Behavior Management Through Adventure

Jean Walsh and Peter Aubry

Behainor Mnnn^ement through Adventure (BMTA) zoorks to create a healthy community, empoweringyoung people to develop responsihiliti/for self and others. It was initially developed hy Project Adventure(PA) for a residential treatment program for court-involved youth. This model moves beyond imrtwdiatebehavior control to foster social emotional learning. Over the past twenty years, the methodology hasbeen extended to other alternative education and juvenile justice programs. This article explores thetheory, practice, and evaluation of the model.

The Evolution of AdventurePrograms

In 1981, Cindy Simpson of Project Adventure beganan Adventure Based Counseling program for first-time and low-level juvenile offenders in Georgia.Adventure Based Counseling is used to help youthconfront and manage anti-social behaviors andadopt pro-social behaviors. This early work laid thefoundation for Behavior Management ThroughAdventure (BMTA) today—a model that integratesAdventure Based counseling with a therapeuticbehavior management system that is restraint free.Currently, PA implements eight BMTA programs,ranging from an alternative middle school to a resi-dential treatment program for juvenile sexualoffenders. BMTA is consistent with the emergingassets-based and resilience approaches as describedby Benard (2004).

Core Elements of BehaviorManagement Through AdventureBMTA is a wholistic model incorporating groupprocesses, conflict resolution, and consequences. In aparticipatory process, the youth co-create the thera-peutic community. BMTA does not supplant othertreatment modalities that might be employed butprovides an overarching resiliency orientation pro-

moting program. Research has repeatedly shownthat adolescents who exhibit multiple problembehaviors also have multiple underlying issues thatwarrant a holistic approach (e.g., Donovan & Jessor,1985; Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1988; Jessor & jessor,1977; Chung & Elias, 1996).

BMTA has four core elements:

1. Adventure Activities

2. A Therapeutic Community

3. Positive Group Process

4. Assessment

Each of these core elements is discussed in theremainder of this article.

1. Adventure Activities

What is Adventure?

Adventure grew from experiential education. JohnDewey (1910), one of the founders of experientialeducation, understood learners to be participants inthe learning process, and he placed an emphasisupon learning through experimentation and prac-tice. Kurt Hahn's principles of goal setting, usingactivities therapeutically, and employing risk to pro-mote growth are foundational to BMTA (Fletcher &Hiiikle, 2002).

36 reclaiming children and youth 16:1 spring 2007 ife pp. 36-39

How is Adventure Used in a BMTA Group?

An example of an adventure activity designed tohelp young people resist substance abuse is calledRelapse River. In this activity a large area, over tenfeet long and four feet wide on the gromid or floor, isdelineated by ropes or the like. It is strewn with itemsrepresenting liquor bottles, cigarette packs, baggiesof drugs, etc. Clients pair up as teams, one blindfold-ed, the other one not. The blindfolded client is wellguarded while he or she traverses the length of theRelapse River with only the voice of his or her team-mate for guidance. The goals can be adapted by staffto meet time requirements, levels of frustration, andother needs. The non-blindfolded teammate cannottouch his or her teammate in the river. To make itmore confusing, and more like real life, a couple ofteams may traverse at the same time, so there are sev-eral competing voices. All clients have a turn asguide and blindfolded person. Youth who are averseto wearing a blindfold can simply close their eyes.The therapeutic community then discusses the activ-ity prompted by questions such as:

• Was your guide encouraging when you made amistake or did he or she get really upset?

• When you are hanging out, are there differentpeople telling you to do different things?

• How do you figure out which of those people, athome, to listen to? Who are the people who trulycare about you and how do you know?

• What did you learn today that would help youfind and listen to those caring voices?

Why Use Adventure?

Challenge experiences are often used to developproblem-solving abilities. Adolescents who are ableto solve problems are more resilient and less likely tosuffer negative psychological consequences thanthose who avoid problems (Dumont & Provost,1999; Ebata & Moos, 1994; Herman-Stahl, Stemmler,& Petersen, 1995).

Albert Bandura (2001) observed that young peopleneed to become active agents in exploring and influ-encing their environment that counts. This inextrica-ble link between learning and problem-solvingexperience has been echoed by educators, and psy-chologists throughout the past century (e.g., Caine &Caine, 1994; Dewey, 1910).

Youth are supported in and asked to focus on theirabilities rather than their inabilities. This orientation

can diminish initial defenses and lead to healthychange when combined with the successful comple-tion of progressively difficult and rewarding tasks.Problems are reframed into opportunities to developcharacter strengths such as emotional stability, deci-sion making, assertiveness, and social competence(Hattie, Marsh, Neill, & Richards, 1997; Peterson &Seligman, 2004).

Adventure, when well done, is engaging—it is funand youth want to participate. They are able to expe-rience a behavior (positive or not), reflect on thatbehavior, replicate or diminish that behavior, andtransfer new learning to other settings.

Adventure challenges young persons to grow inresponsibility to self and others. They are encour-aged to set goals and discover a sense of purpose,central factors in fostering resiliency (Benard, 2004).Setting and achieving goals is also linked toself-efficacy and self-esteem, both internal protectivefactors.

2. A Therapeutic Community

BMTA builds a therapeutic community throughProject Adventure's Full Value Contract' (FVC). Thecontract is pivotal in creating behavioral norms andvalues. It provides a structure for creating a safeenvironment and helps youth explore, understand,and value healthy pro-social behaviors. TheContract itself is typically a poster-sized document,created by clients and hung in clients' shared space.However, it is not simply a piece of paper; the con-tract is at the heart of a well-run BMTA program.

The FVC is a participatory, thoughtful, and funmethod of building a therapeutic community.Resiliency and positive youth development fosteredenables meaningful participation in school, family,and youth programs (Benard, 2004; Pittman &Wright, 1991). The Full Value norms are agreed uponby staff and clients. To that end all community mem-bers (staff and clients alike) use and are responsibleto the Contract and its norms. Therapeutic commu-nities own their norms by defining them. Staff mem-bers make suggestions and clarifications and are freeto eliminate anything inappropriate. Staff may alsoadd any non-negotiable norms if required.

FVC is not stagnant but develops with the life of thegroup. It provides a clear set of expectations andlimits, another key to promoting resiliency.

volume 16, numben spring 2007 '̂̂ 57

3. Postive Group Process

BMTA staff model peer to peer counseling. Clientslearn how to manage a group process that exempli-fies what Brendtro, Brokenleg, and Van Bockern(2002) and Quigley (2004) outline as best practices inan adolescent peer counseling program that theyrefer to as Positive Peer Culture. Young BMTAclients gain not only the skill of self-reflection, butself-efficacy by influencing behavior both of self andothers. Self-efficacy has been shown to positivelyimpact one's ability to achieve goals and functionin a pro-social manner (e.g., Bandura, 1997;Vancouver, Thompson, & Williams, 2001;Vancouver, Thompson, Tischner, & Putka, 2002). AsBandura (2003) reflects:

Among the mechanisms of human agency,none is more central or pervasive thanbeliefs of personal efficacy. Whatever otherfactors ser\'e as guides and motivators, theyare rooted in the core belief that one has thepower to produce desired effects, (p. 87)

A fundamental group management technique isreferred to as Calling Group. This technique is usedby clients and staff alike. As youth manage them-selves, staff are less likely to initiate these group ses-sions. Simply, when group is called, everyone,including staff, stands in a circle close together.Everything else stops as the focus becomes the issueat hand. A Group can be called by anyone in thetherapeutic community to address either a positiveor a negative experience.

As youth begin to regulate their behavior, the FullValue Contract may be used to support group inter-vention. A youth might say, "I am Calling Groupbecause our Full Value Contract says no stealing,and 1 saw you take something that does not belongto you." Group members closely examine eachother's behaviors—challenging the negative andencouraging the positive.

4. Assessment

Assessment belongs to both youth and staff. Adultsare constantly assessing youth who are involved inassessing themselves and their peers. Unlike moretraditional talk therapies, staff are not limited to ayouth's self report to learn of anti-social behaviors,but are able to observe these directly. Direct obser-vation can be particularly valuable when working

with resistant adolescents who may not want to dis-cuss or give an honest appraisal of their problems.Direct behavioral observation is one of the mostempirically sound assessment techniques methods(Merrell, 1999).

Initially, staff play a prominent role in teaching andmodeling expectations. As the youth becomeempowered, staff members are able to cede controland allow the group to manage themselves withinbehavioral norms. However, staff do not abdicatetheir role in managing treatment, education, and liv-ing environment. A major goal is to move youthfrom external controls to self-control and empower-ment. This entails building what Bandura (1986)calls self-reflective capabilities—the ability to thinkabout, define, and evaluate one's behavior.

In addition to individual assessment. ProjectAdventure has tracked results for its BMTAprograms in Georgia, most notably in the area ofrecidivism. The following summarizes data collect-ed by Georgia's Department of Juvenile Justice.Concerning recidivism, from 1991 to 2001, Choicesgraduates were returned to detention at a rateof 15.53%. A 1991 evaluation found statisticallysignificant:

• Gains in positive perceptions of family (pre/postcomparison);

• Decreases in feelings of depression (pre/postcomparison);

• Increases in feelings of social extroversion(pre/post comparison).

From 1991 to 2001, ̂ Challenge (an 8- to 12-weekprogram for adjudicated youth) graduates werereturned to detention at a rate of 29.06%. From 1996to 2001, Legacy graduates since 1996 were returnedat a rate of 6.75"/! (Legacy graduated its first client in1996.) Independent Living graduates since 1998(IL graduated its first client in 1998) returned todetention at only an 8% rate.

Jean Walsh, MA, is curriculum coordinator and grant writerfor Project Adventure, Beverly, Massachusetts. She uses herexperience implementing Behavior Management throughAdventure in one of Project Adventure's direct service pro-grams for adjudicated youth to bring practicality to her researchand writing efforts. She can be cotitncted by phone: 1-978-524-4650 or e-mail: jtwwork@comcast.net

38 t+'̂^ reclaiming children and youth

Peter Aubry, MA, is manager of training and considting forProject Adventure, Beverly, Massachusetts. He has 17 yearsexperience working in psychiatric, drug and alcohol, and resi-dential treatment programs. In his zvork with ProjectAdventure, he delivers various therapeutic, physical education,and corporate training programs. He can be contacted by phone:1-978-524-4608; or e-mail: paubry@pa.org

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1997). Si'lf-effkacxj: The exercise of control. New York:Freeman.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hali.

Bandura, A. (1991). SiKial cognitive theory of moral thought andaction. In W. Kurtines & J. Geweritz (Eds.), The handhook of moralht'luwior and developmenl (Vol. 1), pp. 45-103. Hillsdaie, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bandura, A. (2lX)l). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective.Annual Revieiu of Psychology.

Bandura, A., & Locke, E. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goalsRevisited, lonrnal of Applied Psiichology. 88{\), 87-99.

Benard, B. (2004). Turning the corner: From risk to resilience. TheNatiomil Resilience Resource Center, University of Minnesota,Retrieved on April 5, 2006 from http://www.cce.umn.edu/r\rrc

Brendtro, L. K., Brokenleg, M., & Van Bwkem, S. (2002). Reclaimingyouth at risk: Our hope for the future. Bloomington, IN: NationalEducational Service.

Caine, G., & Caine, R. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and thehuman brain. Boston: Addison Wesley.

Chung, H., & Elias, M. (1996). Patterns of adolescent involvement inproblem behaviors: Relationship to self-efficacy, social compe-tence, and life events. American journal of Community Psychology.24(6), 771-784.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D. C. Heath.Donovan, J. E., & Jessor, R. (1985). Structure of problem behavior in

adolescence and young aduUhcx>d. Journal of Consulting andClinical Psychology. 53. 890-904.

Donovan, J. E., Jessor, R., & Costa, F. M. (1988). Syndrome of problembehavior in adolescence: A replication, jivirnnl of Consulting amiClinical Psychology, 56. 762-765.

Dumont, M., & Provost M. (1999). Resilience in adolescents:Protective role of social support, coping strategies, self-esteem,and social activities on experience of stress and depression.journal of Youth and Adolescence. 28(3), 343-363.

Ebata, A. T., & Moos, R. H. {1994). Personal, situational, and contex-tual correlates of coping in adolescence, journal of Research onAdolescence. 4, 99-125.

Fletcher, T., & Hinkle S. (2002). Adventure based counseling: Aninnovation in counseling, journal of Counseling and Davtopment.80{3), 277-285.

Hattie, J. A., Marsh, H. W., NeiU, J. T., & Richards, G. E. (1997).Adventure education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experi-ences that make a lasting difference. Rexuezi' of EducationalResearch, 67, 43-87.

Herman-Stahl, M. A., Stemmler, M., & Petersen, A. C. (1995).Approach and avoidant coping: Implications for adolescentmental health, journal of Youth & Adolescence. 24, 649-665.

Jessor, R., & Jessor, S. L. (1977). Problem behaz>ior and psychosocial devel-opment: A longitudinal study of youth. New York: Academic Press.

Merrell, K. (1999). Behavioral, social and emotional assessment of adoles-cents. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Peterson, C. & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths andvirtues: A handbook and classification. Washington, DC: AmericanPsychological Association.

Pittman, K., & Wright, M. (1991). Bridging the gap: A rationale forenhancing the role of community organizations in promoting youthdevelopment. Washington DC: Carnegie Council on YouthDevelopment.

Quigley, R. (2004). Positive peer groups: "Helping others" meets pri-mary developmental needs. Reciaiming Youth and Children. 1.3(3),134-137.

Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., Ttschnor, E. C , & Putka, D. J.(2002). Two studies examining the negative effect of self-efficacyon performance, journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 506-516.

Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., & Williams, A, A, (2001). Thechanging signs in the relationships between self-efficacy, person-al goals, and performance, journal of Applied Psychology, 86,605-620.

Photo by Shannon Szwarc from Wilderness Wittiin,Wilderness Wittiout Used with permission.

volume 15, number 1 spring 2007 ^-^ 39