Onwards and inwards - new developments in using the outdoors

SELF-DEVELOPMENT -Onwards and inwards - new developments in using the outdoors
download as pdf
Willem Krouwel MA ACIS FITOL

Introduction

For 25 years I have worked with adults in young people in the outdoors. I chose this way to earn a living during a time when, as a Corporate HR manager, I was strongly influenced by experience in a T-group, strenuously examining cherished assumptions about myself and my relationships to others (Yalom 1995), resultantly setting out on a different personal path. Part of this path was to seek an arena in which other people could do the same, perhaps with some of the stress removed. In the late 1970’s, I discovered a particularly group-dynamic focused version of outdoor management development (Creswick and Williams, 1979) with which my personal values harmonised. I got involved and my working life took a new direction.

Having found a personal paradise – a socially useful, enjoyable, and reasonably well-paid job - I largely suspended my critical faculties and concentrated on enjoying the work. Although a little uneasy over the years with ever-shortening course durations and a clamour for managerialist (rather than human development) justification for programmes, I continued largely untroubled. Nevertheless, alarm bells slowly began to ring in my mind as I reached a point where I was doing the work simply for the tangible rewards. This became clear during reflection and discussion on a Masters’ Programme, and through interaction with instructors from Prazdninova Skola Lipnice (see Martin, A and Leberman, S, 2000, www.psl.cz) simply because they were still working for idealistic rather than financial reasons.

A commission to write a book (Krouwel 2002) turned into a critique of current OMD thinking, added to a growing feeling of dissatisfaction. At the end of 2003 I found employment with the charity dare2, which enables me to adopt a facilitative (Rogers and Freiberg, 1993) and reflective (rather than directive and reactive) approach to work and research, whilst still staying in the outdoors. What follows is the first fruit of that reflection.

What do we mean by “Outdoors?”
In working and conversing with outdoor educators, reading, and reflecting it seems that the educational use of outdoors has different focuses. I will expand upon this later, but in summary, three (sometimes overlapping) sets of values and objectives predominate (See figure 1) :

Paradigm 1: Social Utility: For many years the outdoors has been promoted as a way of preparing young people to be useful citizens. Current state policy in the UK, for example, seeks to use youth work (including outdoors) to “develop the skills and knowledge needed for (young people’s) long-term employability” (DfES 2002).

Paradigm 2: Interaction with Nature: For others, the outdoors carries its own lessons, sometimes summarised as “the mountains speak for themselves” (James, 1980). They assert that nature itself provides effective lessons for life - the medium is the message.

Paradigm 3 Development Training: A substantial number of practitioners adopt ideas from group process, counselling and experiential learning theory (e.g. Kolb, 1984), emphasising a type of outdoor development characterised by a focus on the underlying intrapersonal and interpersonal processes, and utilising facilitated reflection.

Social Utility

Arguably beginning (as far as Britain is concerned) with the founding of the Boys’ Brigade in 1883 (Peacock, 1954), the outdoors certainly took a central place in Scouting for Boys (Baden Powell, 1908), the inspiration behind the nascent Scouting movement. As has been noted in the introduction to the 2004 edition ,

“The cover of each part edition featured an eye-catching illustration….of a Boy Scout absorbed in the fascinating activities of spying and spooring (tracking), activities which to date had been confined to the pages of adventure romance. Now, boys were being encouraged to go out and do these things themselves”(Ibid).

All well and good and, one imagines, a welcome diversion from stultifying Edwardian Sundays. Underneath the tales of daring and hints on woodcraft skills, however, there are some interesting ideological claims. In particular, the book:

“takes on the ideological burdens of imperial expansion inculcating the values of service and discipline – and of racial self-defensiveness and self-promotion – and will consolidate the white Great Britain beyond the seas” (Ibid), clearly spelling out that “Scouting will be to imperial Britain the training in discipline and patriotism that latter-day imperial Rome so woefully lacked” (ibid).

So, the outdoors was seen by at least one early pioneer to be used to produce, among other things, socially useful citizens of the British Empire. This agenda was by no means confined to the United Kingdom - just about the opposite of British imperialists would be Czechoslovakian anarchists. And yet we learn that in these lands between the World Wars:

“…..a great number of scouting organisations were founded….. A considerable number of those, mostly with a low number of members….of leftist till anarchist focus…” (Waic and Kössl, 1994)

It seems likely that such groups existed at least in part to produce people useful to the leftist/anarchist cause.

Neither is an agenda of social usefulness confined to Scouting. A short history of the early years of Outward Bound makes even clearer imperial utility pronouncements, claiming a desire to produce successors to “the great empire-builders” (James, D., 1957).

Although ideas of the outdoors as a place to produce useful citizens may spring from a lost past, they continue to be influential in UK government funding for outdoor courses. The British Department for Education and Skills makes this clear in its blueprint for 21st Century youthwork in England (DfES, 2003) that a given proportion of young people who in the DfES’s own words should undergo (ibid) personal and social development – which includes outdoor programmes – must experience an accredited (i.e. prescribed) outcome. The effect of this is to move away from relational work and into outdoor tasks with predictable and desired (by the sponsors) learning outcomes. Thus, we are confronted with outdoor residentials aiming to “develop the skills and knowledge needed for (young people’s) long-term employability” (Ibid). The social utility agenda is further underlined by the British Minister for Young People, speaking at a conference aimed at developing best practice in summer activities for young people:

“If we’re going to be competitive, (My emphasis) we need the kind of skills the programme is giving young people….” (Challenge and Choice 2002)

An approach characterised by one commentator as:

“…outcome driven - and this is a particular worry. As we know from the experience of …. some youth work initiatives, a narrow concern with outcome leads to an inability to follow-up on significant areas of interest and learning” (Smith, 2002)

Despite these reservations, it is likely that strongly target-focussed governments will continue to seek clear and measurable learning objectives from any outdoor training they fund, rather than using them as a vehicle for people to reflect and perhaps find means to develop themselves.

That is not to say that good things do not happen on state funded outdoor residentials. Targeted areas may coincide with points in a young person’s reflective journey. Also, interaction with instructors shows that many are adept at bending externally-imposed programmes to meet the needs of the particular young people with whom they are working, perhaps relying on an unspoken conspiracy with delegates to conceal deviations in the programme-as-delivered from the programme-as-sold.

Nevertheless, objectives of social utility in outdoor programmes limit the potential of the medium to achieve outcomes most helpful to participants.

Interaction with Nature
For others, the outdoors carries its own lessons, summarised by one trainer as “Let the mountains speak for themselves” (James, T. 1980). This body of opinion takes the view that interaction with the environment can of itself provide effective lessons for life. In effect, the medium is the message. To quote James again:

“I would interpret their point of view as saying that the learning that takes place naturally and integrally on an Outward Bound course does not need elaborate verbalisation and testing in a controlled group process in order to be conscious, useful and transferable” (James, T. 1980)

Early delegate-reports from Outward Bound in Britain give this approach some credence. One states:

“Another thing is my tolerance towards people. I never used to take anybody else’s feelings into account…. (James, D., 1957)

Another asserts that:
“….I have learnt, through necessity, how to live, understand and get on with people that I would never otherwise have wanted to associate with…I used to think it a point of honour to do better than these chaps but now I consider it an honour to have the chance to run and jump and throw together with them..” (ibid)

For me, this is powerful – especially as although the courses were very much outdoor media-focussed, the reported learning is about human interaction and tolerance of others.

Bold claims for interaction with nature (and the media of rock, hill, and wild water) are made by some. One asserts stirringly that:

“If the human species is to continue, then each individual needs to face up to the tremendous problems of the modern world, and to act according to his conscience. Hope and optimism can give us the strength of mind, along with the acceptance that our mother earth, divided against itself, cannot stand; and that war is not the answer. A world without frontiers must be the aim of modern man. First, however, he must learn to cross the frontiers of his own mind and discover something of his enormous potential for constructive and expanding activities rather than self-destruction” (Mortlock, 1984)

and specifies adventure as part of the way to achieve these wide aims:

“My experiences have led me to believe that the adventurous and self-reliant
journey in the natural environment, can provide him with an opportunity to discover himself” (Ibid)

Whilst baulking at such bold claims, I have developed a feeling of warmth for the “Nature’s Realm” school of outdoor education. Interaction with a daunting but beautiful environment can widen young peoples’ horizons, and help them see the world as potentially a better place.

Reasons why interaction with nature and the media of outdoor experience can be developmental require some reflection, but the quotes below (all from recent dare2 courses) may help:

On natural beauty: “This is not like being in England. I never knew this existed in England” (the dare2 newsletter, 2004) This demonstrates that for an inner-city course member, the sheer beauty of the Quantock hills – in which the course took place – made him see his home country as a more beautiful place than he had ever imagined. Interaction with natural beauty had a positive effect on the delegate. Just knowing that England is more than an urban sprawl may make life more bearable. Alternatively, the beauty of the Quantocks may lead to the delegate becoming dissatisfied with his home milieu and seek to reconnect with the beauty experienced. Either way, the interaction has raised the delegate’s awareness of himself and his actual and potential worlds.

On learning: “I’ve got a different side of me that’s been unlocked” (Ibid). The delegate gained an enhanced understanding of her own competence in unexpected areas, and realistically enhanced self-regard. One can see how this might benefit her in her wider life.

On how to meet challenges: “In the end I enjoyed it. You have to trust people and let them help you, then you can overcome your fears” (Ibid) Another very direct benefit: During a canoeing task, the delegate had worked hard to overcome fear of water, received encouragement from peers and instructors, gradually relaxed, and completed a river trip. The point for her was more than achievement of the task; it raised her understanding that fears can be overcome through trusting others and letting them help.

These examples show for me that simply meeting challenges in the outdoors does have real benefits. Why that should be is less easy to illustrate but Neill et al (2003) boldly assert that:
“Outdoor education has emerged out of two forces – our evolutionary history and the rapid cultural shift away from natural living forces of nature. These forces have created a perfect storm and outdoor education has emerged in post-industrial Western societies as a semi-ritualistic compensatory effort for humans to re-engage with their indigenous heritage and inner indigenous nature….The rapid departure from relatively natural living environments has left strong vestigial physiological and psychological remnants of connections to nature which still predominantly drive human beings…. (Neill et al, 2004”)
Thus, interaction with the outdoors can be seen as a return to our roots, “a semi-ritualistic, compensatory effort to reconnect with nature.” (Ibid).

Development Training
Over the years, “pure” interaction with the outdoors has been modified for many by the adoption of ideas from the worlds of group process and counselling, together with emerging theories of experiential learning originating perhaps in Lewin and others’ work with groups (Lewin and Weiss Lewin, 1948), and including theories of experiential learning codified by David Kolb (Kolb, 1984). These (and the occasional adoption of ideas from transactional analysis, neuro-linguistic programming, Jungian typology, multiple intelligences, team formation theory and others) have led to the emergence of a therapeutic type of outdoor development which is characterised by a focus on the underlying human processes arising from interactions with the outdoors, which aims to engender change in individuals by a mixed process of experience and facilitated reflection.

The purpose of such training for young people is summed up by a respected British provider as leading to a “systematic and purposeful development of the whole person - body, mind and spirit” through application of “a particularly powerful form of experiential education, in which young people take part in a structured process……. with much emphasis given to the review of experience, the transfer of learning, and to group process and individual growth” (Brathay, 2004) - in contrast with school education which is seen as focussing on a “relatively narrow range of learning, centred around the linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences” (Ibid). In effect, development training makes claims for second-loop learning (Argyris and Schon, 1996) by outdoor experiential means.

This is the area of outdoor education related most closely in theoretical background to the T-Group which I found so personally influential. Roots are hard to pin down, but in Britain, Lindley Lodge began using these techniques in (mainly indoor) experiential programmes in the early 1970’s (Marsh, 1974) and Outward Bound in the Netherlands and later Belgium, were early adopters, realising that it’s difficult for mountains to speak for themselves when, actually, there are no mountains (Hovelynck, 2000) So that the school’s instructors:

“very soon adopted other methods to promote program participants’ reflection and group discussion. They drew these methods mainly from human psychology and the T-group tradition, which were very present in Dutch adult education in the mid-sixties….progressively, the Dutch Outward Bound Instructors developed an experiential approach which was closer to the educational principles of Kurt Lewin than to those of Kurt Hahn…” (Ibid)

Since then, and possibly influenced by the advent of outdoor management development (see Krouwel, 2002), this approach – sadly sometimes reduced to a simplistic plan-do-review cycle – has been widely adopted, both by old- established providers (Brathay for example) and by relative newcomers (for instance the Impact Development Training Group).

In its desire to see past the immediate experience and to enrich the learning with guided reflection and review, this approach to outdoor education has much to recommend it. It is a potent mix of the outdoors and groupwork.

If it has a weakness, it is that its complexity is deceptive. All one has to do, it seems to the novice trainer, is to ask a few open questions at the end of an exercise and - voila! – it’s development training and bigger fees can be billed.

It’s more complex than that. Exercise design, selection and sequencing can have a serious effect on the reflection process; group interaction must be carefully observed; the selection and timing of review techniques and questions is vital; course duration has a fundamental influence on what can be achieved. Instructors need to avoid manipulation. And the “mix” of these factors – what is called at Vacation School Lipnice the “dramaturgy” (Martin, Franc and Zounkova, 2004) is absolutely vital. True development training is complicated!

Self-Development
Although all three of the above approaches contain great differences of emphasis, they have one thing in common. In the overwhelming majority of cases, programme design and delivery is largely the responsibility of the training provider, influenced by the buyer. Those perceived as experts provide a course, and those perceived as trainees carry it out.

Is this true to the philosophical roots of experiential learning?

Hovelynck (2002) expresses concern about this. Using the term “actorship” to describe the delegates’ own construction of their learning agenda, he asserts that:

“Unfortunately, conventional standards of “professionalism” often confirm educators in their tendency to control program events rather than encourage participants’ actorship. Accreditation programmes, for example, especially safety audits, tend to value the predictability of strictly followed schedules more than the uncertainties of “organic programme design” (Barron, 1996) regardless of the fact that the latter may be more appropriate in the light of participants’ emergent experiences.”

Thus are we tempted by the siren-songs of professionalism and predictability to substitute a fixed programme with pre-planned learning for the reality of (unpredictable) group and individual processes.

Self-Development – A Fourth Way?
Perhaps we need to think about how we might facilitate more and train less. Such a way exists and, borrowing from Mossman’s 1983 borrowing from Boydell and Pedler (1981) , I term this “fourth way” self-development.

Reflecting on my own experience I recall that the real value of that T-group was being able to find my own learning. Certainly, this affected my behaviour - but that was subsequent and subordinate to the reflection process I’d been through. Similarly, my older son was allowed the freedom to think and develop on a Vacation School Lipnice programme – with outcomes that far exceeded all expectations.

Mossman (1983), writing in the context of outdoor management development, asserts that:

“There seem to be two distinct manager development philosophies at work outdoors just as there are in more conventional MD….the Management Training approach and the Self-Development approach…. At the most basic level two questions distinguish Management Training from Self Development (after Boydell and Pedler 1981 p7):

· To what extent are learning needs defined by the delegate (as opposed to the trainer or manager)?

· To what extent does the delegate take responsibility for meeting those learning needs (as opposed to the trainer)?”

He also usefully supplies a comparison between self-development and training (see figure 6) Although this originates in outdoor management development, it has relevance across the outdoor spectrum, and I have very slightly modified the wording.

Does self-development exist in outdoor learning? Some programmes at least approach it. In the Czech Republic, Vacation School Lipnice (Martin, Franc and Zounkova, 2004) and Studio Zazitku in Slovakia certainly offer courses which meet some of the criteria. Although design remains the province of the trainers, a great deal of time and effort is spent during each programme modifying the “dramaturgy” of the following days to more closely meet the delegates’ emerging needs.

An as-yet experimental approach which more thoroughly meets the criteria is that of the Stoneleigh Project (Loynes, 2004) in which groups of young adults (selected for showing leadership potential), along with older mentors form short-term communities in remote, beautiful and dramatic (ibid) settings and take part in experiences which emerge from the group rather than being preordained by trainers. Discussion in the retreats thus far has been:

“about values more than any other topic. Sometimes abstract and often practical and very real issues would be explored. In many cases the chance to do this with adults but not in a way determined by adults (my emphasis) was a critical factor” (Ibid)

The experience is characterised as an emerging one in which people develop meaning and value, addressing issues of justice and sustainability.

Although described by Loynes as “outdoor learning, retreat style” (ibid), the Stoneleigh experience seems to adopt most of the characteristics of self-development – and has very stronger support from ex-participants.

Certainly, the Stoneleigh programme moves closer to self-development than any other programme I know, although an unanswered question arises about the suitability of such programmes with more marginalised young people than the average Stoneleigh attendee.

Does self-development work with them?
Over the next years, this is something that I will investigate by introducing the self-development approach to my work with the marginalised.

References
Anonymous,(2002) Challenge and Choice, a record of the findings of a conference held to develop best practice in summer activities for young people, Alton Towers.
Argyris, C and Schon, D (1996) Organisational Learning II, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass
Baden-Powell, Robert (1908/2004) Scouting for Boys, Oxford, Oxford University Press
Boydell, T. and Pedler, M. (1981) Management Self-Development: Concepts and Practises, Farnborough, Gower.
Brathay Hall Trust (2004), Youth development pages. Available from www.brathay.org.uk/youth
dare2 (2004) dare2 Listen, Woking. The dare2 Project.
Department for Education and Skills (2002) Transforming Youth Work – Resourcing Excellent Youth Services, Nottingham, DfES Publications
Food, Drink and Tobacco Industrial Training Board (1979) Creswick, C and Williams, R Using the Outdoors for Management Development and Team Building, Gloucester, Food, Drink and Tobacco Industrial Training Board
Hovelynck, J. (2000) Outdoor in Belgium unpublished paper
Hovelynck, J. (2002) Moving Active Learning Forward in 30th Annual AEE Conference St. Paul, November 2002
James, D. ed. (1957) Outward Bound. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
James, T. (1980/2000). Can The Mountains Speak for Themselves? Scisco Conscientia, 3
Kolb, D.A. (1984), Experiential Learning, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall
Krouwel, W (2002) Outdoor Management Development, Hazel Grove, ITOL
Lewin, K, Weiss Lewin G, ed. (1948), Resolving Social Conflicts, New York, Harper and Row
Loynes, C (2004) The Stoneleigh Project: An Outdoor Retreat Based Approach to Spiritual Development for Young Adult Volunteers, MS sent to the author by Chris Loynes, Ambleside
Marsh, I. (1974) Influencing Attitudes towards Work and Society, Industrial and Commercial Training.
Martin, A and Leberman, S. (2000) Adventure the Czech Way, Scisco Conscientia
Martin, A, Franc, D and Zounkova, D (2004), Outdoor and Experiential Learning - An Holistic and Creative Approach to Programme Design, Aldershot, Gower
Mossman, A. (1983), Making Choices about the Use of the Outdoors in Manager and Management Development Management Education and Development 14, 3
Neill, J, Gray T, Ellis-Smith, Bocarro, J, Sierra R, & Kaushal (2004) A Psycho-Evolutionary Theory
of Outdoor Education - Re-engaging Intra-indigenous Consciousness, 2nd International Outdoor Education Conference, Bendigo, Australia, July 6-9, 2004
Peacock, R. S. (1954) Pioneer of Boyhood. The story of Sir William A. Smith, London, Boys' Brigade.
Rogers, C. and Freiberg, H. J. (1993) Freedom to Learn, New York : Merrill
Smith, M.K. (2002) The Connexions Service in England, London, Encyclopaedia of Informal Education. Available from www.infed.org/personaladvisers/connexions.htm
Waic, M and Kössl, J.(1994) The Origin and Development of Organised Outdoor Activities in the Czech Countries: in Proceedings of the International Outdoor Training Seminar, Prague, 1994. Edition Erlebnispädagogik, Lűneburg
Yalom, I.D. (1995) The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy 4e, New York, Basic Books

Home • What We Offer • Our Clients • Weekly Thoughts • Who Are We • Newsletters • Articles • A4isms • Links • Contact

info@k2leadership.co.uk T: 01749 671658 M: 07721 651118