In this chapter we will look at:
Jean Piaget (1973) was the first psychologist to undertake a systematic study of cognitive development, describing his work as ‘genetic epistemology’ (the origins of thinking). Piaget defined learning as the sustained re-organisation of understanding in children as they learn and understand, redefining understanding through discovered discrepancies within the framework of their biological maturation and environmental experiences.
According to Piaget, children are born with a genetically inherited mental structure on which all subsequent learning and knowledge is based; learning is biologically progressive, as cognition evolves with age and experience and as the individual actively seeks to learn. The theory of cognitive development focuses on mental processes such as perceiving, remembering, believing and reasoning. Piaget identified four stages in the development of cognition:
- Sensory-motor stage (birth to age two): during this stage, senses, reflexes and motor abilities develop rapidly, with intelligence first displayed as reflex movements become more refined, such as an infant reaching for a preferred toy. The infant understands the world through perceptions and objects they have directly experienced and learns to repeat actions to obtain the same results. Memory begins to develop and the infant begins to understand there is more to the world than themselves.
- Preoperational stage (age two to seven): the child is not able to think logically but begins to learn language and understand the world through mental images and symbols. This is a period of curiosity but limited life experience places the child at the centre of their world, unable to relate well to others.
- Stage of concrete operations (age seven to eleven): the child begins to develop cognitively, thinking about physical actions that were previously performed and increasing in understanding. Operations are labelled ‘concrete’ because they apply only to those objects that are physically present. The primary characteristic of concrete operational thought is its reversibility; for example, a child can trace their route to school and then follow it back home, or picture where they left a toy.
- Stage of formal operations (age eleven to sixteen): Piaget’s final stage coincides with adolescence, and marks the start of abstract thought and deductive reasoning. Thought becomes more flexible, rational and systematic as the individual conceives alternatives and understands different points of view. The adolescent develops a personal value system and a moral code.
Piaget’s theory differs to others in the field because his focus is on the development of children, not on learners or learning generally, and because he proposes stages of development, rather than accumulated competency.
Jean Piaget
- Born: 9 August 1896, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
- Died: 16 September 1980, Geneva, Switzerland
- Professional description: genetic epistemologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
The theory allows instructors to plan sessions appropriately according to an understanding of the age-related ability to reason and remember. As adventure learning may be applied to any stage of an educative curriculum, the instructor has to be able to focus the learning accordingly. Piaget’s theory posits the construction of learning as biologically progressive because he contended that cognition could only evolve with age, and that as a child matures, they seek to learn. Primary socialisation occurs as the cognitively immature brain of the child observes and mimics the actions and values of their predominant influencers. In the case of adventure learning, this means that the child will copy the instructor and thereby learn activity skills and the consequential transferable learning is limited by the restricted capacity of the child to relate activity skills to anything else in their life. Positive reinforcement will indicate to the child that safety is important and that there is a certain way to undertake an activity, but this will be the limit of their capacity. Activities need to be age-appropriate, demanding a suitable level of reasoning and calculation.
Positive regard is the emotional fulfilment that humans naturally crave: love, affection, attention, nurturing. Rogers posited that human beings exist as active, creative, experiencing beings, who live in the present and subjectively respond to their current perceptions, relationships and encounters. Carl Rogers (1959) believed that nature provides the senses needed to survive; however, humans have evolved so that society now teaches them to overcome natural instincts with a developed but perverted sense of conditional worth. The preconscious mind dictates how people respond to the influences that surround them; people only feel emotional fulfilment when they are ‘worthy’ of it, rather than because they need or want it. Rogers termed this ‘conditional positive regard’.
Rogers essentially agreed with the basis of Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of need, but extended the foundations to say that for a person to develop, they must exist in an environment of openness, self-disclosure, acceptance and empathy. Without these, relationships and emotional health will not develop. It was Rogers’s belief that every person has the capacity and the propensity to achieve their goals, wishes and desires, to achieve ultimately self-actualisation (the latent motivating force in all people to maximise their potential). However, people inherently need positive regard to thrive and this conditioning is so powerful that people adapt, led not by organic actualisation, but by social expectations, which may or may not have their best interests at heart.
Over time, this ‘conditioning’ leads people to have personal conditional positive self-regard, people like themselves only if they meet the standards (they believe that) others apply, rather than when they are truly realising their potential. Since these standards are created without regard to individuals, more often than not individuals cannot meet them and therefore cannot maintain self-esteem. The ambition of adventure is to create unconditional positive regard, to teach participants to strive to their potential, they have value and their inherent worth does not depend upon social perceptions. The strength of Rogers’s approach lies in part in his focus on relationships, which is the foundation of adventure. He advocated that no one could teach another person, only facilitate their learning. Rogers believed that individuals know what causes psychological imbalances in their lives and that, within their subconscious, they also know what they need to do to regain equilibrium.
Carl Rogers
- Born: 8 January 1902, Oak Park, Illinois
- Died: 4 February 1987, San Diego, California
- Professional description: humanistic psychologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
The process of engaging with adventurous activities brings individuals to understand themselves better. The challenge of adventure, overcoming fears and believing in oneself, coupled with the improved holistic understanding of learning concepts being presented in a new way, enables individuals to maximise their potential, to make the most of who they are and what they can do. Most importantly in respect of Rogers’s theory, the individual learns to value themselves and take responsibility for their actions and life without reference to the perceptions of those around them (unconditional positive regard). As the individual takes ownership of their actions and choices, they become unfettered by the visions of perceived perfection imposed by environmental and social expectation.
While Rogers’s approach can be argued as being egocentric, the group-oriented nature of adventure learning forces a social element to the development of personal knowledge and control, allowing the individual to redefine themselves in a social context, as opposed to a purely personal one. Thus, they learn to value themselves but also gain a sense of appreciation and understanding of others.
Daniel Goleman (1995, 1998) argued that existing definitions of intelligence needed to be reworked because while intelligence quotient (IQ) was still important, intellect alone is no guarantee of proficiency in knowing or understanding personal emotions or responses, of oneself or others. Goleman claimed that a special kind of intelligence was necessary to process emotional information and use it effectively. He named this emotional intelligence, and devised an emotional quotient (EQ), which is the ability to identify, use, understand and manage emotions in a positive way to manage negativity such as stress, conflict and challenge, as well as to communicate and empathise. The five components of emotional intelligence are:
- Emotional self-awareness: knowing your feelings and understanding how your moods affect others.
- Self-regulation: being able to control or redirect your emotions, able to consider the consequences before acting and not acting on impulse.
- Motivation: using emotional factors when working to achieve goals, enjoying the learning process and persevering when difficulties arise.
- Empathy: sensing and understanding the emotions of others.
- Social skills: managing relationships such that we can inspire others and achieve what we want from them.
Emotional intelligence is closely related to informal learning; the outcomes that arise from personal development and social education are the basis of developing emotional intelligence, which in turn provides the platform to reduce bullying, disciplinary problems and violence. Equally, the motivational aspect of emotional intelligence supports learning through stimulating curiosity and the associated feelings of emotional fulfilment. Emotional intelligence starts developing very early in life and its development will vary widely, depending on each child’s environment. However, it can be fostered, and teachers must be able to support children in building their emotional literacy. Teachers should be ready to talk about feelings in the classroom, advocating that no emotion should be considered ‘wrong’, but that there are certain ways of expressing emotions or acting on them that are inappropriate and the discussions must be presented using age-appropriate language and contexts.
Daniel Goleman
- Born: 7 March 1946, Stockton, California
- Professional description: psychologist, author, science journalist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Quite closely related to Rogers’s theory, emotional intelligence provides the social extension that moves conditional positive regard from self-obsession to altruism. As an individual develops their emotional intelligence, their personal awareness (their drivers, triggers and effect on others) increases. The experiential nature of adventure learning means people learn how they behave or react and their associated emotional responses.
In turn, the reaction of others to their behaviour is apparent and the individual learns how lack of positive emotional control is detrimental to individual and team success. The theory advocates that emotional literacy is not fixed and can be developed through experience and challenge. Using adventure learning as a tool to develop personal awareness and self-esteem, the individual becomes able to manage their emotions, which facilitates their capacity to effect change and influence others by maintaining positive relationships. Similarly, individuals develop their understanding of emotional drivers, enabling them to empathise with others and tolerate different perspectives better.
Bruce Tuckman (1965) stated that teams need time to develop before they can become effective. Initially the group comes together, members are very polite to one another, the atmosphere is civil and little is achieved, as members are wary of one another because relationships are embryonic. The group goes on towards conflict and challenge as members find their way forward, setting boundaries and establishing the group culture. The most effective groups follow on to stability and cohesion, performing synchronously to achieve goals.
- • Stage 1 – forming: a very directive phase, with high dependence on the recognised leader. Individual roles and responsibilities are undefined, as are systems and processes. Group members begin to challenge all aspects, bringing their range of experiences and assuming their way is ‘the best way’.
- • Stage 2 – storming: indecision and dispute are common, as team members try to define their position and establish their identity in relation to one another and to the recognised leader, who might themselves find their position challenged. Clarity of purpose increases but there is still a high degree of uncertainty. The power struggles, relationship issues and emotional process can be distracting as the group tries to begin working towards its goals.
- • Stage 3 – norming: as agreements are reached and consensus begins to form, the leader relaxes into a more facilitative mode. Roles and responsibilities become more clearly defined so a decision-making process emerges. Commitment and unity improve as the team develops its processes and working style.
- • Stage 4 – performing: the team becomes strategically aware, as its processes and systems become embedded and succeed. A shared vision emerges and the members operate more independently from the leader. Although disagreements still occur, they are resolved amicably within the team, with process and structure changes becoming evolutionary. The team can simultaneously work towards achieving goals while maintaining relationship, style and process cohesion. The leader intervenes only when requested to do so by the instructors, but adopts a more paternal role of instructor personal development.
- • Stage 5 – adjourning: Tuckman refined his theory around 1975 and added a fifth stage (also referred to as ‘deforming’ or ‘mourning’). This stage is different in that it is relevant to the group members, but not with managing and developing the team, or even goal attainment. ‘Adjourning’ is the break-up of the group, after the task is completed, the goal(s) achieved and the members move on. Organisationally this stage can be important as members may feel vulnerable, somewhat aimless and suffer a sense of loss, especially when the group has been successful and the members closely bonded.
Bruce Tuckman
- Born: 1938, New York City, New York
- Professional description: educational psychology
Relating the theory to adventure learning
When a group of participants comes together, the instructor will be aware of any preexisting relationship(s), but not necessarily the nature of these. The instructor needs this knowledge because it is a critical indicator of the way that the group is likely to perform over the session/programme. As the group culture is unformed and members do not know one another well, the instructor will have to manage the chaotic individualism of members vying for position and learning how to relate to one another. There will be more failure than success in the activities, so the instructor must manage group emotions carefully in order that motivation is not eroded. As group culture establishes, and relationships form, a working structure develops and the instructor can progressively cede responsibility and autonomy.
While working with Harry Harlow on his attachment behaviour experiments with rhesus monkeys, Abraham Maslow (1943) noticed how some needs take precedence over others. From these observations, he developed his theory of needs, whereby he defined the drivers of behaviour as people strive to satisfy these needs. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is commonly portrayed as a pyramid, although Maslow himself never used a pyramid as a descriptor.
The lowest tier represents the most fundamental and a prolific need, and then each successive tier of the hierarchy represents fewer needs that are harder to satisfy. The bottom four tiers contain what Maslow called ‘deficit needs’; lack of satisfaction of these leads to anxiety, stress and personal discomfort. Maslow coined the term ‘metamotivation’ to describe the motivation of people who go beyond the scope of the basic needs and strive for constant betterment.
Figure 14
Maslow’s pyramid (hierarchy) of needs
One starts at the lowest level: physiological and survival. As the individual succeeds in meeting these needs, they proceed to the next level. Maslow’s theory suggests that the most basic level of needs must be met before the individual will have any desire or motivation to explore satisfaction of higher-level needs. If the conditions satisfying lower needs are removed, the individual regresses downwards to satisfy these needs again. All individuals have the capacity, latent potential and desire to move up the hierarchy, but progress is often stalled by an inability to satisfy one set of needs.
Stress can also force people to regress down the pyramid, working to satisfy needs that they know they can address, rather than face the testing task of working to meet more challenging needs. When severe progressional challenges make satisfaction of one level particularly complex, individuals can fixate on that level, obsessing at maintaining satisfaction and preventing themselves from progressing.
Maslow noted that relatively few achieve the highest level, self-actualisation, because of the stress involved in achieving and maintaining satisfaction of the tiers below.
Abraham Maslow
- Born: 1 April 1908, Brooklyn, New York
- Died: 8 June 1970, Menlo Park, California
- Professional description: psychologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
The most obvious application to adventure learning is that activities are outdoors, therefore the primary concern is the satisfaction of basic needs; if group members are cold, hungry and wet, they will have no capacity for learning. Beyond this, the members need to know the rules of the session, what is expected of them and what they can expect. While group members need to feel a level of safety, their learning capacity at this stage will be piqued by a perception of risk, so ‘safety’ may relate at this point to an understanding of the equipment and what it does. From this point, higher level needs become relevant, as group members begin to experience emotional and psychological fulfilment. By managing the satisfaction of needs appropriately, the instructor directs the capability of the group to focus on the desired learning. As competence develops, higher level social and esteem needs may be addressed and individuals may progress on to seek satisfaction of even higher needs.
There is no single theorist who can be credited with the notion of holistic learning; over many years, it has been posited that education is about more than a production line of future workers, but that it should evolve to become the cultivation of the moral, emotional, physical, psychological and spiritual components that make up the human being. The advocacy of this encompassing approach became known as ‘holism’, a way of thinking that seeks to recognise more than standardised test scores. Holistic learning advocates the provision of a product and a process curriculum as the way to develop young people and enable them to achieve their potential.
Holistic learning sees many routes to the learning outcome, each one specific and unique to the individual learner, entwining new knowledge with what is already known and understood. The learner receives new facts, processes them in their mind and absorbs them in relation to what they have learned in the past. Traditional schooling takes learning as a series of discrete subjects, which encourages discrete ‘silos’ of knowledge without connection to one another and bearing no relation to the reality of the individual, whereas holistic learning allows pieces of learning to become appended to one another in an intricate web of knowledge, constructs applicable throughout life. This process allows the individual to relate the learning to their own ‘world’ and contextualise it; as individuals, we grow and develop our personal values through our relationship with every element of the world around us. Holistic learning recognises the differences in people, that adults and children learn differently and that, as unique individuals, we all learn and conceptualise differently at different times and stages of life. Ultimately, holistic learning aims to foster an interest in learning itself and advocates learning as a lifelong process, not a stage of childhood. Some advocates of holistic learning are briefly described below.
Amos Bronson Alcott
- Born: 29 November 1799, Wolcott, Connecticut
- Died: 4 March 1888, Boston, Massachusetts
- An American teacher, writer, philosopher, reformer, abolitionist and advocate for women’s rights, Alcott pioneered new forms of student interaction, with a focus on conversation and avoidance of punishment. His belief was that the route to perfecting the human spirit was through veganism and pure living.
- The second of his four daughters was Louisa May Alcott, who fictionalised her family life in her novel Little Women in 1868.
Fritjof Capra
- Born: 1 February 1939, Vienna, Austria
- A physicist, educator, activist and author, Capra advocates holism and the inter-connectivity of all parts to any system.
John Dewey
- Born: 20 October 1859, Burlington, Vermont
- Died: 1 June 1952, New York City, New York
- An American philosopher, psychologist and educational reformer whose ideas have fundamentally influenced education and social reform, Dewey is considered one of the founders of functional psychology, advocating democracy in all aspects of life.
- Dewey believed that schools and society both required attention and reconstruction for intelligence and plurality to flourish.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
- Born: 25 May 1803, Boston, Massachusetts
- Died: 27 April 1882, Concord, Massachusetts
- An essayist, lecturer, poet and transcendentalist, Emerson promoted individualism in the face of social pressure.
Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Born: 11 May 1895, Madanapalle, India
- Died: 17 February 1986, Ojai, California
- A speaker and writer on philosophical and spiritual subjects, Krishnamurti and his brother were adopted by Dr Annie Besant. Besant, president of the Theosophical Society, believed Krishnamurti was to become the world teacher whose coming had been predicted by the Theosophists. To prepare the world for his coming, the Order of the Star in the East, a global group, was created with young Krishnamurti its leader. However, in 1929, Krishnamurti renounced the role, dissolved the Order and returned all the money and property that had been donated. Krishnamurti thereafter belonged to no religion, sect or country, nor did he ascribe to any single political or ideological belief, maintaining these as the roots of conflict and war.
Maria Montessori
- Born: 31 August 1870, Chianavalle, Italy
- Died: 6 May 1952, Noordwijk, Netherlands
- A physician and educator, best known for the philosophy of education that bears her name, Montessori concerned herself with writings on scientific pedagogy. The educational approach emphasises independence, limited freedom for self-discovery and respecting the natural psychological, physical and social development of the learner.
Johann Pestalozzi
- Born: 12 January 1746, Zurich, Switzerland
- Died: 17 February 1827, Brugg, Switzerland
- A pedagogue and educational reformer who founded several educational institutions.
- His motto was ‘learning by head, hand and heart’.
Francis Parker
- Born: 9 October 1837, Bedford, New Hampshire
- Died: 2 March 1902, Harrison County, Mississippi
- A pioneer of the progressive school movement in the United States, Parker believed in mental, physical and moral education. Called the ‘father of progressive education’ by John Dewey, Parker strove to devise a curriculum centred on the whole child, rather than standardised lessons and rote learning. He aimed to prove that education meant independent learners who think for themselves.
Charlene Spretnak
- Born: 1946, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
- A speaker and activist, Spretnak is concerned with dynamic interrelatedness and proving that the body and mind are far more dynamically interrelated than recognised.
Rudolf Steiner
- Born: February 1861, Murakraly, Austria–Hungary (now Donji Kraljevec, Croatia)
- Died: 30 March 1925, Dornach, Switzerland
- A mystic, philosopher, social reformer, architect and esotericist, Steiner looked for a connection between science and spirituality.
Henry David Thoreau
- Born: 12 July 1817, Concord, Massachusetts
- Died: 6 May 1862, Concord, Massachusetts
- Described as an American author, poet, philosopher, abolitionist, naturalist, tax resister, development critic, historian and transcendentalist, Thoreau is best known for his writings on natural history and philosophy.
Theodore Roszak
- Born: 15 November 1933, Chicago, Illinois
- Died: 5 July 2011, Berkeley, California
- Roszak was the first to label the ‘counterculture’, the communitarian experiments, cults, spiritual entrepreneurs and competing new-age psychotherapies of San Francisco and Berkeley in the late 1960s.
Ken Wilber
- Born: 31 January 1949, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
- A writer, philosopher and public speaker, Wilber writes and lectures on philosophy, sociology, ecology, developmental psychology, spirituality and mysticism. He founded the Integral Institute in 1998, a group that aims to gather and integrate the perspectives of a number of major fields of knowledge, with the overriding foundation that the different perspectives are all true but partial versions of actual reality.
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Adventure learning is experiential, participants learn through doing, unlike the rote memorisation required by classroom learning. To move the experience from activity to learning, participants are encouraged and supported to make sense of the experience by processing their engagement through the unique lens of what they already know and have experienced in the past (their ontology). This is holistic learning, the enhancement of existing knowledge by appending new knowledge, therefore deepening understanding or creating new awareness.
By developing adventure learning programmes as an embedded component of a formal learning curriculum, concepts are presented as physical and visual mechanisms, which support the verbalisation of the classroom. The multi-modal approach facilitates mental models to be created in the mind of the learner, forming the basis of that which is then mentally connected to what they already ‘know’ (an experience, an emotion, an understanding) and subsequently redefine into greater awareness, understanding or knowledge. Later application of this redefinition, whether to a similar adventure learning experience or to a different situation, will reinforce the redefinition or lead to further adaptation.
A learning style is an individual’s natural or favoured pattern of acquiring and processing information in a learning situation. The idea of individualised learning styles originated in the 1970s, and has greatly influenced education. Theorists associated with learning styles include Peter Honey and Alan Mumford (1982), Howard Gardner (1983) and David Kolb (1984).
Proponents of the use of learning styles in education propose teachers assess the learning styles of each learner and alter their teaching to accommodate each learner’s style. Although there is ample evidence for differences in individual thinking and ways of processing various types of information, there is no solid evidence to support the use of learning styles in practice or to show that identifying the learning style of a participant leads them to better outcomes; the opposite can be argued to be true (i.e. that labelling a participant as a particular type of learner may lead them to only be provided one method, which can damage their learning).
However, it is widely recognised that people learn differently and that a group of learners will require a range of styles (or methods) to optimise everyone’s learning. Learning styles, at best, group common ways that people learn. Some people may find that they have a dominant style of learning that they prefer almost all the time, with far less use of other styles, while others may find that they use different styles in different circumstances or at different times. There is no right mix and nor are styles fixed; people can develop an ability in a less dominant style, as well as enhancing a preferred style.
Using multiple learning styles and multiple intelligences for learning is a relatively new approach that educators have only recently started to understand. Traditional education focuses on predominantly linguistic and logical methods, relying on classroom teaching, repetition and examinations. This results in those tending towards these learning styles being labelled intelligent and those who tend towards other styles finding themselves in lower level classes, with sometimes lower quality teaching. This can result in learners ‘living down’ to a label and restrict them striving for their potential.
By recognising and understanding your own learning styles, you can use techniques better suited to you, improving the speed and quality of your learning.
Both Honey and Mumford (1982) and David Kolb (1984) produced very similar models to explain the learning process, each with its advocates and critics. The greatest weakness of both models is that neither accounts for the impact of social interaction and the extent to which humans ape or learn from each other. In addition, cognitive capacity, goals, purposes, intentions, choice and decision-making are not acknowledged. However, both provide focus and offer a model of facilitation, which apply as the goals of the adventure learning model. Figure 15 shows the two models combined; inside the circle are the types of learner and around the edge are the processes most appropriate to that style.
Figure 15
Experiential learning cycle
Source: adapted from Honey and Mumford (1982) and Kolb (1984)
Both sets of theorists perceived four types of learner, along a spectrum of cerebral to practical preferences. While Honey and Mumford focused on styles, Kolb’s cycle demonstrates a process of learning as well: concrete experience (Honey and Mumford’s ‘hands-on’ approach), provides a basis for reflective observations. Reflective observations (Honey and Mumford’s cerebral learners) are processed into abstract conceptualisation (Honey and Mumford’s theorists). This, in turn, produces actions to be tested (Honey and Mumford’s practical people). This testing creates new experiences as new learning is applied to different situations.
Gardner supplemented the work of Kolb and of Honey and Mumford with his theory of multiple intelligences, proposing all individuals possess a degree of a number of intelligences, combining uniquely to delineate how individuals internally decide to do or watch, while deciding to think or feel. The result of these two decisions produces the preferred learning style. Thus, people choose their approach by watching others and reflecting on what happens or through just going straight into the task or experience (Kolb 1984). Simultaneously, one emotionally transforms the experience by intangibly analysing or by tangibly feeling (Kolb 1984).
Peter Honey
- Born: Oxford
- Professional description: occupational psychologist, management trainer
Alan Mumford
- Professional description: management development adviser
David Kolb
- Born: 1939
- Professional description: educational theorist
Howard Gardner
- Born: 11 July 1943, Scranton, Pennsylvania
- Professional description: development psychologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Just as learning is a personal and a social process, how each individual arrives at their learning is unique. The way that people learn is a function of the way in which they perceive and process what is being taught and that is a complex amalgamation of the subject, cognitive ability, motivation, emotional state, expectations, environment and personal narrative (personal past history). Nobody learns by one fixed method, so nobody has a single lifelong learning style. However, knowing the process through which people learn enables the instructor to become a more efficient facilitator. During the activity (concrete experience), the instructor can observe the roles played, looking at dominant characteristics of individuals. Intervention and reviewing (during or after the activity) can then be focused upon the prevailing nature of the learner(s) (reflective observation). As participants move to absorbing and relating their experience (abstract conceptualisation) the instructor helps learners to put the knowledge into their personal context, shaping it within the framework of their existing knowledge, understanding and experiences. Finally, participants look to redefining their existing framework in the context of that which they have just processed (active experimentation). The instructor has to be able to target theoretical, visual, verbal and physical tools appropriately in order to maximise the learning for the prevailing style of the learner(s). Through the multi-modal methodology of combining the verbalisation of the classroom with the physical and visual platforms offered by adventure learning, participants can be supported to maximise understanding and achieve their potential.
It was Burrhus Frederic Skinner’s belief that free will is an illusion and that actions are founded on the learned consequences of experience (Skinner 1948): if the consequence of an action is negative, the action will not be repeated, but if the consequence of the action is positive, repetition is likely. He called this the principle of reinforcement.
Skinner also believed it was more productive to study observable behaviour rather than try to define internal mental processing because the best way to understand behaviour was to look at the causes of an action and its consequences. He named this approach operant conditioning, which means the changing of behaviour by the use of a reinforcement mechanism given after the desired response. Skinner studied operant conditioning by conducting experiments using animals, which he placed in a ‘Skinner Box’, also known as an operant conditioning chamber, a piece of laboratory apparatus to study animal behaviour. The chamber teaches a subject animal to perform a certain action at the command of a certain stimulus; if the animal behaves correctly, a reward is received and some experiments deliver a punishment for an incorrect behaviour. Skinner identified three types of responses (operant) that can follow behaviour.
- Neutral operants: responses from the environment that neither increase nor decrease the probability of a behaviour being repeated.
- Reinforcers: responses from the environment that increase the probability of a behaviour being repeated. Reinforcers can be either positive or negative.
- Punishers: responses from the environment that decrease the likelihood of a behaviour being repeated. Punishment weakens behaviour.
We can all think of examples of how our own behaviour has been affected by reinforcers and punishers. As children, we try out a number of behaviours and learn from their consequences; for example, if a child tries smoking at school and the chief consequence is that they become part of the ‘in’ crowd, they are positively reinforced (i.e. rewarded) and are likely to continue. If, however, the main consequence is that they were caught and punished, they are consequently much less likely to continue smoking.
Burrhus Frederic Skinner
- Born: 20 March 1904, Susquehanna Depot, Pennsylvania
- Died: 18 August 1990, Cambridge, Massachusetts
- Professional description: psychologist, behaviourist, author, inventor, social philosopher
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Closely related to conditional positive regard, operant conditioning presents a way to define behaviour. The delivery of overt positive and negative rewards should never form the basis of an adventure programme, which seeks to enhance the latent positive potential and personal awareness of the individual. It does, however, demonstrate a mechanism by which the instructor can underpin learning during the review phases of a session or programme. By encouraging participants to give examples of ‘reinforcers’ and ‘punishers’, the instructor can exemplify the nature of conditional and unconditional positive regard. It also enables the planning of adventure learning delivery by fostering a practice of encouraging achievement. Through appreciative facilitation, the instructor emphasises the positive achievements of individual participants and the group, namely strengths such as risk analysis, decision making, collaboration, leadership, team work, meaning successful steps in the attainment of their goal. This provides the basis for building confidence to repeat the behaviour and try it in other contexts. In this way, participants distinguish positive action and begin to adjust their thinking and mind-set accordingly.
Situated learning, as the name implies, proposes that learning is unintentionally achieved (tacit learning) through engagement in an activity, context or culture. It assumes gradually increasing empowerment of the individual towards ownership and control, which chimes with the adventure approach of moving participants from behaviourist to cognitive to experiential learning, and the adventure learning instructor from instructor to facilitator, a process named ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger (1991). The process does not, however, recognise a situation where the participant is already familiar with the environment and has moved beyond peripheral participation.
Their implication may be that such an individual has reached a point of saturation, but this would sit in opposition to Berger and Luckman’s (1966) advocacy of learning being never-ending.
Communities of practice are principally a process of social learning that occurs when people with a shared (vested) interest in something work in partnership in sharing ideas, understandings, jointly working out and testing solutions to issues that arise. The group may not intentionally come together, but their collaboration is the key and any learning arises as a related by-product of their social interaction.
Three core factors define such collaboration as a community of practice:
- A community of practice is not simply a collective of people, there needs to be a shared interest, known as a domain. The domain may be a shared professional arena (in this instance, adventure learning and a particular adventurous activity). Membership of the community provides an inherent implication that the individual has a commitment to the domain.
- A community of practice requires a community; it is essential that the members of the group interact, participate in the shared activity and help each other, sharing learning and understanding. The core of the community is that the members build effective working relationships that enable sharing and learning; this is more than simply a group of people doing the same job, there is a shared intent to commit to the evolution of the community and the empathy that supports all members to learn.
- A community of practice requires a practice; having an interest in the field is insufficient, the members must actively be engaged in the arena to be able to contribute from experience, that is, the members are practitioners.
Communities of practice develop from a range of bases, centred either on problem solving and need or on actively seeking to develop and further practice. Both involve learning, which is central to human identity and evolution. The central tenet of learning within a community of practice is learning through social engagement, where the individual actively participates in the community, rather than engaging because they are required to be there (for example, because they work in the field) and in this way actively constructs their identity through their engagement. People are social beings and we naturally and continuously seek to create a shared identity, which is relative to and defined by the way in which we engage in and contribute to society and the practices of communities. The motivation to become a more central participant in a community of practice can provide a powerful incentive for learning.
Jean Lave
- Professional description: social anthropologist
Etienne Wenger
- Born: 1 July 1952, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
- Professional description: educational theorist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
A group of participants exists as a community of practice for the duration of the adventure learning experience. Generally, the group will form at the start of the experience and remain as a unit throughout. As the group grows in confidence and competence, they progress from peripheral to core participation, with the shared interaction, learning and understanding that come to define them. The community is unique in that the experience is theirs alone. This bond forms the basis of the situated learning that subconsciously creates the group culture and possibly extends beyond the existence of the community into the ‘everyday’ lives of the individuals. The instructor has a strong role in directing the community and shaping it, as they take an initially directive role in the activity. This initial ‘lead’ will shape the way in which the group identifies itself and forms the community that takes progressive responsibility for the activity and the actions of the group.
The instructor belongs to the community of practice of the adventure learning team. Members learn from one another, develop joint practices and devise collaborative solutions to arising issues. The shared interest of adventure learning and the common practice of delivery bring the team together, creating a more powerful and effective collaborative unit than if each instructor operated in isolation.
Peter Ludwig Berger and Thomas Luckman (1966) provide capacity for both social and cognitive development, distinguishing between primary and secondary socialisation. Primary socialisation (Piaget’s cognitive learning) occurs through childhood and ‘initiation’ into society; secondary socialisation (Vygotsky’s social learning) is any subsequent process whereby the socialised individual enters new dimensions; primary socialisation is dominated by others (parents, teachers) and is largely uncontrolled by the individual, ending when the individual attains a consciousness that enables them to act independently, become an effective member of society and able to form their own subjective interpretation of experience.
Berger and Luckman advocate that such socialisation is never complete, as social interaction is never-ending; it follows therefore that learning, as a social activity, is a lifelong process. Meaning is continually constructed relative to the individual’s narrative (their lived experience) and their environment (culture) (their reflected experience). The core idea of Berger and Luckman’s ‘social construction of reality’ is that understanding, significance and meaning are developed not separately within the individual, but in co-ordination with other human beings. We all exist as social beings and explain our experiences through our own personal model of our social world. Over time, we develop a shared mental understanding of the way in which those around us in our social grouping think and act, and then eventually these notions become adopted by the whole group and become the way to think and act. When this way becomes shared by other social groups, the shared interactions are said to have become institutionalised and, in the process, meaning is embedded in society; reality becomes defined by the knowledge and understanding people have of it and thus becomes entrenched. Thus, reality is socially constructed.
This central idea seems obvious and simple; we can all understand the notion that the world has been created through human existence, so it is not a great leap to understand that what we have created is because of what we all understand and, had our understanding been different, the creation would consequently have been different.
Peter Ludwig Berger
- Born: 17 March 1926, Vienna, Austria
- Professional description: sociologist
Thomas Luckman
- Born: 14 October 1927, Jesenice, Slovenia
- Professional description: sociologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Berger and Luckman’s theory defines the longer-term implications of adventure learning. Their assertion that social leaning is a perpetual entity defines the application of learning beyond the adventure learning session. Adventure learning occurs as a group activity; therefore, as the activity progresses, it exists within a social context and will be reviewed as a collective experience. The conclusions of the experience, the learning drawn from it and the knowledge (the ‘reality’) to be applied to the future by the individual will be defined by the shared analysis of the group. That is not to say that all participants will leave with the same conclusion; the individual legacy of the experience will be predicated on their perception of themselves within their world (conditional positive regard, operant conditioning). In terms of the adventure learning team, the social construction of their reality is very closely tied to the creation of their community of practice (Lave and Wenger 1991). The team members collaborate to define their culture, the way they operate, interact and exist, thus establish their reality. The way in which each instructor will deliver activities, work with participants and colleagues and undertake other functions will be defined in the context and by the norms of the communally created team culture.
Lev Vygotsky (1962) felt social learning precedes development; his belief was that the key to human intelligence is our ability to use various types of tools and just as humans use material tools to extend our physical achievements, we have invented psychological tools to extend our mental capacity. These tools are developed within our social culture, rather than genetically inherited, and are the way we communicate and define our world. Vygotsky believed that until children learn to use these mental tools, their learning is controlled by the environment, responding only to the things that are brightest or loudest and remembering things only if they are repeated many times. Vygotsky says learning is a social act, the purpose of which is to introduce children to these cultural tools and help them learn to use them successfully, developing psychological qualities (abilities). The development of abilities leads to the blossoming of personality, independence and social interaction. Many schools have traditionally adopted a behaviourist model, where the teacher ‘transmits’ information to participants, whereas Vygotsky’s theory promotes participants playing an active role in learning, moving the teacher/participant relationship to become more collaborative.
According to social development theory, social interaction is a necessary precursor to development, with consciousness and cognition arising because of socialisation and social behaviour. Vygotsky’s theory is one of the foundations of constructivism and is founded through three themes:
- Contrary to Piaget’s theory of child development, where physical development necessarily precedes learning, Vygotsky postulated that social interaction is central to cognitive development and that social learning precedes development.
- The existence of a more knowledgeable other (MKO), a being with better understanding or greater ability than the learner. The MKO can be the activity instructor but can equally be peers or others within the social group. It is also contended that the MKO could be inanimate, such as a computer.
- There is a gap between the learner’s ability to perform a task under guidance or with a group and their ability to perform alone, known as the zone of proximal development (ZPD). It is in the ZPD, according to Vygotsky, that learning occurs.
Many learning institutions traditionally operate by transmitting data for learners to absorb, but under Vygotsky’s theory, learning is most effective where the learner plays an active role in learning. Learning thus becomes collaborative and a reciprocal experience for the learner and instructor.
Lev Vygostsky
- Born: 17 November 1896, Orsha, Belarus
- Died: 11 June 1934, Moscow, Russia
- Professional description: psychologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Working in antithesis to Piaget’s cognitive development theory, Vygotsky conceives progression as a social phenomenon, whereby the individual learns to exist within the confines of social norms and rituals through mimicry, instruction and collaboration. The assertion of learning as a group process resonates in that adventure learning is a group activity so the whole group finds a way to operate that allows them to tackle the task in hand. Through performing as a group, the different participants will derive personal learning points that are unique to them, (such as learning their leadership potential) as well as the group learning points (such as when everyone talks at once there are no clear decisions). Bearing in mind Tuckman’s group dynamics theory, the group almost inevitably will experience failure before success and it is incumbent upon the instructor to manage the emotional impact of that in order for the group to remain motivated to continue in the face of disappointment (a learning point in itself). The instructor can also use the social group perspective to highlight collective success or failure and alleviate the almost inevitable allegations of individual poor performance.
According to Albert Bandura’s theory, behaviour is derived from observation of the environment; in a concept he named reciprocal determinism, he advocated that the world and a person’s behaviour were inextricably linked and caused each other (Bandura 1977).
Social learning theory (SLT) demonstrated aspects of traditional learning theory and Skinner’s operant conditioning theory. However, unlike Skinner, Bandura saw the human mind as a powerful and active information processing system that can evaluate the consequences of actions; indeed, he advocated that observational learning (modelling) cannot take place without significant cognitive ability and that behaviour arises out of environmental and social observational learning, not the ‘reward and punishment’ reinforcement process posited by Skinner.
Bandura’s famous 1961 ‘bobo doll’ experiment demonstrated how children observe and learn from the people around them. Children are surrounded by many influential models (individuals), such as parents, siblings, relatives, friends, teachers, television characters, all providing observable and imitable behaviours. Sub-consciously, children absorb their behaviour and mimic it. Bandura observed that children are more likely to mimic people with whom they identify as similar, followed by lesser-known people of the same sex. The mimicked behaviour will elicit a positive or negative response from the people around them; if the response is positive, the child feels rewarded and will continue to replicate the behaviour. The behaviour has thus been reinforced. Of course, negative motivation exists too (punishment, threats), giving reasons not to mimic. Like most traditional behaviourists, Bandura argues punishment does not work as well as reinforcement.
Founded on three core concepts, social learning (observational learning, modelling), can explain a wide variety of human behaviour:
- People learn through observing those within their environment and mimicking their behaviour, as they perceive that behaviour as the accepted way to behave.
- Internal mental state is important to learning; intrinsic reward (sense of achievement, pride, gain in confidence or self-esteem) is as influential as the reinforcement methodology in bringing about learning.
- Learning does not equate to a change in behaviour; people actively choose whether to apply new learning, and this can be on a temporary or a permanent basis.
There is also a correlation between Bandura’s social learning theory and writings on organisational culture, such as Lave and Wenger’s communities of practice.
Albert Bandura
- Born: 4 December 1925, Mundare, Canada
- Professional description: psychologist
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Very closely related to operant conditioning and the social construction of reality, social learning presupposes the cognitive maturity to relate actions to consequences. Adventure learning is a group process whose success relies as much on the cohesion of the members as it does on their abilities. The collaborative process of forming a strategy, discussing options, making decisions and working together combine to make adventure learning a valuable social learning tool; peer reaction and action consequence are important mechanisms that embed and reinforce personal development. Having a strong influence on the positivity of reaction to group behaviour and actions, the adventure learning instructor can direct and manipulate this. Supporting participants to realise the nature, extent and applicability of their learning, the instructor facilitates the subliminal decision-making of the individual as to whether or not they want to proceed to Kolb’s active experimentation and apply their perceived ‘new’ knowledge in their ‘normal’ everyday environment away from the adventure learning setting.
Along the lines of social development theory (Vygotsky), a group of adventure learning participants will mimic one another but, more importantly, will mimic the instructor, perceived as the significant influential model (MKO) within the adventure learning setting. The criticality of the way in which the instructor presents themselves and behaves in respect of the group is thus fundamental.
Progressive education is essentially a view of education that emphasises the need for experience, to learn by doing. John Dewey (1910, 1938) believed that people learn through a ‘hands-on’ approach, advocating the idea that experience in itself does not provide ingrained learning; reflection on experience provides lasting learning, which makes the adventure learning instructor’s responsibility to the quality of experience infinite. Where traditional education centred upon a curriculum and inherited knowledge for its content, progressive education focused upon the learner as an individual, unimpeded by the educator. Dewey argued that neither viewpoint is adequate because traditional education requires regimentation and avoids consideration of the learner’s capacity or interests, but progressive education requires absolute individualism and avoids consideration of the educator’s role.
Dewey was a pragmatist, believing that reality must be experienced, that learners must interact with their instructor and their environment, with all enjoying an equal voice in the learning experience. Dewey believed in an interdisciplinary (holistic) curriculum that connected subjects and allowed learners to construct their own paths of learning; the instructor is a facilitator, recognising the propensity of the students and facilitating their next steps. The Dewey-style classroom would be filled with groups exploring differing concepts within subject (topic), conversation and collaboration. Written tests may or may not be evident, but would be supplemented and supported by a range of evaluation techniques.
The term ‘andragogy’ is ascribed to Malcolm Knowles (1990), but was actually first introduced in 1833 by Alexander Kapp. Knowles’s principles of andragogy are arguably a synopsis of the assumptions and values of other theorists of adult educational theory. Malcolm Knowles argued that adults and children learn differently, believing child learning is limited to directive classroom teaching because of limited life experience and less developed thinking, whereas adults independently seek learning and progression. He argued adults are self-directed, responsible for decisions and actions. Adult learning (andragogy) exists in opposition to child learning (pedagogy), as adults enter learning willingly (often voluntarily) because they know and understand why they need to acquire the knowledge. On this basis, adult learners engage differently, applying past knowledge and experiences. The educator becomes a facilitator, rather than a teacher, supporting, rather than controlling, input.
Knowles established four differentiating characteristics between andragogy and pedagogy, later adding a fifth:
- Self-concept: individuals move with maturity from dependence to independence, becoming involved in the planning and evaluation of their learning.
- Adult learner experience: increasing maturity brings increasing experience, building a knowledge bank as a resource base on which to ground learning, founded on experience and ‘trial and error’ learning.
- Readiness to learn: increasing maturity orients learning to the social and professional life of the individual; people are most interested in the subjects that affect them personally or professionally.
- Orientation to learning: increasing maturity makes the need to apply new knowledge more immediate, with the goal of learning being the application of knowledge (problem solving), rather than the knowledge itself (content oriented).
- Motivation to learn: individuals become more motivated to learn as they mature.
Paolo Freire (1996) maintained two views of people:
- People are objects to be shaped as desired, able to be trained like animals, acting and obeying as commanded, without thought or reflection.
- People are subjects, independent thinking beings who can shape the world as they desire, able to reflect and strategise.
By his concept of ‘banking education’, Freire sees the instructor depositing (imposing) predetermined information, without dialogue or negotiation, with no consideration that the learner is able to think or act independently (behaviourist). Freire proposed the alternative of ‘libertarian education’, starting with the reality of the learner and their right to question and challenge (cognitive). Cognitive learning acknowledges the value of dialogue and the learner-instructor relationship. Freire postulated that learning is never neutral; if people are not passive recipients of knowledge, they are active problem solvers, linking knowledge to action in order to shape their world. According to Freire, the world is comprised of dominant social relations that instil a culture of silent suppression on the oppressed, but the oppressed can develop a critical consciousness that will enable them to recognise this culture and reform the world to overcome it.
John Dewey
- Born: 20 October 1859, Burlington, Vermont
- Died: 1 June 1952, New York City, New York
- Professional description: philosopher, psychologist, educational reformer
Malcolm Knowles
- Born: 24 August 1973, Livingston, Montana
- Died: 27 November 1997, Fayetteville, Arkansas
- Professional description: adult educator
Paolo Freire
- Born: 19 September 1921, Recife, Brazil
- Died: 2 May 1997, São Paulo, Brazil
- Professional description: educator, philosopher
Relating the theory to adventure learning
Learning theories are at the core of adventure learning as an holistic educative tool. Adventure learning is experiential, participants engage in an activity physically and psychologically, they feel the emotional and corporal consequences of their engagement and are commissioned with the discovery of their own learning. The support offered by the instructor is ultimately facilitative, rather than directive, placing the responsibility of success on the participants and their cognitive capacity. The subsequent lateral transfer of knowledge and skills endows the participant with the recognition that they have ownership of its application and may choose when and how they may do so. Taking ownership means understanding and accepting the consequences of actions, making informed decisions, a critical indicator of human maturation.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.
Dewey, J. (1910) How We Think. Chicago, IL: D. C. Heath & Co.
Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and Education. New York: Touchstone.
Freire, P. (1996) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin Books.
Gardner, H. (1983) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, New York: Basic Books.
Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Dell.
Goleman, D. (1998) Working with Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Dell.
Honey, P. and Mumford, A. (1982) Typology of learners. In their Manual of Learning Styles. London: P. Honey Publications.
Knowles, M. S. (1990) The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company.
Kolb, D. A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source for Learning and Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maslow, A. (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50: 370–396.
Piaget, J. (1973). The Language and Thought of the Child (Vol. 5). Brighton: Psychology Press.
Rogers, C. (1959) A theory of therapy, personality and interpersonal relationships as developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch (ed.), Psychology: A Study of a Science, Vol. 3: Formulations of the Person and the Social Context. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965) Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 63: 384–399.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.