experiential learners, educators, and experiential learning supporters of the future; who will be creating the education we live ‘with’ and the world we live ‘in’.
245
MY COMMUNITY, MY GROWTH In earlier discussion I highlighted Scheper-Hughes and Lock’s (1987) the three bodies theory as one that can help us understand the intricate relations of being-in-the-world. This inquiry ascertained that the body-self of the individual is nothing but a part of the social and political self. In addition to the somatics of the personal body, this research reveals the significance of our ‘social body’, which shaped symbolic meanings for realising both ‘the self’ and ‘the self’ in community. The community, referring to the social environment, the group, and the lived relationality the individual is involved in, has been a major part of the transformative experiences for both the participants and leaders in the inquiry. It appears that the community had a two-fold effect: it is both a trigger to influence as well as an outcome for transformational-like learning. The provision of growth spaces and their learning potential is significant. Throughout the various stages of learning and stages of reflection on teaching practice, lived relations issues have been the most discussed or shared components. The importance of lived relations, with their notions of group dynamics, bonding and team building, is claimed as one of the attributes of meaningful learning experiences in adventure education (Ewert, 1991; Mckenzie, 2000, 2003; Walsh & Golins, 1976). For this inquiry, the interest is on how people and participants experience their relationality, within the whole group or within subgroups, and how these relational experiences either limited or afforded a response to reflection and transformative learning of ‘the self’. The theme of my body, my soul has already shown us that the embodied experiences of self in adventure education are often personalised and solitary, yet the presence of others or the larger group remained vivid and critical. The phenomenological orientation of this inquiry requires us to dig a little deeper into the meaning and structure of these social experiences and participants’ memories of their influence. Two essences within the theme emerged that provide potential for insights: (1) ‘You hum and I will hum along’, and (2) ‘From inner true self to embodied true self’.
First essence: ‘You hum and I will hum along’ In this essence we see how social phenomena such as group size, working as a group, relationships and attitudes of other members, reciprocity and mutual dependence on other
246
members, and taking care of others were felt to impact upon and/or limit some participants’ depth of reflection and transformative learning. Social phenomena were found to be of great significance in the responses of all the participants with regards to enabling learning and in the reconsideration of self in the social setting. Participants cited relationships and attitudes of other members, reciprocity and mutual dependence on other members, experiences of working as a group and taking care of others as key aspects contributing to their lived relations, reflection and meaning reconsideration. We saw how Mr ‘T’ in Tile Island affected Jay, Joseph and Timothy (positively and negatively). For Justin, even though the experiences of participating in the maze activity might be something with which he is familiar, he similarly pointed out the realisation of ‘how one person can have such a big effect on twelve other people’. Andy, one who is a little self-centered, likewise began to be aware of his attitudes and action towards others’ involvement and participation. From the responses of the leaders, it was encouraging to learn that they were aware and appreciated the significant effects of these aspects of social phenomena. Echoed by Sean in his reflection of his own influence practices (story Chapter 3), it was interesting to note that both the participants and leaders acknowledged the fact that the behaviour of a person was affected by the social environment, and that the social environment also had an effect on how this person might behave: “…. every single course you conducted, you learnt something from the participants. And you learned much more and you rejuvenated yourself based on all this learning” (OL2.Int lines #1. 404-408). Their reflection on practices that followed through involved constant adjustments and reconsideration of personal determinants such as expectations, self-perceptions, and goals. It is this reciprocal, continuous phenomenon that once again reinforced the essence that lived relation experience in adventure education is a social, reciprocal, and continuous-learning notion – one that goes beyond a personal learning journey. What is adventure education about, it’s not just the immediate impact to these participants, but how these participants can also become an impact to the bigger population at large. So I think adventure education itself is really, to me is an extension, now to me is a very big extension beyond personal journey. (OL4.Int lines.#3. 444-447)
247
Second essence: ‘From inner true self to embodied true self’ Building on the first essence, some participants, with the help of their peers and leader, developed social arrangements within the team and tried new social behaviours that enhanced their learning experiences to be a better ‘real’ self. The emerging embodied true self of both ‘Self’ and ‘Other’ are complementary and work to enhance each other. Responses from participants demonstrated evidence of transformation of their inner true self into embodied true self as they negotiated and worked with the meaning gathered through being with others. One participant shared, “I think I am not good in expressing myself. That was why they misunderstood me…. Be more open... Join into the club… the group was the one making me reflect a lot” (Par#56.Int lines 305-307, 327-330, 337). It appeared that working as a group, interacting with other members, relying on others, taking care of others and trying new behaviours in the group setting increased participants’ self-awareness, self-confidence, motivation, interpersonal skills, concern for others and concern for the environment in general. As participants’ sense of personal competency is enhanced with a wide array of trying new social roles and negotiating lived relations issues, they expanded their otherwise ‘false guarded’ self for a more true, open and authentic embodied self. This is possible because the individual is making attempts to integrate external influence, constantly adjusting and adopting the best self to fit into the group. I don’t know if I can account for how much I had improved physically, mentally, but above all I felt it has helped me understand how to relate to people better and I felt that is one of the most important things in life. It is not about how much you can endure physically or mentally. It is about how well you can interact with fellow team members. And that is the thing I really appreciate the most. (Par#29.Int.lines 497-501)
Plausible insights: Engaging communities, tuning souls Not only do learners receive tremendous understanding, support, and encouragement from others facing similar issues, they also gain different perspectives, ideas, and viewpoints on those issues. Most learners, though somewhat apprehensive at first, shared that the group experience was helpful far beyond their expectations. Exposing learners to relationality issues for personal effectiveness is widely categorised under the major theoretical
248
framework of symbolic interactionism, with the idea that people are the constructors of their own actions and meanings (Wood, 1983). Implicit in this notion is that people have different meanings for the same objects in their physical world and they interpret situations in their own distinct ways. Besides, it has been said that people are possessed of a ‘self’, we are our own body and mind. Our inner and outer selves are capable of interacting with each other; we are reflective or self-interacting (Delamont, 1983). The first essence highlighted key aspects of social phenomena contributing to the leaders’ and learners’ lived relations’ reflection and meaning reconsideration in adventure education. The second essence demonstrated that engaging in group-based activities and experiences encourages individuals to move from their otherwise ‘false guarded’ self for a more true, open and authentic embodied self. These essences are consistent with Mckenzie’s (2000, 2003) earlier findings. The phenomenological orientations of this inquiry and the exposure of the lived relationality essences, however, extended beyond highlighting key factors of social influence, to inform us of how these lived relations aspects might provoke reflection and transformation. The notion of lived relation creates certain levels of group spaces for reflection and transformative learning to occur. Here, I discuss them through the perspective of learning outcomes. Three developmental outcomes surfaced as significance. Each of them was triggered by different primary group experiences - that is the object of reflection, and each ‘produced’ varied forms or levels of reflection. The first developmental outcome was a greater awareness of self and an attention to one’s personal growth. There were possibly two triggers for this outcome: (1) Individual perceptions and life experiences outside the group; and (2) interpersonal encounters or interactions within the group, such as critical dialectical discourse with others, dialogue with self, listening to others, witnessing or observing other’s action and receiving feedback from others. Such triggers are a powerful mechanism for critical self-reflection on one’s assumptions, subconscious and images of self in the group. Locus of change centred on intrapersonal and interpersonal issues. One good example in Tile Island was Timothy. He attempted to adjust his attitudes, involvement and participation in the group after he received feedback from his peers about being too authoritative. He took action in response to the feedback and made an effort to maintain it throughout the final expedition. He continued to reflect on this after the course to want to do better.
249
Empathy for others and appreciating individual or cultural differences came out prominently as being the second developmental outcome. Lived experiences of social identities inside and outside the group, and sharing and exploring the imaginary experiences of others were the main triggers for this outcome. Here, we saw mutual meaning making taking place across the people in the group, each making attempts to negotiate and adjust individual differences for a kind of group structure or symbolic representation of group to surface. Meaning making is a stage of reflection at which the new material of learning is assimilated into cognitive structure and, simultaneously, the cognitive structure accommodates it to make sense of the new learning and what is known (Moon, 1999). It requires the group to behave and express their identity or emotions in such a way that is consistent with the conscious awareness of the group’s physiological states, emotions, beliefs, and cognitions. When group meaning making occurs, it indicates a transitional process from beginning learning to transformative learning because according to Wood and colleagues (2008), this is where authentic living occurs – the second aspect of authenticity in their person-centred conception of the authenticity framework. Locus of change in this case would likely be intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup and intergroup. This is most obviously informed by narratives highlighted in the second essence. Political or systemic consciousness surfaced when the lived experiences of oppression, structural inequality, and life in systems outside the group was being challenged. Usually these were triggered through problem-posing by others, storytelling or shared inquiry amongst group members, group meaning making and negotiation, or reflection on action. What follows would usually be a deep level of reflection or some kind of transformation. A person may have felt compelled to reflect deeply, and possibly act upon, forms of social oppression or social change that they became conscious of as a result of the social or relational phenomenon of the group. The resultant changes that might occur may possibly be intrapersonal, organisational and even societal. Sean’s reflection on the entirety of Anqi’s and her group encounters was an attempt to illustrate this point. Building a strong community grounded in respectability of all members and a shared enthusiasm for learning is therefore a distinct pedagogic insight amidst the complexity of reflection I have come to realise reading and hearing and writing the shared stories in this inquiry. Community is a sought-out need in most people and can be facilitated in the
250
leader’s open spirit of interaction. For instance, leaders may take on the roles of respected educator, mentor and friend. Leaders need to realise that they are in the position, to some extent, in exerting influence to encourage learners in community engagement, as echoed by one of the leaders, “I guess the part on where I can still stand and influence is still there, but the part on how much I can influence varies…. It varies in terms of how much I can influence but the standing and influence will always be there” (OL1.Int lines #1. 190-191, 198-199). The discovery that individuals’ souls can be ‘tuned’ through their engagement in lived relations experiences is not a novel concept, but the contribution of this inquiry comes through the lens of lived relationality, in the insights of how such a phenomenon might possibly occur in adventure education. From the perspectives of social theories, for example, rational choice theory (Beacker, 1976) and symbolic interactionism (Mead, 1934), free will, individual choice, subjective reasoning, and the importance of unpredictable events are possible influencing factors to learners’ depth of reflection and transformation. As learners gain an increase in self-understanding, centred around the realisation that he/she is emotionally safe and ‘okay’ to be who they are within the community at that particular time and space, rather than attempting to portray ‘the self’ as he/she perceive others wish them to be - the generalised false self, the inner true self can find outward expression. In this way, one can shift from a generalised false image self to a more true genuine, authentic self. Such shifting phenomena in fact have a reciprocal effect for both a more authentic self, as well as a more authentic community. Lived relations experiences that test our personal powers are critical to engage the self and receive an embodied self. As these experiences builds comfort and confidence within the self, the person becomes more genuinely himself or herself and the community is enhanced. The evolution of more meaningful actions of a truer self and real perceptions received to the self from a truer companion strengthen both the self and the community. The emerging embodied true self of both ‘self’ and ‘other’ are complementary and work to enhance each other. This way of interpreting the reciprocal shifting phenomenon is perhaps another way we could better understand van Manen’s (1990) notion of relations and Scheper-Huges and Lock’s (1987) three bodies theory. As a result of Tile Island and this research process, I now have some answers to the lived relations questions I raised earlier in chapter four: on the reciprocity effect of how ‘the body-self’ shape the ‘social body’ or even the ‘body politic’ and vice versa. Though I am not really sure
251
if one really precedes the other, we see from the stories shared that many of them (both participants and leaders) acknowledged the link between confidence building of new or challenging activities with a feeling of ‘creating’ community and a bond with others. The responsibility on the part of the educators or leaders therefore lies in offering an environment for the learners to engage in community experiences. This is possible only if leaders consider and pay attention to the ‘individual experience’, which is the primary medium of transformative learning (Taylor, 2006). Leaders need to be conscious of what each learner brings (prior experiences) to the group and also what he or she experiences within the community or lived relations issues itself. In Chapter Three I briefly outlined some strategies and these have been echoed in the stories and narratives of the leaders and learners. One leader goes as far to suggest that what the leader brings to the group are equally as important when he says, “I guess your values and principles, and beliefs … is very important because that is the essence of who you are and where you stand in the area of influence” (OL1.Int lines #1.361, 371). In the same way that these shared experiences of leaders and learners supported ‘individual experience’ as core elements in fostering transformative learning (Taylor, 2006), establishing meaningful, genuine and ‘authentic relationships’ with the learners were most frequently described and mentioned by both the leaders and learners in the inquiry. This discovery reinforced the discussion in the earlier chapters that teaching and leading through authentic relationship is indeed a critical pedagogical approach in fostering transformative learning in adventure education. This act, however, needs careful consideration and deliberate action and thoughts. It includes the leader’s role positioning in the group; skills and competency in setting up an emotionally safe and trusting environment; willingness to be vulnerable, or share personal experiences before learners; and a genuine, sincere attitudes. One outdoor leader voiced: Because I think the rapport building part is just very important. If you come across yourself as facilitator you may seemed too distant. If you come across as a teacher right, then they will - so call - expect more from you. So I think what I want to encourage here is that we are not in a way better than one another, because we have our different life we have different way of looking at things, but how we can bring everybody up here is like having a conducive platform so that we can share our experience. And this sharing itself it could
252
also like have different touch points whereby you can help us in areas that you know, we could be struggling in….. then there is this bridge that you know you can enjoy and share with. So it’s just a different approach. But in general the genuine, the sincerity is still there. Just that the way of bridging is different. (OL4.Int lines #2. 202-209, 221-223)
253
MY SPACE, MY TRANSFORMATION In Chapter Four I introduced the concept that space is more than just an open area, that “place is space imbued with feelings and meaning. While space can be anonymous, place has significance and meaning in our lives” (Tovey, 2007, p. 57). Savin-Baden (2008) proposes that such spaces are “places of engagement where often disconnected thoughts and ideas, that have been inchoate, begin to cohere as a result of the creation of some kind of suspension from daily life” (p. 7). He goes further to argue that this notion of spaces stretches beyond the idea of including the physical spaces in which we place ourselves, but that they have different kind of temporality and different ways of thinking. Space, therefore, is inseparable from time; it is ‘crystallised time’ (Castells, 1996, p. 411), for which locating oneself in spaces where ideas and creativity can grow and flourish, spaces where being with our thoughts offers opportunities to rearrange them where the values of being are more central than the values of doing. Savin-Baden’s (2008) concept of ‘space’ shares similarities with that of van Manen’s (1990) lived spatiality and lived temporality. The possibilities of these spaces, or lived spaces, lie in their reflective capacity, and this is vital for adventure education. ‘Reflection’ in the lived stories of the participants and outdoor leaders in Tile Island crossed the transmissible, superficial level of expression in information processing (Henderson, 1995) that was currently proposed in most adventure learning models (for example those offered by Gibbons & Hopkins, 1980; Joplin, 1981; Kolb, 1984; Mckenzie, 2003; Walsh & Golins, 1976). Instead of merely distinct steps in processing experiences, reflection has demonstrated that it is an inherent, continuous thinking process of validity testing and conscious thoughtful action. The leaders and participants’ lived experiences revealed different levels of reflection and sense making activities across the stages of authenticity in their teaching and learning (see Table 9. p. 156). It is possible to conclude that overall, both leaders and learners experienced reflection as a holistic sense making process. These shared stories from the participants and outdoor leaders in Tile Island reveal that reflection in adventure education: (1) engages individuals to explore their experiences for new understanding and appreciations (Boud et al., 1985); (2) encourages individuals, through educative feedback given to individuals from others, unassisted selfobservation, metacognition processing which can lead to deep personal changes (Caine &
254
Caine, 1994); and (3) is a social-action notion, inherent in one’s process of interpretation by judging its effect on the authenticity and truthfulness of one’s ideas (Mezirow, 1991). It is not difficult to find reflective learning spaces in the lived teaching and learning experiences of the participants and outdoor leaders in Tile Island. Reflective spaces, as defined by Savin-Baden (2008), are “spaces that are pre-liminal or supra-liminal, they are invariably suspended states, meta-states in which understandings emerge from often complex situations during the course of everyday life” (p. 69). In other words, they are spaces of meaning-making, and consciousness-raising which reach beyond contemplation and reconsidering past thoughts. Within the novella these learning spaces are powerful and they create opportunities for knowledge creation, reconsideration, sharing and transformation. The lived reflective learning spaces were plentiful and occurred all the time in adventure education. They existed as meaning making pockets, where experiences and learning were transformed, and changes evident. Savin-Baden (2008) suggests that shifts in consciousness can occur at three levels: 1. Primary reflective spaces: rudimentary levels of reflection, such as thinking about experiences, and exploring ideas and challenges. These include problem solving and a prospective challenge. 2. Transitional reflective spaces: occur when a challenge or query prompts us to reconsider views and perspectives. These spaces have a sense of movement from one position to another; therefore, shifts in position occur in particular areas of peoples’ lives, at different times and in distinct ways. These include troublesome or disjunction reflective spaces and liminal reflective spaces. 3. Transformational reflective spaces: involve some shifts towards ‘becoming, moving and repositioning’ into a different life space, transformational reflective spaces are more complex and involves an identify shift. These include higher level of liminal reflective spaces and major epiphany. Like Mezirow’s (2000) four ways of learning, Savin-Baden (2008) reminds us that primary, transitional and transformational spaces for reflection are interconnected and overlap. However, it is likely that transformational reflective spaces have more of a liminal quality than primary spaces, because catalysts to change and major epiphanies tend to prompt identify shifts (Mezirow, 1978).
255
Based upon both Husserl (1970) and Habermas (1987), such concepts of space express the idea that there are diverse forms of space within the life and lifeworld where opportunities for individuals to reflect and analyse learning occur. This theme gives tangible form to the concept of lived spatiality and lived temporal experiences, where different forms of spatial zones and imaginary geographies in adventure education are exposed, and reveal Savin-Baden’s (2008) levels of reflective spaces. As I reviewed the stories collected, I gathered that the formation of these spatial zones and imaginary geographies is a result of the way in which space is produced and reproduced in particular locations and social formations. These spatial zones and imaginary geographies are spaces found in daily routines. The daily life practices affect and impact their formation, and to some extent are responsible in organising them. The shared stories from the participants and leaders also exposed a few types of spaces in which their inner voices, reflection, reconsideration and transformation happened most often. Some of these can be ‘created’ spaces, while others are spaces that just occur naturally, or were ‘unexpected’. I have organised these insights over two essences within this theme: (1) ‘The landscape of spaces’, and (2) ‘Creating spaces, engaging possibilities’. Tile Island had, to some extent, demonstrated that learning spaces are potentially everywhere and specifically ‘somewhere’ in adventure education. Collectively with these essences, they offered a more in-depth understanding into the leaders’ and learners’ lived teaching and learning experiences in adventure education. As we shall see, most of these examples of lived spatiality and lived temporal experiences can be interpreted as avenues for critical reflection in learning and critical self-reflection in teaching, which in turn contributed to transformation and surfacing of a ‘new’ self – a more authentic leader and learner.
First essence: ‘The landscape of spaces’ The extracts and voices of the participants and leaders offered possible identification of four possible spatial zones where participants’ and leaders’ learning are thought to have taken place during the adventure learning journey: (1) space between leader and learner; (2) space between learners; (3) space between people and places; and (4) space within the individual.
256
The first spatial zone, ‘space between leader and learner’, was a learning space especially evident in the case of the 21-day course in this inquiry. The concerns and agendas of leaders and learners are inevitably different spaces with diverse emphases, and such spaces are often complex and difficult to manage. Often these spaces are not just different in territory (due to role positioning and power relations issues) but also in language and social practices. This is portrayed through the struggles Anqi had with her participants in Tile Island, where they seemed to have mismatched expectations of each other. This spatial zone, though appeared as not well managed, triggered a significant number of transitional reflective spaces for both leaders and learners. Participants
Leaders
Looking at what the instructors were doing. Not really motivating. Or was I looking for too much out of them? … It is going to be tough managing people with language barrier and not forgetting the highest difference in outdoor experiences. I still found it a bit hard to really communicate with my leader. Maybe we are still at the forming stage of group dynamics. I still don’t see much from the leader, or maybe she had been executing the norm. Probably I expected too much. I expected a wow to be there. (Par#54. R.J)
In fact I talked to a few people *participants+…I realised that this is their thought process, so that’s why doing the sharing, where the majority, when the whole group have a debrief session, didn’t raise up because their thought process may not be what you think it should be…. and I do feel that as a trainer and participant kind of relationship, it also bring a kind of barrier….. I don’t know how come they can think so deep. I am not thinking deep enough. Ya, so this people actually trigger each other thought. (OL3.Int lines.#3. 263-267, 271275)
Where there are spaces between leader and learner, it should also be acknowledged that there exists ‘spaces between learners’ too. Their diverse backgrounds, life experiences, life stages and encounters made each individual unique, having their own wants, needs, aspirations, expectations and approaches to learning. Spaces between learners are important learning opportunities where they exchange information, knowledge, sharing and benefit from each other’s interaction. This played out evidently in Anqi’s group where differences in age, diversity, background, experience and proficiency levels were vast. We saw from the novella how participants started to reconsider their own stance, approaches and beliefs towards certain issues from each other’s sharing. This second spatial zone has much potential in bringing about both transitional and transformational reflective spaces. If it is accepted that learners are likely to be different both from each other and from the leaders, then we, the educators or leaders, should realise that designing innovative learning 257
spaces that meet the needs and aspirations of learners and leaders can be a means to an end. The third spatial zone is ‘spaces between people and places’. These may be said to be representational spaces, which embody symbolisms, some of which may be coded, but importantly the representation is linked to what is hidden, what is clandestine. These spaces are usually symbolised by activities that occur in a particular place, or setting, but they embody complexity and symbolic meaning to the subjective individuals as a result of their embodied experience. Expressed through the emotional attachments to the places that Sean worked in, these are places where they experienced emotional and physical turmoil and stretches; places where they found their inner voices; places where they questioned and critically appraised their own self; and places where they rested and realised meaning in what they did and what they wanted to be. Wattchow and Brown (2011) summarise this relationship neatly: People and places always exist in mutual bonds of interdependence. Both people and places have a physical reality, but it is the identities of both people and places that are continually emerging as an unfolding, interdependent phenomenon – always evolving, always becoming. (p. 75) Thus, depending largely on the setting of the places as well as the individual’s experiences, this spatial space may cause shifts in consciousness at all three levels: primary, transitional and transformational reflective spaces. Participants
Leaders
I guess is because the trek pushed us to beyond our limits, so we had more to reflect the next day…… it was because of the rain, there were some people who was like their first time trekking, and we trek till quite late, like wee late at night. It was the combine of all. (Par#10.Int.lines 137-138, 142-144)
We were walking past Changi Airport where we had to count the number of lamp posts and it never seemed to decrease and the tower seemed to be at the same spot all the time. But at the end of the day, I realised that it was not the walking that really matters, but what you did during the walk. (OL1.Int lines #1.217-225)
The last spatial zone that I gathered is ‘space within the individual’. This is one of the most powerful and important spaces for reflection and transformation. Often these spaces are formed as a result of their embodied experiences, community or the earlier discussed spatial zones. They may appear in the form of written, dialogue or silent spaces (inner
258
dialogue within individuals). All of the participants and leaders in the inquiry had, at some point or another, experienced this spatial zone and could acknowledged the reflection and changes in their perspectives taking, and shifting points of view or consciousness. This zone engaged all three levels of reflective spaces, and it was evident throughout the stages of learning (from beginning learning to transformative learning) as well. Participants
Leaders
Then I looked back, because we have been training every day on the start we just went 1km more and more and eventually we go there. So that made me realised that you had to build it up slowly. (Par#27.Int.lines 372-375)
This action that people electing me and awarding me as the president has make me reflect and think deeply that ‘hey I am going to be serious about being an outdoor leader’. (OL1.Int lines #1. 282-284)
I started to question myself: When to follow, when to request for more? (Par#54.R.J)
I think I had grown. As a person, in the way I see things. I am more receptive to bad situation. When things don’t turn out good I will reflect more. (OL2.Int lines #1. 493-502)
Second essence: ‘Creating spaces, engaging possibilities’ Learning spaces as I discussed earlier may be, and often are, different for each person, in diverse ways at contrasting points in their lives. But as seen with the first essence, the formation of spatial zones for learning can be considered as a common element that occurs in the interstices and the overlaps of people’s experiences in a phenomenon. Reviewing the narratives of participants and leaders several times and in different ways, yielded deeper insights within this phenomenon of spatial zones for which I present in this second essence. This essence informed us of four approaches where the creation of purposeful learning spaces in adventure education might be possible within the phenomenon. They are: confined spaces, writing spaces, dialogic spaces, and silent spaces. Each of these spaces, seemingly, attempt to engage leaders and learners at different depth of reflection and transformation. These insights provide useful guidance for leader’s pedagogical decisions and considerations. ‘Confined spaces’ refer to the physical removal of individuals from their normal learning environment. In this inquiry this was obvious through the purposeful set up of the solo activity, where participants spent three-days-two-nights in a forested bounded site, confined and alone. These confined spaces were sites for physical recovery and rest, and for
259
many there was a lot of reflection amidst the resting of their fatigue bodies. Some of these reflections were primarily reflective spaces, but plenty of them were transitional and transformational. Participants recalled their past days engagement and negotiated meaning through reviewing their embodied experiences. The same actually happened to leaders during their learning days, Participants
Leaders
I am spending time with myself, listening to my own breathing. Feeling my own limbs (bruised right leg). A time to care, and concern as well as to love myself. My left shoulder, my family, love relationship, friends part… The transition is the hard part, but I believe that when I reach equilibrium, I’ll just be fine. Colleagues, new category to think about. (Par#58. R.J)
So 3 days I actually get to reflect a bit deeper what was the past that I done, what was the event that changed me or what spurred the changes in me and so on and so forth. Because 3-day is definitely you are past beyond managing your fear already. So you will be thinking about what else to your life that happened then, what you can go about it after that. (OL1.Int lines #2.2230)
‘Writing spaces’ are powerful learning spaces in adventure education. These spaces could be as simple as just blank pages for drawing, sketching or noting. However, these are places not only to write about but to reconsider one’s stance and ideas. Through encouraging specific places for writing, for instance having learners find their own most comfortable location to do their quiet writing time; or setting the routine of writing before sleep; or even encouraging writing to one another and writing within one’s own journal to oneself. These spaces give learners an additional platform where reflection, transformation and critical feedback could be possible, where premise reflection, especially on objective reframing action and narrative assumptions about their own self were observed (Jay and Joseph thinking about the written feedback they received from their peers). While some learned a new frame of reference through these written spaces, others experienced some level of transformation in their point of view and thinking habits as they attempted to integrate external influences, critically reflected on their relationship with others. For example, Sarah saying that the written post-it feedback ‘forced’ her to reflect deeply about her relationship with each of the group members. In a similar way, leaders found themselves engaging in personal reflection most times through these written spaces. As reflected in Sean’s recollection of how journal writing had made an impact in his life, there was deep thinking through content and process reflection on broader issues, including other leaders,
260
curriculum, and influence strategies, as well as on leader’s personal growth and relationship with learners. I consider ‘dialogic spaces’ as spaces where critical conversations can occur but also where the relationship between the oral and the written language can be explored. These are usually purposeful conversations with pointed or specific objectives, and are commonly referred to as ‘debriefing’. This kind of reflective space needs to be facilitated with the utmost care (Brown, 2004b) and probably requires a leader who has reached a higher order stage of authentic leadership. Such spaces are powerful in that they allow learners opportunities to elaborate on existing frames of reference, opportunities to recognise the many influences of context on learning and the cause-and-effect relationships between context and learning created spaces to initiate reflection and beginning learning. We saw how Natalie and Sarah in the novella benefited from their team’s sharing and exchange. These spaces also offer learning opportunities to consider a new frame of reference. Few of the participants deliberated for a better self through critical reflection of and on assumptions of contextual issues. For example, Timothy reflected on how he could be a better leader after hearing feedback from his group mates. And in the case of Joseph, these spaces triggered premise reflection – objective reframing on action assumptions as he listened and conversed with others. He realized there is more to just trekking or bushing after hearing the reflection and sharing from his team. There were also others who went to the extent of transforming their point of view by considering others’ beliefs and opinions. Jay, for example, thought about the use of hearing and touching other than seeing after sharing from T and Faz. For leaders, their learning through dialogic spaces differs from participants largely due to the fact that their experiences with these spaces are focused on the purposes of a more effective engagement with the learners, thus their reflections are benched largely on teaching practices. Seemingly, these spaces offered critical reflection on contextual issues especially, where deep struggles with issues related to teaching context arose. Anqi expressed this evidently as she related her challenges dealing with language barriers. For Tazen, he reflected on the use of humour in facilitating discussion with the group.
261
Spaces away from ‘sounds’ that get in the way of creativity, innovation and space to think can be considered as ‘silent learning spaces’. These spaces can exist concurrently in confined spaces, writing spaces, and dialogic spaces. Like others, they may also exist within spaces of the individuals, between people and places, between leaders and learners, and certainly between learners. Because of the wide opportunities for the presence of silent spaces, the impact silent learning spaces had on learning and teaching were also evident across all the stages of learning and teaching practices.
Plausible insights: Transforming locations, negotiating sensibilities The lived experiences of participants and leaders demonstrated that learning spaces are often places of transition, and sometimes transformation, where the individual experiences some kind of shift or reorientation in their lifeworld. I realised that engagement in learning spaces does not necessarily result in the displacement of identity but rather a shift in identity or role perception so that issues and concerns are seen and heard in new and different ways. One can trace the process of such perception shifts using Mezirow’s (1978, 1994) 11-phases of transformative learning. Extended from here, I would suggest that this process runs in a continuous, cyclical form – as informed by Dewey’s (1933a) conception of reflection - where a reintegration of one’s life at phase 11 would then again connect back to phase 1 as and when a new disorienting dilemma occurs. Learning spaces might also be seen as liminal in nature in that they can be seen as betwixt and between states. This is where transitional reflective spaces are obvious, where renegotiation of habits of mind and meaning making happens. Such phenomena generally occur because of a particular need of an individual to gain or create learning space. The essences gathered for this theme support what Herman (2009) suggests, that the meaning one makes out of a space is construed from a representation of his/her situatedness, the event sequencing, levels of world-making or world disruption and an imagined consciousness affected by the occurrences at issue. Place, is indeed created from space positions that the individual situates him or herself within. This theme revealed the spacial and temporal dimensions of lifeworld that surface a new self. Lived spatiality and temporality show that learning spaces could be delineated in particular ways, and can be seen as bounded by time, place, institutional and disciplinary
262
culture. The notion of time and space here is one that offers metaphoric, intuitive, and heartfelt image creation which encourages one to engage in conceptual analysis and critique, leading finally to praxis or reflective action. Seemingly we can differentiate two forms of learning spaces from the essences gathered; ‘striated’ and ‘smooth’ learning spaces. There learning spaces, when made in referenced with Mezirow’s (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumption, were observed to ‘produce’ reflection and transformative learning of a different nature. I relate created spaces (confined, writing, dialogic and silent spaces) as ‘striated’ learning spaces. These spaces are characterised by a strong sense of structure, organisation and boundedness. They can be planned and set up on purpose. Learning is usually epitomised through clear learning outcomes that one is expected to reach. The nature of created-ness necessarily demands a higher sense of subordination to a body of knowledge and the power of the expert is expected. As a result of such a set up, this learning space can usually trigger objective reframing, which as defined by Mezirow (1998), includes reflection on content, process, and premises in the area of interpreting what is being communicated by another person, or critically consider one’s own assumptions in a task-oriented problem solving situation. ‘Smooth’ learning spaces are more evidently related to the natural phenomenon of spatial zones. Because of their fluid nature, these are spaces characterised by open, flexible and contested spaces in which both learners and learning are on the move. Here, a sense of displacement of the notion of time and place is obvious, reinforcing place researchers’ (for example Tuan, 1975, 1977; Relph, 1992) views that learning spaces are defined by the creator of the space most of the time; that is, that they are culturally, socially and personally constructed. Such subjective interpretation and thinking necessarily make it easier to yield subjective reframing (Mezirow, 1998). Here, self-reflection or critical reflection focuses on one’s narrative, systemic, therapeutic and epistemic assumptions. Lived spaces are powerful spaces and transcend beyond physical structures and locations. One of the most valuable insights I have gathered from this theme is that the formulation of spaces gives rise to the natural phenomenon of spatial zone and imaginary boundaries, which I referred to as ‘smooth’ learning spaces. This theme revealed the effect
263
of these spaces on the changing relations on leaders and learners, and factors influencing the learning process. The creation of further types of learning spaces (confined, writing, dialogic and silent), which I discussed earlier as ‘striated’ learning space, therefore might be something that is a choice. Perhaps, too, it is a choice that requires discipline. Those who are successful at finding, creating and using such spaces have discovered how to use them best for themselves. Thus, such individuals find diverse ways of creating learning spaces such as generating opportunities for critical discussion and ensuring learners have space for writing – even if this demands additional effort in outfield camping or in long journey-based programmes. As educators and leaders, the pedagogical responsibility here lies in skillful engagement of ‘smooth’ learning spaces and purposeful creation of striated learning spaces for our learners. This theme offers some good guidance where different forms and types of learning spaces are suggested. For a start, we can consider the use of confined space, dialogic space, writing space and silent space within the programme curricula to encourage and promote both critical and self-reflection. It is believed that careful observation and engagement of these learning spaces will offer powerful reflective spaces, transitional or transformational, for participants and learners alike. Aside from what was discussed in the preceding paragraphs, there were two critical reflection points that I would like to elaborate on from the insights gathered through this theme. The first has to do with texts. Texts, in contrast to classroom learning, are not commonly found in most adventure education programmes largely due to the nature of pedagogical approaches and perceptions about how experiential learning is believed to occur. However, textual spaces, if well posited and presented, can be important learning spaces for learners in the adventure setting. I learnt from Kreber (2012) and Kember et al. (1999) to suggest that texts here could include written texts and artifacts, short stories, letters, readings and even comics or pictures. These spaces are critical reference points to trigger review, reflection, reconsideration, or even repositioning of perspectives as we saw from the narratives presented. As leaders, we should learn that when we draw on texts, we draw on located contexts which are relative to the learners’ concerns, emotions and potential learning points at that particular moment (Herman, 2009).
264
The second point was triggered with the realisation that adventure education needs to pay more attention to the ways in which space is seen both as a site of learning and more particularly as a site of power (of influence). Current practices seem to take little notice of the understandings, formulations and functions of space and place (Wattchow, 2006; Wattchow & Brown, 2011), which are inevitably the result of a cultural contest between different views and beliefs. I have reflected on the practices of adventure education in Singapore. The social architecture of adventure learning places tends to represent different ideologies – the outdoors environment of dynamics and freedom, the man-made challenge ropes course of thrill and adventure. Yet the control of space and the way in which it is valued and represented is evident through timetables, standard operating procedures, restricted teaching and office spaces and organisational safety guidelines and practices. This very ordering belies the way that adventure learning spaces shape not only participants’ learning and leaders’ practices, but also the very nature of adventure education itself, as Lefebvre has argued: (Social) space is a (social) product… space thus produced also serves as a tool of thought and of action; that in addition to being a means of production it is also a means of control, and hence domination, of power; yet that as such escapes in part from those who would make use of it. (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 26, original emphasis) This second reflection point becomes especially significant as I relate it to the current adventure education scene in Singapore – the phenomena of McDonalization and Disneyization adventure which I discussed in Chapter Two. Adventure education in Singapore, to some extent, remains a partitioned-off space where policy and expectations of governments are increasingly seen as given rather than negotiable, contingent or contextual, both in terms of space, place and discipline. The space of adventure education has not only been affected by policy changes related to funding for improving teaching or student learning opportunities, but it has also been reframed through imposed activities related to quality and policy agenda. What also arrives with such imposed activities are the metaphors to sustain them and the positions adopted by those who support them. This is where the ‘danger’ comes in; where shaping and reshaping of ‘what and how adventure education should be’ become a cause of concern and topic of argument.
265
Have we thought that adventure truly provides spaces for learning in Singapore? If we have, I suppose the cultural boundaries, or confined spaces, for adventure learning would need shifting, moving, or transcending. Curricula or programmes need to be seen not just as content for meddling with, but as diverse spaces of opportunity. It is in such spaces that we can explore the possibilities of creating curricula and programmes for uncertainty, liminality and even spaces of unknowability – arguably the true spirit of adventure education. Curricula and programmes then will become a series of open-ended spaces rather than a series of ‘permissions to proceed’ that focus on compliance and rule-based models. Such open-ended curricula and programmes will be provisional, unstable and uncertain, and certainly will reflect the translocational state of the adventure education of the future, or perhaps, of the desired. Outdoor educators, leaders and practitioners alike should stop seeing adventure education as a predictable, ordered and manageable space, but instead review it as an important site of transformation characterised by risk, uncertainty and radical unknowability.
266
MY STORIES, MY LIFE I have previously discussed stories and storytelling in the methodology chapter (Chapter Five). We explored the relationship between narratives, storytelling and lived experiences (Green & Del Negro, 2010, Barthes, 1977). We also discovered how storytelling captures, codes and validates the generative knowledge born of experience, observation and intuition (for example, Stockhausen, 1992; van Manen, 1991; Wells, 1986). Furthermore, we learnt how storytelling can be used to facilitate and detect reflection and transformation (see Mattingly, 1991; McDrury & Alterio, 2003a; Wildemeersch & Leirman, 1988). These discoveries not only provide justification and support for stories and storytelling as an appropriate methodological choice for this inquiry, they also helped uncover the possibilities of using stories and storytelling as potential teaching and learning strategies in adventure education. Stories and storytelling is a distinct theme that I have uncovered through the extracts and voices of the leaders and learners in adventure education. It is not one of van Manen’s (1990) lifeworld existentials though he did emphasise the significance of story for human science. Stories were evident in the discovery perhaps because of its close relation and interconnectedness to lived experiences and narratives. In this theme, I sought for meaning making examples and narratives to reveal how stories and storytelling were used as a way of knowing, and their influence and value in enabling reflection and transformative learning for the leaders and learners. After all, storytelling is a uniquely human experience that enables us to convey, through the language of words, aspects of ourselves and others, and the worlds, real and imagined, that we inhabit. McDrury and Alterio (2003b) illustrate a model of reflective learning through storytelling (reproduced in Figure 4. p. 268). They provide a valuable guide in the organisation of this theme. The discussion that follows, of three essential qualities of stories and storytelling, illuminates a process of transformative learning to some extent. Where stories were found, told, expanded, processed and reconstructed, learners went through a progression of learning, from noticing, making sense, making meaning, working with meaning, to transformative learning. In the end, I am convinced that the power and significance of stories and storytelling lies in their ability to shift learning and temporal events, that stories and storytelling enable a sculpting of self.
267
Map of Learning (Moon, 1999)
Stages of learning through storytelling
Working with meaning
Story processing
formal
individual
spontaneous Story telling predetermined
Noticing
Response discourse
Response story
Release
SURFACE LEARNING
Making sense
group Story expanding
CHANGE
(Entwistle, 1996)
Making meaning
informal
Reflective Learning
Story reconstructing
Storytelling outcomes
Cathartic
DEEP LEARNING
Transformative learning
Storytelling characteristics
Story finding LEARNING
CONTEXT
Figure 4. McDrury and Alterio’s (2003) model of reflective learning through storytelling
First essence: ‘What lies within us instead of what lies behind us’ This essence demonstrated how leaders and learners first became aware of the emotions and their recognition of their embodied experiences as they attempted to locate stories to tell. In the course of deliberating on what to tell, they needed to focus on organising and ordering the content to share. This sense making process in both the context and the human experience is critical to the initiation of reflection and beginning learning. The storying session with the leaders and learners invited, and possibly compelled them to find stories to tell. It is not difficult to observe the trend of their selected stories, they were mostly of high emotional content, something about a situation that excites, upsets or intrigues them. Although noticing something does not necessary mean learning will occur (Moon, 1999), these ‘surface’ learning (Entwistle, 1996) efforts enable the organisation and ordering of the material of learning. They act as triggers for learners to put prior knowledge, ideas or experiences together, to initiate sense making. Moon (1999) further suggests that this type of learning usually appears in memorised representation of events, emotions and incidents, followed by reproduction of ideas, but ideas are not well linked at this stage.
268
Almost all the participants and leaders were able to relay at least three to four stories, indicating that adventure education does provide opportunities for leaders and learners to elaborate on existing frames of reference. In the novella Timothy, for example, demonstrated this as he accounted for his past days’ experiences in the first few letters he wrote to his friend. He storied how the different encounters got him to start thinking about himself, his relationship with the group, the leader and with this friend, and the days forward. Another interesting observation was that the emotional uproar described by the participants and leaders could almost always be attributed to people. For instance, Mark’s sense of embarrassment triggered by the love and compassion showered by his teammates; Timothy’s frustration with Anqi and T; and Jay’s anxiety about her teammate in the simulation exercise.
Second essence: ‘Stories and their lessons’ The second essence exposed meaning making and meaning processing of events, where leaders and learners developed reflective dialogue to critically consider multiple perspectives. Through making connections to the ‘gist’ or ‘moral’ of the stories, one demonstrated efforts in learning new frames of reference. This essence uncovered a shift from ‘surface’ to ‘deep’ (Entwistle, 1996) learning examples. There were necessarily two aspects of this. First, there are story expanding efforts where meaning making of events were being shared. It was spotted especially when questions were asked, and, important aspects of the stories were expanded on and feelings clarified. At times, the intensity of feelings associated with particular stories indicated the presence of unresolved emotions from prior situations that are similar in some way to those being recalled, and this relationship did affect learning potential for some of them. A good example on this is articulated through Joseph’s thoughts about the experience of the final team challenge activity with his group mates. Before he participated, he imagined the experience would be similar to that of his younger days, where he thought it was merely a test of physical endurance. Also, because there were no opportunities for sharing and clarification at the end of the activity, he walked away feeling just the muscle soreness and fatigue rather than picking up other new learning experiences. The second part of this is associated with reflective activity. The focus shifts to working with meaning and in particular, developing through reflective dialogue, multiple perspectives of events. This was commonly observed as
269
debriefing sessions, or silent-dialogue spaces, where tellers and listeners engage in review processes that raise awareness of how their personal knowledge influences actions taken. Participants
Leaders
The day when I was the leader for one of the days of the final expedition… I felt that it’s because of my incapability so I was acutually more disappointed. I thought it was a journey of selfreflection, self-discovery, that’s why if I can I want to reflect more. Get more learning from what has happen. (Par#58.Int.lines 181, 222223)
I found myself to be a little judgemental at that point because anything that was said to me or presented to me, I would think not in a very good manner… I tend to be pessimist coming from where I was. So until I tried out then I realised that it is not so bad. (OL1.Int lines #1.228-232)
Third essence: ‘Bringing about changes’ The last essence made visible ‘outcomes’ of the prior stages. Here leaders and learners demonstrated an ability to interrogate stories critically from as many perspectives as possible. The reflective dialogues, or inner conversations, were reasoned, thoughtful and constructive. Leaders and learners were more aware of what had shaped their perspective. This is where stories were reconstructed (McDrury & Alterio, 2003b) and, in the process, there is the potential for those involved to be “transformed, transfigured and transported by stories” (Jackson, 1995, p. 12). They also critically evaluated the potential of resolutions and solutions. The learning appeared to be a more sophisticated and comprehensive accommodation of the cognitive structure, and opportunities to bring about change in learning and practice therefore were manifested. Participants
Leaders
Through the past 4 days, I’ve realised that many things I thought wasn’t possible could actually be done…. Like well-oiled machinery, each team member plays an important role in completing tasks and overcoming hurdles together. (PAR#2.R.E)
I think going once [into the adventure] is not enough. The first one is really to give you the confidence to go through another one and another one such that you create the opportunity to find out more and more about yourself. You get to discover more and more about opportunities. Opportunities to understand yourself more, showing yourself to understand how you, your thinking, other people’s thinking, what the world has to really offer. I think is important for me, this is significant for me in my context [growing up experiences+.” (OL4.Int lines #3. 348-362)
Really bring across the point of being open and indecisive in decision making. Also the willingness to try the ideas. We may think it is a waste of time. But if the situation allows, trying out new ideas is probably the best way to test its factuality. (PAR#7.Q.E)
270
Plausible insights: Sharing stories, sculpting lives As with my original intent, the use of storytelling here is to gather insights into the lived experiences of leaders and learners in adventure education. I invited the participants and leaders to share their stories with me. Soon, I realised that as they recounted stories of their adventure educational journey, they went through a process of reflection: first to locate the story, then to tell, elaborate, and share the ‘moral of story’, before they reconstructed and critically interrogated the stories from as many perspectives as possible in order to offer some kind of ‘conclusion’. This I found in itself, to be a process of reflection, learning and transformation on the part of the research participants. As a listener I interpreted and reflected upon their stories in my own mind, sometimes mirroring back to the teller my experience of listening to the story, or even my own similar encounters. There were some moments where I felt that I had ‘lived’ their stories, while others were new found knowledge or learning for me. Later, as I retold their stories, even though I made a conscious effort to reflect their ideas, I do not deny that I had included my own interpretation, imagination and meaning that I derived out of their stories as I heard them. Here, I experienced the same reflection process: locate, tell, elaborate, process and reconstruct! I found the process compelling, especially how stories, storytelling and the storytellers worked their way into the novella Tile Island. As I sought for leaders’ and learners’ to share their stories, I was already shifting my intention to use their accounts beyond the individual descriptions of lived experiences into broader patterns, but one that brings about deep learning for myself as researcher, something of which I hope has been represented in the novella. This personal experience was one of the reasons why I decided that stories and storytelling should be an important theme here. It worked both ways for the leaders and the learners. The value of stories and storytelling to learning is significant as was exposed by the essences highlighted. Lived storying brought to focus the idea that stories are alive because we relived them as we tell them. Telling stories of personal experience is also inherently social. It is a reflective act that makes the teller vulnerable as they search for a resurfacing of emotions experienced. The basis of storytelling, I realised, is rooted in one’s intention to learn or teach something, or someone (Schank, 1990). Our intentions to tell stories affect the processes that transform the gist of the stories that we have in our memories into the
271
actual stories that we tell. We seldom remember the exact words of the stories we tell or hear, we extract the gist when we listen to stories, and we recast the gist when we transform them in future telling. These memory processes – extraction of gist from stories for storage in memory and transformation of gist into stories that express an intention – are fundamental to the thinking process (Schank, 1990). From an educational standpoint, we teach cases of stories and the adaptation of cases by telling stories, not teach rules and the use of rules by citing rules. It is the life skills that we are concerned about, for we may never find ourselves in a situation where the rules we were taught apply exactly. Ordinarily, we find answers for ourselves, often in novel situations and settings. Lots of stories and cases help, but methods of applying these stories and cases, especially in places where they weren’t originally supposed to apply, help more. One of the few key challenges educators or leaders-alike can relate to is the engagement of reluctant learners, or reluctant reflectors and, it might be added, in this case reluctant storytellers. Sometimes learners refuse to share their experiences even though they might have had great experiences. There were some examples in the inquiry for which leaders demonstrated their approaches in encouraging learners to reflect or tell their experiences. For instance, when leaders initiated sharing of personal stories, or stories of previous participants, it helped to link context situations to reality and offered alternative suggestions to what may have been possible resolutions. Sometimes this also brought about deeper sharing from the group members as they related similar sentiments to what had been shared, and inspired reluctant individuals to start sharing their point of view as well. At other times, fictional stories were told, and these usually acted as reflection triggers. When told at the start of the day it was often intended to prepare the learners for what was to come, and when told at the end of the day it was to summarise the day or to trigger deeper reflection over the days’ experiences. Besides dialogue forms, there was also the use of text stories, pictorial stories, and the writing of journals. The various approaches offered variable appeal to learners who each might have their preferred learning styles. These are good pedagogical tips that one can mirror, but I suppose the critical point here is to allow a variety of options throughout the entire journey such that there remains interest and motivation for learners to continue reflecting on their experiences and telling stories to each other. Taylor
272
(2009) has similarly suggested creating purposeful dialogue and context awareness for the learners are two core elements in fostering transformative learning. Stories and storytelling has always been a powerful tool for transition (Parkin, 2010). I draw this theme to a close by emphasising that when we tell our own practice stories and listen to those of others, then work together to process them deeply and critically, we connect in ways which enrich self, relationship and practice. Through these connections we construct new knowledge and advance our understanding of the relationship we construct and are constructed by (McDrury & Alterio, 2003a). Enjoying a story together creates a sense of community. It establishes a happy relationship between teller and listener, drawing people closer to one another, leader to learner, learner to learner. This rapport carries over into other areas as well, for leaders tend to have confidence in the person who tells stories well. Storytelling grew out of a desire to introduce learners to the pleasure of learning beyond the literal, to excite learners about possibilities and potentials. To use stories and to tell stories is to educate for life. Storytelling provides the opportunity to interpret for the child life forces which are beyond his immediate experience, and so to prepare him for life itself. It gives the teller the chance to emphasise significance rather than incident. It enables her, through the magic quality of the spoken word, to reveal to the child the charm and subtle connotations of word sounds, all the evanescent beauty emanating from combinations of words and from the cadence, the haunting ebb and flow, of rhythmical prose. It is through the medium of interpretation that all of us, adults and children, come to genuine appreciation… Storytelling, rightly done, is such an art. (Nesbitt, E, 1940 cited in Greene & Del Negro, 2010, p. 43) _________________________________
This story, in the end, is intended to be about soliciting stories of profound change, or transformation. I return to my simple definition of transformative learning, especially the part where I noted that those who experience it “are different afterward, in ways both they and others can recognise” (Clark, 1993, p. 47). Narratively that can be made visible in many ways. I’ve structured Chapter Six, Tile Island around Frank’s (1995) three story types to
273
present the lived experiences of leaders and learners in adventure education – restoration, chaos, and quest – and tried to locate my experience narrated in Chapter Two, as best I can, with these story types. I found Frank’s categories, in a way resonate Mezirow’s (1978, 1994) phases of transformative learning. But because Frank is describing the experience of acute, life-threatening illness, it is not a perfect fit for this study, or my own embodied experience living in adventure education. So I turn to Mattingly’s (1998) more open notion of employment, most simply understood as people coming to realise what kind of stories they are living out at different points in their lives. I think tracking my positioning in different stories may help make the transformative learning process clearer. And so I lived it, tested it, and endorsed it! I feel it is reasonable to claim ‘lived story’ as being as central to the lifeworld in adventure education as lived space, lived time, lived body and live relation – at least for this group of people in this context, and definitely for myself! I wanted to say that this task of retelling is easy because I simply retell the experiences of others (and mine) bit by bit, but it is also difficult because I want to highlight what I think is different and cuts across the boundaries that define in the broadest possible sense the world of social science inquiry. Writing the novella, just as writing virtually everything in this thesis, has helped me with my own reliving of significant narratives in my life. I can only hope the same for readers of this story. I have to trust that somehow the reader will connect with their own narratives and create narrative inquiry journeys that belong to them. The first step for leaders perhaps is an inner journey and exploration of their own story more than anything else. In the end, I am sure you, as the reader and listener to the stories of the leaders and learners, and my story, as shared in this study, have noticed the power of stories and storytelling. The pedagogical power of story and narrative advances the potential for leaders and learners in Adventure Education - to identify and listen to the voices – silenced voices, listening voices, inner voices, voices of reason, the voices of risk-taking, sharing and compassion, and the integration of these voices - that are always present in our work. I am confident that through this, adventure educators will gather a deeper level of insight that can transform how we teach, lead and learn.
274
In the final conclusion chapter to follow I summarise re-telling teaching and learning stories and plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education specifically from the perspective of a change-responsive pedagogy. It was significant of Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty to remind us of the interpretive quality of being-in-the-world. It was noteworthy of Dewey to get us to refocus back to the fundamental prominence of body in experience and learning and in the nuanced relationship between experience and reflection. It was powerful of Scheper-Hughes and Lock to prompt us that our body-self is interwoven in the greater social and political community. It was momentous of the scholars who explored place and spaces that meaning and reflection go beyond the literal space that we are in. And it was meaningful of proponents of narratives, who have been ever-present throughout this thesis, that embracing stories and storytelling can offer much potential in one’s learning and transformation. Based on the interpretations of adventure experiences as they have been ‘lived’ and presented here, I consider what might be necessary for the adventure education profession to (re)turn to a pedagogy of teaching for change in the last chapter.
275
CHAPTER EIGHT: THE PARABLE OF TEACHING FOR CHANGE
Admittedly we are paid to teach and to transmit certain knowledge to our students. Embedding this knowledge in an environment that offers opportunities for transformation is our goal, but we understand that transformational learning cannot be guaranteed or forced on learners. We also understand that we do not own the high ground of truth or righteousness. What we are setting forth is that we try to provide a classroom setting where we engage with our students, our co-learners, in critical reflection, critical thinking, reframing questions, deconstructing issues, and dialogue and discourse. Often in this setting we and others are renewed and transformed in the struggle. (extract from Transformational Teaching and the Practices of Black Women Adult Educators, 2006, Juanita Johnson-Bailey. J and Mary V. Alfred) _________________________________
Living, telling, retelling, and reliving mark the cycle and qualities of a life. A study on narrative inquiry, one reflective of this ongoing quality of life, simply stops at some point or moment when the researchers, and their readers, say: that’s it, at least for now. Such a study, where it ends this way, starts in much the same way - not necessarily at an apparent point, but rather at a point that makes sense to the researchers’ own stories of experience. And so it was for this study. Where other beginnings were possible, I began with telling my lived experiences of learning and teaching in adventure education. I began in the midst. I end in the midst. In these last few end pages, which I do not exactly see as conclusion but rather a space for consolidation, I try to look back at what I have gathered and how I told the narratives of inquiry in this study. In so doing, I reflect upon and retell the narrative of this study. I hope to bring forward, for myself and for you as reader, a sense of how I, and perhaps others, have come to where I am in my doing of, and thinking about, adventure
276
education in general, and in Singapore. This retelling may help us – we educators, researchers, our learners, and readers of interest – relive our experiences of teaching and learning and move on in ways different from, yet connected to, where we began - where retelling is connected to telling, and reliving is connected to living. This study has maintained, at the heart of its interest, the aim to deepen an understanding of teaching and learning experiences in adventure education. It sought a journey into the ‘mysterious’ adventure education ‘black box’, exploring how these teaching and learning experiences are ‘lived’ by leaders and learners in and through the adventure education learning process, and how telling the story of this exploration might inform us of a possible change-responsive pedagogy. This thesis revealed important aspects about how the lived experiences of leaders and learners lead to understanding and promoting transformative learning in adventure education. The voices and thoughts of the four lead characters in Tile Island confirmed ‘fostering changes’ as a central belief and ideal of teaching and leading in adventure education. Not only was this consistently and explicitly shared by the leader characters, the participants similarly echoed how they had been changed, or affected, by the way the leaders led. There were at least 150 identifiable influence strategies shared by the participants and outdoor leaders in the data gathered in this research. It is encouraging to find out that influence strategies suggested by the outdoor leaders coincided with what was being recognised by the participants. Taylor’s (2009) six core elements of a transformative approach to teaching was used as a guide to organise these suggested strategies. While all core elements proposed by Taylor had been evident and cited in the practice of adventure education, it was interesting to note that amongst the other elements, developing authentic relationships is one that had been mentioned most often, with as high as 70 counts out of the 150 cited (see Table 10). What was most noteworthy is that leaders had consistently referred to the importance of continual self-reflection. They highlighted that one critical enabling strategy in developing authentic relationships which in turn, foster changes, is for one to have clear and established philosophical roots and set values that are aligned to the teaching and leading practices of experiential learning. This could potentially be the result of OBS’ training packages and the
277
rhetoric that leaders of adventure programmes must be self-reflective. More study on this aspect might be worthwhile to provide further insights into this preliminary discovery. Extracts and phrases of influence strategies shared by participants and outdoor leaders in relation to Taylor’s (2009) core elements of transformative approach to teaching is provided in Appendix J (pp. 358-379). Taylor’s (2009) Core elements Individual Experience Promoting Critical Reflection Purposeful Dialogue Holistic Engagement Context Awareness Authentic Relationships Total
Frequency of Quotes Cited 14 16 10 22 18 70 150
Table 10. Frequency of quotes and extracts cited under each of Taylor’s (2009) core elements of transformative approach to teaching
We have seen how narratives, lived experiences, reflection, learning and teaching in adventure education are deeply interwoven. This connection and their pedagogical potential have often been neglected in adventure education, particularly the impacts and implications of educational choices made about designing and using adventure programmes. This thesis has explored leaders’ and learners’ lived experiences of reflection and transformational learning in adventure programmes through stories and storytelling, and has revealed important aspects of the lived meanings, essences and structures of those experiences. It was achieved through a shared subjectivity between experiencing and reflecting. This subjectivity has remained a constant throughout the novella and narrative representation in Chapters Six and Seven. It was present between true accounts and fictional stories, between participants’ voices and the researcher’s analysis, between theme and extracts, between textual pieces and their echo. It was also present in the space between thematic texts and reflective plausible insights – a process of hermeneutic cycling between the parts and whole as the meta-narrative unfolded. Most importantly, given my choice to use a fictional novella to represent the ‘data’, I trust that you accepted the invitation to contribute your own questions-answers-experiences to the stories as you read them. I hope that there remained space in the story telling to allow the presence of your subjectivity and, in your own (the readers’) lived interpretations and consideration of a transformative pedagogy.
278
By prudently and patiently finding, telling, expanding, processing and reconstructing meanings and images of lived experiences into stories and writing, I have relied a great deal upon ‘silence’: first to gain entry into the ‘subjective’ world of others, then to illuminate the meanings and lived quality of being in adventure education. Van Manen (1990) says “silence is not just the absence of speech or language” (p. 112), for speech rises out of silence and returns to silence (Bollnow, 1982). Van Manen’s (1990) careful distinction and interpretation of different categories of silence have been most helpful in my quest of storied reconstruction and representation. Through literal silence, as in the absence of speaking or writing, a more reflective response was ensued within this silence of spaces. I found myself searching deeper beyond the literal words for meanings, possible assumptions, and interpretations. It was the epistemological silence that made expressible the unspeakable tacit knowledge that I did not realised I possessed. These were often told through the words of the composite characters in Tile Island, through narratives and extracts of participants and outdoor leaders, through fictional representations of storylines interwoven with accounts of true events, and it was through the emergence of these eloquent voices that, while writing and thinking, I sometimes surprised myself. This effort, as van Manen reminds “requires a high level of reflectivity, an attunement to lived experience, and a certain patience or time commitment” (1990, p. 114). Lastly, it was the ontological silence, the silence of Being or Life itself, that I experienced the ‘dumb’ –founding sense of a silence that craves fulfillment. Bollnow (1982) presents this as the fulfilling silence of being in the presence of truth. In the true spirit of narrative inquiry, I reminded myself that what I found to be the ‘truth’ may not necessarily be so for you. And especially in the case of this study, I stated in the introductory chapter that this inquiry carries more of a sense of search, a ‘re-search’, a searching again, rather than a deliberate effort to ascertain any definite ‘solution’ to the ‘problem’ posed at the outset of the inquiry. This chapter therefore, will not be able to offer a conventional ‘conclusion’. It is, however, possible and appropriate to offer some summative comments on the study as a whole, as a space for consolidation and guidance for adventure educators and researchers as to how they might begin to wonder, to think and act in response to their own situation. I approach this chapter in two ways. First, I provide a summary distilling the structures, meanings and essences of the lived experiences of reflection and transformative learning of
279
the participants and leaders in the inquiry in Table 11. (pp. 281-283). It suggests the pedagogic consequences for fostering transformative learning in adventure education. The practicality of this summary will hinge largely on the reader’s ability to reflect upon their own pedagogic emplacement with learners in their care, and to trigger influence strategies to promote a deeper level of reflection and transformative learning out of their adventure experiences. Second, I propose a speculative deduction that looks forward to the possibilities of a change-responsive pedagogy in adventure education. Before we move on to the next section which summarises the search for a transformative pedagogy in adventure education, I think it is necessary to mention the unique contribution that this study may make to the ongoing discourses of adventure education and transformative learning. First, this scholarship has provided a critical review of the role of reflection and transformation in adventure education through repositioning and reinterpretating their meaning inherent within the key constructs in adventure education. Second, it has looked beyond adventure education discourses for cross-disciplinary pedagogical phenomena, and where appropriate, integrated and solicited key pedagogical concepts and ideas to propose the possibility of transformative pedagogy in adventure education. Third, in the spirit of adventure in risk taking and stretching beyond one’s comfort zone, this scholarship demonstrated the use of a very ‘novel’ approach to methodology and the (re)presentation of data/findings. It is possibly the first, if not amongst the few, in adventure education discourses to adopt this emerging research approach in such intensity. Lastly, this scholarship offered, in a very practical way, insights and summary recommendations to the profession about the crucial role of reflection, transformation and pedagogical strategies to enhance their practice. For some, it is hoped, that this scholarship may serve as revitalisation of their most innate beliefs and passion about teaching and learning in adventure education.
280
Table 11. Summary interpretation of the lived experiences of reflection and transformative learning EMERGENT THEMES 1. My body, my soul where their embodied experiences act as triggers to begin knowing, learning, reflecting, and meaning making
LEADERS’ AND LEARNERS’ LIVED EXPERIENCES IN ADVENTURE EDUCATION Leaders’ and learners’ experiences can be structured exclusively around their embodiment, with three developmental stages: (i) The inner sensory aware learner (where new feelings, emotions and situations created opportunities for self-alienation as they are ‘feeling it’) (ii) The self-management learner (where the body ‘tells’ the learner what to do, negotiating options and learning new responses) (iii) The bodily-based reflection learner (where body recalled the tacit knowledge gathered earlier for potential future learning, meaning making and reflection)
LIFEWORLD AND ADVENTURE EDUCATION A BODILY LIFEWORLD that creates awareness of self Lived bodily notion brought to forefront the idea of embodied knowing. The idea of whole body engagement is critical where: (i) Heart allows the flow of emotions, offer affective knowledge (ii) Mind engages the rational and logical reasoning as one finds reasons to explain their emotions and feelings, offer cognitive knowledge (iii) Body provides the foundation, physical sensations, offer as somatic knowledge This theme explored embodied knowing as it comes into the consciousness, how one accesses this knowledge, and how one can reclaim the body as a source of knowing. key focus: Holistic engagement
2. My community, my growth The interaction with people, the group members and the leaders stood out as one
The body-self of the individual is nothing but a part of the social and political self. Being-in-the-world and being in a community structured two aspects of potential reflection and transformation impact: (i) Social phenomenon and relationality issues were highlighted as key contributing factors to reflection and meaning consideration. (ii) Engaging in group-based activities and
A RELATIONALITY LIFEWORLD that offers tuning of self Lived relations provoked three developmental outcomes, each triggered by different primary experience that is the object of reflection: (i) personal growth and awareness - triggered by individual perceptions and life
281
CONSEQUENCES FOR REFLECTION AND TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING The notion of body offered itself as the foundation for learning, reflection and subsequent transformation to occur: (i) The internal sensing has great significance not only to start noticing, trigger self-alienation, but also allow movement, patterns and perceptions to form as individual start making sense to the emotions and feelings (ii) Meaning making and working with meaning is obvious when one tries to take control in negotiating options. Critical reflection usually happens at this stage for some negotiation and decision to derive. (iii) Consciousness translates into action when bodily-based reflections are engaged, where past feelings or emotions and meaning were triggered or consolidated for new action and views to occur. This is where transformation is obvious. The notion of relation created certain levels of group spaces for transformative learning. Closely tagged to the three developmental outcomes, each ‘produced’ varied form/level of reflection: (i) personal growth and awareness - critical self-reflection on assumptions, subconscious and images of self in
that assisted learners in being aware and learning new frame of reference
3. My space, my transformation This theme captured how levels of reflection and transformation may be evident or promoted through different forms of learning spaces
experiences encouraged individuals to move from their otherwise ‘false guarded’ self for a more true, open and authentic embodied self. This is possible due to as individual make attempts to integrate external influence, constantly adjusting and adapting the best self to fit into the group.
Learning spaces that existed in the various spatial zones and via different types offered powerful ‘places’ for different depth of reflection and transformation to occur: primary reflective spaces, transitional reflective spaces, and transformational reflective spaces (Savin-Baden, 2008). (i) Naturally formed spatial zones where all levels of reflective spaces can be found. Space between leaders and learners (transitional) Space between learners (transitional and transformational) Space between people and places (primary, transitional, transformational) Space within the individual (primary, transitional, transformational)
experiences outside group and interpersonal/interactions within group through critical dialectical discourse, dialogue with self, listening, witnessing, and feedback; (ii) empathy across differences - triggered by lived experiences of social identities outside group, and interactions across differences within group through storytelling, and exploring imagining of experiences of others; and (iii) political/systemic consciousness - triggered by lived experiences of oppression, structural inequality, and life in systems outside the group through problem-posing, storytelling, shared inquiry and meaning making, and reflection on action key focus: individual experience and authentic relationship A SPACIALITY AND TEMPORALITY LIFEWORLD that reveals surfacing of new self Lived spatiality and temporality revealed that learning spaces could be delineated in particular ways, and can be seen as bounded by time, place, institutional and disciplinary culture. Two forms of learning spaces related to learning can be possible: (i) Striated learning spaces - Characterised by a strong sense of structure, organisation and boundedness. - Learning is epitomised through clear learning outcomes that one is expected to reach. - Usually a sense of subordination to a body of knowledge and the power of the expert is expected.
282
group. Locus of change: intrapersonal and interpersonal. (ii) empathy across differences - mutual meaning-making across differences. Locus of change: intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup, and intergroup. (iii) political/systemic consciousness - Ideology critique, collective analysis of oppressive systems, reflection on action for social change. Locus of change: intrapersonal, organizational and societal.
The notion of space and time here is one that offers metaphoric, intuitive, and heartfelt image creation, which encourages conceptual analysis and critique that leads finally to praxis or reflective action. Two forms of reflection can occur (Mezirow, 1998, 2000): (i) Objective reframing includes reflection on content, process, and premises in the area of interpreting what is communicated; or taskoriented problem solving; (ii) subjective reframing refers to selfreflection or critical reflection on one’s own psychological and cultural assumptions or premises that limit one’s experiences.
4. My stories, my life The significance of stories and storytelling in knowing, learning, meaning making and reflection.
(ii) Mostly created spaces where transitional and transformational reflective spaces were more apparent. Confined spaces (primary, transitional, transformational) Writing spaces (transitional, transformational) Dialogic spaces (primary, transitional, transformational) Silent spaces (primary, transitional, transformational) Storytelling theory has close connection to transformative learning theory. As learner participate in story finding, telling, expanding, processing and finally reconstructing new story to tell, he/she experienced a process of beginning learning to transformative learning. Evidences were found in the extracts of participants and leaders as they moved to be a more authentic learner: (i) In an attempt to locate or recall a story to tell leaders and learners initiated surface learning where they start to take notice and make sense of their own or others experiences. Surface reflection occurred. (ii) As leaders and learners advanced to consider what should be included and what is critical they expanded and processed their own stories, which allow meaning making and working with meaning to happen. This is where a deeper level of reflection and transition happens. (iii) The final consideration and construction of story is a form of transformative learning as change had been initiated, transfigured and transported by stories.
(ii) Smooth learning spaces - Characterised by open, flexible and contested spaces in which both learning and learners are on the move. - Sense of displacement of notion of time and place were obvious thus learning spaces are defined by the creator of the space most time.
Objective reframing usually could be triggered using striated learning spaces, while subjective reframing could be easier to set up through smooth learning spaces.
key focus: critical reflection and self-reflection A STORYING LIFEWORLD that enables sculpting of self Lived storying brought to focus the idea that stories are alive because we relived them as we tell them. Telling stories of personal experience is also inherently social. It is a reflective act that makes the teller vulnerable as they search for resurfacing of the emotions experienced. The possibility of retelling stories in some context often represents another. This requires the teller to engage in critical reflective work with stories of their own experiences in relation to their assessment of the given context. This by itself offers a leaping, rhizome-tic, co-created extension of learning which with the infinite capacity of aliveness of stories, this is possible. key focus: purposeful dialogue and context awareness
283
Storytelling effectively deepens learning and can spark transformative learning in a vast variety of configurations. The key to this process is the ability of listeners and the teller to engage in post-telling conversations that explore the stories in ways that clarify, deepen, enlarge, expose new facets, and experiment with new meaning. As suggested by McDrury and Alterio (2003b), depth of reflection and transformation follow through the entire process of storying: Story finding/noticing --- story telling/making sense --- story expanding/making meaning --story processing/working with meaning --story reconstructing/ transformative learning
Indicators to transformative pedagogy in adventure education In the introductory chapter of this thesis I pointed out that the ultimate purpose of this study is for adventure leaders and, invariably other researchers, practitioners, or educators alike, to know “how to act tactfully in pedagogic situations on the basis of a carefully edified thoughtfulness” (van Manen, 1990, p. 8). You might recall the message from Dewey (1933a) that essential in a thoughtful approach to teaching is the ability on the part of the leaders to constantly engage in reflection about his or her pedagogic practices. I found, through the course of the inquiry and personal reflection of teaching practices, that one of the key factors affecting our pedagogic choices in adventure education is the consideration of our role positioning in this learning process. Often, it appears that leaders make deliberate efforts to switch or move between different, and at times conflicting, roles according to the decisions and judgments of the context and situations that they are in. Sometimes they are teacher; sometimes they take on the role of the facilitator. At times they think they are consultant, but other times they choose to be trainer/coach. Most frequently they think they are the leader, but later realise that they are actually the learner! Adventure education discourse (for example Hattie et al., 1997; Mckenzie, 2000, 2003; Priest & Gass, 1997a) informs us that leaders play a supporting, or supplementary role in a learner’s adventure experience. They are often referred to as a guide, a neutral person who manages the group process with no substantive decision making authority (Schwarz, 2005). Metaphorically, they are choreographers who are responsible in designing sequences of movements for the dancers but remain ‘outside’ of the dance in motion. Such traditional ideas of leaders-taking-control-of-the-learners’-experience-from-afar have invited criticism in recent literature (Brown, 2002; Brymer & Gray, 2006; Stan, 2009; Thomas, 2007; 2010, 2011). Instead of seeing leaders as just ‘choreographers’, these authors consider education as socially constructed, that leader and learner have shared power and shared learning in the adventure experience (Higgins, 1997; Joplin, 1995). Brown (2001) goes as far to argue that “the collaborative role engaged in by all participants to interaction means that we cannot position the facilitator as merely a bystander” (p. 123). The leader, under such arguments, is ‘inside’ the phenomenon. There are co-learners. They share a common learning experience with their learners. Thus, I posit the notion of
284
‘teaching as dancing’ as an appropriate expression to encapsulate the pedagogic discussion for this thesis. We might now see the leader as experiencing this ‘dance’ with their learners, rather than as a distant choreographer of their movements. The metaphor of teaching-asdancing is inspired by Gardner’s (2008) pedagogical lens that transformative learning requires a pedagogy of movement. She purports that transformative education itself is tied to a notion of movement. It is a desire for change which entails movement and motion: What is in motion? Part of the answer is that there are the physical or somatic movements to narrate. There are also the multifaceted motions of students’ minds, affects, spirits, imaginations, intuitions, and unconscious ways of knowing. Motion is inherent, moreover, in the diversities of students’ locationalities, subjectivities, and subject positions, which include, for instance, their race, class, gender, age and sexual orientation. There are the interactions between members of the learning community and their interface with their environments. And then there are the movements within course curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment, which shape the goals, structures, and desired outcomes of the teaching and learning process. And finally, and most dauntingly, there is the indescribable dance of all these movements, which comprises a rich teaching and learning ecology. (p. 12) Gardner further justifies her proposed pedagogy with Bitzman’s quote, “*e+ducation as a dynamic … concept *is+ … made from that strange combination of movements… in knowledge, in the teacher, in the students, and in institutional settings” (cited in Gardner, 2008). She argues that “movement is an invaluable pedagogical lens because it reflects teachers’ and learners’ complex experiences” (Gardner, 2008, p. 28). Re-telling teaching and learning stories and plausible insights into the lived-experience of adventure education serve as a guide in several important ways towards exposing the notion of such a ‘movement pedagogy’ in adventure education. Here, I gesture towards five indicators that may constitute a transformative pedagogic pathway that combine the embodied, sensory and interpretive lifeworlds of people’s reflection and transformative learning in adventure education. They are: 1.
Being and the adventure experience
2.
Group work and group spaces for transformation
285
3.
Fluid, dynamic and dilemmatic situations as connector for reflection
4.
Transformation as embodied narrative
5.
Existential approach as the fundamental for transformative pedagogy
Indicator #1: Being and the adventure experience In a renewed commitment to experiencing teaching with and through our bodies, the concept of body pedagogy (Snowber, 2005) can bring learners closer to an awareness of the experience as it is lived, where it acts as a way of inquiry and subsequently as a transformation of self. Stories of the leaders in the inquiry remind us that we do not have bodies, we are bodies. The emphasis is beyond the outer body but in phenomenological terms, the ‘lived body’. This isn’t knowledge that we can just be told or read about; it must be experienced. And in experiencing, there is as much unlearning to do as learning. Only when we become conscious of these meanings and feelings can we then design lessons, ‘teach’ or share this learning with others (Shusterman, 2004). We, as leaders, need to be living, knowing, feeling, and realising how it is being with and within the adventure experiences more than our learners. As adventure educators, we are given the position to co-choreograph dance pieces for our dancers, i.e. to craft learning experiences that engage learners holistically, ones that involve the mind, body, heart, and soul. We saw from the lived experiences of participants and leaders in the inquiry the significance of bodily lifeworld. Taylor (2006) also raises that holistic engagement, based on emotion, spirituality, and affect in the development of critical consciousness, reflection, and altered worldview, is one of the core elements in fostering transformative learning. This domain focused on empathic connection, imagery and contemplative practices, as well as forms of culturally responsive teaching strategies (Lennox, 2005; Tisdell & Tolliver, 2009; Yorks & Kasl, 2006). The critical point is in the careful selection and consideration of the choices, in the case of being a co-choreographer, of music selection, dance steps, rhythm, and somatic movement that would possibly provide a whole person expression and performance. In that same way, we need to be “tactful” in our pedagogical choices (van Manen, 1991) in the selection and consideration of a whole person experience for our learners. Thus the leader might ask and reflect upon the following: Would these experiences arouse new embodied
286
sensations and feelings for the learner(s)? Would these experiences offer opportunities for learner(s) to draw a metaphoric or imaginal presentation of realities in narrative ways? Would these experiences provide extension and potential for learner(s) to derive in some kind of conceptual analysis and critique? Would these experiences allow channels of reflective action, where feedback from learner(s)’ chosen action can be made available? Indicator #2: Group work and group spaces for transformation Sean and Anqi in Tile Island remind us that our body-self is nothing but a part of the social and political self. The emphasis brought to the forefront the ethical care and consideration for us, as educators, as possible change agents. This consequence reminds us that there are always at least two possible outcomes for any educative experience: we move either towards preferred positive learning or towards an undesirable outcome. Butterwick and Lawrence (2009) warn, “we can create an environment where transformative learning can occur, however, without care and attention to the power we have… we can contribute to oppression and silencing” (p. 44). There is growing recognition that the processes of transformative learning must help create reflexive conditions in both individuals and societies so that social transformation can be generated (Mezirow & Associates, 2000; Mezirow, Taylor, & Associates, 2009; Taylor, 1994). This shift in the breath of theoretical reflexivity on the part of the educator has implications for transformative learning practice. It presupposes another level of ethical responsibility on the part of the leader to assess and be mindful of the rich psychological, spiritual, social, political, and cultural contexts of the learner - their personal experiences. Research indicates that accounting for personal experiences and establishing positive and authentic relationships with others are two of the essential factors in a transformative experience (Taylor, 2006). The fluidity, exchange and movement of relational engagement is like the rapport of a pair of dancers. It takes a tremendous level of trust, and this is usually initiated by the lead dancer, which in this case, the leader, before a reciprocal effect takes place between leader and learner, between learners and eventually within the group culture. The lived experiences of participants and leaders in the inquiry reveal that creating an ambience of freedom, helping learners disclose personal reflections and thoughts voluntarily can be achieved through the leaders’ modelling of openness to dialogue and willingness to
287
self-disclose. Perhaps Tisdell and Tolliver (2009) say it simply and best when they state; “I never ask students to do anything that I am unwilling to do myself” (p. 93). Besides building positive relationships, provoking the disorienting dilemma can move learners from resistance to new and expanded perspectives to acceptance of them. Confronting diverse viewpoints and tensions are not new to the learning process. There is always a conflict between challenging learners and offering them a comfortable learning space in which to express questions and new ideas. Here, undoubtedly, is one place where the leader needs keen self-awareness of both intention and skill in leading the learners through this rocky terrain. So often we hear from the voices of leaders in the inquiry that experience may be the only teacher, but I suppose willingness to risk and humility to learn are likely two of the best companions. Indicator #3: Fluid, dynamic and dilemmatic situations as connector for reflection The lived experiences of leaders and learners suggest the need for us to encourage critical reflection as a way of promoting transformative learning. We may be able to find some inspiration in the literature on feminist, critical, and radical pedagogy (for example Bracher, 2006; Hooks, 1994; Maher & Tetreault, 1994; McLaren & Hammer, 1989) and also in the concrete strategies discussed by several authors (for example Brookfield, 1995; Cranton, 1996; Mezirow & Associates, 1990; Moon, 1999; Osmond & Darlington, 2005) as to how we can better foster critical reflection in our learners. Here I pay special attention to the motion and movement of lived spatiality and temporality as key pedagogical guidance to adventure educators. The critical attention paid to reflection highlighted the accountability on our part, as educators and leaders, to be reflective in our practices (Brown, 2004a). We realise that while our designated role might be instructor, or outdoor leader, or guide, so often we switch between different roles and identities between and beyond these. And in this process of locating spatial identities for ourselves, we engage ourselves in critical self-reflection, transition and transformation. This essence is exposed through the concept of spatial identities, it captures the idea of identities being spatial; they are on the move in ever shifting spaces, they are essentially ungraspable. This relates to the way in which identities differ and change according to context, culture, role and identity. Because of this, I have
288
argued the case for us to pay attention to these fluid, dynamic and often dilemmatic situations so often being confronted by adventure educators and leaders in their quest of teaching for change as the fundamental focus in pedagogical considerations. The presence of motion in spaces calls for the need for us to embrace dilemmas. Embracing dilemmas results in greater self-understanding and a means of moving forward which may not initially have presented itself. Dilemmas arise out of tension, and tension exists in the places where our conflicting thoughts surface. The liminal spaces enable us to create new and differently formed identities that emerge out of these liminal spaces. This liminal identity is a transitional process that involves the sloughing off of the old identity with the new one in sight. For a start, we need to learn to live with tensions and move between tensions iteratively. Like Anqi demonstrated in Tile Island, to move between possibilities offers opportunity to be open to new ways of thinking (and doing), of engaging with different and diverse forms of information and of considering different personal and pedagogical stances. Movement between spaces connotes living with open boundaries. To live with open boundaries is to assume, always, that life and learning is continuous, unfinished, unresolved, irresolvable and at least partially unknowable. Open boundaries are therefore necessarily problematic but engaging with them results in continuous identity modification becoming a state of being, as we have seen with Sean in Tile Island. This leads us to realise the need for us to appreciate and value doubt. While doubt is something that is usually seen as adverse, here it is suggested that doubt is a means of shifting away from a liminal space. Instead of trying to eliminate doubt in learning and in knowledge creation, it is better to realise it and value it so that both leader and learner see doubt and uncertainty as central principles of learning. In this way, we acknowledge that both striated and smooth learning spaces are equally important and valuable. The emergence of the various distinct spatial zones and types of learning spaces in the theme my space, my transformation made explicit the acknowledgement of the importance of ‘third spaces’. The notion of ‘third space’ captures the idea that there are “particular discursive spaces … in which alternative and competing discourses and positioning transform conflict and difference into rich zones of collaboration and learning” (Gutierrez, Baquedano-
289
Lopez, & Teheda, 1999, pp. 286-287). These spaces, as we have seen from the lived experiences of participants and outdoor leaders in Tile Island, tend to be poly-contextual, multi-voiced and multi-scripted. Thinking and acknowledging the presence of a ‘third space’ is essential in locating and understanding the languages, discourses and cultures implicit within disciplinary pedagogies. By enabling learners and junior staff to comprehend and negotiate a third space it can help them move away from a liminal space. Such negotiation necessarily involves the engagement of official and unofficial spaces, allowing parallels to be drawn between hybrid genres, knowledge, humour and official and unofficial worlds. In Tile Island, we saw how the limitations in language capabilities within the moving spaces and relationship between leader and learner affected critical reflection. This is not just about our personal limitations, but also the limits of cultures, gender and society that require us to acknowledge ‘conscientisation’ (Freire, 1974). This is a process whereby people come to realise that both their views of the world and their situation within it are shaped by social and historical forces that can work against their own interests. Living in a constant state of ‘conscientisation’ therefore is vital for us to recognise our limits in order to effect changes. In summary, I propose the development of greater self-understanding and a sense of understanding our own stories better. This needs to also occur in relation to other stories, theories and texts that lay the foundation for the adventure educator in fostering critical reflection and critical self-reflection, and to help learners (and possibly themselves) create meanings and connections for themselves. Indicator #4: Transformation as embodied narrative This forth indicator had been an inspiration arising from the distinctive contribution of stories and storytelling to transformative learning as we have discovered in the inquiry. Their ability to produce intense vicarious experiences is central to this contribution. We saw at least two kinds of changes from the extracts and narratives of participants and leaders. There are those changes that rely on the creation of intense and passionate emotions, empathy, and identification. Then there are those that rely, conversely, on making one stand back, stimulating awareness not only of the constructed nature of stories themselves, but also of the way they construct their daily lives and experiences. Transformation through
290
stories and storytelling therefore integrates the emotions and the intellect. The intensity of the experience makes it an emotional and sensory, as well as an intellectual process. The storied exchange of experiences is a natural form of human communication in adventure education. Creating purposeful dialogue and having a high level of context awareness could well be what is needed on the part of the adventure educator or leader. The key to this process is the ability of listeners and the teller to engage in post-telling conversations that explore the stories in ways that clarify, deepen, enlarge, expose new facets, and experiment with new meaning. I can imagine a few considerations for including storytelling in adventure education practice. First are the connected notions of control and time. Tyler (2009) suggests that storytelling depends on the educator’s willingness to release control of the space, to give it over not only to the collective consciousness of the group, but also to the stories themselves. This can be achieved through providing an inquiry structure where time is given for unhurried conversations and giving learners a sense of freedom to dialogue beyond the boundaries of the session. Storytelling is an inclusive approach that blurs the line between leader and learner. Leaders can help to create a communicative space by offering a personal story as a model. The storytelling process invites learners to engage in a form of choice making, on what story they will tell and how they will tell it. Leaders who first unmask with a story that may feel risky will help learners calibrate the extent to which they can take risks with their own stories. These stories deepen the possibility that their stories will spark other stories, prompt authentic dialogue, and contribute to meaning making. I propose that in order to increase their own capacity to tell stories, adventure educators and leaders will be well served by increasing their capacity to listen. This listening is a form of noticing the story in a way that goes beyond the content of the story into the spaces between the lines, to listen for what is not expressed – for that which may not even be known by the teller – the ‘third spaces’. Story listening is gentle, because it stems from an authentic curiosity and care. It is a fearless, powerful listening grounded in the profound trust that both storyteller and the story have sufficient strength to engage in exploration without strain or injury. Indicator #5: Existential approach as the fundamental for transformative pedagogy
291
Existentialist approaches to learning draw from the phenomenology tradition but were developed in a pedagogic and less individualistic way by Maxine Greene (1967a, 1967b, 1988, 1995), who also drew on the pragmatism of John Dewey (1938). The existential approach seeks to underpin and encourage the personal energy of people facing dimensions of transformative learning, which are linked to a strong desire for resolution of an experienced dilemma confronted by contradictory perspectives and related life choices. Morris (1966) summed up the existential mission: It summons us onward … to a new level of awareness: of self, of freedom, of choice, of responsibility, of authenticity. It summons us to take charge of our own symptoms, to assume personal control of our anxiety and make it the occasion for achieving a new kind of life. (p. 32) An existential approach to learning and pedagogy contrasts with the more objective, ‘scientific’ approach of teaching and learning. Here, learning is considered to occur when information and skills are taken into the learner’s repertoire, into their lifeworld. Such an approach emphasises that learning, particularly transformative learning, is a subjective, personal dynamic process. It is made up of a series of ones’ chosen acts of self-orientation in response to life challenges. These personal acts of learning are pursued by people with specific personalities, desires and attitudes in particular social or cultural contexts (Rasheed, 2006). And as we discovered earlier, besides lived space, lived time, lived body, and lived relations, a strong case can be made that lived stories should be a new addition to this existential structure on understanding human experiences in the world. In earlier discussion on effective outdoor leadership I raised a key question that, for many adventure educators, probably remains unresolved: how does a leader foster a change in perspective among learners within a theoretical orientation that advocates a learnercentred approach to teaching, free of coercion, and emphasising the education experience as one that is of learners’ personal impulses and desires? We have uncovered through the process of this inquiry that it is in the agenda of an existential inclusive pedagogy to evoke proactive, holistic consciousness in learners. And as a way forward I would like to propose that this can be done in two steps: establishing credibility and setting out the invitation to learn.
292
The first step requires the educators or leaders to somehow achieve pedagogic credibility. Not only does the educator or leader need to embody the learning being promoted, but he or she must be seen as one who has achieved this form of transformative learning as well, by risking being ‘changed’ and even ‘damaged’ or ‘discredited’ in the process. The second step, an invitation to the learning process, uses the invitation of immersion, story making, and critical and practical appraisal, before finally calling (but not forcing) learners to choose to engage passionately in the work of their transformation. To sum up, I bring us back to the notion of the ‘movement pedagogy’. The preceding paragraphs have demonstrated the presence of motion and movement of a transformative pedagogy in adventure education. As clichéd as it may be, teaching as dancing - or for that matter, the ability to influence learning - is an art. It is a sophisticated phenomenon with the desire to inspire others. The metaphor of ‘dance’ recognises a dynamic, rhythmical, harmonious, fluid and responsive interplay between the learner, leader, experience and reflection in the entire adventure education influence process. Dance may also be characterised as a partially inexpressible, emotionally filled experience (Dienske, 2000) involving intentional and creative movement, like choreography (Lane, 2005). The dance metaphor embraces the holistic experience of people involved within an adventure educational experience, as well as the ‘power’ of the leaders to maximise the learning potential for their learners. Engaging in adventure education (just like dance) is a transformational experience for learners, arguably for the leaders too (see S. Beames, 2006), that taps into the emotional, spiritual and physical realms. For these reasons, teaching-asdancing is perhaps, the most appropriate expression for the pedagogical approach in adventure education.
The final words in this thesis belong to the existential lifeworld of adventure education. Awareness of the existential dimensions of education must also acknowledge the importance of supporting a transcending process. An appropriate pedagogy, aware of transformative learning as the crossing of an existential boundary, can be enriched by supportive elements. Existential pedagogy seeks to be attuned to, and evocative of, human
293
learning as a major life-shaping project and quest: including all of its energies and vulnerabilities. The processes of facilitation as an existential invitation to learning have been examined in the work of Maxine Greene, who has joined ideas of Sartre with those of Dewey. Sinha (2008), writing of Maxine Greene, comments that existential pedagogy can help learners to “experience different perspectives as their own, to experience the radical modification in their own consciousness so they may be enabled to truly see that to which they would not ordinarily be open, and to experience the limitlessness of the range of human possibility” (p.274). This compelling and evocative approach is an invitation to learn through an adventurous inner-journey of reflection and transformation, nothing less than a form of existential pedagogy. This, finally, is the parable of teaching for change in adventure education.
294
REFERENCES
Abram, D. (1996). The spell of the sensuous: Perception and language in a more-than-human world. New York: Vintage books. Aguiar, J. (1986). Analysis of successful adventure leaders. [Doctoral dissertation]. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(462-A). Aitken, R. (2003). Writting a novel: A practical guide. Wiltshire: The Crowood Press Ltd. Ajjawi, R., & Higgs, J. (2007). Using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate how experienced practitioners learn to communicate clinical reasoning. The Qualitative Report, 12(4), 612-638. Allen, D. (1995). Hermeneutics: Philosophical traditions and nursing practice research. Nursing Science Quarterly, 8(4), 174-182. Allix, N. M. (2003). Epistemology and knowledge management concepts and practices. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 4(2). Alvesson, M. (2002). Postmodernism and social research. Buckingham: Open University Press. Angrosino, M. (1998). Opportunity House. London: Altamira Press. Ansari, M. A., & Kapoor, A. (1987). Organizational context and upward influence tactics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40(1), 39-49. Atkinson, P. (1992). Understanding ethnographic texts. London: Sage. Attarian, A. (2001). Trends in outdoor adventure education. Journal of Experiential Education, 24(3), 141-149. Bacon, S. B. (1987). The evolution of the Outward Bound process. Greenwich, CT: Outward Bound USA. Baechtel, M. (2004). Shaping the story: A step-by-step guide to writing short fiction. San Francisco: Pearson Education, Inc. Baldwin, C., Persing, J., & Magnuson, D. (2004). The role of theory, research, and evaluation in adventure education. Journal of Experiential Education, 26(3), 167-183. Banks, A., & Banks, S. (1998). The struggle over facts and fictions. In A. Banks & S. Banks (Eds.), Fiction and social research (pp. 11-29). London: Altamira Press. Barclay, M. W. (1992). The utility of hermeneutic interpretatoin in psychotherapy. Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology, 12(2), 103-118. Barone, T. (1997). Among the chosen. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(2), 222-236. Barone, T. (2000). Aesthetics, politics, and educational inquiry. New York: Peter Lang. Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1998). Curl Rogers' helping system: Journey and substance. London: Sage. Barrett, J., & Greenway, R. (1995). Why adventure? The role and value of outdoor adventure in young people's personal and social development. Coventry: Foundation for Outdoor Adventure. Barthes, R. (1977). Introduction to the structural analysis of narratives (S. Health, Trans.). In R. Barthes (Ed.), Image, music, text. London: Fontana/Collins. Bateson, M. C. (1995). Peripheral Visions: Learning along the way. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Beacker, G. S. (1976). The economic approach to human behaviour. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Beames, S. (2004). Critical elements of an expedition experience. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 4(2), 145-157. Beames, S. (2006). Losing my religion: The quest for applicable theory in outdoor education. Pathways: The Ontario Journal of Outdoor Education, 9(1), 4-11. Beames, S., & Brown, A. (2005). Outdoor education in Hong Kong: Past, present and future. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 5(1), 69-82. Beames, S. K., & Pike, E., C. J. (2008). Goffman goes rock climbing: Using creative fiction to explore the presentation of self in outdoor education. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 12(2), 3-11. Beard, C., & Wilson, J. P. (2002). The power of experiential learning: A handbook for trainers and educators. London: Kogan Page Limited. Beard, C., & Wilson, J. P. (2006). Experiential learning (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page. Beck, C. (1993). Qualitative research: The evaluation of its credibility, fittingness, and auditability. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 15(2), 263-266. Becker, H. S. (1998). Tricks of the trade: How to think about your research while you're doing it. Chicago: The University of Chicago. Behar, R. (1993). Translated woman: Crossing the border with Esperanza's story. Boston: Beacon.
295
Bell, A. (2003). A narrative approach to research. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 8(Spring), 95110. Bell, J. (2002). Narrative inquiry: More than just telling stories. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 207-213. Benner, P. (1984). From novice to expert. Menlo Park, California: Adaison-Wesley. Bennett, J. G. (1983). Awareness of Others. Bovington, U.K: Shantock Press. Berger, J. G. (2004). Dancing on the threshold of meaning: Recognizing and understanding the growing edge. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(4), 336-351. Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Berry, M. (2011). Learning and teaching in adventure education. In M. Berry & C. Hodgson (Eds.), Adventure Education: an Introduction (pp. 63-83). Oxon: Routledge. Berry, M., & Hodgson, C. (2011). Adventure education: An introduction. Oxon: Routledge. Bishop, R. (1996). Collaborative research stories: Whakawhanaungatanga. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press. Bishop, R., & Glynn, T. (1999). Culture counts: Changing power relations in education. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press. Bisson, C. A. (2009). Philosophical influences in outdoor, adventure, and experiential education. In B. Stremba & C. A. Bisson (Eds.), Teaching Adventure Education Theory: Best Practices. United States of America: Human Kinetics. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: David McKay Co., Inc. Blumenfeld-Jones, D. S. (1997). Aesthetic experience, hermeneutics, and curriculum. Philosophy of Education Retrieved 10 August, 2012, from http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/97_docs/blumenfeldjones.html Bobilya, A., McAvoy, L., & Kalisch, K. (2005). The power of the instructor in the solo experience: An empirical study and some non-empirical questions. The Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 5(1), 35-50. Bochner, A. (2001). Narrative's virtues. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(2), 131-157. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (5th ed.). United States of America: Pearson Education, Inc. Bogo, M., Regehr, C., Katz, E., Logic, C., & Mylopoulos, M. (2011). Developing a tool for assessing students' reflections on their practice. Social Work Education, 30(2), 186-194. Bohm, D. (1985). Unfolding meaning: A weekend of dialogue with David Bohm. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Bollnow, O. F. (1982). On silence - findings of philosophico-pedagogical anthropology. Universitas, 24(1), 41-47. Booth, T. (1996). Sounds of still voices: Issues in the use of narrative methods with people who have learning difficulties. In L. Barton (Ed.), Making difficulties: research and the construction of special educational needs. London: Longman. Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Walker, D. (1993). Using experience for learning. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kegan Page. Bowles, S. (1995). The nagivation between scylla and charybdis: The procses of professionalism and adventure education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 12(4), 15-20. Boyd, R. D. (1991). Personal transformation in small groups: A Jungian perspective. London: Routledge. Boyd, R. D., & Meyers, J. G. (1988). Transformative education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 7(4), 261-284. Boyer, N. R., Maher, P. A., & Kirkman, S. (2006). Tranformative learning in online settings: The use of selfdirection, metacognition, and collaborative learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 4, 335-361. Bracher, M. (2006). Radical pedagogy: Identity, generativity, and social transformation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brah, A., & Hoy, J. (1989). Experiential learning, a new orthodoxy? In S. Weil & I. McGill (Eds.), Making sense of experiential learning. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press. Brendel, W. T. (2009). Exploring meaning-making among the terminally ill through the lens of transformative learning theory and the medium of personal narratives. Doctor of Education, Columbia University, Columbia. Brennan, D. (2008). Older adults in adventure education. Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Akitiengesellschaft & Co. KG. Brentano, F. (1973). Psychology from an empirical stanpoint (A. C. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell & L. L. McAllister, Trans.). New York: Humanities Press.
296
Bresler, L. (2004). Knowing bodies, moving minds: Toward embodied teaching and learning. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Brewer, J., & Sparkes, A. C. (2011). The meanings of outdoor physical activity for parentally bereaved young people in the United Kingdom: Insights from an ethnographic study. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 11(2), 127-143. Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brown, K. (2006). Leadership and social justice and equity: Evaluating a transformative framework and andragogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(5), 700-745. Brown, M. (2001). What does a close reading of interaction tell us about how we conduct facilitation sessions? Paper presented at the The 12th National Outdoor Education Conference: Education Outdoors - Our Sense of Place, La Trobe University, Bendingo, Victoria. Brown, M. (2002). The facilitator as gatekeeper: A critical analysis of social order in facilitation sessions. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 2(2), 101-112. Brown, M. (2004a). Doing adventure education the 'right' way. New Zealand Journal of Outdoor Education: Ko Tane Mahuta Pupuke, 1(3), 33-46. Brown, M. (2004b). "Let's go round the circle": How verbal facilitation can function as a means of direct instructions. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(2), 161-175. Brown, M. (2009). Reconceptualising outdoor adventure education: Activity in search of an appropriate theory. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 13(2), 3-13. Bruner, E. (1986). Ethnography as narrative. In E. M. Bruner & V. Turner (Eds.), The anthropology of experience. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bruner, J. (1987). Life as narrative. Social Research, 54, 11-32. Bryman, A. E. (2004). The disneyization of society. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc. Brymer, E., & Gray, T. (2006). Effective leadership: Transformational or transactional? Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 10(2), 13-19. Brymer, E., & Gray, T. (2009). Dancing with nature: Rhythm and harmony in extreme sport participation. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 9(2), 135-149. Bunyan, P. (2011). Models and milestones in adventure education. In M. Berry & C. Hodgson (Eds.), Adventure education: An introduction. Oxon: Routledge. Burch, R. (1989). Phenomenology and its practices. Phenomenology + Pedagogy, 7, 187-217. Burnard, P. (1988). Experiential learning: Some theoretical considerations. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 7(2), 127-133. Butler, J. (1990). Gendern trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge Indent. Butler, J. (1994). From action to thought: The fulfilment of human potential. In J. Edward (Ed.), Thinking: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Victoria: Hawker Bronlow Education. Butterwick, S., & Lawrence, R. L. (2009). Creating alternative realities: Arts based approaches to transformative learning. In J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor & Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education (pp. 35-45). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Byatt, A. S. (2000). On histories and stories, selected essays. London: Chatto & Windus. Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. New York: Addison Wesley. Cameron, J. (2001). Beyond dualism: Wilderness, outdoor education and everyday places. Paper presented at the 12th National Outdoor Education Conference, Carlton, Victoria. Caputo, J. D. (1987). Radical hermeneutics: Repetition, deconstruction, and the hermeneutic project. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Carawan, L., Knight, S., Wittman, P., Pokorny, M., & Velde, B. P. (2011). On becoming a qualitative researcher: A view through the lens of transformative learning. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 31(4), 387-399. Carlberg, C. (2008). Making connections between transformative learning and teaching of the holocaust in the high school classroom. Doctor of Philosophy, School of Saint Louis University, United States. Carr, D. (1986). Time, narrative, and history. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Carter, T. J. (2002). The importance of talk to midcareer women's development: A collaborative inquiry. Journal of Business Communication, 39, 55-91. Castells, M. (1996). The information age: Economy, society and culture (Vol. 1). Oxford: Blackwell. Chapman, S. (1995). What is the question? In K. Warren, M. Sukofs & J. S. Hunt (Eds.), The theory of experiential education (3rd ed., pp. 236-239). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
297
Christopher, S., Dunnagan, T., Duncan, S. F., & Paul, L. (2001). Education for self-support: Evaluating outcomes using transformative learning theory. Family Relations, 50, 134-142. Cilesiz, S. (2009). Educational computer use in leisure contexts: A phenomenological study of adolescents' experiences at internet cafes. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1), 232-274. Clandinin, D. J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge: A study of teachers' classroom images. Curriculum Inquiry, 15(4), 361-385. Clandinin, D. J. (1993). Creating new spaces for women: Restorying teacher education. In D. J. Clandinin, A. Davies, P. Hogan & B. Kennard (Eds.), Learning to teach: Teaching to learn: Stories of collaboration in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press. Clark, M. C. (1993). Transformative learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), An update on adult learning theory (Vol. New directions for adult and continuing education, pp. 47-56). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D., & Philliops, N. (2006). Power and organizations. London: Sage Publications. Clifford, J. (1983). On ethnographic authority. Representations, 1(2), 118-146. Clifford, J. (1986). On ethnographic allegory. In J. Clifford & G. Marcus (Eds.), Writing culture. Berkley: University of California Press. Coe, D. (1991). Levels of knowing in ethnographic inquiry. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 4(4), 313-331. Coffey, A. (1999). The ethnographic self. London: Sage. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. London: Sage. Cohen, A. R., Fink, S., L, Gadon, H., & Robin, D. W. (1992). Effective behavior in organizations: Cases, concepts, and student experiences (5th ed.). Homewood, Ill: Irwin. Coleman, J. (1976). Experiential learning. In M. T. Keeton (Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 2-14. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1994). Personal experience methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research`. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Conrad, D., & Hedin, D. (1981). The impact of experiential education: Summary and implications. Journal of Experiential Education, 4(2), 6-20. Conrad, D., & Hedin, D. (1982). The impact of experimental education on adolescents development. Child and Youth Services, 4, 57-76. Coutts-Jarman, J. (1993). Using reflection and experience in nurse education. British Journal of Nursing, 2(1), 77-80. Cragg, C. E., Plotnikoff, R. C., Hugo, K., & Casey, A. (2001). Perspective transformation in RN-to-BSN distance education. Journal of Nursing Education, 40(7), 317-322. Cranton, P. (1996). Professional development as perspective transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Cranton, P. (2006). Fostering authentic relationships in the transformative classroom. New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education, Spring(109), 5-14. Cranton, P., & Carusetta, E. (2004a). Developing authenticity as a transformative process. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(4), 276-293. Cranton, P., & Carusetta, E. (2004b). Perspectives on authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(1), 5-22. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. Cronin, K. (2008). Transdiciplinary research (TDR) and sustainability Retrieved 2 May, 2012, from http://www.learningforsustainability.net/pubs/Transdisciplinary_Research_and_Sustainability.pdf Crossley, N. (1995). Body, techniques, agency and intercorporeality: On Goffman's relations in public. Sociology, 29(1), 133-149. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. s. (1991). Adventure and the flow experience. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure education (pp. 149-155). State College, PA: Venture.
298
Csordas, T. J. (1999). Embodiment and cultural phenomenology. In G. Weiss & H. F. Haber (Eds.), Perspectives on embodiment: The intersections of nature and culture (pp. 143-162). New York: Routledge. Cuban, L. (1998). How schools change reforms: Redefining reform success and failure. Teachers College Record, 99(3), 433-477. Cuffaro, H. K. (1995). Experimenting with the world: John Dewey and the early childhood classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Dall'alba, G. (2009). Exploring education through phenomenology: Diverse approaches. United Kingdom: Wileyblackwell. Daloz, L. A. (1986). Effective teaching and mentoring: Realizing the transformational power of adult learning experiences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (1999). Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Davidson, L. (2001). Qualitative research and making meaning from adventure: A case study of boys' experiences of outdoor education at school. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 1(2), 11-20. Davis-Manigualte, J., Yorks, L., & Kasl, E. (2006). Expressive ways of knowing and transformative learning. In E. W. Taylor (Ed.), Teaching for change (Vol. 109, pp. 27-35). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. De Pree, M. (1997). Leading without power: Finding hope in serving community. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Delamont, S. (1983). Interaction in the classroom: Contemporary sociology of the school (2nd ed.). London: Methuen. Denzin, N. (1994). The art and politics of interpretation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 500-515). London: Sage. Denzin, N. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. London: Sage. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Dewey, J. (1909). Moral principles in education. Carbondale: Feffer and Simons, Inc. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Vintage Books. Dewey, J. (1918). Introduction. In F. M. Alexander (Ed.), Man's supreme inheritance (pp. xiii-xvii). New York: Dutton. Dewey, J. (1925). Experience and nature. United States of America: Open Court Publishing Company. Dewey, J. (1933a). How we think. New York: Heath. Dewey, J. (1933b). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Heath. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan. Dewey, J. (1968). Democracy in education (Rev ed.). New York: Free Press. Dewey, J. (1988). John Dewey: The later works, 1925-1953. In J. Boydston, P. Baysinger & B. Levine (Eds.), (Vol. I:1925). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Dienske, I. (2000). Beyond words: On the experience of the ineffable. Phenomenology and Pedagogy, 3(1), 3-19. Dirkx, J. M. (1997). Nurturing the soul in adult learning. In P. Cranton (Ed.), Transformative learning in action: Insights from practice (pp. 79-88). San Franscisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dirkx, J. M. (1998). Transformative learning theory in the practice of adult education: An overview. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 7, 1-14. Dirkx, J. M. (2001). The power of feelings: Emotion, imagination, and the construction of meaning in adult learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), The New update on adult learning theory. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dirkx, J. M. (2006). Engaging emotions in adult learning: A Jungian perspective on emotion and transformative learning. In E. W. Taylor (Ed.), Teaching for Change (Vol. 109, pp. 15-26). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dirkx, J. M., Mezirow, J., & Cranton, P. (2006). Musings and reflections on the meaning, context, and process of transformative learning: A dialogue between John M. Dirkx and Jack Mezirow. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(2), 123-139. Diversi, M. (1998). Glimpses of street life. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(1), 130-140. Doughty, S. (1991). Three generations of development training. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 7(4), 7-9. Drengson, A. R. (1985). What means this experience. In R. Kraft & M. Sakofs (Eds.), The theory of experiential education. Boulder: The Association for Experiential Education. Dyson, A. H., & Genishi, C. (1994). The need for story: Cultural diversity in classroom and community. Urbana, IL: National Coulcil of Teachers of English. Egan, K. (2002). Getting it wrong from the beginning: Our progressivist inheritance from Herbert Spencer, John Dewey, and Jean Piaget. London: Yale University Press.
299
Eisen, M. J. (2001). Peer-based professional development viewed through the lens of transformative learning. Holistic Nursing Practice, 16, 30-42. Eisner, E. (1991). The enlightened eye. Oxford: Macmillan. Ellis, C. (1995). Final negotiations: A story of love, loss and chronic illness. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Entwistle, N. (1996). Recent research on student learning and the learning environment. In J. Tait & P. Knight (Eds.), The management of independent learning. London: Kogan Page Limited. Erickson, E. (1975). Life history and the historical moment. New York: W.W. Norton. Ewert, A. W. (1983). Outdoor adventure and self-concept: A research analysis. Eugene, OR: Center of Leisure Studie, University of Oregon. Ewert, A. W. (1989). Outdoor adventure pursuits: Foundations, models, and theories. Scottsdale, AZ: Publishing Horizons. Ewert, A. W. (1991). Group development in the natural environment: Expectations, outcomes, and techniques. Environment and Behaviour, 23(5), 592-615. Fenwick, T. (2000). Expanding conceptions of experientail learning: A review of the five contemporary perspectives on cognition. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(4), 243-272. Fenwick, T. (2001). Experiential learning: A theoretical critique from five perspectives. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearninghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. Finders, M. (1997). Just girls: Hidden literacies and life in junior high. New York: Teachers College Press. Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 70-82). London: Sage. Fine, M., Weis, L., Weseen, S., & Loonmun, W. (2003). For whom?: Qualitative research, representations, and social responsibilities. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 167-207). Thousand Oaks California: Sage Publications, Inc. Fisher, A. (1989). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value and action. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press. Flavin, M. (1996). Kurt Hahn's schools and legacy. Wilmington, Del: Middle Atlantic Press. Fleer, M. (2010). Conceptual and contextual intersubjectivity for affording concept formation in childrens play. In L. Brooker & S. Edward (Eds.), Engaging play (pp. 67-79). Maidenhead: Open Press University. Foucault, M. (1972). Archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge. Frank, A. W. (1995). The wounded storyteller: Body, illness, and ethics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Frank, K. (2000). The management of hunger. Qualitative Inquiry, 6(4), 474-488. Franz, N. (2010). Catalyzing employee change with transformative learning. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 113-118. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press. Freire, P. (1974). Education: The practice of freedom. London: Writers and Readers Co-operative. Freire, P. (1984). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continumum. Friend, L. (2000). Guilty or not guilty: Experiencing and understanding Sweetie's guilt as dissatisfaction. Paper presented at the Firth Conference on Gender, Marketing and Consumer Behaviour, Urbana, IL. Gabriel, P. (2008). Personal transformation: The relationship of transformative learning experiences and transformational leadership. Doctor of Education, The George Washington University, Washington. Gadamer, H.-G. (1975). Truth and method. New York: Seabury. Gager, R. (1982). Experiential education: Strenghtening the learning process. In d. Conrad & D. Hedin (Eds.), Youth participation in experiential education (pp. 31-39). New York: Hawthorne Press. Gallagher, S. (2005). How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Gardner, M. (2008). Transformative learning as a pedagogy of movement. In M. Gardner & U. Kelly (Eds.), Narrating transformative learning in education. United States of America: Palgrave Macmillian. Gass, M. A. (1993). Adventure therapy: Therapeutic applications of adventure programming. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt. Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture The Interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books. Geertz, C. (1988). Works and lives. Cambridge: Polity Press. Gendlin, E. T. (1962/1997). Experiencing and the creation of meaning: A philosophical and psychological approach to the subjective. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Gendlin, E. T. (1981). Focusing (2nd ed.). New York: Bantam. Gendlin, E. T. (1992). The wider role of bodily sense in thought and language. In M. Sheets-Johnstone (Ed.), Giving the body its due (pp. 192-207). Albany: State University of New York Press. Georgakopoulou, A. (2007). Small stories, interaction and identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
300
Gibbons, M., & Hopkins, D. (1980). How experiential is your experience-based program? Journal of Experiential Education, 4(1), 32-37. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California press. Gilbertson, K., Bates, T., McLaughlin, T., & Ewert, A. (2006). Outdoor education: Methods and strategies. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Giorgi, A. (1997). The theory, practice and evaluation of the phenomenological method as a qualitative research procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 28(2), 235-261. Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Duquesne University Press. Goddman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Books. Gorelick, S. (1991). Contradictions of feminist methodology. Gender & Society, 5(4), 459-477. Graham, J. (1997). Outdoor leadership: Technique, common sense & self-confidence. Seattle, WA: The Mountaineers. Green, J. (1996a). Choreographing a postmodern turn: The creative process and somatics. Impulse, 4(4), 267275. Green, J. (1996b). Moving through and against multiple paradigms: Postpositivist research in somatics and creativity - Part I. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Physical Education, 1(1), 43-54. Green, J. (1996c). Moving through and against multiple paradigms: Postpositivist research in somatics and creativity - Part II. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Physical Education, 1(2), 73-86. Greenaway, R. (1993). Playback. Edinburgh: Callander. Greenaway, R. (1997a, 2012). Doing Reviewing. Retrieved 28 January, 2013, from http://www.reviewing.co.uk/articles/reviewing_outdoorsx3.htm#Doing_Reviewing Greenaway, R. (1997b, 2012). Reviewing by doing. Retrieved 28 January, 2013, from http://www.reviewing.co.uk/articles/reviewing_outdoorsx3.htm#Reviewing_By_Doing Greenaway, R. (2004). Facilitation and reviewing in Outdoor Education. In P. Barnes & R. Sharp (Eds.), The RHP Companion to Outdoor Education. UK: Russell House Publishing. Greene, E., & Del Negro, J. M. (2010). Storytelling: Art and technique. California, USA: Libraries Unlimited. Greene, M. (1967a). Existential encournters for teachers. New York: Random House. Greene, M. (1967b). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, arts and social change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of learning. New York: Teachers College Press. Greene, M. (1988). The dialectic of freedom. New York: Teachers College Press. Greene, M. (1995). Realeasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Grossman, P., & Shulman, L. (1994). Knowing, believing, and the teaching of English Teachers thinking, teachers knowing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Grumet, M. (1988). Bitter milk: Women and teaching. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Berverly Hills, CA: Sage. Gurdjieff, G. (1963). Meetings with remarkable men. New York: EP Dutton. Gurdjieff, G. (1973). Views from the real world: Talks of G.I. Gurdjieff. New York: EP Dutton. Gutierrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Teheda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity: An International Journal, 6(4), 286-303. Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon Press. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Polity Press. Hahn, K. (1936). Education and peace: The foundations of modern society. Retrieved from KurtHahn.org website: http://www.kurthahn.org/writings/ed_peace.pdf Hahn, K. (1960). Outward Bound. Retrieved from KurtHahn.org website: http://www.kurthahn.org/writings/obt1960.pdf Hahn, K. (1965). Harrogate address on Outward Bound. Retrieved from KurtHahn.org website: http://www.kurthahn.org/writings/gate.pdf Hall, J. M., & Steven, P. E. (1991). Rigor in feminist research. Advances in Nursing Science, 13(3), 16-29. Hanna, T. (1988). Somatics: Reawakening The Mind's Control Of Movement, Flexibility, And Health Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Hart, B. (1995). Reauthoring the stories we work by: Situating the narrative approach in the presence of the family of therapists. Australian and New Zealang Journal of Family Therapy, 16(4), 181-189. Hart, J. (2011). Storycraft: The complete guide to writing narrative nonfiction. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
301
Hattie, J., Marsh, H. W., Neil, J., & Richards, G. E. (1997). Adventure Education and Outward Bound: Out-ofclass experiences that make a lasting difference. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 43-87. Hayashi, A., & Ewert, A. (2006). Outdoor Leaders' Emotional Intelligence and Transformational Leadership Journal of Experiential Education, 28(3), 222-242. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). London: SCM Press. Heidegger, M. (1968). What is called thinking? New York: Harper & Row. Heidegger, M. (1999). Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning) (E. P & K. Maly, Trans.). Blooomington & Indianapolis: Indiana Univerisity Press. Heilbrun, C. (1998). Writing a woman's life. New York: Ballentine Books. Henderson, B. (1995). Outdoor Travel: Explorations for Change. Doctor of Philosophy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. Herman, D. (2009). Basic Elements of Narrative. United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell. Hertz, R. (1997). Introduction. In R. Hertz (Ed.), Reflexivity and voice (pp. vii-xviii). London Sage. Higgins, P. (1996). Connection and consequence in outdoor education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 12(2), 34-39. Higgins, P. (1997). Why educate out of doors. In P. Higgins, C. Loynes & N. Crowther (Eds.), A guide for outdoor educators in Scotland (pp. 9-14). Penrith: Adventure Education. Higgs, J., & Mcallister, L. (2007). Educating clinical educators: using a model of the experience of being a clinical educator. medical Teacher, 29(2-3), e51. Hirsch, J. (1999). Developmental adventure programs. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 13-27). State College, PA: Venture. Ho, S. (2003). The effects of three-day adventure-based camping programmes on the perceptions of primary five Singaporean pupils' life effectiveness. Master's Thesis. Nanyang Technological University. Singapore. Hobbs, W., & Ewert, A. (2008). Having the right stuff: Investigating what makes a highly effective outdoor leader. In A. B. Young & J. Sibthorp (Eds.), Abstracts from the coalition for education in the outdoors ninth biennial research symposium. Martinville, IN: Coalition for Education in the Outdoors. Hocking, B., Haskell, J., & Kinds, W. (2001). Unfolding bodymind: Exploring possibility through education. Brandon, Vermont: Foundations for Educational Renewal. Holman, D., Pavlica, K., & Thorpe, R. (1997). Rethnking Kolb's theory of experiential learning in management eduction. Management Learning, 28(2), 135-148. Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge. Hopkins, D. (1982). Changes in self-concept as the result of adventure training. CAHPER Journal, July-August, 912. Hopkins, D., & Putnam, R. (1993). Personal growth through adventure. London: David Fulton Publishers. Hopper, T. F., Madill, L. E., Bratseth, C. D., Cameron, K. A., Coble, J. D., & Nimmon, L. E. (2008). Multiple voices in health, sport, recreation, and physical education research: Revealing unfamiliar spaces in a polyvocal review of qualitative research genres. Quest, 60(2), 214-235. Hovelynck, J. (2001a). Beyond didactics: A reconnaissance of experiential learning. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 6(1), 4-12. Hovelynck, J. (2001b). Practice-theories of facilitating experiential learning in Outward Bound: A research report. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 1(2), 53-57. Humberstone, B. (2004). Standpoint research: Multiple versions of reality in tourism theorising and research. In J. Phillimore & L. Goodson (Eds.), Qualitative research in tourism. Ontologies, epistemologies, methodologies and method. London: Routledge. Humberstone, B. (2011). Embodiment and social and environmental action in nature-based sport: spiritual spaces. Leisure Studies, 30(4), 495-512. Hune, A. (2009). Promoting higher levels of reflective writing in student journals. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(3), 247-260. Hunt, J. S. (1999). Philosophy of adventure education. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming. State College, Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing, Inc. Hunt, L. H. (1990). The philosophy of adventure education. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure education. State College: Venture Press Inc. Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas (G. W. R. Boyce, Trans.). London: George Allen & Unwin. Husserl, E. (1969). Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology (G. W. R. Boyce, Trans.). New York: Collier-Macmillan. Husserl, E. (1970). The idea of phenomenology. The Hague, The Netherlands: Nijhoff.
302
Husserl, E. (1977). Cartesian mediations: An introduction to metaphysics (D. Cairns, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Husserl, E. (1982). Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology (D. Casirns, Trans.). Hauge: Martinus Nijhoff. Hyun, E., & Marshall, J. D. (2003). Teacheable-moment-oriented curriculum practice in early childhood education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(1), 111-127. Itin, C. M. (1999). Reasserting the philosophy of experiential education as a vehicle for change in the 21st century. The Journal of Experiential Education, 22(2), 91-98. Jackson, B. (2007). The story is true: The art and meaning of telling stories. United States: Temple University Press. Jackson, P. (1995). On the place of narrative in teaching. In H. McEwan & K. Egan (Eds.), Narrative in teaching, learning, and research. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. James, T. (2000). Kurt Hahn and the aims of education. Retrieved from KurtHahn.org website: http://www.kurthahn.org/writings/james.pdf Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in the social context. London: Croom Helm. Jay, J. K. (2003). Quality teaching: Reflection as the heart of practice. Lanham, Maryland, Oxford: the Scarecrow Press, Inc. Johnson-Bailey, J., & Alfred, M. B. (2006). Transformational Teaching and the Practices of Black Women Adult Educators. In E. W. Taylor (Ed.), Teaching for Change: Fostering Transformative Learning in the Classroom (Vol. 109, pp. 49-58). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Johnson, M. (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Jones, W. T. (1975). The Twentieth century to Wittgenstein and Sarte (2nd revised ed.). San Francisco: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Joplin, L. (1981). On defining experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 4(1), 17-20. Joplin, L. (1995). On defining experiential education. In K. Warren, M. Sakofs & J. S. Hunt (Eds.), The theory of experiential education (3rd ed., pp. 15-22). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Jordi, R. (2011). Reframing the concept of reflection: Consciousness, experiential leanring, and reflective learning practices. Adult Education Quarterly, 61(2), 181-197. Josselson, R., & Lieblich, A. (1995). Interpreting experience: The narrative study of lives. California: Sage Publications Inc. Kahlid, A. (2006). Proposal for a Diploma in Outdoor and Adventure Learning for AY07. Confidential Proposal. School of Sports, Health and Leisure. Republic Polytechnic. Singapore. Kalisch, K. (1979). Role of the instructor in the Outward Bound educational process. Kearney, NE: Morris. Kember, D., Jones, A., Loke, A., Mckay, J., Singclair, K., Harrison, T., . . . Yeung, E. (1999). Determining the level of reflective thinking from students' written journals using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1), 18-30. Killion, J. P., & Todnem, G. R. (1991). A process for personal theory building. Educational Leadership, 43(6), 1416. Kipnis, D., & Schmidt, S. M. (1988). Upward influence styles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(4), 528-542. Kiritskaya, O. V., & Dirkx, J. M. (1999). Symbolic representations as mediators for meaning construction: An exploration of transformative pedagogy within a professional development context. In A. Austin, G. E. Hynes & R. T. Miller (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Midwest Research-to-practice Conference in Adult, Continuing and Community Education (pp. 184-190). St. Louis: University of Missouri. Kirk, J. (2010). Gender forced migration and education: Identities and experiences of refugee women teachers. Gender and Educaton, 22(2), 161-176. Kitchener, K. S., & King, P. M. (1981). Reflective judgement: Concepts of justification and their relationship to age and education. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2, 89-116. Klint, K. A. (1999). New directions for inquiry into self-concept and adventure experiences. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 163 - 168). State College, Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing, Inc. Knapp, C. (1993). Lasting lessons: A teacher's guide to reflecting on experience (2nd ed.). Chaleston, WV: ERIC Press.
303
Koch, T. (1995). Interpretive approaches in nursing research: The influence of Husserl and Heidegger. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21, 827-836. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kraft, R. (1990). Experiential learning. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure education (pp. 175-183). State College, PA: Venture. Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1973). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals. New York: David McKay Co., Inv. Kreber, C. (2004). An analysis of two models of reflection and their implications for educational development. International Journal for Academic development, 9(1), 29-49. Kreber, C. (2012). Critical reflection and transformative learning. In E. W. Taylor, P. Cranton & Associates (Eds.), The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 323-341). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Krieger, S. (1991). Social science and the self. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Sage qualitative research kit. London: Sage. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books. Lane, M. R. (2005). Creative and spirituality in nursing: Implementing art in healing. Holistic Nursing Practice, 19(3), 122-125. Langdridge, D. (2007). Phenomenological psychology: Theory, research and method. London: Pearson Education. Lange, E. (2004). Transformative and restorative learning: A vital dialectic for sustainable societies. Adult Education Quarterly, 54(2), 121-139. Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley. Langness, L., & Frank, G. (1978). Fact, fiction and the ethnographic novel. Anthropology and Humanism Quarterly, 3(1-2), 18-22. Lanson, J. (2011). Writing for others, writing for ourselves: Telling stories in an age of blogging. United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Lauritzen, C., & Jaeger, M. (1997). Integrating learning through story: The narrative curriculum. New York: Delmar Publishers. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (15th ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. Lennox, S. L. (2005). Contemplating the self: Holistic approaches to transformative learning in higher education. Paper presented at the 6th International Transformative Learning Conference, USA. Licoln, Y. (1997). Self, subject, audience, text. In W. Tierney & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Representation and the text (pp. 37-56). Albany, NY: Suny Press. Lincoln, Y. S. (1993). I and thou. In D. McLaughlin & W. Tierney (Eds.), Naming silenced lives (pp. 29-47). New York: Routledge. Lincoln, Y. S., & Denzin, N. K. (2000). The seventh moment. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 1047-1065). London: Sage. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Livo, N., & Rietz, S. (1986). Storytelling: Process and practice. Littleton, CO: Libraries Unlimited. Lodge, D. (1990). Narration with words. In H. Barlow, C. Blakemore & M. Weston-Smith (Eds.), Images and understanding. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings (3rd ed.). Belmont, California: Wadsworth. Loynes, C. (1998). Adventure in a bun. Journal of Experiential Education, 21(1), 35-39. Loynes, C. (2002). The generative paradigm. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 2(2), 113125. Luckner, J. L., & Nadler, R. S. (1997). Processing the experience: Strategies to enhance and generalize learning. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Lyon, C. R. (2001). Hear our stories: Relationships and transformations of women educators who worked overseas. Studies in the Education of Adults, 33, 118-126. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The post-modern condition. Manchester: Manchester University Press. MacIntyre, A. (1981). After virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
304
Madison, G. B. (1988). The hermeneutics of postmodernity: Figures and themes. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Maher, F. A., & Tetreault, M. K. (1994). The feminist classroom. New York: Basic Books. Marsh, H. W., Richards, G. E., & Barnes, J. (1986). Multidimensional self-concepts: A long term follow-up of the effect of participation in an Outward Bound program. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 475-492. Martin, B., Cashel, C., Wagstaff, M., & Breunig, M. (2006). Outdoor leadership: Theory and practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Martin, P., & Ho, S. (2009). Seeking resilience and sustainability: Outdoor education in Singapore. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 9(1), 79-92. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Maslow, A. (1962). Toward a psychology of being. New York: The Free Press. Mason, J. (1994). Researching from the inside in mathematical education: Locating an I-you relationship Centre for Mathematics Education. Milton Keynes: Open University. Matthews, E. (1996). Twentieth-century French philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mattingly, C. (1991). Narrative reflections on practical actions: Two learning experiments in reflective storytelling. In D. Schon (Ed.), The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Mattingly, C. (1998). Healing dramas and clinical plots: The narrative structure of experience. Cambridge, UK: Camnridge University Press. McDrury, J., & Alterio, M. (2003a). Learning through storytelling in higher education: Using reflection and experience to improve learning. Sterling VA, USA: Kogan Page. McDrury, J., & Alterio, M. (2003b). Storytelling as a theory of learning. Learning through storytelling in higher education: Using reflection and experience to improve learning. . Great Britain: Kogan Page Limited McEwan, H., & Egan, K. (1995). Narrative in teaching, learning, and research. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Mckenzie, M. D. (2000). How are adventure education program outcomes achieved?: A review of literature. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5(1). Mckenzie, M. D. (2003). Beyond "The Outward Bound process:" Rethinking student learning. Journal of Experiential Education, 26(1), 8-23. McLaren, P., & Hammer, R. (1989). Critical pedagogy and postmodern challenge: Toward a critical postmodernist pedagogy of liberation. Educational Foundations, 3(3), 29-62. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago. Mellon, N. (1992). Storytelling and the art of imagination. USA: Element Book Inc. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). The phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Merriam, S. B. (2004). The role of cognitive development in Mezirow's transformational learning theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(1), 60-68. Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 28(2), 100-110. Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education Quarterly, 32(1), 3-24. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mezirow, J. (1994). Understanding transformation theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 44(4), 222-232. Mezirow, J. (1995). Transformation theory of adult learning. In M. R. Welton (Ed.), In defense of the lifeworld (pp. 39-70). New York: State University of New York Press. Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3), 185-198. Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult. In J. Mezirow & Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mezirow, J., & Associates. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mezirow, J., & Associates. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass. Mezirow, J., Taylor, E. W., & Associates. (2009). Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Michelson, E. (1996). Usual suspects: Experience, reflection and the (en)gendering of knowledge. Internationl Journal of Lifelong Education, 15(6), 438-454. Miettinen, R. (2000). The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey's theory of reflective thought and action. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 54-72. Miles, J., & Priest, S. (1990). Adventure education. State College: Venture Press Inc.
305
Miles, J. C., & Priest, S. (1999). Historical pespectives on adventure programming Adventure programming. State College, Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing, Inc. Miller, N., & Boud, D. (1996). Animating learning from experience. In D. Boud & N. Miller (Eds.), Working with experience: Animating learning. London: Routledge. Miner, J. L. (1999). The creation of Outward Bound. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming. State College, PA: Venture. Mink, L. (1978). Narrative form as a cognitive instrument. In R. Canary & H. Kozicki (Eds.), The writing of history. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Mitten, D., & Clement, K. (2007). Responsibilities of adventure education leaders. In D. Prouty, J. Panicucci & R. Collinson (Eds.), Adventure education: Theory and applications. United States of America: Human Kinetics. Moon, J. (1999). Reflection in learning and professional development. London: Kogan Page Limited. Morawski, J. G., & Bayer, B. M. (1995). Stirring trouble and making theory. In H. Landrine (Ed.), Bringing cultural diversity to feminist psychology: Theory. research, and practice (pp. 113-137). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Morris, V. C. (1966). Existentialism in education: What it means. New York: Harper & Row. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mullins, M. N. (2007). Re-telling the snowy river: Exploring connections between river guides, the experience of place, and outdoor education. Masters Thesis. Faculty of Education. Monash University. Victoria. Nadler, R. S., & Luckner, J. L. (1992). Processing the adventure experience. Dubuque Iowa: Kendall/Hunt. Nadler, R. S., & Luckner, J. L. (1997). Processing the adventure experience (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Neill, J. T. (2001). The impact of outward bound challenge courses on disadvantaged youth (pp. 23). Australia: University of Canberra. Neill, J. T. (2007). Factors which influence the effects of outdoor education programs Retrieved 20 April, 2012, from http://www.wilderdom.com/research/researchfactors.html Nesbit, S., & Mayer, A. (2010). Shifting attitudes: The influence of field trip experiences on student beliefs. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 4(2), 1-23. Nietzsche, F. W. (1961). Thus spoke Zarathustra: A book for all and for none (R. J. Hollingdale, Trans.). New York: Penguin Classics. Noddings, N., & Witherell, C. (1991). Epilogue: Themes remembered and foreseen. In C. Witherell & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education. New York: Teachers College Press. O'Connell, T. (2011). Paul Petzoldt: Man of the mountains. In T. E. Smith & C. E. Knapp (Eds.), Sourcebook of experiential education. New York: Routledge. O'Loughlin, M. (1995). Intelligent bodies and ecological subjectivities: Merleau-Ponty's corrective to postmodernism's 'subjects' of education. Philosophy of Education Retrieved 15 May, 2012, from http://www.cpd1.ufmt.br/gpea/pub/o%27loughlin(MPonty).pdf O'Sullivan, E., Morrell, A., & O'Conner, M. (2002). Expanding the boundaries of transformative learning. New York: Palgrave. Odman, P.-J., & Kerdeman, D. (1999). Hermeneutics. In J. P. Keeves & G. Lakomski (Eds.), Issues in educational research (pp. 184-197). New York: Pergamon. Olesen, V. (2000). Feminisms and qualitative research at and into the millennium. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 215-256). London: Sage. Oliver, K. (1998). A journey into narrative analysis: A methodology for discovering meanings. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17(2), 244-259. Osmond, J., & Darlington, Y. (2005). Reflective analysis: Techniques for facilitating reflection. Australian Social Work, 58(1), 3-14. Outward Bound Singapore. (2007). Of courage and character - Outward Bound Singapore: The first 40 years. Singapore: KaroCraft Pte Ltd. Pagano, J. (1991). Moral fictions: The dilemma of theory and practice. In C. Witherell & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education. New York: Teachers College Press. Paley, V. (1990). The boy who would be a helicopter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Palmer, P. J., & Scribner, M. (2007). The courage to teach guide for reflection and renewal. United States of America: Jossey-Bass. Parkin, M. (1998). Tales for trainers: Using stories and metaphor to facilitate learning. London: Kogan Page Limited.
306
Parkin, M. (2010). Tales for trainers: Using stories and metaphors to faciliate learning. Great Brintain: Kogan Page Limited. Passarelli, A., Hall, E., & Anderson, M. (2010). A strengths-based approach to outdoor and adventure education: Possibilities for personal growth. Journal of Experiential Education, 33(2), 120-135. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Payne, P. (2005). Lifeworld and textualism: Reassembling the researcher/ed and 'others'. Environmental Education Research, 11(4), 413-431. Pendlebury, S. (1995). Reason and story in wise practice. In H. McEwan & K. Egan (Eds.), Narrative in teaching, learing and research. New York: New York Teachers College Press. Perry, W. G. J. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Petzoldt, P. (1974). The wilderness handbook. New York: W.W. Norton. Petzoldt, P. (1976). Petzoldt's Teton trails: A hiking guide to the Teton range with stories, history, and personal experiences: Wasatch Publishers. Petzoldt, P. (1984). The new wilderness handbook. New York: Norton. Pheffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman Publishing. Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescent to adulthood. Human development, 16, 346-370. Plato. (380 BC, 28 July, 2011). The Republic (Jowett, B Trans.). Book VIII-X Retrieved 27 March, 2012, from http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Republic Polkinghorne, D. E. (1983). Methodology for the human sciences: Systems of inquiry. Albany: State University of New York Press. Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press. Priest, S. (1986). Outdoor leadership preparation in five nations. Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, University of Oregon. Priest, S. (1987). Preparing effective outdoor pursuit leaders. Eugene, OR: Institute of Recreation Research and Service. Priest, S. (1990). Everything you always wanted to know about judgment, but were afraid to ask. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 7(3), 5-12. Priest, S. (1996). The effect of two different debriefing approaches on developing self-confidence. Journal of Experiential Education, 19(1), 40-42. Priest, S. (1999a). Research in adventure pgoramming. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 309-317). State College, PA: Venture. Priest, S. (1999b). The semantics of adventure programming. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 111-114). State College, PA: Venture Publishing Inc. Priest, S., & Gass, M. A. (1997a). Effective leadership in adventure programming. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Priest, S., & Gass, M. A. (1997b). The range of teaching styles in adventure programming. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 14(4), 12-14. Priest, S., & Gass, M. A. (2005a). Effective leadership in adventure programming (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Priest, S., & Gass, M. A. (2005b). Philosophy of adventure programming Effective leadership in adventure programming. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Prouty, D. (2007). Introduction to adventure education. In D. Prouty, J. Panicucci & R. Collinson (Eds.), Adventure education: Theory and applications. United States of America: Human Kinetics. Psathas, G. (1973). Phenomenological sociology. New York: Wiley. Pugh, K. J., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Koskey, K. L. K., Steart, V. C., & Manzey, C. (2010). Teaching for transformative experiences and conceptual change: A case study and evaluation of a high school biology teacher's experience. Cognition and Instruction, 28(3), 273-316. Quinnan, T. (1997). Adult students "at-risk": Culture bias in higher education. Westport, Conn: Bergin and Garvey. Quspensky, P. D. (1977). In search of the meraculous. New York: Harcourt Brace. Raiola, E., & O'Keefe, M. (1999). Philosophy in practice: A history of adventure programming. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 45-53). State College, PA: Venture. Rasheed, S. (2006). An existential curriculum of action. Washington, DC: University Press of America. Raven, B. H. (1965). Social influence and power. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Raven, B. H. (1992). A power/interaction model of interpersonal influence: French and Raven thirty years later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7(2), 217-244.
307
Rea, T. (2006). "It's not as if we've been teaching them...." reflective thinking in the outdoor classroom. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 6(2), 121-134. Rea, T. (2008). Methodology in outdoor research: Approaches from an alternative discourse. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 8(1), 43-53. Reason, P., & Hawkins, P. (1988). Story telling as inquiry. In P. Reason (Ed.), Human inquiry in action: Developments in new paradigm, research. London: Sage Publications. Relph, E. (1992). Modernity and the reclamation of place In D. Seamon (Ed.), Dwelling, seeing and designing: Toward a phenomenological ecology. New York: State University of New York Press. Richard, A. E. (1990). Teaching teachers to reflect: A consideration of programme structure. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(6), 509-527. Richards, A. (1992). Adventure-based experiential learning. In J. Mullingan & C. Griffin (Eds.), Empowerment through experiential learning: Explorations of good practice. London: Kogan Page. Richards, A. (1999). Kurt Hahn. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure education (pp. 67-74). State College, PA: Venture. Richards, G. E., Ellis, L., & Neill, J. T. (2002). The ROPELOC: Review of personal effectiveness and locus of control - A comprehensive instrument for reviewing life effectiveness. Paper presented at the Self-concept Research: Reiving International Research Agendas, Sydney. Richardson, L. (1990). Writing strategies. London: Sage. Richardson, L. (1992). The consequence of poetic representation. London: Sage. Richardson, L. (1997). Fields of play. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 923-948). London: Sage. Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ricoeur, P. (1986). Time and narrative (Vol. 1). Chicago: University of Chicago. Riggins, R. D. (1985). The Colorado Outward Bound School: Biographical and personality factors contributing to the leadership effectiveness of instructors. Journal of Environmental Education, 16(3), 6-11. Rinehart, R. (1998). Players all. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonalisation of Society. UK: Pine Forge Press. Rogers, A. (1996). Teaching adults (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press. Rogers, C. R. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality and interpersonal relationships as developed in the clientcentered framework. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science, Vol 3: Formulations of the poerson and the social context (pp. 181-256). New York: McGraw-Hill. Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist's view of psychotherapy. London: Constable. Rosaldo, R. (1989). Culture and truth. Boston: Beacon Press. Rousseau, J.-J. (1762/1979). Emile, or on education (A. Bloom, Trans. Vol. II). New York: Basic Books. Rowley, T. (1998). Voices of change: Transformative learning in the trek outdoor education program. Master of Arts in Environmental Education and Communication, Royal Roads University, Canada. Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage. Ryan, J. M. (2005). Book Review: The Disneyization of Society. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 266-269. Sabrin, T. R. (1986). Narrative psychology: The storied nature of human conduct. New York: Praeger. Sammel, A. (2003). An invitation to dialogue: Gadamer, hermeneutic phenomenology, and critical environmental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 8(Spring), 155-168. Sandelowski, M. (1991). Telling stories: Narrative approaches in qualitative research. Nursing Scholarship, 23(3), 161-166. Sarantakos, S. (2005). Social research. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Sartre, J. (1964). Words. New York: Braziller. Sartre, J. (1966). Being and nothingness: A phenomenological essay on ontology (H. Barnes, Trans.). New York: Pocket Books. Sato, T., Tan, M., Low, E., Dahalan, M., Sin, S. H., Chan, A., . . . Elamaaran, B. (2002). Kurt Hahn & beyond. Outward Bound World Conference 2002. Outward Bound Singapore, Singapore. Savin-Baden, M. (2008). Learning space: Creating opportunities for knowledge creation in academic life. New York, USA: Open University Press. Schafer, R. C. (1981). Narrative actions in psychoanalysis. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press. Schank, R. C. (1990). Tell me a story: Narrative and intelligence. United States of America: Northwestern University Press. Scheper-Hughes, N., & Lock, M. (1987). Mindful body: A prolegomenon to future work in medical anthropology. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 1(1), 6-41.
308
Schmid, P. F. (2005). Authenticity and alienation: Towards an understanding of the person beyond the categories of order and disorder. In S. Joseph & R. Worsley (Eds.), Person-centred psychopathology (pp. 75-90). Ross-on-Wye, England: PCCS Books. Schoel, J., Prouty, D., & Radcliffe, P. (1988). Islands of healing. A guide to adventure based counselling. Hamilton, Massachusetts: Project Adventure. Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Schon, D. A. (1991). The reflective practitioner (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Schumann, S. A., Paisley, K., Sibthorp, J., & Gookin, J. (2009). Instructor influences on student learning at NOLS. Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership, 1(1), 15-37. Schwarz, R. (2005). Using facilitative skills in different roles. In R. Schwarz & A. Davidson (Eds.), The skilled facilitator fieldbook: Tips, tools, and tested methods for consultants, facilitators, managers, trainers and coaches (pp. 27-32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Scribner, J. P., & Donaldson, J. F. (2001). The dynamics of group learning in a cohort: From nonlearning to transformative learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 605-638. Seaman, J. (2008). Experience, reflect, critique: The end of the "learning cycles" era. Journal of Experiential Education, 31(1), 3-18. Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A selfconcept based theory. Organizational Science, 4, 577-594. Shapiro, S. B. (1999). Pedagogy and the politics of the body: A critical praxis. New York: Garland. Shellman, A., & Ewert, A. (2009). A multi-method approach to understanding empowerment processes and outcomes of adventure education program experiences. Journal of Experiential Education, 32(3), 275279. Shockley, K. G., Bond, H., & Rollins, J. (2008). Singing in my own voice: Teachers' journey toward self-knowledge. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(3), 182-200. Shooter, J. (2003). "Real presences": Meaning as living movement in a participatory world. Theory & Psychology, 13(4), 453-468. Shooter, W., & Norling, J. (2007). Effective leadership through displays of trustworthiness and immediacy. New Zealand Journal of Outdoor Education: Ko Tane Mahuta Pupuke, 2(2), 43-56. Shooter, W., Paisley, K., & Sibthorp, J. (2009). The effects of leader attributes, situational context, and participant optimism on trust in outdoor leaders. [AEE 2008 Symposium on Experiential Education Research Abstract]. Journal of Experiential Education, 31(3), 395-399. Shooter, W., Paisley, K., & Sibthorp, J. (2010). Trust development in outdoor leadership. Journal of Experiential Education, 33(3), 189-207. Shooter, W., Sibthorp, J., & Gookin, J. (2010). The importance of trust in outdoor education: Exploring the relation between trust in outdoor leaders and developmental outcomes Paper presented at the Coalition for Education in the Outdoors Research Symposium, Bradford Woods, IN. Shusterman, R. (2000). Performing live: Aesthetic alternatives for the ends of art. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Shusterman, R. (2004). Somaesthetics and education: Exploring the terrain. In L. Bresler (Ed.), Knowing bodies, moving minds (pp. 51-60). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Sibthorp, J. (2003). An empirical look at Walsh and Golins' adventure education process model: Relationships between antecendent factors, perceptions of characteristics of an adventure education experience, and changes in self-efficacy. Journal of Leisure Research, 35(1), 80 - 107. Sibthorp, J., & Arthur-Banning, S. (2004). Developing life effectiveness through adventure education: The roles of participant expectations, perceptions of empowerment, and learning relevance. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(1), 32-50. Simpson, E. J. (1972). The classification of educational objectives in the phychomotor domain. Washingston, DC: Gryphon House. Singapore Department of Statistics. (2007). Recommendations on definition and classification of age. National Statistical Standards. Retrieved from http://www.singstat.gov.sg/statsres/resources.html#standards Sinha, S. (2008). Review of Rasheed: An existentialist curriculum of action; creating a language of freedom and possibility. Educational Studies, 43(3), 273-277. Smith, D. G. (1991). Hermeneutic inquiry: the hermeneutic imagination and the pedagogic text. In E. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry (pp. 187-209). New York: Suny Press.
309
Smith, H., & Penney, D. (2010). Effective, exemplary, extraordinary? Towards an understanding of extraordinary outdoor leadership. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 14(1), 23-29. Smith, J. (1993). After the demise or empiricism: The problem of judging social and educational inquiry. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Smith, J., & Deemer, D. (2000). The problem of criteria in the age of relativism. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 877-896). London: Sage. Smith, J., & Hodkinson, P. (2009). Challenging neorelism: A response to Hammersley. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(1), 30-39. Smith, T. E. (2011). Rousseau and Pestalozzi. In T. E. Smith & C. E. Knapp (Eds.), Sourcebook of experiential education. New York: Routledge. Snowber, C. (2005). The eros of teaching. In J. Miller & Others (Eds.), Holistic learning and spirituality in education: Breaking new ground. Albany: State University of New York. Sokolowski, R. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology. New York: Cambridge University Press. Sparkes, A. C. (1995). Writing people: Reflections on the dual crises of representation and legitimation in qualitative inquiry. Quest, 47(2), 158-195. Sparkes, A. C. (1997). Ethnographic fiction and representing the absent other. Sport, Education and Society, 2(1), 25-40. Sparkes, A. C. (1998). Validity in qualitative inquiry and the problem of criteria: Implications for sport psychology. The Sport Psychologist, 12(4), 363-386. Sparkes, A. C. (2002). Telling tales in sport and physical activity: A qualitative journey. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics. Sparkes, A. C., & Douglas, K. (2007). Making the case for poetic representations: And example in action. The Sport Psychologist, 21(2), 170-190. Spence, D. (1982). Narrative truth and historical truth: Meaning and interpretation in psychoanalysis. New York: Norton. Stacey, J. (1991). Can there be a feminist ethnography? In S. B. Gluck & D. Patai (Eds.), Women's words (pp. 111-119). London: Routledge. Stan, I. (2009). Recontextualizing the role of the facilitator in group interaction in the outdoor classroom. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 9(1), 23-43. Steiner, G. (1978). Heidegger. Sussex: The Harvester Press Limited. Stetson, C. (n.d). An essay on Kurt Hahn: Founder of Outward Bound (1941), 1886-1974. Retrieved from KurtHahn.org website: http://www.kurthahn.org/writings/stet.pdf Stikkers, K. (1980). Problems of a sociology of knowledge - Max Scheler. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Stockhausen, L. (1992). Reflection in clinical education. Paper presented at the Reflective Practice in Higher Education Mini Conference, 11-13 July, Grace College, University of Queensland. Stogner, J. (1978). The effects of a wilderness experience on self-concept and academic performance. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 4704A. Stokes, H., & Wyn, J. (2007). Constructing identities and making careers: Young people's perspectives on work and learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26(5), 495-511. Stonehouse, P., Allison, P., & Carr, D. (2011). Arstotle, Plato, and Socrates. In T. E. Smith & C. E. Knapp (Eds.), Sourcebook of experiential education. New York: Routledge. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Sugerman, D. A., Doherty, K. L., Garvey, D. E., & Gass, M. A. (2000). Reflective learning: Theory and practice. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Sussman, A., & Kossak, M. (2011). The wisdom of the inner life: Meeting oneself through mediation and music. New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education(131), 55-65. Sutin, A. R., Costa, P. T., Wethington, E., & Eaton, W. (2010). Turning points and lessons learned: Stressful life events and personality trait development across middle adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 25(3), 524533. Swanson, K. W. (2010). Constructing a learning partnership in transformative teacher development. Reflective Practice, 11(2), 259-269. Swiderskl, M. (1981). Outdoor leadership competencies identified by outdoor leaders in five western regions. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Oregon. Swiderskl, M. (1987). Soft and conceptual skills: The often overlooked components of outdoor leadership. In G. M. Robb (Ed.), Proceedings of the Coalition for Education in the Outdoor Research Symposium. Martinsville, IN.
310
Tan, M. (2005). Examining the impact of an Outward Bound Singapore program on the life effectiveness of adolescents. Paper presented at the Redesigning Pedagogy: Research, Policy, Practice, Singapore. http://conference.nie.edu.sg/paper/new%20converted/ab00362.pdf Tan, M., Kahlid, A., & Kuak, N. J. (2007). Impact of Outward Bound Singapore program on life effectiveness in school aged adolescents. study commissioned by Outward Bound Singapore to Republic Polytechnic. Republic Polytechnic. Singapore. Tappan, M., & Brown, L. (1991). Stories told and lessons learned: Towards a narrative approach to moral development and moral education. In C. Witherell & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education. New York: Teachers College Press. Tay, J. (n.d.). Outward Bound Singapore: An experience of a lifetime. Singapore: Outward Bound. Tay, K. S. (2006). Factors that influence the perception of life effectiveness of secondary two pupils in a 3-day adventure-based residential programme in Singapore: A qualitative and quantatitative study. Dissertation. University of Edinburgh. Edinburgh. Retrieved from http://www.education.ed.ac.uk/outdoored/research/dissertation_tay.pdf Taylor, B. (2000). Reflective pratice: A guide for nurses and midwives. NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin. Taylor, E. W. (1994). Intercultural competency: A transformative learning process. Adult Education Quarterly, 44, 154-174. Taylor, E. W. (2006). Teaching for change: Fostering transformative learning in the classroom (Vol. 109). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Taylor, E. W. (2007). An update of transformative learning theory: A critical review of the empirical research (1999-2005). International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26(2), 173-191. Taylor, E. W. (2009). Fostering transformative learning. In J. Mezirow, E. Taylor & Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education (pp. 317). United States of America: John Wiley & Sons. Tennant, M. (1997). Psychology and adult learning. London: Routledge. Thomas, G. (2004). A typology of approaches to facilitator education. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(2), 123-140. Thomas, G. (2007). Skill instruction in outdoor leadership: A comparison of a direct instruction model and a discovery-learning model. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 11(2), 10-18. Thomas, G. (2008). Facilitate first thyself: The person-centered dimension of facilitator education. Journal of Experiential Education, 31(2), 168-188. Thomas, G. (2010). Facilitator, teacher, or leader? Managing conflicting roles in outdoor education. Journal of Experiential Education, 32(3), 239-254. Thomas, G. (2011). Outdoor leadership education: Do recent textbooks focus on the right content? Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 15(1), 3-11. Thomas, S. E. (1985). The effect of course length on self-concept changes in participants of the Minnesota Outward Bound school junior program. [Doctoral dissertation]. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54(10), 3699-A. Thompson, E. (1996). The mindful body: Embodiment and cognitive science. In M. O' donovan-Anderson (Ed.), The incorporated self: Interdisciplinary perspectives on embodiment. Lanham, Maryland: Rowan and Littlefield. Tierney, W. (1993). The cedar closet. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 6(4), 303-314. Tierney, W. (1998). Life history's history. Qualitative Inquiry, 4(1), 49-70. Tisdell, E., & Tolliver, D. E. (2009). Transformative approaches to culturally responstive teaching. In J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor & Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace and higher education (pp. 89-99). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tovey, H. (2007). Playing outdoors. Spaces and places, risk and challenge. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Tuan, Y. F. (1975). Place: An experiential perspective. Geographical Review, 65(2), 151-165. Tuan, Y. F. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minniapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Tyler, J. A. (2009). Charting the course: How storytelling can foster comunicative learning in the workplace. In J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor & Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education (pp. 136-147). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Valli, L. (1997). Listening to other voices: A description of teacher reflection in the United States. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(1), 67-88. van der Zalm, J. E., & Bergum, V. (2000). Hermeneutic phenomenology: Providing living knowledge for nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31(1), 211-218. van Maanen, J. V. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
311
van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228. van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London, Ontario: The Althouse Press. van Manen, M. (1991). The tact of teaching: The meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness. New York: Albany State University of New York Press. Vandenberg, D. (1997). Phenomenological research in the study of education. In D. Vandenberg (Ed.), Phenomenology & education discourse (pp. 3-37). Johannesburg, South Africa: Heinemann. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Walsh, V., & Golins, G. (1976). The exploration of the Outward Bound process model. Denver: Colorado Outward Bound Publications. Wang, C. K., Woon-Chia, L., & Kahlid, A. (2006). Effects of a five-day Outward Bound course on female students in Singapore. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 10(2), 20-28. Watson, T. J. (2003). Strategies and strategy-making: Strategic exchange and the shaping of individual lives and organizational futures. Journal of Management Studies, 40(5), 1305-1323. Wattchow, B. (2006). The experience of river places in outdoor education: A phenomenological study. Doctoral Dissertation. Monash University. Victoria. Wattchow, B., & Brown, M. (2011). A pedagogy of place: Outdoor education for a changing world. Victoria, Australia: Monash University Publishing. Webster, L., & Mertova, P. (2007). Using narrative inquiry as a research method. New York: Routledge. Weil, S., & McGill, I. (1989a). Continuing the dialogue: New posibilities for experiential learning. In S. Weil & I. McGill (Eds.), Making sense of experiential learning. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press. Weil, S., & McGill, I. (1989b). A framework for making sense of experiential learning. In S. Weil & I. McGill (Eds.), Making sense of experience learning. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press. Wells, B. (1986). The meaning makers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. White, J. (1991). War stories: Invitations to reflect on practice. In B. Tabachnick & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Issues and practices in inquiry-orientated teacher education. London: Falmer Press. White, M., & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New York: Norton. Whitelaw, C., Sears, M., & Campbell, K. (2004). Transformative learning in a faculty professional development context. Journal of Transformative Education, 2, 9-27. Wildemeersch, D., & Leirman, W. (1988). The facilitation of the lifeworld transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 39(1), 19-30. Winter, R., Buck, A., & Sobiechowska, P. (1999). Professional experience and the investiative imagination: The ART of reflective writing. London: Routledge. Witherell, C., & Noddings, N. (1991). Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education. New York: Teachers College Press. Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Joseph, S., Maltby, J., & Baliousis, M. (2008). The authentic personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the authenticity scale. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 55(3), 385-399. Wood, P. (1983). Sociology and the school: An interactionist viewpoint. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Wurdinger, S. D. (1994). Examining the learning process used in adventure education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 11(3), 25-27. Wurdinger, S. D. (1997). Philosophical issues in adventure education. United States of America: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Yorks, L., & Kasl, E. (2006). I know more than I can say: A taxonomy for using expressive ways of knowing to foster transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 4, 43-64. Yukl, G., & Tracey, J. B. (1992). Consequences of influence tactics used with subordinates, peers and the boss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(4), 525-535. Zeichner, K. M. (1994). Conceptions of reflective practice in teaching and teacher education. In G. Havard & P. Hodkinson (Eds.), Action and reflection in teacher education. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
312
APPENDIX A (a) Mezirow’s (1978, 1994) 11-phases of transformative learning
(b) The research base for the concept of transformative learning evolved out of a comprehensive study in 1978, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education, of ‘conciousness raising’ to explain an unprecedented expansion in the number of women returning to higher education in the United States (Mezirow, 1978). The study used grounded theory methodology and conducted intensitve field study of students in twelve diverse community college programmes, comprehensive analytical descriptions of an additional twenty-four programmes, and subsequent responses to a mail inquiry by another 314. Findings identified ten phases of learning that become clarified in the transformative process. Mezirow (1994) expanded the original 10-phase model of perspective transformation to include an additional phase, “renegotiating relationships and negotiating new relationships” (Mezirow, 1994, p. 224), between the original Phases 8 and 9. This new phase reflected the importance of critical self-reflection. Mezirow emphasised that the remedy for any epistemic, sociolinguistic, and psychological distortions is the perspective transformation through the revised 11-phase model and accompanying reflective discourse. In other words, when a person begins to interpret new meaning perspectives and meaning schemes, discussion with peers provides an ideal vehicle for learning. However, it is not necessary that a person experience all 11 phase or in a set order to experience a perspective transformation.
Phase 1
A disorienting dilemma
Phase 2
A self-examination with feelings of guilt or shame
Phase 3
A critical assessment of epistemic, sociocultural, or psychic assumptions
Phase 4
Recognition that one’s discontent and the process of transformation are shared and that others have negotiated a similar change
Phase 5
Exploration of options for new roles, relationships, and actions
Phase 6
Planning of a course of action
Phase 7
Acquisition of knowledge and skills for implementing one’s plans
Phase 8
Provisional trying of new roles
Phase 9
Renegotiating relationships and negotiating new relationships (added in 1994)
Phase 10
Building of competence and self-confidence in new roles and relationships
Phase 11
A reintegration into one’s life on the basis of conditions dictated by one’s perspective
313
APPENDIX A (continued) (b) Mezirow (1991) four phases of learning (c) Mezirow (1991) articulates four ways learning: (1) elaborating existing frames of reference; (2) learning new frames of reference; (3) transformating points of view; and (4) transforming habits of mind. Several other authors have similary describe transformational-like learning, though in different ways and forms. Despite differing in the ways that they describe these forms and levels, I can identify a general flow or broad categories to which each level fit within. Table below shows the comparison of Mezirow’s (1991) four phases of learning with others’ writing. Four phases of learning Mezirow’s (1991)
Five stages of learning Moon’s (1999)
Four clusters of learning experience Fatherston & Kelly’s (2007)
Elaborating existing frames of reference: “learning to differentiate and elaborate the previously acquired meaning schemes that we take for granted, or learning within the structure of our acquired frames of references” (p. 93)
Noticing: “… the stage of acquisition of the sensory data from the material of learning. It is the first filter and a point at which the cognitive structure guides and organises the inputs of the material of learning on the basis of expectations and previous experiences..” (p. 141)
Not getting it: “limited understanding of pedagogy and reflection, as well as an unwillingness to engage in a process of critical examination of their beliefs” (p. 272)
Learning new frames of reference: “creating new meanings that are sufficiently consistent and compatible with existing meaning perspectives to complement them by extending their scope” (p. 93)
Making sense: “… a process of becoming aware of coherency in the material of learning, organising the ordering the material of learning and slotting ideas together” (p. 142)
Transitional changes: students “… articulate for themselves where they fit into the course, how they wanted/could engage with it, and enunciated the challenges and blocks to doing that successfully.” (p. 273)
Transforming points of view: “learning that involves reflection on assumptions… specific points of view or beliefs have become dysfunctional, and we experience a growing sense of the inadequacy of our old ways of seeing and understanding meaning.” (p. 94)
Making Meaning: “..a stage at which new material of learning is assimilated into the cognitive structure and, simultaneously, the cognitive structure accommodates it to make sense of the new learning and what is known” (P. 143)
Getting it/change: “… new information, understandings, and awareness were gained and skills were employed with more deliberation and reflection” (p. 273)
Transforming habits of mind: “becoming aware, through reflection and critique, of specific presuppositions upon which a distorted or incomplete meaning perspective is based and then transforming that perspective through a reorganisation of meaning “ (p. 94)
Working with meaning: “….guided by the accumulating ideas resulting from the ongoing learning. This type of processing implies a major role for reflection..” (p. 144)
Transitional disruptions: “rather than wholesale reorganisation of fundamental assumptions… students recognise problems in their prior frameworks of understanding and seeing the need for change” (p. 273)
Transformative learning: “…may not be very different from that of ‘working with meaning’ …but identify a form of representation of learning that would require learning of a more sophisticated nature than ‘working with meaning’” (p. 146)
314
APPENDIX A (continued) (c) Diagrammatic representation of Mezirow’s (1995) three types of reflection, their related actions, transformations, and depths of change Mezirow presents three types of reflection and their roles in transforming meaning schemes and perspectives: content reflection, process refleciton, and premise reflection. Content reflection involves thinking back to what was done and, therefore, might involved a transformation of meaning scheme (see diagram below). Process reflection causes a person to consider the aetiology of actions and whether there are other factors yet to be unveiled; this form of reflection might also transform meaning schemes. Premise reflection requies the person to see the larger view of what is operating within his or her value system, for instance, and could transform a meaning perspective rather than a meaning scheme. In other words, learners can transform an individual meaning scheme by examining previous action (content or process), but when they consider a more global view, the reflection is much deeper, more complex, and involves transforming a series of meaning schemes (premise). In short, there are two types of transformation: straightfrward transformation of a meaning scheme, which occurs through content and process reflection, and a much more profound transformation of a set of meaning schemes (i.e. meaning perspective) by critically reflecting on premise.
TRANFORMING INDIVIDUAL MEANING SCHEMES AND PERSPECTIVES
TYPES OF REFLECTION
CONTENT REFLECTION
PROCESS REFLECTION
(Learning with present meaning schemes)
(Learning new meaning schemes)
ACTION
ACTION
PREMISE REFLECTION (Learning through meaning transformation)
ACTION
Thinking back to what was done
Considering actions origins and related factors
TTRANSFORMATION
TRANSFORMATION
TRANSFORMATION
meaning scheme
meaning scheme
meaning perspective
Considering the larger view
Profound transformation
Straightforward transformation
315
APPENDIX A (continued) (d) Diagrammatic representation of Mezirow’s (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on
assumptions Based on further research, Mezirow (1998) refines his earlier work on critical reflection (Mezirow, 1995). He presents two new aspects of critical reflection. One of these aspects was the critical reflection of assumptions, whereby learner not only looks back on something that occurred but also examines the assumptions or presuppositions that were involved in the reflection process (i.e. content and process reflection). The other new aspect was the related concept of critical self-reflection of assumptions. It involves “a critique of a premise upon which the learner has defined a problem” (Mezirow, 1998, p. 186). Therefore, critical self-reflection of an assumption is akin to premise reflection. Mezirow (1998) taxonomy of critical reflection of and on assumptions involves objective reframing and subjective reframing. The distinction between the objective and subjective reframing is that the former is a consideration of the assumption, whereas the latter is a consideration on what caused the assumption to occur. Objective reframing is reflection of either a narrative or an action assumption; while subjective reframing is reflection on one of four forms of assumptions: narrative, systemic, therapeutic, and epistemic. See diagram below for brief descriptors of these assumptions.
316
APPENDIX B
317
APPENDIX C
318
APPENDIX C (continued)
319
APPENDIX C (continued)
320
APPENDIX D
321
APPENDIX D (continued)
322
APPENDIX D (continued)
323
APPENDIX E (a) Long Table Analysis of 5-day Team Building Programme Experiential Texts (October 2011) THEMES
PARTICIPANT SOURCES
Enduring limits, out of comfort zone
Par#1, Par#2, Par#4, Par#9, Par#13, Par#15, Par#16,
Reaffirm strengths
Par#1, Par#13, Par#14, Par#19, Par#22
Uncover strengths and weakness
Par#3, Par#4, Par#5, Par#6, Par#8, Par#9, Par#13, Par#14, Par#15, Par#16, Par#18, Par#19, Par#20, Par#21, Par#22 Par#5, Par#22
To do or not to do
Life skills
Par#1, Par#2, Par#3, Par#4, Par#5, Par#8, Par#9, Part#14, Par#15, Par#18, Par#19, Par#22, Par#23
Peer relationship
Par#3, Par#4, Par#7, Par#8, Par#10, Par#12; Par#13, Par#14, Par#18, Par#20, Par#21, Par#22, Par#23, Par#24
Realising potential
Par#2, Par#14, Par#15, Par#22
KEY WORDS / PHRASES / NARRATIVES ELABORATING EXISTING FRAMES OF REFERENCE Par#1 – pushed the limit in both mental and physical endurance, get out of comfort zone; Par#2 – being out of comfort zone is a huge step, tested my patience, endurance and adaptability; Par#13 – I started out feeling apprehensive, but perseverance and teamwork had endured these feelings; Par#16 – seeing others doing it together pushes myself more Par#1 – reaffirmed my easy going personality which contribute to the harmony of the team; Par#13 – I can keep in control my competitive urge for things greater than myself; Par#14 – my views/opinion can be valuable to team Par#5 – learning more on strengths and weakness that I can further develop; Par#6 – self-discovery; Par#13 – I value integrity, honesty, courage and respect; I am competitive and sometimes overlook courtesy and respect for others; Par#14 – I found out I am actually a task-oriented person; Par#15 – my teammates actually found me flexible (in character traits) Par#5 – should you push for your views/opinions or should you just keep quiet and work towards a compromise?, how far should you go to help someone? Par#22 – felt hesitant but seeing how others managing it helped ease that anxiety LEARNING NEW FRAMES OF REFERENCE Par#1 – learning to embrace what is to come, inner sense of courage and endurance that I didn’t know exist; Par#2 – setting clear goals, planning is crucial, listen to your team members, pursuit of excellence; Par#3 – learning qualities about self and others: teamwork, communication, respect, initiative, encouragement, patience, sweat; Par#4 – the value of cooperation; Par#8 – perseverance, confidence, teamwork; par#9 – respect others, being sincere, working hard, striving for achievement; Par#14 – be more confident and voice out my opinion/comments; Par#18 – open-mindedness, teamwork, positivity, perseverance, communication; Par#19 – teamwork, positivity, leadership, toughness, decision making situation Par#3 - What u do affects others; Par#4 – understanding my peers better as values, style, motivating each other to achieve greater things; Par#7 – really bring across the point of being open and inclusive in decision making; Par#8 – warm, encouraging and supportive nature of people is unexpected; Par#10 – people are tougher than they look, do not judge a book by its cover; Par#12 – empathy is crucial, beginning to demonstrate teamwork, compassion and empathy that is found in a strong team; Par#13 – realized that the world does not resolve around me only; Par#14 – how to work with the team; Par#15 – learning the attributes of effective team; Par#18 – most valuable lesson is to be able to work well with the team; Par#20 – learn about team dynamics and managing changes in team, how you fit within; Par#21 – increase awareness of when to listen and when to lead; Par#22 – learn a lot about helping to look out for one another; Par#23 – understanding the emotions of others to avoid miscommunication, misjudgment and misunderstanding; Par#24 – being place in a team helped me learn to manage my competitive nature Par#2 – I realize that many things I thought wasn’t possible could actually be done; Par#14 – I am actually able to try new things with an open mind, I am surprised that I can handle the hardship; Par#15 – I thought I had reached my limits, but I was wrong; Par#22 – I didn’t think I would be able to reach the top but my group mates encouragement helped a lot
324
Overcoming adversity
Par#1, Par#3, Par#12, Par#15, Par#17
Vision/goal
Par#3, Par#13
Communication and planning
Par#2, Par#3, Par#5, Par#7, Par#14 Par#15, Par#16, Par#20, Par#22
Numbers is strength
Par#3, Par#4, Par#13, Par#14, Par#15, Par#19, Par#20, Par#24
Managing change open-mindedness
Par#3, Par#18, Par#20, Par#21 Par#16, Par#20, Par#21
Friendship
Par#6, Par#8, Par#15, Par#17
Trust
Par#8, Par#13, Par#15, Par#18
Reflection
Par#4, Par#13, Par#17
Leadership
Par#6, Par#19, Par#24
Appreciate the uniqueness of individual
Par#2, Par#6, Par#13, Par#17, Par#18, Par#20, Par#24
Individual role in team Positive mindset
Par#9, Par#18 Par#15, Par#17
Tenacity Nature
Par#12 Par#17
TRANSFORMING POINTS OF VIEW Par#1 – overcame fear of water, Par#3 – persisting in hard times; Par#12 – Not giving up is easy to say but when the going gets tough, I had seen that it can be done in practice; Par#15 – if one pushes on even after limit, one can exceed the limit and reach a new record, overcame fear of height; Par#17 – the feeling of pushing the boundaries of your personal (perceived) limitations Par#3 – great things can be achieved if we have the same vision and determination; Par#13 – take a step to look at the big picture is important Par#2 – planning is crucial before commencing on any task/project; Par#3 – communication and planning is essential for good teamwork; Par#7 – the witnessing of how reluctant to hear and try out new ideas can being a team to a halt; Par#14, Par#15 – backup plans is important; Par#15, Par#16 – listening is an important element in teamwork; Par#20 – importance to re-group and restrategise after failure Par#3 – great achievement can be accomplished in numbers as opposed to doing it alone; Par#4 – teamwork and adjusting my roles to fit the team; Par#13 – no man can achieve success alone; Par#19 – anything is possible when working together, Par#20 – more can be achieved when we form alliance and work together Par#3 – Open to changes and the importance of managing change; Par#18 – we should accept changes with an open-mind; Par#16 – having an open mind to try new things, never discount yourself; Par#20 – open-mindedness to accept difference in values and ideas, always enter things with an open mind; Par#21 – the importance of open-mindedness Par#6 – Friendship goes beyond this course; Par#8 – roughing it up is more fun with friends; Par#15 – I had labeled this as ‘torture camp’ before the course, but after the course, I would change it to ‘torture camp with lots of great friends’; Par#17 – the image of strangers bonding and helping one another when in need Par#8 – in unfamiliar surroundings, the people around you are the people you rely on the most, encouragement keeps you going; Par#13 – important to value the trust others gave to you; Par#15 – being entrust with something important, like your friends lives is powerful in realizing my own ability, without the support of team members I could never did it; Par#18 – Trust and bonding among team members encourage you to go beyond limitation Par#4 – reflective thinking to know where I can improve; Par#13 – importance of reflecting; Par#17 – to be an observer and reflect on what can be learned from others Par#6 – as a leader, people do not care how much you know until they know how much you care; Par#19 – the importance of having a leader in the team Par#2 – teamwork and the important role that each team member plays. No one is insignificant; Par#6 – people are different in nature, not to impose views, beliefs onto others; Par#13 – nobody is perfect, have an open mind and be grateful for who they are; Par#17 – how different teams work together on a single project, sorting out difference and combining strengths; Par#24 – I should focus on the strengths and positives of the people so that our team can always shine Par#9 –the roles that make the team, not everyone lead at the same time, each have a different role in different situation Par#15 – nothing is impossible, if you are willing to give it a go with all your best, even the impossible can be achieved; Par#17 – practicing flexibility in the ways we resolve issues Par#12 – mental strength is capable of overcoming physical shortcoming Par#17 – the beauty of nature that we seldom see in our daily lives
325
Sensitive to others
Par#22
Not giving up
Par#1, Par#5, Par#10
Envision reaching goals Strive to be better self
Par#3 Par#3, Par#5, Par#8, Par#21
Personality
Par#3, Par#4, Par#13, Par#17, Par#21
Experiences
Par#4, Par#9, Par#11, Par#13, Par#14, Par#23 Par#6, Par#8, Par#9, Par#11, Par#15, Par#16, Par#17, Par#18, Par#22
Negative engagement Positive engagement
Ability to create conducive learning environment
Par#15; Par#22
Parallels
Par#4,
Par#22 – we should be sensitive to listening to other’s ideas and not be easily discouraged from making our ideas heard. TRANSFORMING HABITS OF MIND Par#1 – giving things a try instead of simply giving up in the future, Par#5 – not giving up easily and to have a pursuit of excellence mindset; Par#10 – never give up easy and believing that there will always be people supporting Par#3 – must not have doubts about completing, must envision myself reaching the goals Par#5 – I commit myself to change for the better; Par#8 – put my best effort not just for myself but for others too, make the best out of myself INSTRUCTOR Par#3 – wonderful personality who give wise advice and lessons; Par#4 – serious and focus on task at hand, dependable; Par#17 – fun-loving, resourceful and approachable; Par#21 – warm, dedicated, passionate, extremely competent, anchor of the whole experience Par#4 – very experienced in subject matters, and good in facilitate discussion; Par#9 – knowledgeable; Par#11 – demonstrated high level of competency and provided sufficient guidance; Par#14 – clear instructions; Par#23 - approachable and knowledgeable Par#6 – I think facilitator is still a little shy in opening up a little about self; Par#8 – like a friend, sincere, warmth, perceptive, and humorous; Par#9 – encouraging and gave a lot; Par#10 – approachable, sense of responsibility; Par#11 – they encourage members to share group-up ideas and control timing; Par#16 – friendly, motivating and enabled learning through activities; Par#17 – relate of his work experiences draws parallel learning for myself; Par#18 – one of the best facilitators ever seen; Par#22 – always willing to listen and give advice Par#15 – not only allow us (participants) to share feelings but also share their (instructor) observations too; Par#22 – help us to come to our learning points SETTING Par#4 – working with teammates here is similar to working in department, can transfer learning
326
APPENDIX E (continued) (b) Long Table Analysis of 16-day Leadership Programme Experiential Texts (September 2011 - October 2011) THEMES
PARTICIPANT SOURCES
Getting out of comfort zone
Par#26, Par#27, Par#32, Par#34
Pushing beyond limits
Par#29, Par#30, Par#37, Par#38, par#39, Par#42, Par#44, Par#45, Par#52
Uncover strengths and weakness
Par#26, Par#27, Par#28, Par#30, Par#32, Par#34, Par#36, Par#47, Par#50, Par#52, Par#53
Unsure
Par#30; Par#42
Leadership
Par#25, Par#26, Par#28, Par#30, Par#33, Par#34, Par#38; Par#46
Trust
Par#28, Par#31, Par#42, Par#43
Managing self
Par#28, Par#30, Par#47, Par#49
Peer relationship
Par#30, Par#36, Par#38, Par#39, Par#40, Par#44, Par#52
Valuing other’s learning
Par#38
KEY WORDS / PHRASES / NARRATIVES ELABORATING EXISTING FRAMES OF REFERENCE Par#27 – In out of comfort zone situations, I was forced to see things in a different light; Par#34 – I experience this through things that I had never done before Par#29 – the turning point was going through CNB completely by literally paddling for 3hrs non-stop; Par#30 – while words like persevere and determination came to mind in describing the expedition experience, the single word that sums up would be ‘testing’, I was tested mentally, and physically; Par#42 – not to take the easy way out but just to push ourselves further; Par#45 – it tested my mental resilience and stretched my limits Par#27 – being put in situations exposed myself ; Par#28 – it was a long journey for us to discover the various sides of ourselves; Par#30 – the breadth of activities and debrief has allowed me to gather many pieces of information about myself that I had not known, e.g. I am a poorly discipline individual; Par#36 – the reflections and feedback everyday was insightful; Par#53 – I experienced and attempted to overcome the obstacles faced as a leader, skills thought were implemented Par#30 - was I up to it?, what if I let them down?; Par#42 – can I do it? LEARNING NEW FRAMES OF REFERENCE Par#25 – understanding the emotional state of my team members and making decisions based on their opinions; Par#26 – putting us in tough times and placing high limitations help define our leadership skills; Par#28 – I learn to find a better balance between leading and micromanaging; Par#30 – a team without a leader is like a ship without rudder; Par#33 – the ability to influence others as leaders; Par#34 – the leader set the mark for people to follow; Par#38 – help me improve myself (style of leadership) and thus can be a more effective leader; Par#45 – learn how to manage people with different characters and how to inspire them to work together to complete the mission Par#28 – trust others in their ability and allow them to infuse their own style as they do; Par#31 – one must learnt to trust the team in making certain decisions Par#28 – heights was my always weak points, but I learn have to manage and enjoy it; Par#30 – I applaud his [referring to peer] courage, and this spurs me on to give the best I have in everything; Par#47 – when we faced crunch time, people may start being angsts and such. It is vital to stay firm and not be swayed by others; Par#49 – challenge my fear of heights more than once Par#30 – I am harboring some negative feelings at this point [day 6] maybe because I am tired, and had some minor conflicts with peers; Par#36 – seek to understand, then to be understood; Par#38 – everyone is good at different things, we commend on those that was good and we advise those that aren’t; Par#39 – to be patience and to accept differences; Par#40 – nothing is impossible with the help of friends; Par#44 – listen to the advice of others; Par#52 – how to work effectively with people you may or may not know, and the importance of good communication Par#38 – Interesting to realise how a singular activities can offered different learning for individuals, these are valuable reflections points for us
327
Realizing potential Dealing with failure
Par#26 Par#30, Par#35, Par#38
Love
Par#30
About myself
Par#30, Par#49
Leadership
Par#29, Par#36, Par#37, Par#41, Par#48, Par#51, Par#53
Teamwork
Par#37, Par#38, Par#53
Out of comfort zone
Par#42, Par#43
Taking small step
Par#44
Taking initiative Hope
Par#45 Par#47
Commitment Sharing of knowledge
Par#30 Par#40
Personality Experiences Positive engagement
Par#30, Par#45, Par#49 Par#26, Par#32 Par#26, Par#34; Par#36; Par#38, Par#47, Par#48
Ability to create conducive learning environment
Par#26, Par#34, Par#37, Par#38, Par#45, Par#47, Par#53
Role model
Par#30, Par#34, Par#45
TRANSFORMING POINTS OF VIEW Par#26 – feedback from peers on my leadership allows me to have a different perspective about myself Par#30 – I learn a good judgment is made from experience – this usually comes from bad judgment, that is why I see much potential in failure; Par#35 – I had learnt from my mistake to become a better leader; Par#38 – you learn from your mistake and it will help you that one time, learn from the mistake of others and it will help you for a lifetime Par#30 – I was truly heartened by the help extended by peers despite of our physical tiredness, how was it possible that a bunch of guys care much? I guess the only answer is love. Par#30 – I am stronger than I think I am, I was my greatest competitor, and I think that I kind of conquered me; Par#49 – demand more of myself and be more tolerance of failure. It’s about the journey and not the destination Par#29 – the need to prioritise relationships and emotions in leading; Par#36 – everyone can be a leader; Par#37 – as a leader, it’s important that I earn their trust; Par#41 – there are more than one way to lead a team; Par#48 – as leader we need to be sincere to earn the respect and also it is not easy to be a great leader; Par#51 – leadership is not always about pushing to reach your goals but motivating and guiding others them throughout the journey; Par#53 – the goal is important but considering the human aspect before making decision is more valuable Par#37 – alone I can go fast, but together we can go far; Par#38 – communication is a key component in teamwork; Par#53 – being a good team player is as important as being able to lead a team Par#42 – it is important for us to bring ourselves out of comfort zone and realise our true strength in times of hardship. In times like this, we realize that we should not settle for less Par#44 – little by little, one goes far. Every step we take we take it as it is and react to the best way so that our lives will be more colorful Par#45 – the need to take initiative whenever you feel you can make a meaningful contribution Par#47 – the optimism and the smiles kept us going TRANSFORMING HABITS OF MIND Par#30 – I resolve to be a better person at the end of the 16-days, I have been given the opportunity, I will now take it [day 6] Par#40 – share my knowledge more readily, without being approached. INSTRUCTOR Par#30 – excellent instructor who is sincere and passionate; Par#49 – patience, never gets angry Par#26 – competent; Par#32 – very meticulous especially in safety details Par#26 – caring, friendly and professional, clear communication; Par#34 – sincere and caring; Par#36 – he was very personal, gave direct and honest feedback; Par#38 – friendly, fair and understanding, treat us with respect and as a friend; Par#48 – he never fail to look out for us and when in times of need he will always help us Par#26 – interesting new ways to bring about learning each time; Par#37 – doesn’t provide too much information forcing us to help each other and think for ourselves; Par#38 – varied types of reflection activities; Par#45 – I find his methodologies and pedagogy refreshing as well to hold my interest; Par#53 – he has interesting recipe Par#30 – I resolve to be more like him [the instructor] in this sense, to be able to engage someone more emotionally, to be able to comfort and encourage others; Par#34 – inspiring and motivating
328
On rediscovery of self
Par#26, Par#27, Par#28, Par#32, Par#34, Par#35, Par#36, Par#43, Par#46, Par#48
On perception
Par#30, Par#37, Par#38, Par#40
On wisdom
Par#32, Par#38, Par#41, Par#44, Par#50
DESCRIBING THE OBS EXPERIENCE Par#26 - Clear, concise, complementary and committed to one’s own journey of experiential learning; Par#27 – it was all worth the pain; Par#28 – This back to basic course has resulted in a rediscovery of self, a reaffirmation of beliefs, a rebirth; Par#32 – its all about you, how you are to be impacted, and how you impact others, and how much you learn; Par#34 – well spent time that bring leadership transformation within each and everyone of us through breaking of boundary; Par#35 – tiring but meaningful. Meaningful in the sense that it taught me values, but long enough to break my bodies; Par#36 – open up your minds, heart and soul to the experiences and lessons in OBS, and you will definitely learn and grow as a person to be stronger, more resolute and able to lead your own life; Par#43 – OBS have made an impact in my character and force me to be placed in different positions to challenge my leadership; Par#46 – OBS allows us to venture beyond our limits. The more we know, the more we know we don’t know, and the more we know we want to know; Par#48 – the course had help me push my limit and to know my capability Par#30 – I have to admit that I was skeptical of this course at first, but all I can say is that I have never been this happy to be proven wrong; Par#37 – defining, it really push us to leave a legacy for our batch; Par#38 - It is an enriching experience beyond my initial presumption; Par#40 – definitely more than what I have initially asked for. Built on my physical and mental strength, both which are vital to lead others better and more effectively Par#32 – when the muscles fail, the mind takes over; Par#38 – be prepared for the worse, be open to worse and appreciate the little luxuries you have; Par#41 – treasure the simple things in life; Par#44 – Expect the unexpected, facing it like a real person with enthusiasm, will let you experience a journey that will stick to you forever; Par#50 – we were made to strive for progress and excellence, OBS has proven that fact
329
APPENDIX E (continued) (c) Long Table Analysis of 21-day Classic Challenge Programme Experiential Texts (October 2011 – November 2011) THEMES
PARTICIPANT SOURCES
Self-discovery
Par#54, Par#55
Uncover strengths and weakness
Par#55, Par#58
Reaffirming strengths Doubts
Par#57 Par#54, Par#57
Reflection
Par#54, Par#55, Par#56, Par#57, Par#58, Par#59
Peer relationship
Par#57, Par#61
Flexible
Par#57
Resilience Reflection Independent Teamwork
Par#57 Par#57, Par#59 Par#57 Par#56, Par#59
Appreciating others
Par#60
Negative engagement Role model
Par#55 Par#54, Par#57
KEY WORDS / PHRASES / NARRATIVES ELABORATING EXISTING FRAMES OF REFERENCE Par#54 – I started to be more mindful of myself be it action or words; Par#55 – I learnt about myself, how is my character, threats, potential challenges I will face in future Par#55 – peer feedback session was really powerful to realize how others thought of me; Par#58 – the strength within us have no limits, we just have to find it, together with our courage, complete what we have to Par#57 – I feel I have helped impact my adaptability and resilience in facing challenges to team Par#54 – maybe I need to know them better, maybe I need to step up and educate what’s right and not right, I guess sometimes doing right and doing what’s politically right don’t match; Par#57 – to know the reason to do something adds doubt and confusion, true test of patience, saw a lot of character emerging around me, wonder if I am like anyone of them, am I positive or negative character? LEARNING NEW FRAMES OF REFERENCE Par#54 – I reflect and evaluate myself; Par#55 – solo reflection gave me opportunity to dialogue with myself, consider role in team or my character profile; Par#56 – the reflection ‘hot seat’ gives me a learning experiences of myself; Par#57 – the experience allowed me to fully focus on myself without the pressure of external judgment; Par#59 – get to understand myself better, understand how things can be different when I am alone or with company Par#57 – to learn to be tolerant towards others and to adapt by reacting quickly to different views and backgrounds, being pleasantly surprised by the team cohesiveness and openness; Par#61 – patience, waiting for others who are slower than me, compassion, helping them to finish what they can’t Par#57 – bend, but never break TRANSFORMING POINTS OF VIEW Par#57 – despite experience challenges are bound to arise, it is within our mental tenacity to convince the mind to out-perform itself Par#57 – to constantly reflect on one’s impact, Par#59 – do more reflection and know myself better Par#57 – to be independent and be your own pillar in order to be a pillar for others Par#56 – it really was a mental and physical challenge, but because of the power of we, I continue to strive; Par#59 – “the power of we” Par#60 – people whom mean something to you will never know it unless you tell or show them, this is because we take them for granted INSTRUCTOR Par#55 – can be more flexible with the lesson that is planned to bring forward Par#54 – looking at what the instructor is doing, not really motivating, or am I looking for too much out of them?; Par#57 –
330
On rediscovery of self
Par#55, Par#59
On wisdom
Par#57, Par#60
demonstrating positive instructional strategies, e.g. compassion and empathy for participants, safety never compromised, sharing a piece of personal life story, subtlety of request DESCRIBING THE OBS EXPERIENCE Par#55 – this course allow me to realise, discovery the inner me, when I do things subconsciously. It also permits me to stretch my limits in terms of physically and emotionally; Par#59 – it enables one to discover about themselves and learn a lot from others Par#57 – with the proper mindset, any OBS course would be a summarised version of human interaction; Par#60 – do not discount any part of the course no matter how simple or small it may be for the learning you may generate is beyond what you expected
331
APPENDIX F
332
APPENDIX F (continued)
333
APPENDIX G
334
APPENDIX G (continued)
335
APPENDIX G (continued)
336
APPENDIX G (continued)
337
APPENDIX G (continued)
338
APPENDIX H (a) Overview of the three adventure programmes **A typical OBS programme structure has three phases: Phase 1 (Foundation): This phase lays the foundation for further learning to occur. It introduces the interpersonal and intrapersonal skills. It aims to create a fun, safe and challenging climate for participants. It is also the best time to set the atmosphere for personal awareness as well as team awareness. Phase 2 (Reinforcement of personal and team discoveries): The intensity of challenges is progressively increased. From previous successes participants are encouraged to take up more demanding challenges. Focus from personal development shifts to team development, there are more opportunities to work as teams and activities focus on acquiring team working skills Phase 3 (Application): This is the application of knowledge and skills stage. Challenges are multi-complex. There are opportunities to execute lessons learnt in areas such as planning, goal setting, group management, and role allocation. This is also the stage for transfer of learning. Setting goals after leaving the course; future action plans to make learning relevant and useful when return to own environment. Programme name
Programme objectives
5-day “Building Teams” Programme (October 2011)
1. To increase selfawareness particularly in identifying strengths and weakness 2. To develop selfconfidence to meet challenges and the unexpected 3. To appreciate the importance of teamwork 4. To develop leadership skills 5. Opportunities to experience company’s core values through activities
Challenges/Activities
Problem solving initiative activities Trust building activities and team initiation games Series of problem solving games (team-based) Improvised rafting Team maze challenge Height challenges Artificial rockwall climbing Expeditions Mini kayak expedition ( 5-hr) Land expedition (2-day-1-night) Tent out, outdoor cooking Discussion/scenario based exercises Values discussion activity
Location
Description
In-land and around waters of P.Ubin (see map below, highlight in red)
Phase 1** - Day 1. Day started with a team initiation activity as an avenue to discuss ground rules after program introduction and welcome tea. It was followed by trust building activities and a 2-hr rock wall challenge to allow individual to go beyond self-imposed limits. Evening ended with a 1.5hr night walk to allow team to acquaint with the outdoors for amateurs and getting accustomed to be out of comfort zone. Phase 2 – Day 2 & 3. Day 2 was welcomed by a 30min quiet time followed by a 5-hr kayak paddling introduction and mini expedition around waters of P.Ubin. Later afternoon was a 1.5hr problem solving game and day end with a 1.5hr paper scenario exercise followed by values discussion. Day 3 was a full day land hike, expedition overnight with team having to navigate checkpoints and solving problems at each checkpoints. Including in this day was also an improvised rafting activities in-land P.Ubin. Phase 3 – day 4 & 5. Most of day 4 was a follow through from the land expedition, including of settling back at based around noon and cleaning up of
339
16-day “Leadership Development” Programme (September October 2011)
1. To take participants out of their comfort zone to enhance their awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses 2. To develop teamwork and team spirit 3. To enhance physical and mental resilience 4. To develop deeper appreciate of company’s core values of courage, loyalty, integrity and fairness 5. To enable learning of leadership skills such as taking calculated risks, effective communication, role modelling and listening 6. To enable transfer of learning in their daily lives.
Warm seat – feedback session Personal challenge/commitment Night walk Trust dive
Problem solving initiative activities Trust building activities and team initiation games Series of problem solving games (team-based) Cross-field orienteering exercise Improvised rafting Height challenges Inverse Tower challenge Peak ascent challenge Expeditions Cutter sailing expedition (3-day-2night) Land expedition (2-day-2-night) Mini-kayak expedition ( 7-hr) Kayak expedition (4-day-3-night) Discussion/scenario based exercises First aid workshop Leadership workshop Warm seat – feedback session Personal challenge/commitment Daily physical training sessions 12km commitment run
In-land and around waters of P.Ubin Coastal waters of Eastern and Northern part of Singapore islands (see map below, inclusive red and green highlights)
equipment. Team was faced with a team maze challenge late noon, a team problem solving activity aimed to bring out element of change in their comfort zone and to recognize how different individuals handle and react to changes. Day 4 ended with a 2-hr warm seat session in the evening where each received feedback from their peers. They were also invited to set personal action plans. Day 5 closed with a personal commitment activity to reinforce individual achievements during course and to invite them to commit to their personal action plan. Program ended with a final debrief to consolidate learning and transfer of learning to workplace. Phase 1** - Day 1- 3. First day started with course introduction, including routines of physical training session twice a day, morning quiet time and group journal sharing, and a 2hr daily review at the end of the day, ground rule setting via team initiation games and a 2-hr rope course challenge focusing defining personal limits and meaning. Day end with a 1-hr first aid workshop followed by review of the day. Day 2 had a 3-hr leadership workshop followed by a 3-hr cross-field orienteering exercise in the afternoon in-land P.Ubin. Day 3 morning was kayak paddling introduction, and afternoon a 3-hr cutter sailing theory and expedition preparation session. Phase 2** - Day 4-10. Start of 3-day-2-night cutter sailing expedition around waters of P.Ubin, including coastal areas of Northern side of Singapore island. Daily routines still practiced during expedition, with a night sleeping on board cutter sailboat. 2-day-2-night land expedition was activated late at night of day 6 upon return from cutter sailing expedition. Including on the land expedition in-land P.ubin was also team problem solving activities – find-atree and improvised rafting. Day 9 returned to base camp was followed by preparation of mini-kayak expedition in the late afternoon and a 3-hr warm seat session in the evening. Day 10 was a 7-hr kayak paddling mini expedition around waters of P.Ubin. The evening was spent on the preparation for 4-day3-night final kayak expedition. Phase 3** - Day 11- 16. After usual daily routines, team set off for the 4-day3-night kayak expedition to Eastern and Northern coaster of Singapore island. Return on day 14. Day 15 was full day team challenge – Peak Ascent. This activity served as reinforcement to the learning of the past 14 days. Final day started with a 12-km personal commitment run, followed by final debrief to consolidate learning and transfer of learning.
340
21-day “Classic Challenge” Programme (October – November 2011)
1. To learn to deal with unfamiliar tasks and challenges 2. To develop selfconfidence, commitment, resilience and determination under adversity 3. To understanding how an effective leader inspires and motivates others to achieve team goals 4. To understand the key factors contributing to effective teamwork 5. To recognize the need for compassion toward others 6. To develop physical and mental robustness
Problem solving initiative activities Trust building activities and team initiation games Series of problem solving games (team-based) Cross-field orienteering exercise Improvised rafting Emergency evacuation and response exercise Team maze & caving Height challenges Inverse Tower challenge Peak ascent challenge Expeditions Land expedition (3-day-2-night) Cutter sailing expedition (3-day-2night) Mini-kayak expedition ( 7-hr) Kayak expedition (5-day-4-night) Community service Community service day Discussion/scenario based exercises First aid and CPR workshop Leadership workshop Mid-course review Warm seat – feedback session Personal challenge/commitment Daily physical training sessions Reflection night walk Solo (2-day-1-night) 15km commitment run Life run activity
In-land and around waters of P.Ubin Coastal waters of Eastern and Northern part of Singapore islands Coastal waters of neighbouring islands Indonesia (see map below, inclusive red, green and blue highlights)
Phase 1** - Day 1- 5. First day started with course introduction, including routines of physical training session twice a day, morning quiet time and group journal sharing, and a 2hr daily review at the end of the day, ground rule setting via team initiation games and a 2-hr rope course challenge focusing defining personal limits and meaning. Day end with a 1-hr team maze activity to set team charter, followed by first aid workshop and review of the day. Day 2 had a 3-hr leadership workshop followed by a 3-hr cross-field orienteering exercise in the afternoon in-land P.Ubin. Evening was spend on land expedition preparation. Day 3 -5 was the 3-day-2-night land expedition, including of mid-might activation, improvised rafting, reflection night walk and emergency evacuation and response exercise along the way. Upon return from expedition on day 5, rest of the day was on a 3-hr kayak paddling introduction session and team caving activity in the evening. Phase 2** - Day 6-10. Start of this phase was day 6 mini-kayak expedition around waters of P.Ubin. Day 7 & 8 was the solo component where participants spend a night out in the jungle solo after the warm seat session on day 6 evening. Day 9 was solo review in the morning, followed by peak ascent activity in the afternoon for 4-hr. The evening was spent on cutter sailing theory and preparation. Full day of day 10 was on final expedition, including of cutter sailing and kayak paddling. Morning was on cutter practical, and afternoon was expedition preparation overall. A mid-course review was conducted in the evening. Phase 3** - Day 11- 21. After usual daily routines, team set off for the 2-day1-night cutter sailing expedition to Eastern coastal of Singapore island. It was immediately followed-by a 5-day-4-night kayak paddling to waters of neighbouring islands– Indonesia from day 13-17. Day 18 was the return to Eastern coastal of Singapore, and the expedition sail back to the based on day 18 & 19. Day 20 started with a 15-km personal commitment run, followed by a half day community service day where groups from the disadvantage family visited OBs and participants planned, conducted and facilitated a half-day program for them. Final day was a 3-hr life run activity - personal reflection and commitment activity followed by final debrief to consolidate learning and transfer of learning.
341
APPENDIX H (continued) (b) Activity location of the three adventure programmes in and around Pulau Ubin
Activities location for 5-day “team building” programme (red only)
Activities location for 16-day “leadership development” programme (red and green only)
Activities location for 21-day “classic challenge” programme (red, green and blue)
Image Source Page: http://www.singapore-travel-guide.de/singaporemap.html
342
APPENDIX I A sample of single case interpretation: OL4 Biography background: Male, 34, Training Consultant. 8yrs service in OBS. Featured leading experience: 5-day team building course. Prior adventure/outdoor experience: In army days – PTI in charge of fitness of men, personal trekking trips, facilitating camp experiences in university days Lessons gathered: to be independent, more adventurous, letting go and moving on. Self-leadership is important. More sociable, more able to communicate, articulate and relate to others. Earlier adventure experiences left this message: Going once is not enough. Going the first one is really to give you the confidence to go through another one and another one such that you create the opportunity to find out more and more about yourself. You get to discover more and more about opportunities to understand yourself more. Role now: focus on how instructor assesses and chose the way of managing the profile. Travel along with learners. As a friend, one who build friendship, to encourage the built up of emotional safety net, to built rapport. Not drawing clear line between learner and self. Be real and sincere. Key leading strategy: Empathy and passion to share. Reflection: “Reflection will be thinking through, thinking back the experience that actually has, ya thinking back the experience, especially those experiences that has eerr. Sort of like it keeps running through your mind. Experiences that bothers you. Experience that makes you feels good. So that is reflection lah. Reflection that trigger you at the emotional level, trigger you at the emotional level, maybe it pulls your values, it pulls your principle. So that’s reflection. To me is also about what you see in other people that sort of makes you pause. Sometimes is like it might not be something that has happen to you, like this experience might not be something that has happen to you, but you see a certain reaction in other people. So that is also something that is worth reflecting also” (OL4.Int lines #1.387-397) Meaning Making: “Then, meaning making to me, meaning making. Okay the term itself, perhaps is how you actually want to pitch a certain activity so it eventually… have this would have this impact to a person at a personal level. Like …. For example like ah… for example if I conduct a rock wall, okay perhaps I conduct a canoeing activity. Kayaking activity for special needs program. And then what happen is they capsized and have to do their rescue, all these. So that is an experience already. So but then again when we come back itself right, I want to make this experience mean something to them by able to connect to them their real lives. So meaning making itself would be say, in life when you capsize, who are the people help you get on board, keep you safe, so that you won’t drift away, affected by the current. So to me these are meaning making activities. Make sense of what they are doing, what they did, rather than just doing it then so we did this and we move on. Like what meaning they could make out of this.” (OL4.Int lines #1.402-415) Transformative learning: “Learning I think in simple terms is like the learning itself change you in the way you look at things, perspectives, even to the extent of how you choose your actions in the future, how you choose to think….. there must be a change in you. That’s why is transformative. Transform, change in perspective” (OL4.Int lines #1.420-422, 442-443) Relationship between these three: “I think everyone of this cannot do away with reflection. It cannot do away with reflection but I think it’s peck at different level lah. Perhaps reflection needs to be at the first. But in order to go deeper into transformative right, they need to make sense also. So to me is like reflection, the meaning making, and then with the meaning making then you realised that it hits you to transform. I am not so sure whether meaning making, whether it can bypass or not. Ya, not sure if can bypass or not. There might be example that it can be bypass. But reflection would be the basis. To me is like transformation learning is becoming like the 第九层 already (highest level). It’s like you really become a life changing. Because I think we had been through in this field we know that not a lot of activity is a life changing” (OL4.Int lines #1.447-463) Which of the three you experienced more during instructing days?: “There is surely a lot of reflection that is going on, but sometimes the reflection itself would have, only a certain depth. You probably just think about it, then okay then you move on. Because it may not be something that has got to do with yourself, it might be something that deals with your subordinates, or your supervisor. But I do have experience a lot, in my working with OBS, I do have experience a lot in my transformation learning. In the example of how I deal with things, how I want to look at situations, how I want to deal with my supervisors and that also dictate, it becomes a, it dictates my actions that follows. Even my life as an instructor also. Because we were thought to always, you know … our lives is a learning journey, so we need to get out of the comfort zone to do this, do that. So during my holidays, during my weekends all these also, we also engaged in these types of going overseas to paddle. Doing our own trekking trips. So I find myself like, doing, changing my holidays not just shopping, but doing things like benefits me and making me grow also into this career” (OL4.Int lines #1.470-486)
343
On participant (do you expect them to be transformed?): “No leh. I don’t expect them to change. I think… it really depends on the duration of the course also. Coz if it’s like 2-day…. but having to say that, when we do our final debrief, there is always sharing that points to that evidence. Or how the journey itself helps them to realign how they can move forward. But I think during the course itself right, I don’t like consciously go and tell them that at the end of the day they must have some action plan that guides their personal life. Aahh.. I don’t do that. I think what lead to that is something bigger. Firstly is like when the course happen, if it’s impactful course right, the instructor able to have a style to go in that people feel comfortable to share in. and spend time to do journaling and quality sharing, then inevitably it will leads to something like that. So I focus on the front part…Ya I think that is the fruit of it. Often enough if you do the first part well right, then it will come naturally. Because last time I did try in this approach it does not work very well, because it became a stress point. Everybody also stress. So if you want you become more natural, so I think building the safety network, building the structure of it, the framing part of it well ah, they will automatically be guided to think that way” (OL4.Int lines #2.310-327) Authenticity level (in bold) Events/Incidents/stori es Box 2.3 What is the role of an adventure educator?
Box 2.4 Who is responsible for reflection, meaning making and transformative learning?
Narrative Theme (in bold) Idiomatic phrases (underlined) Extracts, phrases from the interview are in italics.
Structures of the lived experience (in bold) Reinterpretations of lived experience Researcher’s interpretative descriptions
Clearly articulated the nature of preferred relationship with learners and why: “If you are to break down the of course the adventure part is something that you do with outdoor experience, something to do with bringing them to an unfamiliar setting. Putting them in the comfort zone. Triggers certain thoughts and emotions through the process of the activities. So, ya okay. And then facilitating the ones we know, what it means, aligning the experience with the real lives also…..So the term adventure is artificial to me, my tendency is towards expedition part, journey-based, out in the wilderness. Here is very created environment. Because it’s created adventure. I think if it’s created then it could be easier for the facilitator, because what happen is that if it’s created it’s something that can be also.. How to say.. a lot of time we tend to do the activity again and again, and can prep. We can control, we can pre-set. We can influence, manipulate what we want. The setting, the framing part of it. When we go into the nature wise right, the wilderness itself, the setting, the outcome itself, I think is vaster and not so predictable. So I think for the adventure educator is really to just to be able to look at and observe and then catch teachable moments to bring out learning. And different groups will have different reaction to the environment. But a lot of time, let’s say you have a rock wall or a height elements right, a lot of time the group will go through similar process, for example apprehension, fear, so it’s pretty much within our anticipation. In a control environment (OL4.Int lines #3. 42-77) Awareness of the many influences of context on teaching and authenticity: “Firstly is I have to be first responsible for it. I myself then also the people around me, and not to mention also the organizations…. The culture. And because of that it encourage me to go even further into other aspects also, because myself even the organization, there is always one person that I would always want to look out to in the organization also” (OL4.Int lines #1.488-489, 498505)
Reflection-in and on-action on lived relation and lived body:
344
In striving to become more authentic in his teaching, HiapIuh can articulate the nature of preferred relationship with learners and the reason behind. He clearly identify the role of an adventure educator as one who uses the outdoor experience to stretch learners beyond the comfort zone, trigger their thoughts and emotions through the process of activities and assist them to align experiences with their real lives. In local setting, HiapIuh referred the environment as a created adventure, where the job of educator might be relatively easier as there were a lot more prep time given, and situations are in control, preset. As such it makes the framing of experiences easier. The role of leader then is to look at and observe and catch teachable moments to bring out learning. It’s pretty much in an anticipated, controlled environment. Based on personal embodied experience, HiapIuh believed the learner himself, the social setting and the leader/influence figure is one responsible for reflection, meaning making and transformative learning to happen. With ultimate goal for learner being promoting receptivity, he is aware of the influences of contextual factors on teaching and authenticity: Context awareness Impactful activities sufficient to act as trigger Time set aside for reflection, Timely - hitting the right sport, the right place and talk about the right thing
Box 3.3 Influence attempts
“I think always one of the things is that I want to promote receptive. I think basic condition is that… one thing is the activity. The activities that is impactful enough and that triggered, or those activities that also have a so-call, follow-up. Maybe at the start it may not, but what happens is that how we frame it. Perhaps, or after the activity the sharing of it. I think activity itself is the one that is important. Then of course the time set for reflection part of it. I think appropriate. Let’s say, for example height elements ah. Sometimes you just state one person tenacity in going through the struggle despite physical disability, or emotional fear right. When other people around are supporting him sees that, that can be a very good learning point already. Even though the person themselves are not in the position. From what they see right, they register that… a lot of time they start to also have something to admire for this person. You know something that is.. like how that actually cause this thoughts in different people and how they also want to approach struggles. So sometimes it just like you have only 2-hr training, but maybe is just the 15mins to receive that, sometimes that become the whole learning point. So I would say that it is full of surprises. I think… what are the conditions.. so the activities, the time.. I think the group readiness to share. I think the facilitator styles.. I use the word facilitator style.. is like.. you go inside, wah, what happen.. sometimes I like to for example, go in the approach about you know, sharing. Kick off by sharing what is our observations and how these observations has how have what I have observed okay, affected you? Finding a topic or a talking point. Instead of like what have you seen. Sometimes facilitation doesn’t need to be long, just need to hit the right spot, the right place and talk about the right thing that is enough. (OL4.Int lines #2.336-373) Allows for a variety of ways of relating to learners in different context: “First …. by establishing a good relationship with them. By being myself, being real – to offer myself as a sincere person so that they will know ultimately if you don’t. And offer myself as a support as a pillar so that they can trust in you. That is one of the way. I also will expose myself in deeper thoughts, being vulnerable, I don’t mind doing that. and … another influence strategy is to create an emotional safety net for them within the group. All very people. People-based one. Other strategy share stories. I think these are some of the things I like to do. Or even I share quotations that are relevant to what I want to talk about. Or even sometimes get those.. Get the participants who are seemingly most affected or most emotional triggered, to kick start the sharing. I think that talk about another condition that we talked about. I think the instructor or facilitator need to capture teachable moments. I think that is important. I think that is also the most tiring part, always have to pay attention to those teaching moments to bring out. The most comfortable approach is really the people approach. Take care of the people first and the rest will take care of itself” (OL4.Int lines #2.378-414)
345
Uses the social setting, or other person for discussion and reflection opportunities Group readiness to share Holistic engagement The framing of learning for these activities Self-reflection (leader) Facilitator styles
Deliberative reflection on lived relation and lived body via content and process reflection on broader issues: HiapIuh is aware of exercising power and questioning power, he can identify with the various influence attempts for learners in different context: Authentic relationship Establish good relationship by being sincere and real Offer self as a support as a pillar Establish trusting relationships by exposing oneself in deeper thoughts, being vulnerable to learners Create an emotional safety net for learners within the group Take care of the people first and the rest will take care of itself Context awareness Catch teachable moments
Box 3.4 Local instructor more skilled or lesser skilled in facilitating learning?
Box 3.5 On critical influence of young adults
On choosing what kind of instructor to be
Critical reflection of and on assumptions and critical questions of contextual issues: “Somehow the people who goes with me to conduct such programs they have already background and foundations which is well built in the controlled environment like I mentioned. E.g. within OBS. So we already have the foundation there, is only upon when our foundation is strong and we are able to show that we can transfer our learning in terms of RAMS, in terms of managing people in the control setting then we allow such people to go out in a more dynamic situations. I think because that is also assurance by the management that this person is, oh I manage this already so you can focus attention on the more dynamic situation and make better choices. In general yes. But it also depends on the individual style. Those I had seen, of the people who gone with me are the people who ya lor, they are able to take your learning, they are able to construct, or to facilitate learning based on the foundation they already have, you know back at the center. My experience is yes” (OL4.Int lines #3.114-132) “Based on a few factors also, one is culture. We will know the culture of the people better. So when we facilitate we are able to draw context, you know we are able to maybe inject the right questions also. So culture is one. The other one is also I think in terms of language also, our language barrier, it’s difficult for the overseas instructor perhaps to vocalize their thoughts, even though they might know what questions they want to ask, but it could be in their language very hard to transfer to us. (OL4.Int lines #3.136-141) Content and process reflection on broader issues: “Is still the instructor. I think is more in-line with this, how the instructor assesses and chose the way of managing the profile. So the activity, the group, the place, the instructor are sort of like subsidiary. Important but subsidiary. Important for me to, important as it become a form for me to use to enhance the experience. But the place and all these are dead” (OL4.Int lines #1.239-253) “There were times when I have to decide on my own choice what kind of instructor I want to position myself at, I think it was during the Army time because in my appointment itself either I can be those like dictative type, commanding, or I can choose to be those type that, I say, we do together. You know, then after that we sweat it out, we bleed together, we go travelling together. I think that makes a lot of difference to me…..I think until now I would still hold the kind of same philosophy. In fact along the way I think the most important for me is the part of respect for fellow beings. And having that kind of respect is to share understanding, and then to go through with them, to listen to them. Which is what I did during the Army days. And Uni day there is a gap because not so involved already, but what once after start off with OBS that time, I realized there is actually, the roots actually started from there …… I think the background to this is during the army itself, well you can respect all these but it’s all more regimental. Uni days there is a gap but then when it comes to here.. Uni days I took engineering. Engineering is a lot more of sitting paper,
346
Individual experience Get those seemingly most affected or most emotional triggered participants to kick start the sharing Holistic engagement Share stories, quotations
On lived body relations, leaders from controlled environment have the opportunities to practice facilitation skills, building the foundation and thus allowed for transfer and application of learning to be easier, in terms of RAMS. The foundation of practicing in a controlled environment allows application on more dynamic situation. Knowledge on cultural factor also is important in that leader need to be able to draw contextual information and appropriately inject the right questions for the group. Language barrier can present huge challenge as it may hinder verbalization of thoughts and transfer of meaning. This is based on his personal embodied experience, and observation. Through content and process reflection, HiapIuh believed how the leader assesses and chose the way of managing the profile is important as to how participants derive meaning out of the experience. The best approach is one that is people centered for him, saying we do together. The most important for him is the part of respect for fellow beings, having that kind of respect is to share understanding and then go through with them, to listen. These are his personal embodied experiences since young (army days). The high level of interactions opportunities offered in his environment currently forced him to become more sociable. In order to engage with others, he also needs to have opinion so that people are then willing to share more. For him, the reflection can be summed in how one chooses to communicate with others.
Box 4.5 On personal influence figure or events in growing up days
facts, dealing with mathematical figures. But when it comes to OBS itself, is a lot do with interactions. So interactions also forced me to become more sociable. More sociable and also become more.. you have to have opinion also lah. Because when you listen to people, and you don’t have opinion, overtime, people also don’t really want to share with you. after that also is like how I want to communicate with others, what is my stand when with people. Because there were occasions whereby I have some form of ideas, but then because I can’t really verbalise it or package it in a way is like, other people would be receptive to it. But another person who is able to package it, then you find that eh, the plans works. Then it’s like you are asking yourself, how, what leads to this. So the self-reflection is like how you want to choose to communicate. (OL4.Int lines #1.326-346, 366-379) Content and process reflection on own personal growth: “The person is .. when I was posted to Tekong itself, these was this mentor who is guiding us in our area of work. So during the free time itself, we will actually explore the jungles, then we engage ourselves in things like catch snakes, catch fish, crab, probably things like people do in the Kampung in the earlier childhood but I get to experience that. to the extend we also like, we also found ourselves a way to abseil down the bridge into the river. He makes the whole experience very fun. First is the fun component, and because of that we also don’t mind staying back. Because for us we can actually regularly stay out, but because of him, we enjoyed the nights out, in the forest, so we find ourselves like staying in and do all these, so called, fun things” (OL4.Int lines.#1. 70-80) “I think when I just joined, and not long after Jacob and Adam left. I think the two of them, there were our ah…one of our core trainers during our trainee days. So their departure is sort of like a blow to me during that period of time. Because they were our mentor, so you felt like, what they had shared with me, is like this much only. And they have a lot more in terms of their experience to share. And also because they are very, very capable people that we recognized so it’s like, their loss is sort of like our personal loss also. It make me depressed because then who is going to be the one who is going to mentor and guide us? ……two of them who choose to leave. I think that help me in my growth, how important for me to also to listen to people and to also understand their position in their life, rather than thinking that, trying all my means to make them change, keep them or change their perspective about the situations…..so I find that I have to apply what I have been preaching to my participants, what I had been sharing with my group back to myself. It became a lot more real. Rather than sharing on the field itself. So that is sort of like what I preach have now become very much like it’s important for me to apply it to myself during this period of time. This period of time I found myself more affected when people leave. When people leave rather than all the fire-fight that we do, in terms of coordination and logistics. All these are not that important” (OL4.Int lines.#1. 264-272, 299-303, 308-314)
347
Personalistic reflection via content and process reflection on own personal growth and relationships with learners: There was a lot of personalistic reflection, benching on embodied experiences in the growing up days. Some of the influence tactics that he gathered are: Authentic relationship People makes a lot of difference, the mentor in army days and role models in OBS The social circle around Leader doing the extra beyond responsibilities How to communicate with other people Individual experience The many novel first time experiences The actions of seniors, departure inspiring to take on new roles The embodied experiences of seeing the fruit of labor in impacting another’s life in contrast to trained field. Holistic engagement Fun Self-reflection To apply what have been preaching to learners, what had been sharing with group back to self Self-leadership More frequent reflection and put meaning into reflection Modeling others action, e.g. writing journals, the depth of it, using analogy, metaphors etc Realizing that I have certain privilege to know about your friends’ life you also will share more of your life
What is your starting point of becoming seriously wanted to be an outdoor practitioner?
“I think when my two mentors left already by contract haven end yet. So it’s.. I am still bind to the job itself. How I want to spend the remaining one year is up to me to decide. So I decided to tell myself that... Perhaps, everybody cannot be thinking like me, then they will feel depressed, feel sad. But maybe I need to help myself by thinking or getting myself ready to fit into their roles. So I think there is more, more ownership of taking charge, more ownership of making sure that I read up more, I do more and experience more. The leadership part of it become having to the leader for myself” (OL4.Int lines.#1. 350-356) “I know that I reflect more after I joined OBS because is part of our teaching model to reflect and putting meaning into the reflection itself. So after learning about the models that we learn during the BIT training after that putting to use in people and in the job itself after hearing reflection from other people right, you tend to see the value of reflection stronger than just hearing from people, because you get to see firstly how it affects other people life, and then that make you think about yourself also. I think one of the very strong triggers for reflection is during staff expeditions…… I think the most impactful one was the one actually where I joined for the first year we went for cutter expedition. That was in my first year. We write journals, there are a lot of senior staffs and they pen their thoughts into it and it reflects what they are thinking behind all the journeys, so call the physical journey that we made. And to be honest it is like it impressed… it does leave an impact on me because I remember I try writing for the journals, it’s all very factual, it’s just what happen, and very descriptive, and how I wish the next day would be. So like what I say is just very factual, it just describe like a routine kind of thing, like writing out a routine. So comparing how come my journals and other people journals are different, it struck upon me is like ‘am I able to write like this?’ because it’s not my training in Engineering, that is where my school of study, to actually have a lot of reflection thinking. Maybe a lot more of trouble shooting and analyzing but not in this sense of reflection. So it’s something very new to me, it struck me as am I able to do that, you know, to write in this manner or not. Because you are using analogy, you know they are drawing back like how this cutter expedition actually relate back to their work, metaphors, even people like, I remember Brandon, you know during one of the staff expedition, he describe the life of an instructor is like a leech, you know the life of a leech. Then there is also Wee How like talking about you know, trekking the jungle, how our life is like the tree in the jungle. So it’s not that is never the physical, or the photograph, or how nice the expedition are, but a lot of time I think is the journals that actually make us think back about the expedition, I think that is one of the major trigger point. After that is like encourage me to think a lot deeper about why I feel certain ways” (OL4.Int lines.#2. 13-20, 22-49) “Struggle to learn how to reflect. Because I think… for me, it’s not easy for me at the start of my career to verbalize my thoughts, to understand that eh, why I feel like disturb over certain
348
A forward and backward process of thinking, brings to another level Context awareness The activities, the rustic and natural setting
incidents. So I think during the reflection itself, as you running through what have happen and what had impacted you, and if you want to share right, you definitely need to be very clear in what I want to, what I intent to send the message out. So in the part of the process I think my reflection also likes, in a way it goes into how I want to communicate with other people. So it has to be clear to other people. What I am thinking, what I am saying. So I find that there is this struggle here. And I think the good thing is that overtime you get more in touch with yourself, and this reflection becomes more real, more natural. And it became more accurate. Ya so, I think also, other than staff ex itself that help to bond us, and then when remember instructor we always come to the campsite at the end of the day, and then we sit down, last time we used to do outdoor cooking, and then we cook, we talk and we share. When you have certain, or when you realized that you have certain privilege to know about your friend’s life you also like, will also share about your life also. And then also when you share about your life you also want to share the in-depth part, and also how you feel about things. So I think inevitably you also start to reflect, and start to share more in the sense that’s the time where I actually realize that I am reflecting. Actually sometimes the thing is that if you don’t say it out right, it’s just going through inside you ah, somehow it doesn’t… you still don’t know that you actually are … you still don’t know that you are actually feeling this way. Like sometimes people will tell you that ‘eh, talk it out’. Then as you talk it out you realize that what you are thinking about. So it’s a forward and backward process, as you do this. Ya then you talk to your friend then after a while is like ‘oh ya, maybe this is how I really feel’. Then that bring you to another level of thinking.” (OL4.Int lines.#2. 56-82) Why decide to join adventure industry?
Final year, 6-months of attachment. Then I realized that the nature of my job wise, if I chose this field, is a lot more of in terms of planning and paper work. But being physically very active for the last like, 8 yrs ah, it’s quite daunting to think about, having to be a desk bound. So there were thoughts of ah.. going something into enable me to be out most of the time. So what happen was that during my… I received an email from a friend in PA. I think he just flood the email out, so OBS is instructing. So at that time I didn’t know what OBS is about. So I searched online, so the only link I have is.. because I do instructional work in during my NS time, so I think. Eh. I think I also have a lot of.. feel a lot of accomplishment and achievement when I was an instructor during my Army days. Because I trained 肥仔, so 肥仔 you trained them during my time is about 4-6months depending. So you get to see them at the end of the day they slim down, you feel good during their passing out parade, and then they will come and thank you. Especially during my vocation, for them to come and thanked me, we are sort of more feared than respected in the Army. So but for them to come I also feel that kind of respected, respect that I earned through the 6 months with them. So I have this high, and this high and this good feeling that I think I did something that at least in their life.. worth doing. So because of that I transfer it to OBS. Although I had never been to OBS course I sort of know that.. it’s something to do with students, something to do with teaching them teamwork,
349
leadership, putting them on a rash pack to help them along. So I relate that kind of feeling to OBS that’s why I applied for this” (OL4.Int lines.#1. 202-221)
Box 5.3 On how personal reflection contribute or encourage young adults’ reflection
Box 5.5 What is important for an outdoor leader?
What’s your philosophy as an outdoor educator?
Awareness of complexity of relationship with learner: “I think one thing is the things that I want to share with them. Because I think in my personal life reflection itself, it does make me see clearer who the person I am, and make me more acute of how people are different from me, and how we can all help one another out. So I think is just very purely, this intention that makes me want to get people to think more about it. Because I think with our present lifestyle now is every day is just very routine. And the thing is that if it’s just being routine and just doing things without thinking how it actually helps us or how it shapes us right, then I think is very sad. Because it’s just.. you are not keeping in touch with yourself. I mean ultimately your life is that we all know we need to know what we want and what we want is also what is important is our made up, our personality made up. So I think along the way as I reflect I really sort of like realize what motivate me and what are the things that I want to keep away from. I think I want to share this with the younger adults is important. Because right now they are always in the midst of so many things, are they consciously aware of how these things are shaping them and how it affects their thinking. If they don’t like something do they know or understand why? Or is it just the emotional trigger? Then it doesn’t make sense” (OL4.Int lines.#2. 131-146) Critical questioning of premises underlying conceptualization of self, other, relationships and context: “The passion to share, the… I don’t know whether to call it empathy or sympathy. To help people to go through the hurdles and so that they can also they enjoy their lives as an instructor. Because when I look at them, I see them like myself many years ago. And then whenever I see them I felt there is this compassion thing that I want to be there for them to help them through, be there for them. So that is the main reason why I am able to stay in this job. Because when it comes to taking course, it’s the same things also. Taking course and going into my own colleagues. So called the internal and external clients. Then now even in our own lives itself we also become more engaged in mission works also, so it’s sort of like transit from work, colleagues, friends, and even to bigger circle of lives” (OL4.Int lines.#1. 518-529) “I think the philosophy here is not to, firstly is not to draw the lines when we talk about sharing. I don’t work the… I don’t work on the concept whereby I am here to tell you something, or I am here to teach you what is right or what is wrong. What is the decision that you should made. But instead I am here to share with you, perhaps along the life journey what are the perspective that I can, you know if I can teach you along the way, how I manage. So… I think maybe I adopt this strategy is
350
Critical reflection on lived relation, critical questioning of premises underlying conceptualization of self, other, relationships and context: HiapIuh is aware of the complexity of relationship leader had with learner, realizing what matters and why he cares about his relationships with the learners. He can identify that sharing of his personal life reflection makes him see clearer who the person he is, make more acute of how people are different from him and how one can help one another. The realization that ultimately one’s life is that one know they need what they want and what they want is also what is important of the individual made up, the personality. He is consciously aware of how these things are shaping and affects ones’ thinking. Consequently what is important for an outdoor leader is to have the passion to share, to help people go through hurdles, to be compassion. The philosophy of an outdoor educator can be seen firstly in not drawing lines when people are talking about sharing. It’s a two way communication. It’s important to be sincere about sharing, because this approach can touch hearts. The fundamental is one need to be yourself, doesn’t be somebody else. This can then build trust. The creation of emotional safety net enables sharing within group setting, through this way it is more sustainable. Going out to participate in adventure education once is not sufficient. Every opportunity is one that one find out more and more about oneself. It’s oopportunities to understand yourself more, showing yourself to understand how you, your thinking, other people’s thinking, what the world has to really offer
because I think I can relate better. So call the breaking ice part of it. Because my character itself not the … it’s difficult for me to be rara type of person. For me I choose this approach where I am able to touch the heart closer, which I felt that for me to touch a heart from this approach. I felt important because I felt is about sincerely. I mean the person might not be comfortable to disclose to me but it’s okay. At the end of the day sometimes the program can be the person choose not disclosed, it’s fine. Then you know you just have an enjoyable and memorable course. I think this philosophy part how I… I think all these summaries how I choose to establish the relationship. The foundation is really, purely like you just need to be yourself, don’t be somebody else. Just sincerely to help them out. For those who are not outdoor one they know there is somebody there to turn to. I think when you display that itself, you built that kind of trust. And people when it comes to sharing at the end of the day sharing about how the activity had triggered some thoughts in their life, they will be more willing to share. Then I think also we don’t just take one to one, we take for example one to a group, the other one of my emphases is also to make sure that they are comfortable with one another within the group. There is this emotional safety net. Ultimately is not how high they climb, we all know that it’s not how high they climb, or how fast they do it, we all know that. At the end of the day we feel comfortable with one another and then we also feel comfortable to share. And I think I hope that you let this accompany or group of young adults go back into their cluster they can continue it, continue to share what is going on in their life. Ya, helping one another through, something that needs to be sustainable. This is what I hope” (OL4.Int lines.#2. 256-294) What message would you want to leave for others?
Box 6.2 On choosing a position to take when dealing with young adults
“I think going once is not enough. Is having to.. is going once the first one is really to give you the confidence to go through another one and another one such that you create the opportunity to find out more and more about yourself. You get to discover more and more about opportunities. Opportunities to understand yourself more, showing yourself to understand how you, your thinking, other people’s thinking, what the world has to really offer. I think is important for me, this is significant for me in my context *growing up experiences+” (OL4.Int lines #3. 348-362) Conscious and deliberate consideration of learners preference as part of teaching and influence attempts: “I think I seldom put myself into these roles [instructor, trainer, educator, facilitator, teacher, or outdoor leader]. Instead I choose to put myself as something along the line as a friend. I think when I see myself as their friend, when I introduced to them right, okay today I am your so-call the instructor, in fact what you want to be is to build friendship and to be as your instructor as well because I think it’s easier to when I phase in this way right, sub-consciously I don’t have the pressure. I don’t feel the pressure to must guide you in your thinking, or must tell you this is wrong and this is right. Or rather I just want to share this is area of my life, which is outdoor educator aspect of it and as a specialist in this field right, just share with you what are the things that you
351
Critical reflection on lived relation and lived body: HiapIuh is conscious and offered deliberate consideration of learners’ preferences, values and qualities as part strategies to teaching and influence attempts. He is able to differentiate profiles needs and therefore will choose the appropriate strategies when dealing with young adults. For this age group, his positioning is one that is friend. To build friendship, so that subconsciously he don’t have the pressure to be needing to be the one doing the leading role but be there to share areas of his personal life as well, learning from the participants as each share and pick up their learning through these friendship sharing.
know, what are the good things that I can share with you. It can be in the area of learning, or perspective. So it makes me.. feel a little more easier. but I think I also will set a boundary, you know like in terms of this, sharing of any issues that you have, you come to me I am more than willing to help you out. There is also the part about, when you come to safety activity expertise all these, then of course, at that point of time I am the so-call, the safety in charge” (OL4.Int lines #2. 173-194) “So long as they don’t cross the line I still can.. I will run it that manner. Because I think the rapport building part is just very important. If you come across yourself as facilitator you may seemed too distance. If you come yourself as a teacher right, then they will - so call - expect more from you. So I think what I want to encourage here is that we are not in a way better than one another, because we have our different life we have different way of looking at things, but how we can bring everybody up here is like having a conducive platform so that we can share our experience. And this sharing itself it could also like have different touch point whereby you can help us in areas that you know, we could be struggling in….. then there is this bridge that you know you can enjoy and share with. So it’s just a different approach. But in general the genuine, the sincerity is still there. Just that the way of bridging is different (OL4.Int lines #2. 201-209, 221-223) “I think in those early 18s to early 20s is more like… I only start of by allowing myself to share some of the struggle I have when I was younger and then also how are they coping in this areas nowadays. But I think is more like finding out more from them then along the way is like I can share with them my personal journey. So in my personal journey is like a story like that you know you share with them this is how I cope with it. Just sharing you know along the way in my life I have seen other people like this also, it could happen to you also. I think this is my approach for the 18s to early 20s. I think for the older ones is like I could be more vulnerable…For example instead of asking them first I would said this generation for example now is the time whereby we all start to… say I got marriage, and then I will share do you find that you have this and how do you cope with it. So I would like…. if enough rapport I will be able to share real life issues or real life problems with this group of adults. Then I think when there is eh.. everybody realize ‘eh we are in the same boat’ then I think in that way when we reflect using the activities you will realize you know the thing is not just for me, the thing is also for everybody.” (OL4.Int lines #2. 227-247) “Authentic leadership to you means the instructor must first be very well aware and very comfortable with your own style. Then from there, having a deeper understanding of themselves and what they can do, they will need to observe and make quick judgment and decision about the participants, or the learners, and adjust accordingly. I mean ultimately you talk about education is really to come out with a style as to what’s best for you to help the participants. So it’s still a
352
Rapport building is very important for HiapIuh. Sincerity must be there. Leaders need to be very well aware and comfortable with own style, to be able to observe and make quick judgment and decision about participants, and adjust accordingly. Deciding what is best to help participants. Sometimes leaving the learning to the impact of experiences, to let the mountain speaks works, especially for adults, and subsequently followed up by sharing and transfer of learning. This is like a self-guide discovery for the adults are capable of discerning what is important and to what aspect the experience might relate to life, if the experience is very impactful and appropriate intervention or processing is available to assist. Influence tactics used on the 5-day: Context awareness Setting emotional safety net Authentic relationship Sincere, model through action Allow time and space for them to mingle and break ice slowly Built rapport, trust and support Holistic engagement Setting ground rules, mood setting Setting structure, expectations for the next few days Individual experience Understand their background, intention to be there, and what other influences might be their deciding factors to participate in this course Invite individual to disclose themselves through sharing of individual information. Draw common experiences amongst them Other influence attempts that HiapIuh gathered was also role modeling – admiration from his mentors. The need to strive a balance in the environment, the purposeful activity and the leader amongst is the best approach. In critically reflecting what meaning he finds in what he do now, self-reflection and growing was one that he highlights, along with the significant of giving and receiving. Opportunities to make friends, to get advices from them are also amongst others that is meaningful for him. Beyond personal journey for self and learners, Hiap Iuh also reflected on the broader implication of his leading or influence. On connecting communities and culture, the bigger, emerging role to play. The inward setting of self, the ability to transcend beyond self to the bigger setting, is the potential awaits in adventure education.
learner-centered kind of beliefs, depending on what the students want There is also, I think talking about that there is also besides ‘let the mountain speak for itself’ the other one is the very structured one right. So is to really understand where you want to come from. Because our.. Let’s say for example our students profile is 15yrs old. Although they are more vocal now but in terms of life experience is still a little bit short. So you tend to gear towards the more structured part of it. Whereas for adults, most of the time the pleasure of conducting something for the adult program is that ‘let the mountain speaks for itself’ first, then after that you can ask them, what do they think about…For younger profile will adopt the higher generations which is more guided. And then for young adults’ profile, likely to adopt the 1st generations all the way up. When times needed then you debrief, then you do the transfer and all that.. Adults they will tend to, they will be able to selfguide. I think the only thing is to get them to share their experience, the many people that is around them, I think, ya lor. I think adults normally, what my experience and your experience might be the same; there is very limited thing that we can share with them about telling them about life. If we can get them to open up, share about their perspectives, listen to other people’s perspectives, in a comfortable setting, you know in a group of 16, then you have a wealth of experience for them to share with. I think that is the take-away that most of them at the end of the program appreciate. Because they don’t just take away the learning, seeing each other point of view but there is also this understanding exchanging the culture and friendship they are leaving away from” (OL4.Int lines #3. 182-218) On influence attempts of the 5-day course
“They are a group of people with a lot of energy. They are a group of people who willingly, or rather they some of them are willingly to be here, some of them ought to be here long ago but because of work schedule they can’t. But I think we have a mixed of these people willingness to be here, and readiness to be here. Because some of them have a lot of work back at home. So I think my very based basis on engaging them, is really at first is to set my own ground rules with them. We did the writing your name with your non master hand, so to let them understand there are times when you are in discomfort, don’t feel like you are at your environment. You might perceive that what you wrote is going to be ugly, but then, when you try writing it you realize it is not. So I try to get them understand that there is this things that is going to happen is also transferable to what is going to happen in the next few days. So I say this under the influence strategy of setting up structure. (OL4.Int lines #3. 259-273) “So upon that I also give them the assurance that if you have encounter any personal problem, come forward to share with me, I will try my very best to help them. I think this is under the sincerity part of it. I think this one fall under the part be sincere and real. I think in action wise it must reflect also” (OL4.Int lines #3. 259-279)
353
“Get them to share about themselves. Get them to disclose themselves. But this is the first step. I am looking that they only share very little because first day they always share very shallow. I think the first thing is to get them be comfortable with each other in the group setting. And also to draw common experience …… creates some kind of opportunity for them to talk about things” (OL4.Int lines #3. 280-286, 300) “Normally after the session end they will be some laugher. Which I think is important and natural ice breaker. You don’t want the ice to break in big chunks, you know then collapse. But you allow ice to slowly melt. So my approach would be if I have a 5-day program, I can afford to let the ice melt. Rather than I break the ice, rush into it. Because on the surface it might appear that broken ice, but when you leave them alone you will know whether the ice had been broken or not. So when I leave them alone they can chit chat among themselves then I know that things will go very smoothly. So that’s my approach. After which slowly, this setting make it easier for me to bring them through other activities, which later on I can go into share what challenges at work. So when they felt that they are vulnerable to share that right, then that is the point whereby we can get each other to share about work experience, and perhaps from the activity to draw some common transfer” (OL4.Int lines #3. 301-312) “Because a lot of time they will actually get they also have the same issue on time management. Team issues about the management part of it. But most of them I would say they are alone in such issues in such a problem but when you bring it out you realize that people also have such a thing. So that actually inevitably built a bridge across for them to share how they manage. You know. and there is this, you create this emotional safety network. And you know that because once after finish the course right, they set up their own face book, they keep each other in contact, and then even if they have promotion or recruitment right, they will put it in the face book you know, to get people within their network to come over. So it definitely needs a rapport, the trust and the support must be there. So I think that is what something that is very perhaps use up the first question that you ask me, the meaning of what you get as an educator. So is not just after the course but maybe a bit further beyond the course” (OL4.Int lines #3. 315-326) Box 6.3 On personal white water kayaking course
Conscious of influence of relationship with others on own development of authenticity: “There is a lot of admiration, like how Liew is teaching, how this.. NamJin, and the people around me who were not Outward Bound people but they are very good at their skills in kayaking, like, eh.. yah or, actually I am not in the world of myself. There are a lot of people outside that are actually good and better than me, so the perspective of this like greatness of the outdoor right, suddenly like don’t just encompass only OBS people but a bigger group of people that I also want to know. ya so.. ya lah. I think that is one thing that I think is a break-through for me to want to keep the
354
journal…. self-motivated. Then I think still as we go on, there are people who actually also write to me about their thoughts, in relation to work, in relation to friendship and one of them is Yvonne. She like to write to us small notes, and in the notes itself, is also about how she feels about things, so I think having all these writing all these also make me more like receptive, and that give me a lot more… how to say.. make me realize the importance of reflection and the part that comes with it is also sharing people with your thoughts. I think I get to know the person better even though we might not have spent the time together but because of this sharing of reflection, feels like you can know a person very well. You don’t have to always spend time, but in the form of writing, it does help. (OL4.Int lines.#2. 102-108, 116-125) Do you find meaning in what you do now?
Box 6.4 Outdoor will takes precedence over the role of adventure educator?
“Definitely yes, as an educator. I think I still look forward to running programs. I think these are some of the very strong indicators to me, that I will still look forward to do what I am doing now. Because there is a learning for myself. This part for me… there is this significant of giving and also there is this significant of receiving. So I find that at the end of the day you can be quite tired delivering the course, but also always towards the end of the course or doing the night itself, you find that, when people share with you their experience, it makes it very worthwhile of what you are doing, it’s significant. So I felt that is like you are making an impact on people that you probably can’t do when it’s just giving them a gift. So it’s something like the intangible part of it where you cannot be bought by money or purchase, and I think it’s make it special for me. Also the part on the kind of opportunities we make friends. I mean now I still manage to keep contact with some of the participant Especially young adults group. Then from those older ones we also find advice also. So I think it’s a really good exchange” (OL4.Int lines.#3. 7-25) Setting one’s self apart from context: “Quite subjective. I think the environment can be very good, great for learning, but then if the facilitator does not match up to it then of course the outcome in terms of getting the rich experience will not be able to be met. I think there need to be a balance. Outside there is a lot of so called, adventure tour packages but then they do not have the facilitation part of it. It’s just the people go there, great experience, take great picture and then say it’s just another tour. The only difference it makes is when you have somebody who is keen to observe and catch teachable moments, observe people expressions, get people to certain, like for example problem solving activities in that environment, for example find a tree. Find a tree itself. So you have the environment, you have the purposeful activity and you have the facilitator, then I think that is the best” (OL4.Int lines.#3. 87-97)
355
Box 6.5 On emerging trends
Critical reflection on the social, moral, and political dimensions of leading in adventure education: “I think the trend in the outward bound movement itself, one of the thing, for example Outward Bound Oman is doing is connecting culture. It’s a new centre. So what they do is that they bring people of the Middle East culture and also the Western culture together, and get to observe each other lifestyles. How Middle East people always wake up early to pray, how the Western people actually, you know their thought processes and their way of thinking. At the end of the day they become good friends. So there is this cultural understanding that is important in the big picture sense. We are influencing our future generations, you need to have a look and an understanding, you know, learning to understand other people’s culture. Same thing like they are working with the Israelis and also the Palestinian in the Outward Bound Centre of Peacekeeping. I think the inward setting itself, before you can move to the social setting itself the person have to journey through the inner setting. So I don’t think that it has defer away, but it has, create opportunity for new awareness. In the past it might be a case whereby there is no need for me to understand how the people of the particular culture think, what their religious, share with them. I don’t have to know what is their learning, how’s their upbringing like. But this type of separation creates a lot of tension, because there is a lot of lack of understanding. So in the bigger picture of what now these outward bound centers doing is actually bridging the culture so that they will sense that there is this needs to actually understand, to seek to understand before to understood this process. So by going to that extend they need to journey through a personal experience also. So I think it create new awareness, create new opportunities. I think that is important because that is also not talking about a person’s journey. A person’s journey inside can also affect the community, a nation, a global setting” (OL4.Int lines.#3. 220-249) “I think outdoor leader one thing also is how we can use adventure education to help the generation to prepare the world that is coming. I mean just now I share the example about the cross-cultural part of it from OB Oman and Outward Bound of Peacekeeping. Because the thing that, what they do is the not just something they do at their community, but is something that that is to trying to help the nation, the world in general. So I think in adventure education you need to put out these goals at the big picture point of view also, to see how we can help our younger generation. So other than that is also I think we have to also deal with social issues. I mean I quote another example is Outward Bound Hong Kong. They are educating their youths so that their youths can pay it forward by being the ambassador to speak in schools, to speak their local community and different agencies. One thing they did they talk about depression and suicide so they select the youth and then equip the youth with the skills and after that they guide the youth through a different stages of being able to be an ambassador. So you know the youth were actually be able to speak with 5,000 people through the one year itself as an ambassador. And i think this is
356
Critical reflection on the social, moral, and political dimensions of leading in adventure education: HaipIuh is able to integrate external influence to consider and reflect upon the social, moral, and political dimensions of leading in adventure education. He considered the role of leading as influencing not only the self (ownself), but also individual other, which eventually influences the community, culture and nation and therefore future generations. The power of connecting culture is one that he see high potentials and possibilities.
something that adds a lot of meaning of, this is what outward bound is really about. What is adventure education about. It’s not just the immediate impact to these participants. But how these participants can also become an impact to the bigger population at large. So I think adventure education itself is really, to me is an extension, now to me is a very big extension beyond personal journey” (OL4.Int lines.#3. 423-447) On where would you be in adventure setting in the future?
“If the reality of life is able to match it then I would see myself still in adventure scene, but perhaps taking a different role from what I am doing now. Because now I am doing more of a client management role, and a lot more of organizational, generate revenue all these. But it become means of using outdoors adventure learning to meet an organizational needs. I think for my personal desire in reality is really for me to coordinate do my own adventure experience, journey based one. Allow me to have higher purpose of why I am doing this. So is the building on the meaning part of it. Right now the meaning part of it is not very strong anymore. So but then because of the, I am still conducting course I am able to draw meaning from there. But the ideal one for me is really for me to really just instead of an in-house, do a multi-international expeditionary, you know in the real world context a different environment, something like, along the role of an expedition leader. I think that is where my strength is, my skills set is also. And I think I need that to keep me alive. I take pleasure in organizing for others to come along and join. I see that as an win-win because I will enjoy doing it. At the same time is like the outcome is I get to bring other people along” (OL4.Int lines.#3. 366-389)
357
APPENDIX J Influence strategies shared by participants and outdoor leaders in relation to Taylor’s (2009) core elements of transformative approach to teaching Taylor’s (2009) Core elements Individual Experience
Extracts, phrases from the interview are in italics. “He will try to stretch everyone and then you see some people, let say during the hike, trekking, you see some people already not doing too well, like half dead, he will do the activity and then everybody will be like ‘sian’ that kind. So he plays a part in stretching” (PAR#2.Int lines 189-192) “He understands that all of us are adults and some of them are probably older than him. Yah he gives us that amount of respect, he doesn’t like give orders that kind of thing” (PAR#2.Int lines 312-314) “He *the leader+ prepared us and it was sufficient I guessed. Whether he was or wasn’t there, we would have still carried on” (Par#29.Int.lines 318-319) “He *the leader+ gave us breathing space, he let us explore our capabilities and at the same time he guided us. The way the leader facilitated learning” (Par#29.Int.lines 358-359) “There are some of them who say that they have issue with trusting, they have some of them who have trouble back at home and they have some of them who have trouble dealing with their own set of anger management. So these are the changes…or rather these are the observations that are shared to me and also felt by me throughout the whole 16 days. But because my focus was as a team, so the transformative changes was to the team rather than individual but as an individual. I tried as much as possible to give them the pockets of time for them to think about how far they have gone and to look outside and then beyond inside back so that they know they are still dealing with their own personal challenges and at the same time they are really improving themselves. So those who have trouble trusting, I will try to create an honest, open communication, not to be…not to say something even try not to say half-truth. For those of them who have their trouble with their anger management, I give them amble opportunity to voice out and to let the team and including the person himself decide how they want to go about it, so they know that there is nothing wrong with being angry, yet at the same time they can use anger at a better timing you know to drive them to better motivation, what ticks them to get moving. And the basic thing of course is they also have pride, all of them have this equal level of pride that they want to do the best, they don’t want to let each other down. So that itself is one of the secret ingredient that I discover. So hence I don’t really have to push a lot because they are selfmotivated, they are aware of what they need to do, so I just need to target on their awareness on themselves. So that itself to me…that changes or rather that was the adaptation that I did throughout and while some of them are wanting to go even more further and they already did but I have to remember my role as a facilitator, educator was to make sure that as a team, you move along at about the same pace, not to move too fast. I can give the pockets of time for the individual to pursue in different areas, not necessary in the areas that is affecting them as a team. So team changes was experience during this cutter sailing. I compare this batch with the previous batch that I took 16-day, this batch I didn’t have to teach much because there is this guy who already know how to do sailing. So I put him, in a way I put my faith and love unconditionally that whatever that he was taught, he can still make best to it and he did. And he shared that he was very appreciative for that moment because back home he couldn’t get affirmation. Back home whatever he did was always being pin down by his parents, by his father, more particularly father and he doesn’t have a healthy relationship with his father. But here, while I noticed is that he takes pride and I also noticed that he still likes this aggressiveness. He wants to be aggressive but he is always cautious of what he is trying to say, so I guess there must be something that stops him, so what is he looking for at the point in time was just affirmation. So basically I give him the opportunity and in fact the whole 3 days he passed on the motivation and he spread on to the
358
rest of the others for that 3 days. (OL1.Int lines #3.320-359) “How sincere they [learner] are to learn something out from this course. And how receptive are they in learning” (OL2.Int lines #2. 340-342) “As facilitator you need to be able to pick up those [referring to assessing the maturity level of the learners] Because you will have a general gut feel on the first day and second day how the group, the way they behave, the way they think or what is their maturity level because some on their 18 years old they are already be able to do reflection and then you tap on all these to get the ball rolling. Wah then you can go even deeper. It actually take 2 hands to clap, if you actually look for one hand every time or two or few hands, so that you can start the ball rolling every single time when you run a course. That is the outcome you want” (OL2.Int lines #2.257-280) “Actually at the later part of the journey then I start to work with these young adults. To what extent…. I think when it comes to the things that you share with them, you share more in-depth theory, you share a lot more on personal experiences. Of course the quotes stories all these are still my basic” (OL3.Int lines #2.226-229) “The ability to read them, processed them, and to offer an appropriate challenge…. we can actually elaborate this ability to read. Is about your interactions with them, a personal interactions, is like you have, let’s say you have 16 participants, and to be able to read them, is to be, take a step closer to them and really find out what’s their point of view. How much they accept things, or just basically just chitchatting with them, interacting with them…… Then once you understand you will know why they are so resisted to something, or certain things, then you will know why. Because if you don’t know, and you assume that oh, this will be a better coaching style for them, then you using the wrong technique. That’s when two frequency does not meet. Because, is a very simple things what. This person needs more help, but you are just giving this person freedom and okay, be independent and you can do it. But it doesn’t match, if you realized that this person actually needs help then the things that you want to bring across in their learning may not turn out the way that, or may not turn out a positive experience for this person.” (OL3.Int lines #3.155-156, 163-183) “Core elements…there should be an involvement of some reflection. I think the trainer myself must be ready, must be able to accept that transformative of this group of people may not happen. Be prepared, you can’t expect that this person to change after an outward bound course. If this person has already some baggage or something, have already so-called be mounded like this, then no matter how hard you try, if this person does not accept then you must not take it too personal about it. Because as we run courses, like I give you example of my 21-days, I tend to compare my watch and my buddy watch. And I tend to compare how come my watch will always do things in such a way, that not what I have expected. To me, my perception, is not meeting my expectation. Then I start to think and then as you talk to your fellow instructors, then you start to realize that we.. I think to think about the maturity as well, like what I said the maturity level of the participants. Then we start to look at it differently. Okay it may not be the maturity; it could be the dynamic of the group itself. That affects how each other behave. And I realized that because some of them felt that it wasn’t a very impactful course for them due to different factor like some of them the level of maturity, technical skills in the group that affects some of their learning. So they actually learn differently, and learn different thing. I don’t know am I going out of the topic or not. But so whether this transformative learning takes place, mostly is, what I observed is through the subjects being brought up to them” (OL3.Int lines.#3. 202-230) “Definitely there would be some differences. Because the way they see you as. Let’s say for 15 yrs old, they see you like a role model, somebody with authority. But for this 21-days, they see you more of like an instructor bringing experience to them, conducting a course for them. Some they see you as, I don’t know if they see you as peers, but whether they see you as role model is subject to I would say age difference. 18-35. I would want them to see me as someone.. may not be a role model as in.. but more of a maybe for the younger young adults maybe a mentor?
359
Maybe 18 to probably not working yet. Then for those who probably have already step out of the society and work, to see me as someone who can help to see them from a different perspectives. I think it’s just very dynamic. And the kind of instructions you give, is not like instructing, commanding.. not of a someone of a higher authority. It’s just like a friend, like a peer, to spar ideas. (OL3.Int lines.#3. 289-312) “I guess the part on where I can still stand and influence is still there, but the part on how much I can influence varies. Varies because you have different students and profiles to take and exposure to all these is very limited. Sometimes you get to have normal students, so your influence to them is, they will look at you as idol-ship or they will be motivated to become like you and move on and so on. While if you are exposed to SNP – Special Needs Program, your influence is even greater because they look at you as someone… It varies in terms of how much I can influence but the standing and influence will always be there” (OL1.Int lines #1. 190-199) “I think in those early 18s to early 20s is more like… I only start of by allowing myself to share some of the struggle I have when I was younger and then also how are they coping in this areas nowadays. But I think is more like finding out more from them then along the way is like I can share with them my personal journey. So in my personal journey is like a story like that you know you share with them this is how I cope with it. Just sharing you know along the way in my life I have seen other people like this also, it could happen to you also. I think this is my approach for the 18s to early 20s. I think for the older ones is like I could be more vulnerable…For example instead of asking them first I would said this generation for example now is the time whereby we all start to… say I got marriage, and then I will share do you find that you have this and how do you cope with it. So I would like…. if enough rapport I will be able to share real life issues or real life problems with this group of adults. Then I think when there is eh.. everybody realize ‘eh we are in the same boat’ then I think in that way when we reflect using the activities you will realize you know the thing is not just for me, the thing is also for everybody.” (OL4.Int lines #2. 227-247) “Authentic leadership to you means the instructor must first be very well aware and very comfortable with your own style. Then from there, having a deeper understanding of themselves and what they can do, they will need to observe and make quick judgment and decision about the participants, or the learners, and adjust accordingly. I mean ultimately you talk about education is really to come out with a style as to what’s best for you to help the participants. So it’s still a learner-centered kind of beliefs, depending on what the students want There is also, I think talking about that there is also besides ‘let the mountain speak for itself’ the other one is the very structured one right. So is to really understand where you want to come from. Because our.. Let’s say for example our students profile is 15yrs old. Although they are more vocal now but in terms of life experience is still a little bit short. So you tend to gear towards the more structured part of it. Whereas for adults, most of the time the pleasure of conducting something for the adult program is that ‘let the mountain speaks for itself’ first, then after that you can ask them, what do they think about… For younger profile will adopt the higher generations which is more guided. And then for young adults’ profile, likely to adopt the 1st generations all the way up. When times needed then you debrief, then you do the transfer and all that.. Adults they will tend to, they will be able to self-guide. I think the only thing is to get them to share their experience, the many people that is around them, I think, ya lor. I think adults normally, what my experience and your experience might be the same; there is very limited thing that we can share with them about telling them about life. If we can get them to open up, share about their perspectives, listen to other people’s perspectives, in a comfortable setting, you know in a group of 16, then you have a wealth of experience for them to share with. I think that is the take-away that most of them at the end of the program appreciate. Because they don’t just take away the learning, seeing each other point of view but there is also this understanding exchanging the culture and friendship they are leaving away from” (OL4.Int lines #3. 182-218) Promoting Critical Reflection
“Like when we are being debriefed he will actually highlight some factors that you know everyone has observed but then he will elaborate on it, like really highlighted it out saying, “Oh you all
360
noticed during the beginning of the activity, something happened…” that kind of thing” (PAR#2.Int lines 200-203) “*in an ideal situation+ I would probably put ‘the way the trainers help in reflection’ as the top one. Probably the activities as the second one. The group as the third one” (PAR#7.Int lines 392393) “*Promoting and enabling+ reflection is the instructors” (Par#10.Int.lines 111) “He’s normally like making jokes, like laughing around with us, but every time during the reflection he would like have this like very solemn face and like very seriously say like “ok you all think about this.” You know like suddenly very serious” (Par#10.Int.lines 349-352) “I would say largely the instructors. As much as many argued that it is up to you to make these changes, ultimately I think….. Sometimes in these kind of situations when we find it really tough. Like I said I was really tired, really wanted to give up. If he didn’t come across and say, ‘look let do some reflection, let’s have this circle.’ We wouldn’t be doing all these, we will just be like “so tired. ‘Pak’ then sleep. And you wake up the next day and go through the motion again. So for this outdoor expedition learning thing, I would say it has largely to do with the instructors because basically they are the ones running the course. I say that because this is kind of a leadership thing. So as much as possible they try to let us to have control of how the course goes. When I said running the course I mean like to make sure that nothing bad happens like things get out of control. So they are always there so in a sense they are our safety net. In times when we are very tired, when we cannot go on anymore, they are the ones who will be there to support us and that are where the reflection comes in. Because for transformative learning this kind right, for it to be really effective, it must be like at your most raw self” (Par#27.Int.lines 118-119, 124136) “Try to pull it out from us that kind of thing. And I guess in a way I wouldn’t have learnt this if all those other lessons didn’t come together. He helped complete the picture you know. Like I had a rough sketch of what it is and he just add the colors and everything, made it a something to be get so I can see it from a clearer point of view” (Par#27.Int.lines 476-480) “Well there were some routine things he did. Like whenever he could in our morning briefings, he would like share with us a moving story, which we would use and keep in mind and try to apply during the day. At the end of the day also he would asked us how we did and the thing I like is how he asked us to express ourselves through those face cards. It is different than just writing down, because there is something about faces, faces are very deep and they can contain a lot of meaning. Through those simple cards, perhaps we expressed ourselves in a deeper level than could have been done than simply writing” (Par#29.Int.lines 89-96) “Those questions that they prepare [in the reflection pack during solo]. There are some questions that you need to do.” (PAR#56.Int lines 244-246) “The instructor does come into part, but it’s a small part I would say. Probably it comes during when she share those quotes or the stories that she shared which kept me thinking and kept me, give me something to reflect…. Story stories that she shared. It’s not her personal experience. (PAR#58.Int lines 83-85, 87-89) “the instructor did come to play, in terms of giving us the journal, and also sharing with us all the quotes and asking us to think about, prompting us to reflect, yah I think those are the reminders for us” (PAR#58.Int lines 227-229) “I think we each have our own ways of defining reflection. Can be the trip journey down to work or when you just take a walk, a stroll in the park or when you just happen to talk about things and you talk about the past and it is still form of reflection and it doesn’t necessary mean it has to be
361
a solo or quiet time. So I will not advocate certain…only one way type of reflection but rather I will just ask reflection in a way, let’s talk about the past that has happened and what went through your mind and all these stuff. So to me…I am not a very stringent, follow the scheduled reflection type but I know that in our Outward Bound philosophy, reflection is one part and parcel of learning, so I will always strive to be at least minimally as a discussion and it is also a form of reflection on what you can do about it. So I will strive even though I may not be necessary very structured, I will still do my part. (OL1.Int lines #2. 125-135) “When the ‘ah hah’ moment happened then you really feel good because as a facilitator you have achieve the teachable moments that make them realized that there is this ‘ah hah’ moment. You actually did tell them before, and then they didn’t realized. And then that particular moment that thing happen and then they ‘ya!’ it was being mentioned before and that is a real ‘ah hah’ moment. That moment itself actually is very strong because why, maybe you had mentioned it and they just push it one side, and they feel go ahead and do their own way and when the thing really happen, that’s where the ‘ah hah’ moment really come because it was told to us but we didn’t bother. So, that actually can create the mood of reflection again, and actually we need to sit down and listen and recap and go through all these things, thought processes. it is meaningful because you can see the learning happening for the participants, actualizing it, for them” (OL2.Int lines.#3. 59-73) “I think there must be an impactful learning, or impactful activities, or experiences. It can be something that… different people have different things that trigger them, so you will just try all means to create an impactful learning for them. The person must be physically, cognitively, emotionally like connected that will be impactful. Maybe you know in terms of your emotional and physical… maybe not. I think it’s more of the emotions, because that is something that you will remember a lot more. When they start to consider their values and principles….when they asked themselves, am I doing something right? Or am I morally, ethically correct.. because it is against their… they questions their values. Because changes is not just about.. is not about physical I think what we want to.. what for me is I want to emphasize is personal characters, behaviors, values. So it’s the inner looking of the individual. Also a quiet, for me I like to set an atmosphere, an ambience conducive for reflection. If not it will become like reflect for the sake of reflecting. I think the instructor will play a role as well. If the more personal experience that you have or you as a role model that you may influence them in many ways because some people will look out to their trainers for inspirations. So it plays a part as well” (OL3.Int lines.#2. 253-297) “They *learners+ must be given that opportunity. Because some people they will take initiative, let’s say you have a long day, but before I sleep I know that for me when I go through my 21-days, no matter how late I will still write my journal. No matter where I am. I know the importance of writing out what I had gone through. But some people may not have the habit, so you need to create the opportunity for them. You allocate time for them, you give them material. You can give them a topic, give them questions. So it depends on what I want them to reflect about.” (OL3.Int lines.#2. 308-315) “I like to read stories and quotes to my participants. So from there I actually pick up things, and I start to reflect myself through what I shared. So I believe in all these stories and quotations that will make a different. So every time when I conduct my courses I made sure I have a quote, I have stories to share.” (OL3.Int lines #3.110-114) “There is a lot of admiration, like how Liew is teaching, how this.. NamJin, and the people around me who were not Outward Bound people but they are very good at their skills in kayaking, like, eh.. yah or, actually I am not in the world of myself. There are a lot of people outside that are actually good and better than me, so the perspective of this like greatness of the outdoor right, suddenly like don’t just encompass only OBS people but a bigger group of people that I also want to know. ya so.. ya lah. I think that is one thing that I think is a break-through for me to want to keep the journal…. self-motivated. Then I think still as we go on, there are people who actually also write to me about their thoughts, in relation to work, in relation to friendship and one of
362
them is Yvonne. She like to write to us small notes, and in the notes itself, is also about how she feels about things, so I think having all these writing all these also make me more like receptive, and that give me a lot more… how to say.. make me realize the importance of reflection and the part that comes with it is also sharing people with your thoughts. I think I get to know the person better even though we might not have spent the time together but because of this sharing of reflection, feels like you can know a person very well. You don’t have to always spend time, but in the form of writing, it does help. (OL4.Int lines.#2. 102-108, 116-125) Purposeful Dialogue
“He will ask questions other than that he would also share his own personal experiences. Or experiences of his previous participants.” (PAR#7.Int lines 265-266) “Asking questions and giving structure….. there are simple question, there are also like need you think deeper to answer that kind of questions…… the content of the question” (Par#10.Int.lines 353, 365-366, 371) “For example let say someone falls out of the kayak and nearly drowns, for example, it didn’t happen, he won’t be like, ‘what happened, how come you didn’t breathe out even if you can swim, even if you have your life jacket on, blah blah blah, he didn’t really ask questions to that particular incident, but what ask is, ‘so what was your experience?’ At which part did you realize that something was wrong. So the questions he asked weren’t to the practical side but more to the emotional side” (Par#25.Int.lines 430-435) “He manages to get us start talking. As far as I know he was a captain in SAF, so I was expecting him to be very fierce like someone full of authority but somehow he exudes the authority that he doesn’t need to scold. He just says once and people will listen and still with this, I don’t know how he does it, he just got us to start talking” (Par#27.Int.lines 164-167) He had this sharing circle….. he really places a lot of importance in these circles. He gives you time as much as you need to think about what you wanted to say. Then he will give you a specific topic like ‘what happen today’. Sometimes it is like ‘what happened today’, sometimes it is ‘what do you notice what other people did’ that kind of thing. So you just one by one, you will just share and although we get bored of doing it after a while, he will redirect us back. He will just stop after 4 or 5 and he will just say something and give a general idea, summaries a bit and then continue that kind of thing. And he sometimes has stories. And I realized each story he shared had a significant meaning, either to what has already happened like when the jibs are down and when we are behind schedule for the first day of the kayaking expedition, he will just share some stories about that, I can’t remember what it was. Or before a hiking event, he will share some stories to set our mind straight that kind of thing. He has a story for everything, I am quite amazed. I think he memorizes. I enjoyed the stories. (Par#27.Int.lines 486-487, 491-515) “The leader always asked us to share but I feel like when you share in a group based setting when there is an instructor is different when you share one on one generally. Because when you are sharing in a group, you could easily put up a face, easily say the flowery things” (Par#29.Int.lines 282-285) “Yah a one-one-one conversation during….Peak Ascent” (PAR#56.Int lines 486) “Ok, because during the debrief right, there’s this one participant from my watch, his name is T, ok, actually he was the one who assure me that, because at that point of time when I know it was a stimulation, I was like, ‘what? Ok.’ Oh no, before I knew that it was stimulation, I was still like, you know, the tears just keep falling down. And then T was the one who assured me that ‘hey look, if your friend is really in danger, they would have evacuated him immediately, he’s resting inside now.’ So he was the one who reassured my feelings and he is the one who acknowledge my feelings. And telling me like ‘hey, you don’t have to be …… if you’re worried for him, you don’t have to.’ So he was the one who make me like, have thinking about why I’m crying.” (Par#58.Int.lines 165-174)
363
“Because you get to share more insights with them and perhaps maybe the change that you hope that they can get out from it can sustain. Because there is chances for them to practice it, and realize that what they have practice actually come through. It is worth doing it that way. Then is meaningful…. I think is very much from the feeling of having learnt a skill of doing things right for me.” (OL2.Int lines.#3. 39-42, 45-46) “Normally after the session end they will be some laugher. Which I think is important and natural ice breaker. You don’t want the ice to break in big chunks, you know then collapse. But you allow ice to slowly melt. So my approach would be if I have a 5-day program, I can afford to let the ice melt. Rather than I break the ice, rush into it. Because on the surface it might appear that broken ice, but when you leave them alone you will know whether the ice had been broken or not. So when I leave them alone they can chit chat among themselves then I know that things will go very smoothly. So that’s my approach. After which slowly, this setting make it easier for me to bring them through other activities, which later on I can go into share what challenges at work. So when they felt that they are vulnerable to share that right, then that is the point whereby we can get each other to share about work experience, and perhaps from the activity to draw some common transfer” (OL4.Int lines #3. 301-312) Holistic Engagement
“Actually in some way maybe because he came out with the activities and then he came out with different obstacles that…” (PAR#2.Int lines 186-187) “He will also briefly said, I mean explain to us like…what is the purpose and to teach us like how do we get started with it, like give us some guideline and some instructions” (Par#10.Int.lines 216-220) “I think this is a team building activities, that’s why I thought the group experience is the most important one” (Par#11.Int.lines 435-436) “I think the instructor plays a part because for example if you compare OBS with the short orientation camp that we have in the university, we have a lot of orientation camps and myself we also organized a lot for the juniors, the huge difference is that this course is very structured and we have a professional instructor to guide us along in a way and he controls the situation and he really guided us to go beyond the activities, the fun itself and it is not just like in university you know, you ‘hee hee ha ha’ and that’s it and you make friends but that’s it. Here you also have fun and you make friends, through activities, but the instructors will make us to think and make us learn a lot. (Par#11.Int.lines 94-101) “One of things that I thought most about was, I have never felt so helpless, so useless in the longest time, like I haven’t fallen sick in recent memories in a time where my team needs me. So I have not felt that sense of like I can’t do anything about it because I am always like being part of what they are doing and I don’t like missing out. So he *the leader+ gave me time to know what it feels like to not be part of the activities. It made me think about members of the team who wanted to contribute but are often shafted aside because of we don’t think their opinions are worth listening to or what. And the feedback I received from friends also and my peers also was that I was not open to listening to their feedback when they had good things to contribute. So that really like struck it home for me, I understood what they meant by that…..I think it is more like people’s care and concern for you because in the end I believed that it is interactions among people that evokes meaning, evokes thought. (Par#29.Int.lines 204-213,226-227) “Of course I will reflect on my own experience as well. I managed to get through without fainting but at the same time it was very difficult for me. Like it was almost at my breaking point mentally. It was my buddy who was behind me, who was just pushing me the whole way. He was very good” (Par#29.Int.lines 144-149) “In the particular event *as in kayaking expedition]? He [the leader] was a facilitator, he could
364
have done many things but then instead what the instructor chose to do collectively was to try to allow us to go through the hardest experience as independently as possible. So minimal intervention was seen. It was very annoying but I think it worked. We gained the most from it because it was all our own doing, from the expedition leaders and everything little things; it was quite independent yet at the same time facilitated in the overview” (Par#29.Int.lines 152-159) “The leader was good in getting our genuine emotions to come out. My teammates also helped because he is a very frank person. He [teammate] sort of cultivated the atmosphere where everyone could just say anything they wanted” (Par#29.Int.lines 288-290) “That was his *the leader+ theme, always talking about habits, habits, habits” (Par#29.Int.lines 455) “The final expedition. It was really a mental and physical challenge for me. Lack of sleep, extreme energy used up during kayaking makes me giving up sometimes, but because of the power of ‘we’, I continue to strive” (Par#56. Q.E) “first time looking at people who at a situation of losing someone that you love. No matter how strong you are, you will still cry it out. Whole watch really changed a lot after the evacuation” (Par#56.R.J) “Talking to ‘T’ yesterday made me realize the importance of appreciating cultural differences (use the word appreciating because it’s about accepting and accommodating and not about changing the other person. It’s about learning the other culture and not about judging that culture. Let’s all show more care and concern for the people around us and especially to the minorities. I believe we will be able to adapt and accommodate one another in time to come” (Par#58.R.J) “I felt happy yesterday being the expedition leader cum day IC…… being a leader is hard, but leaders are harder. For a team to function, each and everyone got to play a part. As my dragon boat senior once said, no matter where we are and who we are, be the leader of the position we take. It goes down to the simple things like collecting and flattening the cans, cooking noddle and even helping to gather everybody for the briefing. It’s about taking charge and doing it good and proper. What’s more important is the initiative and taking pride in the things we do, for the team. Think hard, do heart.” (Par#58.R.J) “I will say that up till now if I can go back, I find that the motivating part of me where I am today is because of the group I started out with from the activity. Up till now this batch is still with me and we have our friendships strong and we have already been into our 10th year friendship. So having to know that we went through wheels and woos and still managed to come together and amongst our busy schedules and all, I find that it is a very difficult thing to do in now this era and it is already a very humbling experience just to maintain a relationship especially with friends. So with that, knowing that this channel of activity allows us to bond in the early years and that sticks with us and true the activities may sticks with you, but at the end of the day, you know that he power is given to you to really influence the others. And back then how the instructor did was is just simply to let us bond, simply to let us go through all the things together, so that we feel more bonded and that is when I realized that that position is actually one of the key ingredients. I won’t say that it is really the most top priority but it will carry a heavy percentage” (OL1.Int lines.#1. 143-156) “Consequences learning. I am a bit mix and match of everything. Like I said I am much of an intuitive person. What I feel is right for the group at that point in time I will not hesitate to do what I need to do. I don’t always believe in consequences learning because consequences learning are like very reactive. Something happened then only you do something about it. And may not necessary be a good way to handle that situation. I am much more of a…sometimes I will like
365
them to think of a pre-empt before consequences kicks in, what can you do about it. So more or less, I will do mix and match about everything, storytelling, hard way, consequences learning depends on intuition and the group’s dynamic. Preferred method is usually just the top 3 – observation, ask questions and process talk” (OL1.Int lines #2. 345-356, 357-358) “To the team. While they are very focused on results. So the first day they really pushed all out. I gave them quite the hardest check points that I can think of and they still managed to find. So I am quite glad that they are able to do it. There is no issue to face the challenges but I do realize that I need to make pockets of time for them to be really reflective and to be appreciative of what was going on so far. So the second day I kind of change the concept to appreciation mode. I let them go through back the same route but this time round to observe what were the beautiful things around and in fact they did it quite good in a way, they end up having a deep in the quarry when the other watches didn’t have it. I wanted to but I …but it is the standing…I am very sensitive; believe giving them the best as well. But I always have difficulty convince my other colleagues, because other colleagues will have their own sets of values and principles. They may think that it is something extra and something that I want to gain points, but that is not what I am looking at because there is no trophy, there is not monetary result for me. There is nothing I gain from it. So I am very aware of what I need to do and what I cannot do, so in a way, then I told myself, whatever decision whether right or wrong, as long as I can answer, so I give them the deep. So is it something that you go the extra mile… to also role model and demonstrate to them that just go for it if you believe it something like that. I try to walk what I talk and as much as I can without having to jeopardize professionalism, you know the basic things that the organization put you in place as a staff. And then the kayaking was the special one. It was a bit heart-warming to see that they pursued on and pushed on, it was also a scary experience for me in that sense my previous batch was stuck at the CNB area for very long, very long until night, so I was quite worried for them and they were very weary in that sense by the time they finished that stretch, they are very tired already and a lot of them are tired out and…but still they want to pursue on. So in a way I have seen them how they want to pushed themselves but I also seen them how they want to push themselves because for the fact that they don’t want to lose face, egoistic kind of reason. so that is also another thing I need to change after that. I get them to think about it. That is when the last day, the Peak Ascent, they really did it very fast, faster than I expected. (OL1.Int lines #3.367-406) “Maybe a trainer or an outdoor leader. Because I feel that maybe a trainer is a combination of doing instructing as well as you facilitate learning …. a trainer may not need to necessary do an in-depth facilitation, their focus is like I trained you to certain set of skills and knowledge …. an outdoor leader is basically someone that.. what I think is, you are more specifically in the outdoors. And you are like… it’s like a role model. It’s similarly like an instructor, but you may not have a set of skills that is sufficient enough to share everything. Maybe still at the learning stage.” (OL3.Int lines #2. 143-145, 160-163, 186-187) “If you are to break down the of course the adventure part is something that you do with outdoor experience, something to do with bringing them to an unfamiliar setting. Putting them in the comfort zone. Triggers certain thoughts and emotions through the process of the activities. So, ya okay. And then facilitating the ones we know, what it means, aligning the experience with the real lives also…..So the term adventure is artificial to me, my tendency is towards expedition part, journey-based, out in the wilderness. Here is very created environment. Because it’s created adventure. I think if it’s created then it could be easier for the facilitator, because what happen is that if it’s created it’s something that can be also.. How to say.. a lot of time we tend to do the activity again and again, and can prep. We can control, we can pre-set. We can influence, manipulate what we want. The setting, the framing part of it. When we go into the nature wise right, the wilderness itself, the setting, the outcome itself, I think is vaster and not so predictable. So I think for the adventure educator is really to just to be able to look at and observe and then catch teachable moments to bring out learning. And different groups will have different reaction to the environment. But a lot of time, let’s say you have a rock wall or a height elements right, a lot of time the group will go through similar process, for example apprehension, fear, so it’s pretty
366
much within our anticipation. In a control environment (OL4.Int lines #3. 42-77) You are the one who try to create the environment for it. Opportunities. Because there is group that you take that is so easy because they are able to do self-facilitation. You would like to have a conducive environment for them to do so. So that is something easy. But for some of them who are totally blur, that is where you actually need to set the pace correctly. Because sitting in a circle not everybody is comfortable, so but the beginning part maybe you like to imply a bit more to let them get used to it. After that it becomes very natural. So you somehow or other at certain point you need to kick start the whole thing. And I think as a facilitator, you really need to be able to capture certain key people in the group to help you. That is very important.” (OL2.Int lines #2.229-238) “I guess what stick with me is the experiential learning principle, no matter where I go, no matter what industry I go, this experiential learning is something that I…is good to have and I would say that it is a must to have in this kind of society… we are protected in many ways whether by government, whether by parents, whether by the harsh reality by the world around….and there is nothing wrong with adopting this experiential learning anywhere or everywhere you go. But for now I see myself as still doing what I love and to meet people and to influence people as best as I can…but other than that if…1 thing good about this job currently right now is what you give, it gives it back. So it a way it replenishes you and you don’t feel so drain. It is not like service industry, sometimes you give so much, nothing or very little is given back to you so…” (OL1.Int lines #3. 518-528) “What is authentic leadership, I think it should be something letting the experience speaks for itself. That could probably be impactful for people. The experience itself is that leader. Includes activities may not be those like big scale kind of activities, it’s just episodes along the way, throughout the whole entire, the adventure phase….. if you are talking about, in this context, is a combination of a lot of things. Instructors themselves also play a role because they are different perspectives, so the way you try to put across this activities, maybe you can another instructor who try to use the same activities but put it across differently, that kind of experience the person gains, it may also be different” (OL3.Int lines #3. 68-77, 82-86) “But to conclude everything, I still think that instructor is not the first thing that I would want them to remember. I would want them to be really taking away the experience they have, the learning, the activities, because the instructor is really the back scene people. Staging the experience for them. But the role of the instructor is critical because you need to be able to stage the kind of experience for them to remember forever. And then forget about you. If they are able to successfully forget about you, but only remember the experience, it means the instructor is successful. Something like that. (OL3.Int lines #3.376-385) Context Awareness
“I think he gave us a lot of freedom, a lot of leeway. And he, because a part of the objectives of the course was to also for us to bond within the group so he gave us the time and the space to do that” (PAR#7.Int lines 402-405) “He gave us space and time but he also step in to appropriately to do the facilitation when necessary” (PAR#7.Int lines 413-414) “Firstly he will make everything very organized so we don’t have any unpleasant surprises in terms of the structure of the activities, the whole experience with the activity itself. That’s the first thing, it is very organized. And secondly he will control, I think that is a very important part. For example like when we were doing the trekking right, it was raining I think twice. It rained and stopped and rained again and he knows that we were kind of lost and to control the timing he will sort of hint us that this might not be the right way to go so that we have enough time to complete the whole learning process, the whole trekking part. And sometimes when we really didn’t do….we didn’t go according to the flow, he will sort of guide us but it’s not like he is always at the lead, he’s like monitoring the situation and I thought that was very good” (Par#11.Int.lines 103-
367
112) “He really in a very subtle way. For example, trekking for example right, we were really on the wrong track and then we have somebody from our team in front and somebody behind and then the one behind he shouted that leader is not following us, he stopped. But not answering call, he just stopped there so it sort of tells us that it might not be right and you might want to look at your map again. But he didn’t tell us at all and if you don’t look at him you wouldn’t realize because we have a huge team you see” (Par#11.Int.lines 114-119) “he is more like putting himself aside, observe the situation and come forth when it is necessary” (Par#11.Int.lines 278-279) “Before each activity, they give clear instructions. During the activity, they observe, control, know when to voice up their opinions and when not to. After the activity, they encourage members to share group-up ideas and again, control timing” (Par#11.R.E) “because I always have this thought that I’m not a very easy to get along person, so when I kind of look back on the things that happen between me and my friends, my classmates etc, it sort of fit the bill, it’s like someone hitting straight on the nail, that this is the issue, not any other things you see. So maybe emotionally wise, I will start to link this so called problem to why certain people react differently to me and it kind of repeat itself through different people. So it sort of reconfirm, maybe this is the root problem, let’s say I solve this, maybe my social circle will be better or a lot wider etc” (Par#54.Int lines 125-133) “she didn’t really appear much, so I’m looking more towards facilitator…. I mean like she facilitates in the activities but there is no AAR, no debrief to discuss openly what was done, why it was done this way, I believe if she has spent more time doing it, I would probably learn a lot more but now a lot of things is I’ve done it but I’m not too sure why” (Par#54.Int lines 284-287) “I think that probably because it’s an adult course, and that’s why they give us the opportunity to take charge of our own expedition ourselves and that’s why the distance…. some of them who doesn’t really reflect, they thought that the final expedition wasn’t a very good experience for them, go through an agony for them” (PAR#58.Int lines 303-304, 313-314) “A better impact form of affirmation when they acknowledge themselves because the awareness is very high. But for those of them which might need a little help, I will probably just use questions and encouragement or rather, in fact affirmation there is nothing wrong with it also, I will also affirm them on what I thought that was good that the change was helping them. So the basic thing is, the only difference is just the awareness, whether someone is there to watch for you or you can know it by yourself. Affirmation is definitely something that everyone wants to have a certain level, is a language that everybody strived on, affirmation, and if you do it correctly, you will bring the person to a better change” (OL1.Int lines #3.271-279) “Observation on the group dynamics, group actions. I discovered over the time that I used to be afraid to say what I observe about the group because I feel that it is not my place to judge them or to even place my opinion on the group ‘the group is happening this way because of that.’ But over the years I managed to practice the art of asking questions. When I observe something, I get them to stop and get them to look at this situation and ask them out what does it mean to them when this thing is happening right now right then. So how open I am is through observation when I get them to sit and look, if they react to it, then it is good for them, if they don’t react to it then I will ask what is the next step, why do you go about it and after that I will just go along with it because the groups learning are different. So definitely my strategy will be I hope that can use my observation more often than not” (OL1.Int lines #2. 316-326) “Why OBS trainers are good whenever we go overseas to do facilitation. I honestly speaking, you also believe in that that the Outward Bound Singapore trainers, facilitators, who bring groups
368
overseas they are able to tap on many teachable moments. Because our environment is very safe and very sound, they need to think their head through to create all those teachable moment. But overseas because of the environment that is there, you know you shock them already. And these trainers, it’s just so easy for them and it seems like they are very experienced. Actually we are not, because we are at the nature of our environment here. That’s what I feel ah.” (OL2.Int lines.#3. 168-175) “I think being an educator is not just as easy as facilitating the program and then talk about what, what was good, what was bad, think it is also to give them the pockets of time to really just immerse in the situations, feel good about it, you now 16 days, it’s either you make best use of it or that was the worst days of your life throughout, you know and I…like I said I believe in the goodness in everybody, there is more good than bad, so let’s make things through. There is no harm in trying to be optimist, I mean there is also no harm in trying to be a pessimist but at that point in time what calls more is being an optimist than a pessimist because the event itself is already very strenuous, natural pessimist will adopt by themselves already. It is difficult in trying to be optimist” (OL1.Int lines #3.409-417) “Because like if you suddenly see a group of friends who don’t know each other, then after the course they become very close to one another or they are still hanging out or talking to one another. Already quite a success in a way. You always want to put something upfront to them to say that it is really not by chance that everyone here come together, maybe by fate, if this group of people are here now, what are we going to do about it? It can be very cliché to say that beginning of course, 2 days we ‘ha ha ha’, then we go back that’s it. Or do you want to forge a friendship here that maybe next time we can hang out or something. Sometimes I can be quite blatant friendship sometimes you are making use of one another. So in times when you are in need, these people may come to your aid. So you will never know. Why burn the bridge when you can build bridges. Sustainability, catch up with one another. You have many sessions or…you know that they are still catching up with one another. You know that they are still hanging out, and then there is this change. Because they are the ones who experienced it. (OL2.Int lines #2.257-280) “They are a group of people with a lot of energy. They are a group of people who willingly, or rather they some of them are willingly to be here, some of them ought to be here long ago but because of work schedule they can’t. But I think we have a mixed of these people willingness to be here, and readiness to be here. Because some of them have a lot of work back at home. So I think my very based basis on engaging them, is really at first is to set my own ground rules with them. We did the writing your name with your non master hand, so to let them understand there are times when you are in discomfort, don’t feel like you are at your environment. You might perceive that what you wrote is going to be ugly, but then, when you try writing it you realize it is not. So I try to get them understand that there is this things that is going to happen is also transferable to what is going to happen in the next few days. So I say this under the influence strategy of setting up structure. (OL4.Int lines #3. 259-273) “There are a few recipes that you need to. One is the willingness from the trainers and participants, the environment…It can be any kind of environment but it just has to be emotionally safe. The factor of ‘I am safe’ should be ideally still be there for the learner. The adequate tools that you have, that means what you have been trained, the skills and competency. For me it is because I am much more of a ‘feel’ person. What I feel that is right and feel that is good that is bringing about something different, I will do it. Intuitive. Not necessary I have to structure in that sense oh they must go through these baby steps first before they go through that. While there is some growth in that or some truth in that, but I feel sometimes intuitive is it will hit a bit faster. It may not be an always be an orthodox manner, I will say it is still equal ground to practice whether by intuitive or structure. While some may see it as failure in certain areas because a person who is structured will not be seeing intuitive as a way of delivering your topics or subjects. But to me so far I have never regretted. Not that I caused anybody any live or any damage yet, so far haven’t yet. I guess there might be along the way, I couldn’t off hand remember what happened or what
369
may not be good. But there are, I do realized that through evals there will be some that will hit less because there are more structured people than intuitive people. As in the personality of the participants. So as I more towards favored towards intuitive sometimes I may not practice a lot of substance in terms of standard in building up. So it can be a hit and miss situation. But to me is more hits than misses. I mean through my evals at least I can immediately see it. It is an immediate feedback. (OL1.Int lines #2.174-218) “It’s really the people and the environment. If you talk about human being, for me my different stage of life, single, married, with kids, how I cope with the family, all these things also, if I anytime don’t use all these things, I think I will be screwed by now. The group right, it could be the people you know, it could be the people. If one of them are negative, then the rest are trying to be positive, this negative energy will affect, and how are the group going to overcome it? Sometime you just leave it; they don’t want to do anything. But some of them may felt that it’s important to do it to answer to their query first. Why is this person feeling negative? So they may do it. So that’s where we come in, only if that’s not being reflected. For me I seize this chance and opportunity where possible, rather than going in straight to tell them what to do, because I felt that that would be very bad, there is no wanting to work, it’s all waiting for the trainer to go in to tell them, you see someone is negative already, what are you going to do? But if they are already feeling the tension, and they don’t know what to do you come in and say actually there is a negative energy there, why can’t we solve it? Then they would want to solve it, because they felt it. So if the group is your key factor, it does matter if what age is the group. From the differences from running a T&O courses to OBP course, it’s like flying a kite like that. For the younger chaps one, for the TO courses, which is the sec 3, your kite you cannot let go of the string too, too loosely. Because for them, if you let go too loosely, it may not come back. You give more guidance, but the group is still triggers. You give much more guidance compare to the one that is in the OBP courses whereby you actually let it flow and then at the right situation you come in. But the, but the sec 3 ones you already expect that this may happen, you pre-aim them. And when it happens they have another feeling. Because they won’t know how to feel, they are not experience or their life experience is not enough to get the learning out but as you pre-aim them, when the situation happens, everybody laugh about it, we talk about this, earlier. That would be a much.. so you actually adopt different techniques based on the synergy of the participants, after 1 day or half a day with them you will be able to sense it, and that’s where I felt that it is my training during my corporate time where you can sense people, to read people and that was your 3 year stints in corporate world to have taught me this. Maybe even way before, when I started doing sales without learning or management, you need to sense your customers whether they want to buy things from you or not” (OL2.Int lines #1.619-677) “Is still the instructor. I think is more in-line with this, how the instructor assesses and chose the way of managing the profile. So the activity, the group, the place, the instructor are sort of like subsidiary. Important but subsidiary. Important for me to, important as it become a form for me to use to enhance the experience. But the place and all these are dead” (OL4.Int lines #1.239-253) Authentic Relationships
“Some people said you must have passion, so if you don’t have passion, even if you have skill sets or training you are given, can bring you to better deliver the program, it doesn’t mean that you are very competent because you can just say it out very professionally but it doesn’t necessary mean a lot” (OL1.Int lines.#2. 389-392) “I would say he is an outdoor leader…. Outdoor leader is more like a…when we are in the outdoor, he will be the one who gives like instructions to us, guides us and like for outdoor activities, he will be the one to demonstrates and show us how to do it properly” (PAR#2.Int lines 362, 375-377) “Actually I would say he is more of a friend as well…. he is definitely one person that I would want to keep, quite assured with.” (PAR#2.Int lines 380, 394) “He did share some stories like personal stories” (PAR#2.Int lines 213-214)
370
“I would think outdoor leader….. outdoor leader would be like a role model, an inspiring figure, an outdoor leader would give more guidance, but at the same time allow the followers to give feedback as well as to give suggestion to their own feelings or more of like their sharing. It give space for the follower to share, that would be a leader, but I would think that an outdoor leader with more guidance and more instructions, guided discussion I would say, would instill more reflection in people…… if the outdoor leader sets a negative example, if the outdoor leader doesn’t really care about the participants, or when the outdoor leader didn’t quite join into what the participant do, I think probably not knowing what is happening in the participants would then not allow the person to actually instill reflection or learning in the participants…..” (Par#58.Int.lines 272, 280-292) “He was definitely an outdoor leader. Because he brought us through all the activities. And he’s very experienced. Could tell. Also facilitator because other than the skill, he was also the one who led us through the discussion that I mentioned earlier just now about the activities that he had us sat down and talk through things….. Perhaps friend also. He wouldn’t come across somebody who was very autocratic all that, we must listen to him, but he would chit chat with us, you know spend time with us, so, definitely came across as a very friendly person” (PAR#7.Int lines 244-256) “Thanks a lot for the heart you put into the course” (Par#7. Q.E.) “Never give up easily. There will always be people supporting” (Par#10.Q.E) “I would regard him as a facilitator….. a friend……. he’s really just like guiding us along….. he’s just like a friend to us, like anyone of us” (Par#10.Int.lines 316, 318, 329-330, 339-340) “He is always telling lame jokes” (Par#10.Int.lines 337) “Very approachable and I can sense that the feels very responsible for us.” (Par#10. Q.E) “He would be a mentor during the 5 days….. Mentor is like somebody who guides us” (Par#11.Int.lines 328, 332) “I think he’s…maybe he is older compared to another instructor. So I feel that in a way he is more matured and the way he talked, the way he resolved our issue, he is like…he’s more…I can only say matured…… he is very kind and very matured. He made sure he doesn’t hurt my feeling because I want to have some good time but also he didn’t want to cross the line like it is a rule you must follow” (Par#11.Int.lines 296-300, 314-316) “*sharing+ His experience as an instructor in the past, yes” (Par#11.Int.lines 396) “Share personal experiences, tell fictional stories” (Par#10.Int.lines 358) “I would say like outdoor educator. An outdoor educator is someone like him, knows a lot, motivates and passionate in whatever he does. He does that for 4 to 5 years and to be still that passionate about something is admirable and is beyond” (Par#25.Int.lines 360-363) “He is really good! I have done a lot of outdoor before, so he is really admirable because one thing about him is he really cares for the group….. He knows in the group, who is suffering from what ……That itself was an admirable trait because I don’t see any of the other OBS instructor doing it and if you want to do it, you don’t do it because you want to win the hearts of the group. I think that is just secondary. I think the primary thing is that he genuinely wants to help and is sincere about it. And he is also very knowledgeable. I guess what made the OBS experience more is also not just about the things that we learn from the activities but other things like about Pulau Ubin itself. What kind of birds is there, what kind of plants is there…… Then I learn a lot and also the history of Ubin” (Par#25.Int.lines 334-336, 339, 346-352, 355)
371
“Because one of the things he kept emphasizing is, one of the things we did in OBS trip is we have to exercise every morning. In OBS we have to run 2.4km in the morning then in the we go for evening run, long distance run. One of the things that OBS emphasized was fitness…. Because some people just have this trait about them that whatever he or she says will really affect you. So also whatever that person tells me, I will really think about it and see whether I should do it or not or is it meaningful or not” (Par#25.Int.lines 372-375, 399-401) “I think is the way he speaks, he doesn’t shout, he doesn’t raise his voice, he doesn’t scold. He is like, ‘you want to do this? You do lah. You see what will happen.’ And it is not he is going to smack you if you do this. It is not like that. It is like you will realize yourself that something is going to happen to you. Give freedom for us to just experience the consequences” (Par#25.Int.lines 421-426) “I think he is more of a mentor/facilitator….. He facilitated the learning. He helped us. That is why I said he is a mentor slash facilitator because mentor in the sense that a brother figure, he is like guiding us along the way what to do, at the same time he facilitated us especially when this kind of things are what happened when I, are like the more significant event that I learnt. But everything else along the way, I wouldn’t learn it if he didn’t drop chance…” (Par#27.Int.lines 459, 470-474) “I looked at him and he doesn’t wear a frown and he doesn’t smile much, he smiles sometimes, he doesn’t like look angry, he just has this calm, zen face all the time. But somehow you know what he feels. You know when he is being serious or when he is not, you know that you cannot mess with him but yet you respect him, you are not scared of him that kind of thing. I don’t know, it is just him” (Par#27.Int.lines 175-179) “I must say that I owe a lot of it to leader. The leader really made it, I say, made the experience worthwhile. As good as the program is, until it is actually implemented by the leader, it won’t have any effect or as good as that” (Par#29.Int.lines 69-71) “In the end I guess I learnt to trust their [the leaders] judgment because everything worked out” (Par#29.Int.lines 179-180) “I think I prefer the term mentor, role model. Leading by example. That I think can sum it up” (Par#29.Int.lines 121) “But in the way he interacts with us as a whole. The way him as a person, like you could say that his character is, he is very nurturing in a way. He allows room to grow and know when to adopt leadership principles when required and exemplified them” (Par#29.Int.lines 73-76) “But then, they *the leaders+ seemed like they knew what they were doing” (Par#29.Int.lines 176) “I started feeling very sick and I had fever and I was just out of action for a while and throughout the night the leader really took care of me. He really gave his attention to me and every little detail also he made sure I was taken care of” (Par#29.Int.lines 200-202) “The leader is not just an OBS instructor because he always went more than what was required. He could have just done what was required, shows up whenever the instructors needed to show up. But he chose to come visit us on nights after an event and like celebrated with us. that personal touch, that was what made it” (Par#29.Int.lines 339-346) “Because I think like you could go on a very challenging experience and be unchanged by it. I mean the only thing you get out of it is be able to take more hardship than other people. But then it leaves you unchanged. It takes a person who has genuine interest and concern in you for a
372
change to happen” (Par#29.Int.lines 487-490) “I would think she’s like facilitator, just giving instruction to carry out the activity, and that’s all…… because she doesn’t really interact with us that much. Ok specifically to me. I don’t really interact with her that much and when I do interact with her, it’s during when she’s giving instructions. We don’t really have private talks about feelings or what has happen or anything” (Par#58.Int.lines 251, 261, 265-268) “I also don’t know if she knows what’s going on within us a not, because they are always like far away from us, especially during the final expedition, so actually I’m not sure, maybe she knows what’s going on….. no I don’t think it works. Because to me, if let’s say I’m a more reflection person, I’ll make meaning out of everything that is happening on myself, but for people who don’t reflect, I don’t think it’s of any meaning to them” (Par#58.Int.lines 294-296, 306-308) “In my opinion…well is to instill a sense of purpose and belonging to a country. I would say that you must at least feel a sense of belonging or as a young adult of Singapore, being a young adult of Singapore. It like as an educator. The role of OBS actually plays a part, not just to instill the hardiness in the kids. Because the way we move from 3rd world country to first world country at such a fast pace, so some things are missing and this missing link is what OBS can help with for very long time. As such that these are…this delivering of education in outdoor, it is important…just as equally important as how education is being done in classroom. Because classroom, one, can provide the theory and practice in a very safe environment, adventure learning expose them to a much more risk, so call risk in a sense that the kids will have other senses that they can engage us, rather than just, “Erm, very safe, I can just need to do this in order to get this…” But when you are in adventure learning, the risk in fact open up to taking care of yourself, taking care of your friends, taking care about the environment around you and that itself will help promote this compassion. You know if they think a bit, that will be nice to anyone or in fact for themselves, compassion will slowly build and I think for OBS to plant that seed first is important and hopefully the society can help to water them so that this compassion will just keep on spreading” (OL1.Int lines #3. 91-109) “I would say that at first I need to remember why I need to deliver this course for, so the objectives were something that I read to myself and make myself believe in the objectives, what I need to deliver for the kids, for the young adults. Secondly, how I go about it is well, the first 2-3 days are trial and error for me, is the intuitive mode for me. And I will see how they react to my teaching methodology, how they react to each other and how open and readiness they are. So the program for the first 2 days is actually help us or rather help me to discover them, I mean in the process that they discover themselves but it helps me to discover more in the sense that I get to see how they, how the team dynamic is, how comfortable am I in going further with them and they type of teaching or rather methods or how I can deliver it, facilitation with them” (OL1.Int lines #3.290-299) “I think activity can only expose you so much but after that what stays with you is, how can you use that standing if you are in that position of power or the position of influence, that is where no matter what activity you had, if you can deliver it the way you need to deliver, at the end of the day it is the key important area where people will leave away knowing that someone has touched their lives different” (OL1.Int lines.#1. 136-140) “I would say the ‘have faith, have hope and have love.’ Maybe because as a child I don’t have experience much that. I try very consciously hard to remind myself that minimally I should still have love. It is all about giving and that doesn’t mean you have to expect anything in return. Even if you don’t get the return you wish to have but the main role is that you still able to give someone and in many ways it is a more fulfilling journey. Rather than you give and you expect some things and you will feel empty throughout. Unconditional love. And …hope for the best…” (OL1.Int lines #2. 108-119)
373
“I would said it’s value such as patience, understanding, compassion, loving,…beliefs that everyone has the good intention or was born good, there is always more good in people than the bad and hope in the sense that …well there is always something to look forward to like dreams, which is good, like visions which is good. Yah, so these are the basic principles, my values, beliefs and principles” (OL1.Int lines #3. 160-164) “I call myself a facilitator because I facilitate what the group’s outcome is together with them. You don’t so called imply your ideas to them. You just let things flow and then after that and then you tell them that this is what you observe and the choice is their again. It is very dangerous if you, which I personally felt that sometimes I had that level of influence as facilitator, I implied too much and it became a bit… it may be weighing on the ‘I prefer this method’ rather than that. So it is quite scary because one of the incidents why I said that is because PA Induction, there is this value part and I think I come in too hard because the value… I want to facilitate the value thing. Yah and it became like I am really warning them ‘you want the job you better choose properly if not you quit.’ I find that it is not right because it is their beginning of their journey I asking them to quit, if they don’t see eye to eye, which painfully I find that it is very important……. Friend. A friend with a much more life experience when it comes to certain kind of people or like for example to the more corporate pax, we are friends to them but I have the more outdoor experience more than them that is all. Maybe even some of them even had more experience than you but in terms of the way of experiential learning, we have more experience slightly. So that is what we need to relate. So to some extent the term as facilitator and friend demonstrate my philosophy as who I am being the person in the role to influence or help them in reflection and meaning making. Just now I also mentioned my philosophy will be these 3 things; wanting to be a good person, want to forgive people and do better the next time, does thing contribute to my practicing journey” (OL2.Int lines #2. 185-223) “I will use my intuitive based on the group. If the group welcomes my influence I will definitely be a bit more on. I will be happy to offer more, I give them the possibilities and I will guide them, to try to coach them and see whether they like it or not. But my first impression of them…or rather how I portray my first impression towards them will be basically see how they accept me first. And when they are able to accept me and I feel comfortable and they feel comfortable, then that is where my next step will come in” (OL1.Int lines #2. 287-297) Sharing of personal experience yes, but more towards the younger than my age group. So is between 18 to 23. between 24-29 also. Because I feel that it is like an equal grounding. Because if you are 29, you more or less see about the same thing, so that you can relate. I have handle a bit more mature group 30 and above, but when I facilitate it will be me also portraying that I am also learning. It cannot be that I am in a position in a more authority where I can influence people but rather I put myself across as I am also learning also, why don’t you teach me. That strategy works differently. So to me if I were to share my personal experience more so 29 and below. 30-35 not so much” (OL1.Int lines #2. 332-342) “You maintain a set of integrity or being open in terms of communication to the pax” (OL1.Int lines #3. 170-171) “Like role modeling is a way on how you give the learners time and space and you also give the slightly different strategies to different age group, your personal experiences, these are…you are actually doing the role modeling already. You are delivering it in a way you want to be valued as the person as you are. In terms of painful experiences speaks for itself, the consequential learning, some is like mountain speaks for itself, well some you need to have the debrief session, you know about it, well the other one is to be initiated by the learners, in the first place wanting to have it, is really the process talk. Okay from there you get to know whether the learners are interested in what they want to have, what they want to feel and what they want to know about it” (OL1.Int lines #3. 194-203) “You must hold a certain set of strong values, personal values. This personal values actually need
374
to coincide with the value as an outdoor practitioner, ah, which I adopted OB values and philosophy. If you ask me that, how do I, because it is important. Aligning your values towards the philosophy of supposedly outdoor leader type of values, I think, outdoor leaders there are many different kind, so for mine, for what I want is not to show, not to point out new heights or whatever, but to make people realize, I think if you were to say outdoors, we are just using outdoor as a mean to help us, let people realize and reflect because you can really go off if it’s not align, because of wilderness, if you don’t respect the wilderness you call yourself as a outdoor practitioner? You go out anyhow chopping trees, or burning down the forest, it’s wrong. And you call yourself a outdoor practitioner when you don’t even know what bird, what species are these and that that’s why I said I never say I am a leader, because leader would know everything, but practitioner you learn with the people” (OL2.Int lines #1. 522-553) “I don’t do facilitation so much to them [the younger ones, e.g. sec 3] as I mentioned during the first interview as well. I really do a lot more instruction and because they are minor, you really need to be a bit more wary of what you say” (OL2.Int lines #2. 482-484) “Like you have try to position yourself as a role model somehow, sometimes. And you use your EQ definitely. You try to portray your philosophy and values, the roots of it. And being involved with them, like a friend” (OL2.Int lines #3. 201-204) “I will adopt a different strategy for uniform group, for example. They need a role model of a leader. Then how you then, as a facilitator that point of time where critical decision need to be made, how you gonna tell them that, ‘eh, as a leader you need to make this kind of choices that you need to make’. It may not be good. Then again, how then, is not implying, but rather than influencing them? You cannot imply that, ‘eh, at this situation, you need to do this,’ this is very wrong. So you need to build a rapport, to have some friendship with them, they look up to you as a big brother for advice, there then the influence power can come in” (OL2.Int lines #3. 276-283) “Being able to be a role model, that, you do what you believe in and preaches in, to your, to anyone who is under you. Because if you don’t believe in the things that you do. Then how are you going to influence and inspire others?” (OL3.Int lines #1. 422-424) “I think it comes to a point by experience in work helps me enough to understand that you need to work to find something that is tangible for you to continue working which is very important. If you have lost it, then it is time for you to go. Sabah courses whereby you tried to bring the best out from the young men that are starting a live of uniform group where, I think the 2 years is a big suffer for those being forced to go army or national service. Some are 20 over years because they, some are regulars. So at this point in time you try to reflect on what is your mood then before you embark your these 2 years of ‘no choice’ journey. So you are trying to bring the best out from them and make them realized that don’t waste their 2 years’ time in these situation you are in. So you tend to reflect to try to make the best out of the course for them. It was before and after. Because you want to improve on the next run what can I do much better. So there was this constant improvement. And a lot of discoveries as well. Especially on different phrases or different kinds of course that you run.The trigger is for both myself and the young men that I am receiving because if you are successful, it is for them and it is also for yourself to have that experience in able to handle this kind of participants again. (OL2.Int lines #2. 64-88) “That is where I draw energy from running courses because you are consistently learning and wow it sharpens your skills a lot by doing such things. It is a nice sparing session with them and they felt that you are genuine as well because it is really very interesting. You get to share a lot and it is a very 2-way thing that you feel very interested. But personally I felt that my humor helped me a lot also” (OL2.Int lines #2. 442-446) “Just being honest. …State how I feel, what I see towards the team. Sometimes I am a bit too blunt also. I am not afraid to say nasty things sometimes. It has always helped me.. But of course the tactfulness of when to bring that in. (OL2.Int lines #2. 356, 362, 375-380)
375
“I embracing on our philosophy right now in OBP is emotional intelligence Because up to a certain time where you share about your experience to other people, they may appreciate it and they are able to relate to it even much better. That is something that I felt at the right time when you share that, people get closer to you. When of course they are comfortable, that is where I think the EQ comes in the appropriate time for you to ‘Guys, actually I have seen this before, I have experience it and this is what I feel and what have happened, what do you all think?’ And then they are able to relate it much nicer. It is true what, it is honest, it is real, tangible, something that ‘ey, yah huh (OL2.Int lines #2. 383, 405-411) “And also derive some examples from me. During these 16 days, I did said about my disappointment as well but I did tell them when I stand from, why was I disappointed but I didn’t…as far as I was disappointed, as a normal human beings you will feel very down as a trainer, but I cannot forget that I am a professional, so hence they see it that it is possible that you may feel negative but you can still deliver objectively. Well, that is what differentiates you between a good trainer and an excellent trainer and so they see it as a classic example. So the reason why I communicate my disappointment is to offer them a role model example. Not just that but base on my values and principles. Well my principles is try not to be tell them half-truth. Because your actions usually starts with your emotion. What you do is usually also tied to your emotions. Our brain can feel and so is our heart, so sometimes we think we feel. So there is always a different, so to be better off, we always try to communicate. (OL1.Int lines #3.439-45) “Share personal feelings, I …. Ask them questions …. Which is probing, Reflective, Questioning, And Critical…. Suitable type of questions for the particular context…. based on intuitive. Sometimes I got it, sometimes I don’t. But I am lucky to a certain extent I have been asking the right questions. Probably it is also trained” (OL2.Int lines #2. 383, 413-415, 419, 427-429) “Humor as a strategy. I have been trained to use humor in different way. Both, pharmaceutical or whatsoever. I felt that when the situation is tense, people tend to be….how you are going to lighten the situation to let them share again. So that kind of humor cannot be too blunt kind of humor. Witty. It must be something that comes naturally, everybody felt it or to break the ice you really need to be very lame kind of humor, then everybody loosen up already. Then after that, they start talking. It is adequately pacing the atmosphere and the tension. And during learning you know that they are too much information overload. You need to crack a joke or something then they relax again then you say ‘thank you for listening.’ Because you all are listening and thinking. That is a 2-way thingy. My humor helped me a lot. Then it became a double thing, it become ‘lagi best’. Because you know why, when it doesn’t work it becomes very awkward right. Then you straight away say ‘it is going to be awkward right now because I crack a joke and nobody laughs’ and they will laugh. Again it is back to being humor and being honest. You straight said ‘I am embarrassed right now, I tell a joke and nobody laughs’ then everybody will ‘hahaha’. Then they will try to listen to you more. Then I said ‘ok let’s get something done, this is what we are going to do now.’ Everybody will be ok. I think it is just pure honesty” (OL2.Int lines #2. 447-477) “Tell jokes. Get them to talk to one another. Allow time for them to interact.Is like, you purposely make it a dinner time to sit together as a group. If you do it it must be in a subtle way. Tactful. Ya, you cannot be enforcing it. So it’s really very tactful, you start to sit around with those that is more extrovert, then you start to pull everybody. ‘eh come, sit down’ so naturally that forming is there. Then they find that it’s very comfortable then they start laughing, after that naturally, after one session, two session, the third session, they just sit down together and chit chat. And that is very successful. Especially for young adults. For the youth you adopts a different techniques altogether. Ya, that’s how it is. Because I felt that influence is much more powerful than authority” (OL2.Int lines #3. 318-340) “Very high EQ. it’s all EQ, you can’t have the ah huh moment if you are a stuck up trainer, or facilitator. I think life experience, observation skills, listening skills, and actually you need to
376
consistently take note inside your head, take note of the situation around and by the second day, or the third day, usually I am able to profile most of my participants. Profile them as in what kind of character they are, introvert, extrovert, then you test it out yourself. That is when you consistently sharpen yourself also. So then you see whether you are right. When they are comfortable, what kind of person are they now again. Then from there is very easy you know (OL2.Int lines #3. 363-379) “To be honest right, there is always this X factor in all the trainers…. the charisma… the appearance… first impression” (OL2.Int lines.#3. 403, 422, 425, 440) “First …. by establishing a good relationship with them. By being myself, being real – to offer myself as a sincere person so that they will know ultimately if you don’t. And offer myself as a support as a pillar so that they can trust in you. That is one of the way. I also will expose myself in deeper thoughts, being vulnerable, I don’t mind doing that. and … another influence strategy is to create an emotional safety net for them within the group. All very people. People-based one. Other strategy share stories. I think these are some of the things I like to do. Or even I share quotations that are relevant to what I want to talk about. Or even sometimes get those.. Get the participants who are seemingly most affected or most emotional triggered, to kick start the sharing. I think that talk about another condition that we talked about. I think the instructor or facilitator need to capture teachable moments. I think that is important. I think that is also the most tiring part, always have to pay attention to those teaching moments to bring out. The most comfortable approach is really the people approach. Take care of the people first and the rest will take care of itself” (OL4.Int lines #2.378-414) “In fact I talk to a few people. So when I start to ask how do you feel about this particular incident or this particular things that I do, so upon hearing then I realized that oh.. this is their thought process, so that’s why doing the sharing, where the majority, when the whole group have a debrief session, didn’t raise up because their thought process may not be what you think it should be. So getting personal is really very important to find out what is their thought processes. So it’s like sometimes you cannot just jump over and expect them to transform themselves. So upon hearing their sharing was more on they hear this person share this then they start to oohh okay, actually I can think this way.. and I do feel that as a trainer and participant kind of relationship, it also bring a kind of barrier. So the feedback was within their watchmates, whatever their watchmates have share something suddenly like wahh.. the wah.. moment. That is where I, wah I don’t know how come they can think so deep. I am not thinking deep enough. Ya, so this people actually trigger each other thoughts. Ya, so which is why I say the dynamic and the maturity in the watch is very important” (OL3.Int lines.#3. 263-276) “I think one thing is the things that I want to share with them. Because I think in my personal life reflection itself, it does make me see clearer who the person I am, and make me more acute of how people are different from me, and how we can all help one another out. So I think is just very purely, this intention that makes me want to get people to think more about it. Because I think with our present lifestyle now is every day is just very routine. And the thing is that if it’s just being routine and just doing things without thinking how it actually helps us or how it shapes us right, then I think is very sad. Because it’s just.. you are not keeping in touch with yourself. I mean ultimately your life is that we all know we need to know what we want and what we want is also what is important is our made up, our personality made up. So I think along the way as I reflect I really sort of like realize what motivate me and what are the things that I want to keep away from. I think I want to share this with the younger adults is important. Because right now they are always in the midst of so many things, are they consciously aware of how these things are shaping them and how it affects their thinking. If they don’t like something do they know or understand why? Or is it just the emotional trigger? Then it doesn’t make sense” (OL4.Int lines.#2. 131-146) “Definitely yes, as an educator. I think I still look forward to running programs. I think these are some of the very strong indicators to me, that I will still look forward to do what I am doing now.
377
Because there is a learning for myself. This part for me… there is this significant of giving and also there is this significant of receiving. So I find that at the end of the day you can be quite tired delivering the course, but also always towards the end of the course or doing the night itself, you find that, when people share with you their experience, it makes it very worthwhile of what you are doing, it’s significant. So I felt that is like you are making an impact on people that you probably can’t do when it’s just giving them a gift. So it’s something like the intangible part of it where you cannot be bought by money or purchase, and I think it’s make it special for me. Also the part on the kind of opportunities we make friends. I mean now I still manage to keep contact with some of the participant Especially young adults group. Then from those older ones we also find advice also. So I think it’s a really good exchange” (OL4.Int lines.#3. 7-25) “Actually for them is very much of a friend for the 5-day… never much of a leader and even in the beginning of the introduction I would just say that I am just another person who has slightly more outdoor experience and knowing the environment here much better than you guys. That is why you need me to go through some safety aspect. Other than that I am equally the same as you guys and I will learn from you all.” (OL2.Int lines #3. 209, 213-217) “Not just rapport, and also to get them to be comfortable. And not have the feeling of in charge. And you always tell them also, you sit as a, hopefully that they agree that you sit as a separate angle, different camera lens to go in as a person outside. And see how the group is performing” (OL2.Int lines #3. 225-230) “Friendship must be there, and how you want to take it up after it, how you gonna sustain this friendship that you have develop here. These are the two things. If they are able to sustain that means they are very sincere with one another. And that is success already. Coz, everyone, there is no such things as ‘wah, by chance everybody get together.’ They are being force to come, some of them, it’s not your choice. It’s your company’s choice to send you here. Let’s get the best out from everything. So that’s why in the beginning of the course I always been very honest and blunt to them” (OL2.Int lines #3. 260-267) “I think I seldom put myself into these roles [instructor, trainer, educator, facilitator, teacher, or outdoor leader]. Instead I choose to put myself as something along the line as a friend. I think when I see myself as their friend, when I introduced to them right, okay today I am your so-call the instructor, in fact what you want to be is to build friendship and to be as your instructor as well because I think it’s easier to when I phase in this way right, sub-consciously I don’t have the pressure. I don’t feel the pressure to must guide you in your thinking, or must tell you this is wrong and this is right. Or rather I just want to share this is area of my life, which is outdoor educator aspect of it and as a specialist in this field right, just share with you what are the things that you know, what are the good things that I can share with you. It can be in the area of learning, or perspective. So it makes me.. feel a little more easier. but I think I also will set a boundary, you know like in terms of this, sharing of any issues that you have, you come to me I am more than willing to help you out. There is also the part about, when you come to safety activity expertise all these, then of course, at that point of time I am the so-call, the safety in charge” (OL4.Int lines #2. 173-194) “So long as they don’t cross the line I still can.. I will run it that manner. Because I think the rapport building part is just very important. If you come across yourself as facilitator you may seemed too distance. If you come yourself as a teacher right, then they will - so call - expect more from you. So I think what I want to encourage here is that we are not in a way better than one another, because we have our different life we have different way of looking at things, but how we can bring everybody up here is like having a conducive platform so that we can share our experience. And this sharing itself it could also like have different touch point whereby you can help us in areas that you know, we could be struggling in….. then there is this bridge that you know you can enjoy and share with. So it’s just a different approach. But in general the genuine, the sincerity is still there. Just that the way of bridging is different (OL4.Int lines #2. 201-209, 221-
378
223) “So upon that I also give them the assurance that if you have encounter any personal problem, come forward to share with me, I will try my very best to help them. I think this is under the sincerity part of it. I think this one fall under the part be sincere and real. I think in action wise it must reflect also” (OL4.Int lines #3. 259-279) “Get them to share about themselves. Get them to disclose themselves. But this is the first step. I am looking that they only share very little because first day they always share very shallow. I think the first thing is to get them be comfortable with each other in the group setting. And also to draw common experience …… creates some kind of opportunity for them to talk about things” (OL4.Int lines #3. 280-286, 300) “Because a lot of time they will actually get they also have the same issue on time management. Team issues about the management part of it. But most of them I would say they are alone in such issues in such a problem but when you bring it out you realize that people also have such a thing. So that actually inevitably built a bridge across for them to share how they manage. You know. and there is this, you create this emotional safety network. And you know that because once after finish the course right, they set up their own face book, they keep each other in contact, and then even if they have promotion or recruitment right, they will put it in the face book you know, to get people within their network to come over. So it definitely needs a rapport, the trust and the support must be there. So I think that is what something that is very perhaps use up the first question that you ask me, the meaning of what you get as an educator. So is not just after the course but maybe a bit further beyond the course” (OL4.Int lines #3. 315-326) “I guess your values and principles. And your beliefs. Who are as a people is what drive us by our back ends of values and principles. As you grow, you probably know what you want in life or what you believe in life. So if you have that strong set of values and principles, in whatever you do be it outdoor adventure or as a leader or in fact in any other industry, you will still be able to carry the job or career well. And that is very important because that is the very essence of who you are and where you stand in this area of career. So that 3 factors really is the important thing for me” (OL1.Int lines #1.361-371) “I have always been run by my sets of emotions. When I feel safe or when I feel that I am able to do it and I know that I can get enough support, I will do it. But if I don’t feel comfortable in any way, I wouldn’t do it even though when people can assess me then, I can actually able to carry on. So to me I must be able to feel it. The calling must be strong for me in order for me to deliver what I believe in and it also stems from my belief, if I don’t believe anything then it will be quite difficult for me to actually execute whatever I planned for my students and where am I now is also because of my belief”
379
