Adventure into Education: Innovation in teaching in tertiary settings

Teresa B. Carlson

The Department of Human Movement Studies

Nadja Spegel

The School of Law

The University of Queensland Q 4072

Phone: 07 3365 6637

Email: terryc@hms01.hms.uq.edu.au

Adventure into Education: Innovation in teaching in tertiary settings

Each year, tens of thousands of Australians make a brief but significant appearance on stage. Dressed in period costume, and usually restricted to a small walk-on-role, they get to shake the hands with a person splendidly attired in medieval regalia, and leave again clutching a rolled certificate. For some, this ceremony embodies the intangible links between the modern university and its ancient predecessors; for others, it represents the essentially anachronistic trappings of an out-of-date institution. For all, it marks an important accomplishment, the realisation of a dream, the fulfilment of an ambition, the recognition of an achievement. For a brief instant, the new graduates can pause and revel in their attainment before turning toward whatever the future might hold for them. None knows for certain just what that future will be: the only thing they can be sure of is that their learning-far from being over-is really only just beginning.

(Candy, Crebert, & O'Leary, 1994, p. 15)

This manuscript describes a journey upon which the authors embarked to explore different ways to better equip their students with strategies to facilitate lifelong learning. The pilot study began with collaboration among three University Departments (Law, Government and Human Movement Studies) and the decision to work toward the design of an interdisciplinary subject on conflict

management. This subject would employ a range of different interactive teaching strategies including adventure based learning (ABL).

ABL can be defined as "an experiential process of learning by doing, which takes place primarily through exposure to the out-of-doors." Experiential learning has been defined as:education (the leading of students through a process of learning) that makes conscious application of the students' experiences by integrating them into the curriculum.... Students are viewed as valuable resources for their own education, the education of others and the well-being of the communities of which they are members. Although formal

educators become senior members of learning communities, students share in the process of teaching, and teachers actively continue to learn from the experiences with the group."

Carver, 1996, p. 9.

Experiential education and ABL include the following principles (synthesised from Carver, 1996). First, they are authentic in that the activities and consequences are relevant to the lives of the participants. They are personally meaningful - not only for the future (as much of education is) but for the here and now. Second, students are physically and/or mentally engaging in the active process of learning, using problem solving methods. Third, students' experiences are integrated and their feelings, reactions and observations guide them towards greater understanding. Finally, there are mechanisms provided for connecting experience to future opportunity. In all forms of experiential education, students are active participants in their own education. Essentially, the difference between experiential education and traditional education isthat classroom learning usually begins with dispensing of a particular body of information (via book, film or lecture). This information is then meant to be organised and assimilated by the student and finally learned when it is actually applied through action. Experiential learning takes just the reverse track. The learner is presented with the opportunity to carry out an action and see the effects of that action. From this base, general concepts and principles are generated (Gager, 1982).

Little (1981) stated that

students describe these limitations [of the traditional approach] as reporting that they know something but do not

understand its application or how to apply it. Employers express this in their primary criticism of college graduates that students know a lot but cannot do anything, obviously a case of incomplete learning (p. 1).

Considerable similarities can be identified between the characteristics of experiential learning and those identified by the Higher Education Council (Australia) as teaching methods that encourage graduates to become lifelong learners. In fact, one of the characteristics is the inclusion of experiential learning! These characteristics include (a) "use of peer-assisted and self-directed learning; (b) experiential and real-world learning; (c) problem-based teaching; and, (d) the encouraging the development of reflective practice and critical self-awareness" (Candy, Crebert, & O'Leary, 1994, p. xii).

ABL has two additional principles. First, participants are challenged by choice. They can set their own level of involvement in the process. Second, ABL takes experiential learning one step further by adding the element of disequilibrium. Disequilibrium is described as "an individual's awareness that a mis-match exists between old ways of thinking and new information. It is a state of internal conflict that provides motivation for an individual to make personal changes" (Nalder & Luckner, 1992, p. 7). The addition of disequilibrium to a task results in the activity becoming less predictable and therefore more real.

The need to place participants in a state of discomfort or disequilibrium has also been identified by Sakofs, Armstrong, Proudman, Howard and Clark (1995). They proposed a Teacher Development Model for Promoting Sustainable Educational Reform (TDMSER). The model was founded on "the proposition that, in general, people find it difficult to let go of ideas with which they are familiar/comfortable" (p. 129). Basing their model on the work of Lewin (1977), Dewey (1938) and Friere (1973) the authors believe that in order to promote change, ideas and beliefs have to be thawed and shifted (deconstruct and reconstruct) in both personal and professional paradigms. This shift could then lead to an action-reflection praxis phase. Both this model and ABL identify a need to move participants out of their comfort zone to create maximum impact. It is important, however, to note that adventure education does not cause change; "it highlights a need to change and supports any personal decisions to make changes." (Priest, 1990, p. 114).

ABL has been used in tertiary education for many years, although its status and its purposes have varied. Some programs have been

used as a way of orienting new students to the rigours of academic life and assisting them to adjust to their new environment, and for residential life training programs, particularly in the USA (Gass, 1990; Terenzine & Pascarella, 1980). Others have been utilised to train residential assistants at colleges (Gass, 1990) and in teacher education, the technique has been used in connection with physical education. There also are ABL programs that have "been used as means to provide student teachers with insights into how students learn, what school is like for children who have difficulty learning and how placing students in stressful situations affects their learning" (Gass, 1990, p. 397). Unfortunately, very few of these programs have been documented, nor research conducted to measure the effectiveness of these (Cason & Gillis, 1994; Eder, 1976). Documentation of how ABL could be used in the context of teaching the skills necessary to manage conflict was not found.

The major purpose of the research project was to investigate the impact of an ABL program of one day duration on fourteen University students. The specific research questions were (a) Did the participants report that the ABL program contributed to their knowledge and implementation of conflict management skills? (b) In what ways (if any) did the participants report that participation in ABL impacted upon their beliefs or skills? and (c) Did the participants report any carry over from the ABL program one month after the intervention, and if so, what aspects were reported as important.

Method

Participants and contextThis research was funded by the University of Queensland under the umbrella of an action learning grant. Action learning has been defined as "learning from concrete experiences and critical reflection on that experience, through group discussion, trial and error, discovery and learning from each others" (Zuber-Skerritt, 1993, p. 45). Five members formed the action learning team that worked for a year to design and pilot ideas and teaching methods to encourage "deep learning", particularly in connection with conflict management strategies. The team consisted of a lecturer from the Law, Government, and Human

Movement Studies Departments, a representative from the University's Tertiary Education Institute and a student from the Law department.

Fourteen students were involved in the specific ABL program which consisted of a one day workshop. The participants comprised six departments: Law, Education, Psychology,

Government, Management, and Human Movement Studies. They were at varying stages of their University studies and their age varied from 18-40 years. Six were male and eight female. None of the participants had studied conflict management skills prior to the study. The students had volunteered to be involved with the program because they had an interest in conflict management skills or in the technique of ABL. Very few of them had met prior to this day. They were presented with the certificate of participation for their attendance and breakfast and lunch were provided. All participants gave permission for the collected data to be used for the study. Some of the videotaped material was used in a video production so anonymity could not be assured.Participants were aware of this. Nevertheless, pseudonyms have been used for all participants in this paper.

The workshop consisted of one day of eight hours duration, in which the participants were involved in a series of ABL activities. The program was structured to provide participants with an introduction to conflict management, in particular the skills of communication, negotiation, issues of trust and cooperation, problem solving, and lateral thinking. The workshop was trialled on campus, in a parkland area. Three facilitators, the two authors and a consultant, organised and conducted the program. The workshop included a range of trust and communication activities followed by problem solving and lateral thinking exercises. Many of the activities can be found in adventure education books (Rohnke, 1984, 1989, 1991, 1994, 1995; Schoel, Prouty & Radcliffe, 1988). Appendix A contains the activity sequence and references.

Systematic observationThroughout the day, participants were videotaped, not only during activity and reflection sessions, but also in interaction with their peers during "down times." Notes from the eight hours of tape were then taken, and dialogue was recorded. Each recorded segment were then noted and coded.

Reflective JournalsParticipants were provided with a reflective journal and asked to respond to the questions contained within the document. The journals were collected at the end of the day and photocopied before being returned to the participants.

Interviews and stimulated recall sessionFour participants (one each from law, education, psychology and government) were interviewed four to six weeks after the program. The audiotaped interviews of approximately 30-40 minutes were conducted in pairs, with the first author as facilitator. The facilitator did not teach the participants and was unlikely to interact with these students in any future academic setting. The

semi-structured interviews (Miriam, 19) included questions about the participants' perceptions of the day, what events remained vivid in their memories one month after the program, why these particular events stood out as memorable, and what they believed they learned (if anything) from their involvement in ABL. On the

completion of the interview, interviewees viewed an edited version of the videotaped data and were invited to discuss how they were feeling at that time and to report reactions to the activities, the participants and facilitators.

AnalysisData from the interviews and stimulated recall sessions were transcribed and added to the transcriptions from the videotape data. All transcripts and the journal entries were broken down to segments. All the written material was sorted into segments which contained one idea and were placed on cards. The structure within the journal format and the discussions that followed the activities ensured that four areas of foci or categories would be present: communication, negotiation, cooperation, and problem solving/lateral thinking. The authors coded samples of the data independently and placed each incident or segment into these already identified categories if appropriate and sorted the remaining data into tentative categories. A process of constantcomparison was used (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Any discrepancies were discussed, with the result that a limited number of segments were recoded. Segments often spanned two or even three categories. Segments were then separated into sub-categories which better represented the data. Frequency counts for each coded item were used to identify the more prominent categories.

LimitationsThe small number of participants involved in the workshop component of this research and the smaller number interviewed should be considered when the implications of this research are weighed. Further, a keen observer will note that some voices are more prominent than others throughout this paper. This is, in part, because of the extra data obtained through the interviews, but also because some participants, particularly the older students, either responded more positively to the technique or articulated their ideas more freely and more comprehensively. Biggs and Telfer (1987) believed that older students had learned more "about themselves and their learning that school leavers have not yet learned" (p. 155) and this may account for the more positive response from the mature age students.

Results

Six categories were identified from data analysis. As mentioned, the first four centred around the objectives of the program (communication, cooperation, negotiation, and problem solving/lateral thinking). Two additional categories were identified from the data: group conflict and personal learnings.

Communication. Communication is defined as the process whereby an idea is transferred from one person to another, using visual, verbal and vocal means (Halpern, 1992). The fact that communication was identified as a dominant theme throughout the data was not surprising. The participants were guided through journal questions and discussions to reflect on the different modes of communication they had adopted and observed. While the abundance of data centred around communication was expected, what participants reported that they had learned about communication was less directed and of greater interest. Not all of the reported findings were new revelations. What the program appeared to do was highlight and reinforce the different components of communication.

Participants reported that the ABL activities placed them in intense and complex situations with strangers (a process of disequilibrium) and in order to be successful, they recognised that effective communication skills were essential. In the processing sessions that followed the activities, participants were guided to a greater awareness of why the communication had or had not been successful. The effectiveness of the interactions varied considerably, but it appeared that over the eight hours of contact, most participants realised that communication was a learned skill.

Analysis of the data indicated that within the communication category were three sub- categories: issues focusing on the listener and the skill of listening, reasons for the breakdown of communication and the role of communication structures. No doubt, participants already were aware of much of the information contained within these threesub-categories. By placing them, however, in situations where these aspects of communication were highlighted, practiced and then reflected upon, they were required to analyse how and why the miscommunication had take place and actually experience the problems this could cause. The process was no longer merely cognitive. The "putting into practice" (the doing) required that knowledge became applied. Further, a focus on these skills may either motivate the participants to practice these skills or offer them a greater insight into the importance or subtleties of the skills. The following comment supports this conclusion. When asked the most important thing learned in this program, a

participant wrote, "I think I knew it already, but listening and accommodating others. This is something that I need to apply more to everyday experience and this workshop has heightened my awareness of this" (journal entry).

Listening skills. Analysis of the journal entries, the videotapes and the interview data indicated that the participants became increasingly aware of the importance of knowing more about the listener. One participant summarised this awareness when s/he wrote, " [I need to] understand their [the listener's] goals and their needs, consider the best technique to communicate with them, carefully instruct and make sure they are confident in themselves and with my instructions." Another participant wrote, "Had we known each other better we could have understood certain tones and meanings of specific instructions more effectively." During an interview, one participant commented, "I learned that day that there are some people who don't like to be touched...It had never occurred to me before. This is something I can't understand, something I have to learn about" (Annette). The last two statements also demonstrate the awareness of non-verbal communication--and how the messages could be distorted or interpreted quite differently from the messages being sent.

The data indicated that the ABL workshop highlighted the need to listen. The activities followed by the processing session reinforced what was already cognitively known but not as yet sufficiently developed as a skill. The following is an extract taken from video footage (Video 1) after one activity (raft) in which some participants were unsuccessful in achieving their goal. Videotaped footage reveals that not one participant from this unsuccessful group questioned their assumptions or clarified the rules. This point was raised by the facilitator during the

processing session that followed.

Facilitator: What was the initial problem?Participant: We didn't have enough informationFacilitator: You didn't have information?Participant: Oh, we had the information, but we didn't listen.Facilitator: You didn't listen and you did not clarify the rules or understand what the rules were.

One of the participants who was involved in this miscommunication was interviewed five weeks after the ABL workshop and he stated that the day had an impact on his listening skills,

Now I stop and listen, not all the time...but the adventure

day made me aware that I do not listen sufficiently and that listening is an important part of communication. I knew that theoretically already but the activities on that daydemonstrated its importance to me. I learned about listening in a practical sense (John, interview data).

Another interviewee also reported that his listening skills were enhanced by the workshop. He reported, "When I find a conflict arising in difficult situations, I find myself listening more, just hanging back before I get involved" (Ron, interview).

Unfortunately, the participants's communication skills were not measured prior to the workshop. The videotaped footage and the interviews, however, suggested that over the day the participants demonstrated a greater appreciation of the need to listen in an active way, and take into consideration the needs and mind set of the listener when sending messages.

Reasons for breaking down of communication pathways. Participants, through a series of activities, were guided to identify how communication can be rendered ineffective. Poor listening skills has already been discussed as one potential cause of communication breakdown that was identified during the workshop. Four other points raised during the day were (a) differences in terminology, (b) trust, (c) outside interference, and (d) the importance of verbalising coupled with the danger of making assumptions about team members' levels of understanding.

The realisation of how differences in terminology and jargon could result in miscommunication was highlighted by one particular activity (the mine field). As a communicator, the importance of being able to place oneself in another's shoes is important. The ability to achieve this includes being able to use the listeners' language, so that message has meaning for them. The task set required participants to negotiate an obstacle course blindfolded, with the verbal assistance of their team members. The need to clarify what was meant by simple words such as "big" were raised as one participant explained after the activity, "There was a huge difference in people's step size... Dan was shuffling along and others were taking big steps so you needed to communicate what size is big." (Cathy, videotape 1).

The importance of trust was raised during and after several activities. During the same exercise described above (minefield), one participant admitted, "These people have my best interest in mind, but they were giving me instructions and I was still walking very tentatively.... Like they were saying "you can take

a big step" and I was saying, "no I can't"....My point is that I

couldn't trust them enough." A discussion followed as to the importance of trust in communication, with the recognition that communication could be impeded if trust was not present. The data also indicated that participants recognised the responsibility of the communicator's role, an issue that is connected closely with trust. One participant stated "you felt that their life was in your hands." This comment indicates how real the perceived risks had become to the participants. Proponents of ABL (e.g. Nalder & Luckner, 1992; Schoel, Prouty, & Redcliffe, 1988) would argue that this is why the technique can be more effective than many other teaching methods. The videotape data suggest that participants accepted the challenge of being responsible for their team members. The following conversation supports the videotaped data,

Annette: People were so concerned, so caringHelen: They took it so seriously.... I got the sense of being in the real situation. That is why I was so pleased I got through. And when he said "you are nearly there, you can run" [blindfolded], I trusted him totally, I ran.

In another activity that required lifting, Rachel expressed her fears and her willingness to overcome these when she stated, "Someone had better catch me or I will be really unimpressed."

Interference (noise) that prevented the intended message reaching the listener through was also identified. One participant explained the pressure he was under during one activity,

One person was saying "try to get me a fruit cup"..and Jay was saying "try to get some sugar", so I was trying to get my voice in to get the sugar and margarine but it was difficult because there were 4 or 5 people. (George, Videotape 1).

He had difficulty coping with the multitude of messages bombarding him from several different sources.

Finally, two related issues, the importance of verbalising, and not assuming understanding were raised. These issues are also closely linked to effective listening skills. In an interview, Annette commented, "I felt they could have included us and explained what they were doing and to see if maybe we had some better idea or just explain it as they went along." Helen, when talking of another activity added, "They [males of group] could have verbalised their

thinking." Verbalising thinking can open opportunities for collaboration if framed as an open question. This skill can also reduce latent conflict and may have done so in this situation.

These comments raise another important issue: exclusion from a group, due to a lack of skill. The videotaped sessions clearly illustrated instances where there was some division by sex, with males taking charge at some stages of the workshop. The fact that this behaviour occurs is useful, because it emulates many "real life" situations. At the

same time, the issue must be addressed in order that transfer of learning to other situations can be made. If left unspoken it may reinforce past behaviours and beliefs.

Role of communication structures. Participants were placed in activities which required them to work in groups of four to the larger group of 14. The different structures and the varying effectiveness of these alerted the participants to some of the issues that should be considered when working with others. In the group discussions at the end of the day, participants indicated their preference for working in smaller groups and obtaining input from all group members. Some of the participants indicated an awareness of some of the issues involved in group. For instance, one student commented, "When we were broken up into smaller groups, the effectiveness often hinges on smaller group dynamics working properly, so the larger group dynamics can work better" (Dennis, videotape). Another participant reminded that collaboration and consultation was obtained at a cost,

I think people need to realise that if we want to be consultative and that is the way we wish to work, then there is a cost involved, and we should be willing to pay that cost and the cost is more time. Perhaps a willingness to discuss the matters openly and not to rush in. And we have to be willing to pay that price if we want to take that approach. (George, Video 2)

Finally, when asked to record the skills on which the group still needed to work, the majority of participants wrote down aspects of communication. The following are a few examples, "establishing and verifying rules and instructions and increasing listening and getting input from everyone." and "planning and communication." Finally when asked for memorable moments, one participant wrote, "Seeing how important communication and cooperation was to get through the course effectively."

A comparison of the aspects of communication the participants selected as important with the accepted principles of effective group communication may be worthwhile. Strano, Mohan and McGregor (1989) lists some of these principles as follows: The message should be complete and specific, assumptions should be made clear, feedback should be sought, knowledge of the audience is important, verbal and non-verbal messages should be congruent and the ideas, not the person presenting them, should be judged. These principles corresponded to many of the aspects highlighted above. Judgement of a person rather than an idea was the only principle that was not clearly articulated by the participants on the day. Nevertheless, there was some evidence of this in the interview data. Annette (interview) commented, "He is the antithesis of the type of person I would get on with and he's the person who I've learned the most from...and that day I was seeing him soften."

Cooperation was identified as an important component to maintain a cohesive group, although in this particular workshop harmony was not always completely obtained or maintained. Helen's (interview) comment illustrated the cooperation that existed among most groups, "I had great sense of satisfaction when we finally made it. That was

great. We worked very well together." Annette added, "We all managed to cooperate and I think a lot of people had the same fears or concerns, and we all managed to get each other through." Analysis of the journals revealed a similar story. In answer to the question "what went well in this activity?" the majority of the replies mentioned cooperation and/or trust. The following comment was typical of the replies, "We all worked well together and our cooperation and trust with and of one another assisted in our successful completion."

A very interesting point was raised after an activity where cooperation between two groups did not occur. One participant stated that he believed this may have been the groups' mind set, focused on the achievement of a narrow goal.

We didn't extend that task or question the rules or goals as being anything else other than getting our group across the swamp. If we had reconceptualise the task maybe we would have been more inclined to help the other groups." (George, videotape 1)

Problem solving and lateral thinking were placed in the same category, although there are difference between the two skills. Problem solving involves understanding the problem, devising a plan,carrying it out and reflecting on its success (Biggs & Telfer, 1987). Lateral thinking is a term coined by Edward de Bona to refer to non-linear, non- logical thinking patterns such as brainstorming (de Bono, 1990). Problem solving was dependent in part on the cooperation among members of the group. Planning was identified as a vital component of problem solving. Some activities took up to one hour to complete with the groups trialing more than six different models before adopting the one they eventually used. Some groups spent at least half of the allotted time in this activity to experimenting with a range of ideas. During the interview one participant confirmed this when she stated, "We spend at least half the time working out how to do this. We spent more than half. We were running out of time...but because we worked it out so well, we made it without any problems at all." (Helen, interview). It was evident from the videotaped material that as the day continued, planning which involved trialing a range of options became more prevalent. During the interview session, one student confirmed the use of problem solving and planning during the day,

We tried the original plan...but we didn't do very well, so that was abandoned straight away...We just thought we've got to sit down...and really look at it because if we made a mistake the first time, we'd just have to start all over again... we talked a lot." (Helen, interview)

Most of the activities completed over the day were designed to ask students to think differently and listen to and develop ideas in collaboration with others. This approach was not always successful, as the following videotaped episode of a discussion demonstrates,

Cathy: I found myself frustrated with the stupid ideas people were coming

up with until Margaret suggested the way it should be done and then everyone said, "OK, we will let her take charge" Facilitator: Isn't that an interesting perception? The way it should be done.Chorus: Yes, we found... (Babble of replies)Cathy: Well, the way we found it successful last time. Facilitator: But that is not the only way. What sort of thinking is that? When

we start talking, thinking like that as an individual? Jenny: Very close mindedFacilitator: It is limiting isn't it? Basically you have the resources here... you have 15 magnificent minds. You could potentially expand those 15 ideas 15 more times.

Cathy believed there was only one way to complete a task, the way that she had found had been successful in the past. Whether the ABL workshop had any impact on her future approach to problems is unknown as she was not one of the interview participants. Not all groups experienced this narrow perspective, as one interviewee explained,

With my group, David came up with the first suggestion, but it obviously wasn't really working well. Then someone suggested a better way and David stood back completely because someone had a better idea. It worked well." (Helen, Interview)

Another participant was amazed when his group discovered that what appeared at first to be a great disadvantage, could be turned to be in their favour. He stated "I know it sounds weird if we had suggested to get rid of a block would an advantage, but in the end actually losing a block for us became an advantage." (David, videotape #2) Participants were presented during the day with a series of activities that challenged them in different ways. The lasting impact of such an incident on Cathy and other participants was not measured, apart of the interview of four of the participants held after the workshop. Nevertheless, it appeared that some participants were alerted to the importance of listening and sharing new ideas and accepting that their idea was not the only successful way of completing a task.

Negotiation can be defined as a process where two or more parties who perceive their goals, needs, interested or behavior as incompatible, attempt to reach an agreement regarding these incompatibilities (Richards & Walsh, 1990). One particular activity (Barter for Breakfast) was designed to highlight and practice the skills of negotiation (See appendix A for description). There were real consequences to this activity as the participants bartered for sufficient food for breakfast.

It was evident from the videotaped footage that a variety of negotiation styles were trialled during the 40 minute

activity, with some being more successful than others. Annette explained "some people were very possessive and others would just give everything they had" (Annette,

interview data). One group had been allocated a range of "useless" items with which to barter, including coloured tissue paper. They created a demand by packaging this product and they "sold" the tissue paper as a breakfast table cloth in a package with other food resources (Videotape 1).

During the discussions that followed the activity, participants discussed what negotiation strategies they used, why they employed them and the success of these techniques. They reported that there was two forms of negotiation occurring simultaneously: intra- team and inter-team negotiations. George (videotape 1) identified the pressure he, as chief negotiator for his team, experienced. This comment has been used earlier to highlight the impact of "noise" interference in the communication structure.

One person was saying, "try to get me a fruit cup"..and Jay was saying "try to get some sugar, so I was trying to get my voice in to get the sugar and margarine but it was difficult because there were 4 or 5 people, so I had coercion from my own group as well as from other groups.

The observed and reported strategies adopted to cope with these pressures included walking away, speaking louder, and finding a new trading partner. One group admitted that they identified "certain things we wanted so we would put it away and only bring things down that we were willing to trade" (Damien, Videotape 1). During theprocessing session after the activity, participants admitted that some of these tactics would not be useful if the negotiation was to continue into the future. They identified that an ongoing relationship would require a consideration of mutual benefits.

Other negotiation aspects identified by the participants included the need to identify just what was available to trade, "The first thing I was wondering was what everyone else had. I wasn't sure what was there...Not knowing what was there" (videotape 1). Finally, the participants admitted that they had identified an imbalance in power. The designated negotiators were isolated from the rest of their team and therefore had more power than those outside the bargaining circle. This isolation resulted in some participants feeling ineffective,

while others repositioned themselves as close to the bargaining circle as possible, in an attempt to regain some influence and power. The result was the formation of informal negotiation channels outside the circle, in addition to the formal structured negotiation channels.

ConflictWhile overall the workshop was viewed very positively by all participants, there were moments where division occurred. As mentioned earlier, the activities were designed to place the participants outside their comfort zone. The fact that conflict did arise demonstrates how frustration and other emotions can easily occur when people are placed under pressure. One interviewed participant remembered, "I was so impressed with the way everyone came together but there were a couple of times during the day when I sort of felt as though there was division. One of the most evident

divisions occurred during an activity called the raft. The object was to move all members of the group safely to the other "shore," on a raft.

The following is an extract taken from the videotaped documentation of the workshop (Videotape 2)

Plaintive cry from the shore: Can we join your team? Reply from one team member in the "successful" team: No, you could copy us though. Call from another member from the stranded team, trying to get their attention: Hello. The successful team moves away from the stranded team, discussing among themselves but ignoring the stranded team.Voice from shore: Wait there. One member of successful team: Do you guys want to join us? Voice from shore: We have lost all our blocks.One member of successful team: Will we be nice?Another person from successful team: no. A voice from shore: That's not very nice.

The other members of the successful team accepted the decision made by one person that no help would be given. They continued, ignoring the calls for help from the stranded team. During the processing that followed this activity, this incident was discussed. One of the stranded members stated, "We actually asked for some help and they told us to go jump." Another of the stranded members explained how she felt, "I

guess [I felt] disbelief that people would let leave you stranded there. I guess I can't understand that mentality" (Annette, videotape 1). Another participant, later on in the day identified the danger of conflict not being resolved when he stated, "In the long term if there is conflict and that conflict is not resolved, it can really undermine the working relationship of the group." (Dennis, videotape)

One month after the workshop, this particular incident was still very vivid in the mind of one participant. She stated, "If people can come away from the day feeling one way and still hold that, many people who made those comments still hold that belief that they were invincible and are never going to have to help other people...It still lives in me today." (Annette, interview) This comment demonstrates the impact of latent conflict; conflict that may not always be obvious to facilitators, but that could lurk beneath the surface of overt behaviour.

Strategies participants identified as ways to manage conflict varied considerably. Annette describes her frustration and her solution to conflict which emerged during the workshop. "We were talking past each other. That really frustrates me. I would have sooner walked away..It was on my mind...I didn't want to belong to the group." When asked what she would do in a similar situation in a work environment, she thought before replying, "If I had to work with a group like that, day after day...I'd go...It is an awful waste of energy doing nothing." Another student identified his method of dealing with the some problems faced during an activity when

he explained, "I just took a back seat for a while, let things just fall into place...I found no point in trying to pursue the point because it would increase the conflict and wouldn't do anything (John, interview). Similarly, Ron (interview) found he stood back and appraised the situation "I find myself [in conflict issues] just listening more, just handing back before I get involved."

Personal learnings The interview participants identified several "learnings" that they attributed to the workshop. These learnings centred around increased knowledge about themselves and others and differed greatly from individual to individual.

Annette (interview) discovered that she had a tendency to give up if she could not see the immediate relevance to a particular topic. She explained,

I didn't realize when an obstacle comes up that I can't be bothered with it...I just leave it...I wish I knew that at the beginning of my law degree. My whole study program might have been slanted differently. Ever since then [the ABL program] I have been monitoring myself very carefully to make sure that I don't walk away from things I shouldn't walk away from and it has been a real struggle. I remember the day clearly and I think, "You gave up in that situation, but you can't give up here." And I'll be working on myself over the next few years before I get the message. It was something that I really didn't know about myself (Annette, interview).

Annette also reported learning more about others and her reaction to them. ...that day was one prime example where if you just waited and watched people all their own fears and their images they felt they have to project but when the heats off... they come back and just be human and I thought that was one of the big things I got out of it...Every since then I've sort of looked at the person and if they worried me a bit, I think well that's only that person this minute on this day and they might be a bit different tomorrow...I was very grateful to that day. I mean you are aware of these things, but then when you are forced into their company and those horrible situations, it really makes you think more about what makes me think...and I have had to fight them ever since.

Helen identified a different aspect of her character that was highlighted during the workshop, I get so frustrated with myself. I know I have some good ideas, but I am not always sure at the time. So I sit back and assume that others have better ideas than mine. But afterwards I realise, "Why didn't I get in and do that." (Helen, interview data).

When I asked if she felt she had altered her behaviour since the ABL program, she stated, "I am doing it less than I used to...I am learning...I am better at participating now than I use to

be."

Ron stated that he had begun to develop more assertive

skills following the workshop. He explained.

Before the course, I was really interested in seeing what sort of person I was and how I was with people. And since then I've sort of related to the person I am...I have become more self-centred and think of myself a bit more and just justify what things are about. (Ron, interview)

John also identified the need to become more assertive. He commented,

Since that course I have seen that people just take me for granted sometimes. You get labelled and people expect you to do things...It confirmed for me that I am entitled to be noticed and I find in conflicts arise in a difficult situation, I find myself just listening more, just hanging back before I get involved" (John, interview)

These comments indicate that all interviewed participants believed they obtained some greater insight into their abilities and limitations and the abilities and limitations of others.

Discussion

While this was a preliminary study with a small sample size, the results indicate that ABL, as a form of experiential learning could be a valuable additional teaching technique in tertiary settings--particularly when skills such as communication, negotiation, and problem solving are being emphased. These elements are importantskills that are needed in situations were conflict management is necessary. The fact that much of the workshop was still so vivid in the minds of those interviewed a month or more after the intervention suggests that this medium has the potential to be a very powerful instructional tool. The aspects they reported as important tended to be individual and depend upon the personality and needs of each participant. Certainly the personal learning category indicates that some knowledge about themselves and others around them had altered (deconstructed), reconstructed and that some change had taken place. The other categories, particularly communication suggested that praxis, the welding of the theories of communication and negotiation, had taken place.

It is not practical, however, to introduce ABL in some subjects. Therefore, an analysis of the elements that appear to make this technique effective may assist

researchers and educators to design parallel experiences, using other media.

The first element identified as a vital component of experiential education and ABL was the authenticity of the experience and the need for the learning experiences to be relevant to the participants, now, as well as in the future. Second, students' feelings, reactions and observations are used to guide them toward greater understanding. These two

elements build upon a constructivist approach in that "knowledge is not transmitted directly from one knower to another, but is actively built up by the learner" (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Mortimer, & Scott, 1994, p. 5). Dewey, often hailed as one of the pre- eminent figures in American education believed that learners should be "actors" rather than spectators and advocated "learning by doing" (1969). One of the workshop participants enforced the importance of this "action" component when he stated,"When you learn from a lecture theatre it is hard to apply what you learn" (John, videotape 2). The third element, problem solving, adheres strongly to the principle of "learning by doing." The fourth attribute of experiential learning was the need for mechanisms to connect the experience to future opportunity. This component requires transfer to "real life" situations.

While many of us try, some more successfully than others, to incorporate these components into our teaching, the aspect which may single out ABL from other forms of experiential education is the deliberate introduction, and the intensity of the destabilisation or disequilibrium. The introduction of this element is designed to place participants outside their comfort zone, while maintaining an emotionally and physically safe environment.

Dewey (1938) believed that "Growth depends upon the presence of difficulty to be overcome by the exercise of intelligence" (p. 79). He continued that it is an educator's responsibility to present a challenge within the capability of the learner, a challenge that "arouses in the learner an active quest for information and production of new ideas." Similarly, Sakofs et al.'s (1995) Teacher Development Model (TDMSER) was based on the principle designed to take the preservice teachers away from what is familiar and comfortable. This may result in the "thawing" of former beliefs and ideas, thereby allowing the students to recreate a new position, based on new evidence. ABL achieved this by placing the participants in a new

environment and presenting them with unique situations. Appropriate support was provided and questions were used to guide theparticipants to reflect on what had occurred, to reconstruct meaning from the events and to transfer these to other real life situations.

Sakofs et al. (1995) argues that this action-reflection praxis phase assists preservice teachers to better cope with new environments. Students who have been placed outside their comfort zone, provided this is coupled with a supportive environment, have the opportunity to practice skills and can be guided to reflect on the implication of these skills. As a result they were more likely to move out of their comfort zone again, have learned the basis skills of reflection and are more likely to become committed lifelong learners.

In ABL, disequilibrium is effective because the experiences generate feelings of perceived risk (physical or emotional) and the situation becomes "real" to the participants. It is this feeling of reality that takes ABL one step further than media such as role play. Dependant on the intended

outcomes, however, the medium used to challenging the students could vary. For instance, the use of theatre to assist people to deal with real life issues in conflict and its resolution has been practiced and documented (Boal, 1995). The research raises the following issues. Is creating disequilibrium among learners a way to ensure that they confirm or "discover" important concepts? If this disequilibrium is desirable, how is it best introduced? Finally, how can a supportive environment be created and maintained in order that learners have something on which to cling when their ideas and beliefs are under attack or at least undergoing some restructuring.

Creating disequilibrium in our classes does not only challenge the students. Adopting this approach also challenges educators as it requires courage, commitment and a change of roles. The teacher is a learner and a guide in the quest for further knowledge. Lecturers and students must both become lifelong learners.

References

Alessandra, T., & O'Connor, M. J. (1990). People smart. La Jolla, CA: Keynote.

Biggs, J. B. & Telfer, R. (1987). The process of learning. Sydney: Prentice Hall.

Boal, A. (1995). The rainbow of desire: The Boal method of theatre and therapy. NY: Routledge.

Candy, P. C., Crebert, G., & O'Leary, J. (1994). Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. Canberra: Australian Govt Publishing Service.

Carver, R. (1996). Theory for practice: A framework for thinking about experiential education. The Journal of Experiential Education, 19(1), 8-13.

Cason, C., & Gillis, H. (1994). A meta-analysis of outdoor adventure programming with adolescents. Journal of Experiential Education, 40, 40-47.

de Bono, E. (1990). The use of lateral thinking. Ringwood, Vic: Penguin Books.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.

Eder, S. (1976). Learning on the rocks. American Education, 12(1), 24-29.

Friere, P. (1973). Pedagogy of the oppressed. NY: Seabury Press.

Gager, R. (1982). Experiential education: strengthening the learning process. Child and Youth Services, 4, 31-39.

Gass, M. (1990). Adventure Programs in higher education. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure Education (pp. 385-402). State College, PA: Venture. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. N.Y: Harper & Row.

Halpern, A. (1992). Negotiating skills. London: Blackstone Press.

Little, T. (1981). History and rationale for experiential

learning. National Society for internships and experiential education. 1-3.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. NY: Harper & Row.

Lincoln Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Miriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Nalder R. S., & Luckner, J. L. (1992). Processing the adventure experience. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.

Priest, S. (1990). The semantics of adventure education. In Miles J. C., & S. Priest (Eds), Adventure Education (pp. 113-118). State College, PA: Venture .

Richards, C., & Walsh, F. (1990). Negotiating. Canberra: AGSP Press.

Rohnke, K. (1995). Quicksilver. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.

Rohnke, K. (1994). The bottomless bag again. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.

Rohnke, K. (1991). Bottomless baggie. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.

Rohnke, K. (1989). From cowstails and cobras 11: A guide to games initiatives, rope courses and adventure curriculum. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall.

Rohnke, K. (1988). The bottomless bag of tricks. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall.

Rohnke, K. (1984). Silver bullets. Hamilton, MA: Adventure press.

Sakofs, M., Armstrong, G., Proudman, S., Howard, J., & Clark, T. (1995). Developing a teacher development model: a work in progress. The Journal of Experiential Education, 18(3), 128-132.

Schoel, J., Prouty, D., & Redcliffe, P. (1988). Islands of healing: A guide to adventure based counselling. Hamilton, MA: Project Adventure.

Strano, Z., Mohan, T., & McGregor, H. (1989).

Communication. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Javanovich.

Terenzine, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (180). Student/faculty relationships and freshmen year educational outcomes: a further investigation. Journal of College Student Personnel, 21(6), 521-528. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 238188.)

Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1993). Improving learning and teaching through action learning and action research. Higher Education Research and Development, 12(1), 1993, p. 45-58.

Acknowledgments: We would like to acknowledge the University of Queensland Tertiary Education Institute for their support. Sincere thank you also go to Glenn O'Grady (mentor for this project), and Michael Mellon and Kate Hutchings who were the other members of the project.

Appendix A

7.30 - A brief introduction to the day and introduction to the first activity Bartering for Breakfast (designed by N. Spegel). In this activity, participants were placed in groups. Each group had some ingredients or utensils or skills to contribute to successful completion of breakfast, but insufficient to successfully have breakfast without bartering with other groups. Rules provided structure and encouraged negotiation skills.

8.30 - Breakfast

9.30 - DISC model. This model was designed to assist participants to identify dominant behaviours and temperament types. Participants completed the disk and when they had worked out their "temperament type" they divided into those types and answered questions as a group and shared these with the other groups. This exercise highlighted to existence of many others who think and act in very different ways and for different reasons and how important it is to utilise those skills. More information on this model can be obtained from Australian Distributor, Integro Learning Systems, P/L, PO Box 483, Why, NSW, 2099. A useful reference that includes information about this model People Smart, written by Alessandra and O'Connor (1990).

10.00 - Minefield (Rohnke, 1991, p.50) - An exercise encouraging trust and because one of the group is blindfolded, the importance of clear verbal communication.

11.15 - Raft (Rohnke, 1984, p. 114) - An exercise in groups of approx six with the objective of encouraging teamwork and problem solving.

12.00 - Lunch

1.00 - 3.00 - Site central (Rohnke, 1991, p. 32) consisted of a range of activities, culminating in the spiderweb (Rohnke, 1984, p. 114)

3.00-4.00 - Group discussions culminating in a whole group sharing of ideas.

Biggs, J. (1994) What are effective schools? Lessons from East and West. Australian Educational Researcher, 21(1), 19-39.

Bolton, R. (1987). People skills. NSW: Prentice Hall.

Hunt, J. S (1990). Philosophy of Adventure Education.In Miles and Priest (pp. 126 Jasper S. Hunt, Philosophy of Adventure Education. Adventure Education. State College, PA: Venture

Priest, S. (9186). Redefining outdoor Education: A matter of many relationships. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(3), 13-15.