The area
The trip consisted of three nights and four days with canoeing, climbing and mountain bike activities throughout. Day one started with a short canoe section from the start point of Byglandfjord to an island around half way to the Syrtveit Dam which lies south of the start point.
Setting of learning outcomes
The group was split into two groups with each group being in charge of their own learning outcomes, this liassez-faire style of leadership led to the development of some problems especially when the two groups were then merged into one big group for the following two days of canoeing. when the group had been split into the initial two groups each group was given time to discuss what they wanted to learn while on the trip. After a small discussion the main outcomes were related to leadership and learning new skills. These skills involved looking at canoe strokes, leadership skills, shelter building and fire construction.
The trip was presented as the groups trip, meaning that it was up to the group to decide what and how they learned; these areas where chosen at the start but were able to change during if necessary.
The guides made it clear that they would take on a Liassez-faire leadership style perhaps in an attempt to allow the group to be able to solve their own problems which as Hayashi and Ewert (2006) discuss allows the group to have ownership of their learning and allows them to come up to problems that they can produce solutions for rather than being told how to solve them, however I feel this approach for this particular group may not have been beneficial considering the amount of inexperienced participants who needed direction. Perhaps a more structured approach utilising an autocratic style of leadership could have been more beneficial, giving the group specific learning objectives with structured activities, e.g. fire construction/shelter building demonstration.
Canoe Section
The canoe section was the first stage of the trip, spread over two days covering around 20-25km, from Bygland heading south to finish at the Syrtveit Dam north of Evje. Maps were given out and the group was instructed to come up with a plan for the next two days, with information about the overnight camp location, the intended travel distance on each day, river navigation and keeping the group together. As we set off it soon became clear that the group was going to struggle to stay as one group, with such a spread of ability throughout the group we soon found ourselves spread out with as much as 1km separating the front to the back of the group. Up to this point I had been happy to watch and see how the group developed, however when the group eventually reformed on the mainland shoreline (just 2-3km from the intended overnight island destination) I took on a more autocratic role, encouraging the group to continue with the original plan of camping on the island and not the mainland.
The next day I continued with the role I had adopted the previous day taking control of the group and plan. This time I was able to keep the group together and get them playing games; while at the same time practicing controlling their canoes. Rest stops were chosen with the finish point reached within the time frame.
During the overnight camp I spent time going round to each sleeping group’s camp to look at how tarps had been erected, looking at site location along with knots that had been used. This allowed me to learn from others and to give tips and advice like what sort of knots to use. Many people found it useful to be taught knots such as the Siberian, taut line and rolling hitch.
Seaman (2008) and Lynch (2010) explains how reflection is a key component to outdoor learning and before the end of the canoe section of the trip we stopped for time to do a reflection exercise, this reflection took the form of a circle with everyone having the chance to talk about what they had done: Seaman and Rheingold (2013) found this approach can give the individuals of the group a ‘socially shared meaning’ to what they had learnt, many of the group explained that they had enjoyed how I had taken responsibility to lead the group and enjoyed the games; they also expressed regret that they had not learnt anything in the way of paddle strokes or leadership styles themselves. I pointed out that although this part of the trip was coming to an end there was still time to practice some of these things during the remainder of the trip.
Climbing section
The climbing venue was located adjacent to the main road (route 9) at Kilefjord. Four climbs had been set using top ropes while around the corner an abseil had been rigged. During this stage the guides talked through how they had set up the ropes as well as setting up a simple system on the ground for the group to see, however they then left the group to practice setting up a system amongst themselves. I feel it would have been more productive with a group of beginners to only show one system; this could then have been demonstrated for the participants to practice with the support of the guides. Redmond et al. (2010) suggest the best way to teach in an outdoor (experiential) environment is for the teacher to be an active part of constructing a learning process with the participants.
Cycling section
The cycling section consisted of two days with an overnight camp at the climbing location. This first day saw the two groups cycle around 20km from Trollakiv to the Kilefjord, for the second day we headed south to eventually finish back at the University. Having had the issues during the canoe section where participants felt that they had missed out on learning opportunities due to the lack of structure, I could see that the same situation was forming during this stage also. This time I stayed as a group member to see what the group did, how they worked out problems or decisions that had to be made to try to gain a better understanding of group dynamics. Before each group set off there was a brief discussion as to whether the groups should change into a fast and slow group. As with the days before a small portion of the group where giving opinions however the majority of the group either stayed quiet or said they were happy to do ‘whatever’. The groups as a result stayed the same. Within a couple of kilometers the groups came together with tempers running high, again only a few members from the entire group at this point were expressing their opinions with nothing but talking happening. Taking our time limit into consideration I decided to take on an autocratic role again and suggested that anyone who wanted to ride fast should stand to my left and anyone wanting to take an easier pace should move to stand to my right, this got people moving rather than sitting around waiting for everyone else to do something. After the two groups formed we could continue the cycle.
Learning Outcomes
The group had listed some areas that they wanted to improve in however as the trip started to unfold it became clear that for many group members any learning outcomes where quickly forgotten and the trip had became a canoe, cycle and climbing holiday for a group of friends.
During the first day of the canoe section the group found itself trying to make a decision regarding whether to stay on the mainland or press on further and stay on an island: a camp fire had been made on the shore and some group members had indicated that they where happy to stay, some where happy to not come to a decision and simply go with the majority, I found that I had to step in and assume a leadership role to get the group to make a decision. This was partly because the group did not seem to be coming to any sort of conclusion and also because I wanted to carry on and stay on an island (which was one of the main reasons the group had come on the trip). I did this by standing out and voicing my opinions, giving the reasons and benefits of my choice. The group decided to follow my advice and we continued to the island.
The learning objectives that I identified at the beginning of the trip were to practice my leadership skills, and hopefully develop my instructor skills in teaching those who wished to learn basic skills and techniques in paddling, climbing and cycling. I felt these objectives would benefit my level of ability and competency in these activities. I also wanted to experience camping on an island which would have fostered a sense of self sufficiency.
I found myself frustrated throughout the trip; perhaps this can be explained by my personality traits which the International Personality Item Pool tests (IPIP) (Appendix A) and Sport Motivation Scale tests (SMS-28) (Appendix B) provide insights. Due to my high scores in ‘conscientiousness’ and motivation ‘to accomplish’ and ‘to experience’ it may be argued the trip did not provide enough stimulation when considering my high level of competency in the activities compared to other group members who were novices. I needed to feel a sense of accomplishment in other areas such as those which I identified prior to the trip (leadership and instructor skills). I had hoped that other competent members of the group would share their knowledge and skills in leadership and group management so that we could all benefit from each others knowledge; for example, learning new games from each other that help novices to practice their new skills. I felt these were lost opportunities and although I got to practice what I already know in regards to leadership and instructor skills, I did not learn anything new from other group members. Perhaps I could have benefited more from choosing to observe group dynamics as my learning objective, comparing what I saw with models such as Tuckman’s (1965) Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing.
Conclusion
During this trip I was able to practice and improve upon pre-existing skills such as paddle and climbing techniques, while giving my knowledge and experience to others at the same time. I was not able to see how the group developed as I had hoped, which was to see how each group member took on a leadership role and lead the group; this was due to the group needing direction and structure from an outside source and not being able to set their own, however as a result of this I did get to see how a group that had no structure dealt and coped with issues and problems. I was able to take on the opportunity of a leadership role throughout the trip which allowed me to challenge myself and grow in terms of self-confidence, decision making, delegating and instructing. In the future I hope that my experience will allow me to see when a group is lacking motivation and pick up on opportunities to help them learn and develop.
References
Hayashi, A. and Ewert, A. (2006) Outdoor leaders’ emotional intelligence and transformational leadership, Journal of Experiential Education. 28 (3), 222-242.
Lynch, J (2010) Outdoor Learning and Learning Cycles: Moving Forward. Horizons, 51, 4-7.
Redmond, K., Foran, A. and Dwyer, S. (2010) Quality lesson plans for outdoor education. Human Kinetics,Leeds.
Seaman, J. (2008) Experience, reflect, critique: The end of the “learning cycles” era, Journal of experiential Education. 31 (1), 3-18.
Seaman, J. and Rheingold, A. (2013) Circle talks as situated experiential learning: Context, identity, and knowledgeability in 2lwearning from reflection”, Journal of experiential Education. 36 (2), 155-174.
Tuckman, B. (1965) Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63 (6), 384-399.
Appendix A
Results from the IPIP test: calculating the average score we get the following results:
Openness = 37.8
Conscientiousness = 43.4
Agreeableness = 38.5
Extraversion = 39.8
Neuroticism = 25.6
Appendix B
Results from SMS-28 test: calculating the average score we get the following results:
To know = 4.7
To accomplish = 6.3
Experience stimulation = 6.1
Indentified Regulation = 3
Introjected Regulation = 5.6
External Regulation = 4
Amotivation = 2.3