PA

TH

WA

YS

40

ISSN: 0840-8114

PathwaysTHE ONTARIO JOURNAL OF OUTDOOR EDUCATIONAutumn 2006, 19(1)

PA

TH

WA

YS

41

PathwaysThe Council of Outdoor Educators of

Ontario Board of Directors

President: Shane Kramer

Past President: Grant Linney

Vice President: Kyle Clarke

Treasurer: Astrid Turner

Secretary: Laura Yakutshik

Director At Large: Steve McElroy

Director At Large: Jane Wadden

Central Region: Steve Turner

Eastern Region: Zabe MacEachren

Western Region: Mike Elrick

Northern Region: Heather Flack

Membership: Ron Williamson

Our mailing address:The Council of Outdoor Educators of Ontario1185 Eglinton Avenue EastToronto, ON M3C 3C6

Our website address:www.coeo.org

COEO

Formed in 1972, The Council of OutdoorEducators of Ontario (COEO) is a non-profit,volunteer-based organization that promotes safe,quality outdoor education experiences for peopleof all ages. This is achieved through publishing thePathways journal, running an annual conferenceand regional workshops, maintaining a website,and working with kindred organizations as well asgovernment agencies.

Contributions Welcome

Pathways is always looking for contributions. Ifyou are interested in making a submission, ofeither a written or illustrative nature, we would behappy to hear from you. For a copy of oursubmission guidelines, please contact RandeeHolmes, Managing Editor.

If you are interested in being a guest editor of anissue of Pathways, please request a copy of ourguidelines for guest editors from Randee Holmes,Managing Editor.

If you have any questions regarding Pathways,please direct them to Bob Henderson, Chair of thePathways Editorial Board. If you’d like moreinformation about COEO and joining theorganization, please refer to the inside back coverof this issue or contact a Board of Directorsmember.

Our advertising policy:Pathways accepts advertisements for products andservices that may be of interest to our readers. Toreceive an advertising information package, pleasecontact Bob Henderson, Chair of the PathwaysEditorial Board. We maintain the right to refuseany advertisement we feel is not in keeping withour mandate and our readers’ interests.

PA

TH

WA

YS

1

FeaturesLosing My Religion: The Quest for Applicable Theory inOutdoor Education ......................................................................... 4

Simon BeamesResponse to Losing My Religion ....................................................... 12

Bryan GrimwoodResponse to Losing My Religion ....................................................... 13

Scott CaspellTwenty-five Years of Environmental Education in Nova Scotia:Lessons, Challenges and Directions .............................................. 14

Alan WarnerProjects on the Go: “Baywoods” Outdoor Classroom .................... 19

Diana SaundersDiscover the Acadian Forest with the Conservation Council ofNew Brunswick ............................................................................... 19

Tracy GlynnCommunity-based Outdoor Leadership Training in Nova Scotia .. 20

Jody ConradEcotourism in the Atlantic Provinces ............................................. 22

John ColtonMentoring in the Outdoors ............................................................ 25

Kathleen NaylorAtlantic Canada’s Adventure .......................................................... 26

Glyn BissixOutdoor Education Affects Your Health ........................................ 29

Amanda CliffWhere We Go From Here: Placing Outdoor Education in ourCurrent Context ............……...…….....…........…………..……....…. 32

Grant Linney

ColumnsEditors’ Log Book ...………...…………................…………..…..…… 2

Editorial BoardPresident’s View .......……...……..…….............…………..……....…. 3

Shane KramerBackpocket ............................……...………........…….……..…….…. 34

Nicole Tait

PathwaysPathways Editorial Board

Chair: Bob HendersonDept. of Kinesiology,McMaster University

Scott Caspell

Allan Foster

Peter Goddard

Ian Hendry

Zabe MacEachren

Erin Sharpe

Friends of PathwaysClare Magee, Barrie Martin,

Barb McKean and Mark Whitcombe

Managing Editor: Randee Holmes

ISSN: 0840-8114Pathways is printed on recycled paper.

Pathways is published four times a year for The Council of OutdoorEducators of Ontario (COEO) and distributed to COEO members.Membership fees include a subscription to Pathways, as well asadmittance to workshops, courses and conferences. A membershipapplication form is included on the inside back cover of this issue ofPathways.

Opinions expressed in Pathways are those of the authors and donot necessarily reflect those of the Pathways Editorial Board or COEO.Advertising included in Pathways should not be interpreted as anendorsement by COEO of the products or services represented. Allrights reserved.

Articles in Pathways may be reproduced only with permission.Requests must be made in writing and should be directed to BobHenderson, Chair, Pathways Editorial Board.

THE ONTARIO JOURNAL OF OUTDOOR EDUCATIONAutumn 2006, 19(1)

PA

TH

WA

YS

2

ditors’ Log BookE

Sketch Pad — Art for this issue of Pathways was generously provided by the followingindividuals: Heather Read (cover), Josh Gordon (page 2), Kate Prince (page 6),Dominique Dery (pages 13 and 20), Lindsey Daleo (page 17), Dawn McKay (pages 23and 35) and Emily Robertson (page 27).

It is a pleasure to introduce this EasternCanada theme issue of Pathways. This issueevolved out of an inspired conversation withAcadia University professor Alan Warner. Alanwas responsible for compiling this collectionof “what’s going on” in Eastern Canadaoutdoor education. In essence, this is a“Beyond Our Borders” column expanded intoits own theme issue. Thanks Alan. We willensure many copies of this issue travel toEastern Canada.

Also within this issue, we are excited thatSimon Beames has contributed a thoughtfulcritique of outdoor adventure education. Wehave high hopes that this submission will finda home in many university and college course-reading kits.

Finally, this issue marks the passing of anenjoyable time for Bob Henderson, RandeeHolmes and Krista Friesen.

Bob has served as Chair of the Editorial Boardof Pathways since 1991. He was a member ofthe founding committee of Pathways as itevolved from the 1980s ANEE.

Randee Holmes has served as editor, layoutco-ordinator, computer whiz and attention-to-detail person (the only person) since 2000.She has been responsible for the quality ofpresentation and works behind the scenes atthe tasks so important and so easily neglected.All involved in Pathways over the last manyyears as guest editors, writers and artists oweRandee a big collective thanks for herdedication to the journal and a task well done.

The same can be said for Krista Friesen, whohas worked alongside Randee handling alltasks to do with art and layout. Her creativityand design expertise have ensured that weconsistently produce a quality publication.Thanks!

Now we usher in a new era with ChristineBeevis at the helm. Christine will gather eachof these tasks into her own bailiwick. The

Editorial Board will largely remainintact, as we help Christine ease intothe job. We welcome the new energyand ideas coming to Pathways on allfronts and welcome Christine withopen arms.

Editorial Board

PA

TH

WA

YS

3

resident’s ViewPAt the time of this writing the 2006 COEOconference has just wrapped up. This was anenjoyable conference for me in many ways butalso showed me that COEO faces manychallenges as an organization. While thesechallenges may require us to look at thingsthrough new eyes, the joys that COEO bringsme, and many others, should make the effortworthwhile.

Of course the highlight for many of us at ourconferences is the reconnection with oldfriends and colleagues, the joy we have incatching up with good people whose companywe enjoy and may not see as often as we wouldlike. Then there are the new people we areintroduced to, new friends who inspire us andwho we welcome into the extended COEOfamily. This year I had the pleasure of meetinga number of new folks who bring an enthusiasmand energy that is easy to latch on to.

We had some wonderful sessions, and therewere several I would have enjoyedparticipating in if I could have been in two ormore places at once. Andrea Foster organizedan engaging panel for Saturday night thatchallenged us, inspired us and introduced usto a number of people on similar journeys toour own, people who are forging their ownpaths — paths that I hope will cross with oursagain.

We had wonderful people selected asrecipients of our annual awards, including theinaugural presentation of our newest award,the COEO Amethyst Award in memory of BrentDysart, to its first recipient, Stacey Hislop.Thanks to Carolyn Dysart for attending theconference and presenting this award. BarbWeeden-Carmichael received the DorothyWalter Award for Leadership, Zabe MacEachernthe President’s Award, and the Toronto UrbanStudies Centre was recognized with the Robin

Dennis Award. Congratulations to all! We alsogot our first look at the COEO research briefthat has been an important part of our workthrough the Ontario Trillium Foundationgrant, and that will be fully presented thisautumn.

What challenges us is the lower-than-hoped-for-and-expected attendance at this year’sconference. We certainly knew this conferencewas a new direction for us and a bit of a risk,but we had hoped the COEO membershipwould welcome and support it with greaternumbers. I hope those who attended willforward their thoughts and experiences to me.I would also like to hear from those whodidn’t attend in order to learn more from theirperspectives. I am sure the fifty or so attendeescame away with new insights into howoutdoor education can adapt to the changingneeds of society and find new ways topromote our values. This does not mean weshould turn our backs on the strengths oftraditional outdoor education experiences, butrather increase the arc of what we recognize as“outdoor education” to include those seekingthe same outcomes we are — those who mayhave felt excluded from our field due to avariety of barriers, including location, cultureand definition. If we can dismantle thesebarriers we will only strengthen the role thatoutdoor education can play in our educationsystem and in our society at large.

If you attended the conference I hope you findways to implement what you learned in yourpractice. If you did not attend, I hope youspeak to those who did and gain from theirsharing of the experience. I hope we all findways to continue to contribute to andstrengthen our organization and field for thefuture.

Shane Kramer

PA

TH

WA

YS

4

eatureF

There is a growing body of increasinglycomplex critical outdoor education theory.This paper seeks to extract and synthesizeapplicable points from this literature sothat they may be put to the test ofusefulness in the field. In an effort toconsider how practice may be informed bycurrent outdoor education theory, a modelis presented that places outdoor educationpractice on three dimensions: journeys/ready-made sessions; instructor driven/learning negotiated; universal/placebased.

The 1990s were good to me as an outdooreducator. They were good because I was sureof what I was doing. I was sure of what I wasdoing because I followed the gospel accordingto Islands of Healing (Schoel, Prouty, &Radcliffe, 1988), Adventure Education (Miles &Priest, 1990), and, later, Adventure Programming(Priest & Gass, 1997). As a schoolteacher andoutdoor education fundamentalist, I wouldeagerly stand on my soapbox andunashamedly try to convince parents andadministrators that I would sort out theirteenagers during a two-week canoe trip.

I learned how to funnel, frame, and frontload(Priest & Gass, 1997) and was good at it. Thefirst 48 hours of my wilderness-based courseswere carefully choreographed in order to steerthe group to just where I wanted them to be. Iwanted to be a top outdoor adventureeducation instructor, and, for a while, Iactually believed I was. Now, when I look backat the nineties, I wonder, “Was that me?” Thiswonder stems from the growing body ofcritical writing in outdoor education that hascome to the forefront in recent years. Duringthis time, I have found myself moreexperienced, yet less certain about the kind of

outdoor education I want to practice. Thisconfusion is a result of the incongruencebetween what I saw happening in the field andthis emerging body of literature. I no longerknew what I believed in and, like a pop songfrom the early 1990s, I was “losing myreligion.”

What Does the Research Say?

The last few years have brought with themsome critical writing that has made mequestion what I do as an educator. Examiningone’s professional purpose should be a goodthing for anyone to do. Higgins and Nicol(2002), Lugg (2004), and Wurdinger (1997)suggest that outdoor educators shouldcontinually examine the educational rationaleunderpinning their activity choices. My owndeeper questioning began when I read“Adventure in a Bun” (Loynes, 1998), whichcompared pre-fabricated, off-the-shelfadventure education programs to McDonald’shamburgers. Loynes argued that outdooreducation courses were becoming predictable,packaged, and commodified.

My questioning continued when I readHovelynck’s (2001) “reconnaissance” ofexperiential learning, where he stated that “ifthe lessons to be learned from an experiencecan be listed before the experience has takenplace, and thus independently of the learner’sexperience, it seems misleading to call thelearning ‘experiential’” (p.8). Perhaps mycourses were less experiential than I thought.Had I been the kind of domineering instructordescribed by Brown (2002) — the kind ofinstructor that acts as “gatekeeper” to what isadmitted as knowledge, thereby steeringindividuals (and the group) towards my ownpre-determined outcomes?

Losing My Religion: The Quest for ApplicableTheory in Outdoor Educationby Simon Beames

PA

TH

WA

YS

5

Losing My Religion

Loynes’ (2002) “The Generative Paradigm”outlined a number of defining features thatran contrary to the beliefs that seemed tounderpin most of the residential-basedoutdoor education that I had encountered.The dominant American model of theinstructor as clever, all-knowing master of 100initiative tasks was now being challenged by amodel with a participant-centred approach,where “meaning and value emerge throughthe experience rather than being representedor defined by the programme structure orfacilitator” (p.122).

At the same time, the literature I had beenreading on friluftsliv, the “Norwegian traditionfor seeking the joy of identification with freeNature” (Faarlund, 2002, p.18), stimulatedthe romantic in me. What could be better thana way of living and learning that emphasisedforming cultural connections to the land,valued joy from being outside with each other(Faarlund, 2002), and did not depend onexpensive equipment (Dahle, 2002)?Henderson (2001) urges North Americanoutdoor educators to learn from the friluftslivtradition. He penned an essay adding “warm”and “green” elements to the North Americanpreoccupation with instructors’ hard and softskill development. Warm skills consider howwe meet nature (our “manners”) and the waysin which the educator works to create anoverall ambience within the group. This is acrucial antecedent to developing a reconceived“human–nature” relationship. Green skillspertain to an instructor’s ability to ground theexperience within stories, meanings, andcontexts that are deeply relevant to localculture.

Warm and green skills address the limitedattention given to “place” in outdooreducation. This kind of universal program cantake place anywhere — or in “Anywoods,USA” (Baker, 2005), and has been criticised bya number of writers (Baker, 2005; Brookes,2002a, 2002b; Higgins & Nicol, 1998; Knapp,2005; Stewart, 2004). Brookes (2002a) isparticularly critical of “neo-colonialist”

understandings of the land, in which somelocations are viewed as “empty sites on whichto establish social or psychological projects”(p.2). As with Henderson’s (2001) green skills,Brookes (2002b) believes that outdooreducation programs need to incorporate“knowledge of local patterns of communityrelationships with nature” (p.7). Place-basededucation is more attuned to localphenomena as it unfolds.

Although by this point my thinking wasshifting further away from universalised,commodified adventure education, moreinsight came in the form of the “Neo-Hahniancritique,” where Brookes (2003) argued howsomeone’s character cannot be changed in aweek-long adventure education course. Iwasn’t sure if I should be disappointed (“pitywe can’t change his character, as it needschanging”) or relieved (“there was no way inhell we were going to change his character —now we don’t have to attempt theimpossible”). It became clearer to me that Idid not want to base my outdoor educationpractice on the dominant textbook literatureof the 1990s.1 There was too great anemphasis on the instructor manipulatingvariables in order to reach pre-determinedparticipant outcomes, along with minimalattention given to developing culturalconnections with the land. I was eager toembrace all of this important critical writingfrom the last years, but unsure about how Icould extract relevant nuggets that I coulddirectly apply to my day-to-day work. Hencethis essay, which emerged from notes Iscribbled with the hope of clarifying mythoughts.

No longer under pressure to change people’scharacter by going camping, I found myselffaced with some difficult questions. First, if I

1 For a particularly scathing critique of Priest &Gass (1997) and other “cookbook” approachesto instructor training, see McDonald (2000).

PA

TH

WA

YS

6

Losing My Religion

don’t think that through an outdoorexperience I lead someone will have a betterunderstanding of their relationships withthemselves, other humans, and the naturalenvironment, just what learning outcomes doI hope to elicit through my practice? Is itacceptable for me to have some pre-determined outcomes for my courses or is thattoo domineering? I am left wondering if it isegotistical of me to hope that anyone will gainanything from the time they spend with meon an outdoor education course. If I don’texercise some influence over the group, whatis the point of me being there in the firstplace?

Second, if carefully planning a coursebeforehand (along with some un-experiential,pre-determined outcomes) is frowned upon bytheorists, why would an outdoor educatorneed anything more than minimal experience,training, or qualifications? I have spent a fairnumber of years accumulating fieldexperience, instructortickets, and universitydegrees. Doesembracing the ideals offriluftsliv, the generativeparadigm, and a place-based inspiredpedagogy mean thatpost-Priestian outdooreducation has no placefor me?

My third question is, if organisations stopevaluating their programs because they areworried that theorists will criticize them fortrying to measure what participants mightgain, don’t they risk losing funding frompurse-string holders who demand evidence ofsuccess? While I’ve never been a fan of usingscientific research designs as a means ofgauging learner outcomes, government andcorporate funders want proof that their moneyis raising self-esteem and reducing recidivism.Allison and Pomeroy’s (2001) question of“How shall we know?” would probably elicitdifferent answers from outdoor educationresearchers and from funding bodies. Despitean increasing trend of outdoor educationresearch being naturalistic (watching andtalking to people), the people giving out themoney still want to know what percentage ofparticipants are better leaders than they wereat the beginning of the week.

Idealism in the Real World

Wrestling with my three questions made mewonder if I could replace the fundamentalistoutdoor education literature to which I hadsubscribed with simple and solidly groundedtheory that would guide me in the field — not

give me the answers, as some old-

PA

TH

WA

YS

7

school theory did, but, rather, help me ask theright questions. As there are elements of thegenerative paradigm and friluftsliv that Ibelieve in, I thought I might be able to createmy own manifesto by combining their similarethos’ of espousing a less macho andadrenaline-dependent approach, emphasizingrelationships, and not objectifying nature.Perfect.

The trouble is that friluftsliv doesn’t sell andthe generative paradigm does not bring infunding. My time working for a localeducation authority has shown me thatschools, play centres, and youth clubs arecrying out for commodified adventure. Theywant more than adventure in a bun — theywant the entire adventure Happy Meal. Formost outdoor education consumers, the maincriteria seem to be trying something new, fun,safe, and close to home. In my experience,youth services and course directors wantpredictability and don’t want to be lectured onwhy theorists are critical of off-the-shelfadventure programs.

If fundraising staff for youth developmentcharities are applying for lottery money, it isnot in their best interests to state that“meaning and value emerge within theexperience rather than being represented ordefined by the programme structure or thefacilitator” (Loynes, 2002, p.122), andfurthermore, that the course is mostly aboutseeking “a way home” through nature(Faarlund, 1993, p.158). If money is whatyou’re after, then you’d better write“participants will learn leadership, problem-solving, and team-work skills” in bold face. Infact, some English government fundingschemes have developed a code system fororganizations who have received funds tooperate activity programs for young people atrisk of offending. One simply enters the codefor the participant’s ethnicity, followed by thenumbers of the types of at-risk behaviour theparticipants have exhibited, and the code forthe anticipated outcomes that will be theresult of one of six types of intervention

(Positive Activities for Young People, 2005).This is an excellent example of what has beenlabelled the “algorithmic paradigm” (Ringer,1999) in outdoor education, where specificinterventions are used to elicit outcomes pre-determined by the instructor.

So, what’s the alternative? Well, in the youthorganisations and local government withwhich I have been affiliated there is little timeto “educate” funders on the new outdooreducation program that features“serendipitous learning” where “theindividuals in learning communities discoverand address issues within themselves”(Krouwel, 2005, p.28), and offers learningthat is “goal free, the experience offered a stepon the road rather than a solution” (Loynes,2002, p.122). Funders want measurableoutcomes and outdoor educationorganizations want money, which makesthem, too, want measurable outcomes. Butsome outdoor education literature warns usthat measurable is no good — that we cannotquantify something as personal and subjectiveas an outdoor education experience (Allison &Pomeroy, 2001). What’s the answer? “Showme the money.” In my experience,instrumental reasons win almost every time.In the world attracting funding, this means,“Show me the pre- and post-coursequestionnaires.”

So, on one side, outdoor education theoristssuggest that programs need to incorporate“broad adventure” where there is lessemphasis on short, adrenaline-filled activities,and a greater focus on taking responsibility formore substantial outdoor challenges withuncertain outcomes (Loynes, 1998, 2002;Rubens, 1998), and all of this deeply rootedwith a strong sense of place (Baker, 2005;Brookes, 2002a, 2002b; Henderson, 2001,2005; Knapp, 2005; Martin, 2004; Nicol &Higgins, 1998; Preston, 2004; Stewart, 2004).On the other side are the funders who givemoney to those who play the game andinclude all the right buzzwords in their grantapplications. Who loses? Well, the kids,

Losing My Religion

PA

TH

WA

YS

8

Losing My Religion

obviously, because they are stuck withconveyor belt style outdoor education. Theother people who lose are those on the frontline, the instructors who end up teaching threesessions of “team-building activities” to tengroups a week for 40 weeks. All of this pointsto a large chasm between theory and practiceand not much learning for anyone.

I am an outdoor educator — that is part ofwho I am. From a pragmatic perspective, Ineed to make a living: I need shelter, food,and clothing. I’d love to be paid a decentsalary to work at The Friluftsliv Centre or TheGenerative Paradigm Organisation, but thereare not many of these places around. I need tomake money, so I fall back on the skills I havespent 15 years accruing, and . . . provideadventure in a bun. What a shame.

Where to Now?

If I am to remain an outdoor educator, I needto decide what kind of outdoor education Iwant to practice. To do this means answeringthe three questions I posed earlier in thepaper.

The first question concerned pre-determinedoutcomes. I do not support any programs thatcoerce participants into attending with the aimof eliciting specific, pre-determined intra-personal or inter-personal outcomes. I willhappily run a course that seeks to yieldpersonal growth in some form, but only if theparticipants are part of the process thatdecides what is learned and how it is learned.Only then will the learning have personalmeaning for each individual. Mostparticipants should not be left to figure thisout for themselves, but should be helped by afacilitator.

While the generative paradigm seesrelationships as egalitarian (Loynes, 2002), Itake relationships to be hierarchical as well.There are times where participants will havetremendous power and freedom and othertimes when the instructor will assume total

control. Indeed, we use our power to provideour participants with a structure within whichthey may experience “the world in highlyindividual, unique, and variable ways”(Patterson, Watson, Williams, & Roggenbuck,1998, p.426). The notion of instructorsretaining a fair amount of discretionary powermay be regarded by some theorists as un-experiential (see Hovelynck, 2001), but I amhard-pressed to think of any experientialeducation programs that are so experientialthey don’t need a facilitator. There would beno point in participating in an experientiallearning program in that case. It is theinstructor’s privilege to have control over thegroup and it requires tremendous judgment toknow how and when to use it. This judgmentcannot be learned from a book either. Itcomes from the experience of having runmany courses as an apprentice and leadinstructor.

The idea of learning judgment leads to thesecond area of concern: Experience, training,and qualifications. I agree with Loynes’ (1998)inference that some adventure activityprograms in the UK are so artificial they arepractically devoid of adventure. Still,adventures in buns as well as adventures to beplanned by participants still need competentstaff to oversee them — competent in relationto activity, that is. Being outdoors withparticipants demands technical skills suited tothe terrain and conditions. Wilderness-basedprograms, in particular, require instructorswho are very comfortable living outdoors inremote settings and who can impart theseoutdoor living skills. Although I would arguethat there is an over-emphasis on outdooreducators amassing qualifications (certainly inthe UK), parents have a right to expect thattheir child will be paddling down a river orwalking in the hills with a competent leader.

The third area I highlighted was research andfunding, which appear to be inextricablyintertwined. I believe in qualitative,naturalistic research that focuses onunderstanding people’s experiences. I am not a

PA

TH

WA

YS

9

Losing My Religion

big fan of using scientific methods to establishwhether someone has increased their “lifeeffectiveness.” We need to observe people andhear their stories (Barrett & Greenaway, 1995).This can be incredibly valuable research, butfor it to be trustworthy in the eyes ofacademics, it needs to be done with greatrigour. This is what funders do not seem tounderstand: Rigorous, credible research inoutdoor education does not have to rely onexperimental research designs. On grantapplication forms, I have resolved to writealmost anything that is needed to obtainmoney, which, in the past, has meant pullingout all of the clichés and buzzwords. I willnot, however, use psychometric tests to justifythe existence of my programs. If funders want“results” then I will offer to conductnaturalistic research to show how my coursesmay have influenced participants.

A Way of Considering Practice

The conceptual model presented below isoffered as a tool for considering the nature ofthe outdoor education programs we areinvolved in, and, perhaps more importantly,would like to be involved in. It consists ofthree dimensions, the ends of which meet inthe centre. The centre of the model ischaracterised by practice that I consider to beinformed by current critical theory. There issome natural overlap between the threedimensions.

The first dimension (ready-made sessions —journeys) explores the extent to which outdooreducation programs use self-sufficientjourneys as a means to learn about self, others,and place. Why is it that so many outdooreducation programs are packaged into three-hour sessions between meals prepared bysomeone else? All outdoor educationprograms are contrived to some degree, butjourneys offer a high level of authenticadventure, as the outcomes are somewhatuncertain and there are very real consequencesfor actions and non-actions. The amount of

lasting, transferred learning that a participantcan take from a centre-based activity such asthe “dangle duo” is questionable. We need tomove away from fragmented courses that aremade up from a series of adrenaline-filledsessions and move towards “broadadventures” that involve much longer timescales, varied challenges, and responsibilitiesdevolved to students (Rubens, 1998). I shouldadd that journeys do not have to be multi-week arctic canoe trips, but can take place inurban environments with minimal expense. Ajourney can take place over an academic yearand focus on curiosity-driven explorations ofone’s immediate surroundings.

The second dimension (universal — placebased) considers the extent to which programsare grounded in a sense of place. The outsideof the model is the domain of activities thatcan be done identically in thousands ofdifferent locations: Adventures in buns(Loynes, 1998) that can happen in Anywoods,USA (Baker, 2005). Outdoor educationprograms should be rooted in the history,ecology, culture, and stories of the place theyare in (Baker, 2005; Brookes, 2002a, 2002b;Henderson, 2001, 2005; Knapp, 2005; Martin,2004; Nicol & Higgins, 1998; Preston, 2004;Stewart, 2004). As outdoor educators, we mustbe able to interpret the land and bring it alivefor participants.

Figure 1.

Instructor driven/laissez-faire

Ready-madesessions Universal

Journeys Place based

Learning negotiated

PA

TH

WA

YS

10

Losing My Religion

The third dimension focuses on the level towhich participants are able to negotiate whatthey want to learn and how they want to learnit. Educators in the centre of this model aredifferent from manipulative instructors whohold all the power, and different frominstructors who think they are being“experiential” by not getting involved at all(the laissez-faire approach). I believe thatfacilitators need to get to know theparticipants well enough to be able to helpthem determine just what they are after, andthen help them get it (see Loynes, 2002). Onlythen will learning have personal meaning foreach individual. Programs without specific,pre-determined outcomes may be a tough sellto those who are providing funding, but if thenature of the activities is to be experiential,then the “learning that really matters onexperiential programmes is that which comesfrom the experience, not prescription”(Krouwel, 2005, p.31).

Until recently, I really felt as if I had lost myreligion. I had read widely within the body ofoutdoor education literature and wasbewildered by its volume, complexity, andcontradictions. This confusion marginalisesorganisations whose practices are driven notby critical outdoor education theory, but byfinancial constraints or, simply, what hashappened historically. Although I find thatmodels tend to oversimplify complexrelationships, this visual, three-dimensionalway of considering outdoor education practicehas helped to clarify my thoughts. This hasproved to be particularly helpful in myconversations with program administrators,funding agencies, and field instructors.Ultimately, the test of usefulness for thediscussion outlined in this paper is the degreeto which it encourages instructors andadministrators to develop their own set ofguiding principles that are informed by criticalperspectives.

References

Allison, P., & Pomeroy, E. (2000). How shallwe ‘know’? Epistemological concerns inresearch in experiential education. Journal ofExperiential Education, 23(2), 91–98.

Baker, M. (2005). Landfullness in adventure-based programming: Promotingreconnection to the land. Journal ofExperiential Education, 27(3), 267–276.

Barret, J., & Greenaway, R. (1995). Whyadventure? Coventry: Foundation forOutdoor Adventure.

Brookes, A. (2002a). Lost in the Australianbush: Outdoor education as curriculum.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(4), 405–425.

Brookes, A. (2002b). Gilbert White nevercame this far South. Naturalist knowledgeand the limits of universalist environmentaleducation. Canadian Journal of EnvironmentalEducation, 7(2), 73–87.

Brookes, A. (2003). A critique of neo-Hahnianoutdoor education theory. Part one:Challenges to the concept of ‘characterbuilding.’ Journal of Adventure Education andOutdoor Learning, 3(1), 49–62.

Brown, M. (2002). The facilitator asgatekeeper: A critical analysis of social orderin facilitation sessions. Journal of AdventureEducation and Outdoor Learning, 2(2), 101–112.

Dahle, B. (2002). Friluftsliv. Pathways: TheOntario Journal of Outdoor Education, 14(3),15–16.

Dewey, J. (1973). My pedagogic creed. In J. J.McDermott (Ed.), The philosophy of JohnDewey (pp. 442–454). Chicago: TheUniversity of Chicago Press.

Faarlund, N. (1993). Nils Faarlund. In P. Reedand D. Rothenburgh (Eds.), Wisdom in theopen air (pp. 155–175). Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.

Faarlund, N. (2002). Defining frilufsliv.Pathways: The Ontario Journal of OutdoorEducation, 14(3), 18–19.

PA

TH

WA

YS

11

Gass, M. A. (1993). Adventure therapy:Therapeutic applications of adventureprogramming. Boulder: The Association forExperiential Education.

Henderson, B. (2001). Skills and ways:Perceptions of people/nature guiding.Journal of OBC Education, 7(1), 12–17.

Henderson, B. (2005). Every trail has a story:Heritage travel in Canada. Toronto: NaturalHeritage Books.

Higgins, P., & Nicol, R. (2002). Outdoorlearning in theory and practice. OutdoorEducation: Authentic Learning in the Contextof Landscapes, 2, 10–21.

Hovelynck, J. (2001). Beyond didactics: Areconnaissance of experiential learning.Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 6(1),4–12.

Knapp, C. (2005). The “I–thou” relationships,place-based education, and Aldo Leopold.Journal of Experiential Education, 27(3), 277–285.

Krouwel, W. (2005). The value ofserendipitous learning: Part 2 — A wayforward through self-development.Pathways: The Ontario Journal of OutdoorEducation, 17(3), 28–32.

Loynes, C. (1998). Adventure in a bun. Journalof Experiential Education, 21(1), 35–39.

Loynes, C. (2002). The generative paradigm.Journal of Adventure Education and OutdoorLearning, 2(2), 113–126.

Lugg, A. (2004). Outdoor adventure inAustralian outdoor education: Is it a case ofroast for Christmas dinner? AustralianJournal of Outdoor Education, 8(1), 4–11.

Martin, P. (2004). Outdoor adventure inpromoting relationships with nature.Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 8(1),20–28.

McDonald, P. (2000). Issues of progress: Trendsin the training of outdoor leaders. RetrievedMarch 22, 2006, from http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/petemcd/iop/IoP.pdf

Nicol, R. & Higgins, P. (1998). A sense ofplace: A context for environmental outdooreducation. In P. Higgins & B. Humberstone(Eds.), Celebrating diversity: Learning bysharing cultural differences (pp. 50–55).Marburg: European Institute for OutdoorAdventure and Experiential Learning.

Patterson, M. E., Watson, A. E., Williams, D.R., & Roggenbuck, J. R. (1998). Anhermeneutic approach to studying thenature of wilderness experiences. Journal ofLeisure Research, 30(4), 423–452.

Preston, L. (2004). Making connections withnature: Bridging the theory–practice gap inoutdoor and environmental education.Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 8(1),12–19.

Positive Activities for Young People. (2005).Management information. RetrievedDecember 28, 2005, from http://www.connexions.gov.uk/partnerships/index.cfm?CategoryID=6&ContentID=387

Priest, S. (1990). The semantics of outdooreducation. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),Adventure Education (pp. 113–118). StateCollege: Venture Publishing.

Priest, S., & Gass, M. A. (1997). Effectiveleadership in adventure programming.Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Ringer, M. (1999). The facile-itation offacilitation? Searching for competencies ingroup work leadership. Scisco Concientia, 2,1–19.

Schoel, J., Prouty, D., & Radcliffe, P. (1988).Islands of healing. Hamilton: ProjectAdventure.

Smith, G. (2002). Place-based education:Learning to be where we are. Phi DeltaKappan, 83(8), 584–594.

Stewart, A. (2004). Decolonising encounterswith the Murray River: Building placeresponsive outdoor education. AustralianJournal of Outdoor Education, 8(2), 46–55.

Simon Beames is originally from Montreal. Heearned his undergraduate degree from McMasterUniversity and now teaches Outdoor Education atthe University of Edinburgh.

Losing My Religion

PA

TH

WA

YS

12

The disparity between practice and theoryseems characteristic of outdoor education, andbridging this gap is a regular struggle for bothsides. With this in mind, I read Losing MyReligion as a call for leadership. In this essay,the author takes a step out of the pack, peersback over his shoulder at the outdooreducation community, and calls us forwardwith the wave of his arm. I recognize this callfor leadership in a few ways.

First, the author encourages continuededucator training and development. For thefront line instructors, their experience isessential for effectively facilitating experientiallearning for participants. We know that the‘tickets’ (i.e., certifications and qualifications)are important elements — but not the entirescope — of instructor training. Instructordevelopment must be unending. One avenuenot often incorporated into training is howour practices can be influenced by criticaltheory. We need front line outdoor educatorsthat are motivated to develop skills beyond thetrendiest facilitation techniques or certificationstandards and that have a grasp of the deepertheoretical or philosophical understandings oftheir roles. These informed practitioners arethe individuals most capable of and committedto promoting the individual transformationsnecessary for improving our environmental andsocial situations on Earth. Like the authordoes through his personally prompted essay,practitioners need to take responsibility formaking connections with theoretical knowledge.

Second, the author’s awareness of outdooreducation’s various faces demonstrates hiscommitment to outdoor education,captivating readers and followers (or so it didfor me). For example, the author makesreference to the limitations of “adventure on abun” sessions but understands that there is aplace and a clientele for these safe, controlled,instructor-driven programs. Perhaps, this placeis one in a progression or continuum ofoutdoor education experiences. Can we acceptand support the variety in and evolution of

Response to Losing My Religion

A Response to Losing My Religionby Bryan Grimwood

peoples’ outdoor education needs? I believethat the author does; furthermore, heunderstands the discussion on which outdoorexperiences offer the best bang for the buckbut is willing to return his focus to gettingpeople out experiencing nature. Ready-madesessions provide an introduction to the kindsof experiences nature can offer with a positivenature-based experience as the primaryoutcome. Extending lessons beyond theseshort-term packages and infusing curiosity-driven explorations in nature will ultimatelybe an individual choice of the participants,parents, or teachers.

Finally, Losing My Religion endorses an idea ofleadership similar to one that James Raffanspoke of during his keynote address to the2006 Risk Management Conference forOutdoor Educators in Canada. In reference tothe boards, administrators, and lawyers thatmake decisions about the appropriate levels ofrisks in their sponsored programs, Raffanurged outdoor educators to, essentially, takeoff their Tevas and base layers, put on a suit,and get involved. Like Raffan, the authorchooses not to separate himself from the issue.Rather, he immerses himself in it, strives tomake sense of it for himself, and offersguidance for those ready to follow on his path.Don’t separate, infiltrate. I like it.

And, as the author suggests, “Ultimately, thetest of usefulness for the discussion outlinedin this paper is the degree to which itencourages instructors and administrators todevelop their own set of guiding principlesthat are informed by critical perspectives.”That is the key. For outdoor education toinfiltrate society and achieve the aims that itproposes it can, our practice will require thesupportive, grounded foundations of criticaltheory. With Losing My Religion, the authortakes strides towards this feat.

Bryan Grimwood is Director of Outdoor Educationat Camp Kandelore.

PA

TH

WA

YS

13

Response to Losing My Religion

While reading Losing My Religion, it occurredto me that I have recently spent a great deal oftime musing over and discussing some of theissues that Beames wrestles with in his article.One of Beames’ main discussion pointsfocuses on his experience interpreting andapplying outdoor education theory to hiswork as an educator. Although I believe thatthere is valuable information to be derivedfrom outdoor education theory and research, Ifeel that educators should also critique,discuss, and continuously revise theireducational philosophy. For the purpose ofthis paper, an educational philosophy willpertain to what one feels one should beeducating towards, which will likely be in linewith personal values and worldviews.

Perceptive educators should be able to discernwhether their practice is compatible with theireducational philosophy. Accordingly, if aneducator finds that the program they areinvolved in is not in line with theireducational philosophy (such as providing an“adventure on a bun” style of program, asnoted by Beames) then perhaps it is time totransform the program (or funding structure)to ensure that their craft and philosophy arealigned. Of course, this objective can bedifficult to accomplish, as described in detailby Beames, and may require moving toanother organization/school, or creating a neweducational centre.

Musings from the Backcountry: A Response to Losing My Religionby Scott Caspell

I value how Beames encourages educators tocritique their practice and note how their craftrelates to the dimensions of the modelpresented in the article. I have, however,found that there is rarely an appropriatestructure in place within educationalorganizations and outdoor education centresfor educators to reflect upon these issues andtransfer their learning towards improvingfuture programs. I am a proponent ofstructured opportunities for educators tocritically assess and provide constructivefeedback on their own performance and theperformance of their colleagues, as well asother facets of a program. Obviously, thescope and depth of such an assessment needsto take into account the length and focus ofthe program.

After co-instructing a 21-day Outward Boundcourse this past summer, our staff teamexplored how our philosophy and coursegoals affected our instructional approach andthe course culture that emerged. This was oneof the most beneficial and insightful coursedebriefs that I have experienced; it encouragedme to process my experiences, to express mythoughts, and to understand the diversity ofinstructor styles. Yes, some educators are ableto process and transfer their learning withlittle or no assistance, while others benefitfrom a course debrief being facilitated in amore formal manner. I believe that outdooreducation programs need to take intoconsideration critical theory and research. Ialso believe that what educators learn fromtheir colleagues, students, and experiences —if given the energy to process themappropriately — can be equally applicable tothe quality and influence of their programs.

Scott Caspell is currently enjoying the B.Ed.Program with the Outdoor, Ecological, andExperiential Education (OE3) specialization atLakehead University.

PA

TH

WA

YS

14

eatureF

A young, experienced environmental educatorwas complaining about all of the logisticalproblems, extra commitments and work hoursrequired to deliver a range of environmentaleducation programs to children in Nova Scotiacompared to her past experiences working inOntario and Western Canada. In a moment offrustration I asked her why she did not returnout West if everything was so difficult here.With a smile she responded, “Because we didnot work at the same high level of excellenceout there.”

This vignette captures some of the strengthsand challenges facing environmentaleducation in the Maritimes. There has beentremendous growth — 17 organizations wererepresented on the organizing committee forthe 2006 Canadian Environmental Educationand Interpretation Conference hosted in NovaScotia (a small province), and approximatelyhalf the delegates were from the region.Twenty-five years ago there was one non-profitorganization with one staff member doingenvironmental education in Nova Scotia, plusa smattering of interest among governmentdepartments. In contrast, the Halifax RegionalMunicipal (HRM) Adventure Earth Centrenow provides 2,500 young people each yearwith day-long and residential Earth educationprograms that are integrated into schoolcurriculums and local communities. CleanNova Scotia, Sierra Club Atlantic, EcologyAction Centre, and the Resource RecoveryFund Board of Nova Scotia provide numerousclassroom environmental education programsto students across the region. In NewBrunswick, the Fallsbrook Centre and theIrving Centre provide a range of programs intheir regions. There are numerous otherorganizations providing curriculum materialsand resources such as Parks Canada Atlantic,

Twenty-five Years of Environmental Education inNova Scotia: Lessons, Challenges and Directionsby Alan Warner

Environment Canada Atlantic Region, theEvergreen Foundation, and SEEDS.

The dramatic growth has been accompaniedby recognition of excellence as well. Forexample, the HRM Adventure Earth Centrereceived the 2003 Canadian Parks andRecreation Association Award for long-termexcellence across two decades for itsenvironmental education programs, as well asan award from the Canadian Network forEnvironmental Education and Communication(EECOM). Several Nova Scotia teachers havereceived national teaching awards for theirwork in environmental education, includingRhea Scrutton, Tracy Webb, and Rita Boyld.

Yet despite very creative and effectiveinitiatives from individual teachers andschools, today there seems to be lessinstitutional commitment from schoolsystems to environmental education thanthere was 25 years ago. In short, there hasbeen a lot of success and growth, but it hascome with challenges and problems. Thisarticle will explore some of the lessons learnedand suggest directions for the future. It focuseson work through the HRM Adventure EarthCentre, as that is what I know best, and Ibelieve it exemplifies broader issues andtrends in the region. I hope that others canbenefit from our experiences.

Lessons Learned

Principle-based Learning and ProgramDesign. Given the lack of institutionalresources and infrastructure in the Maritimes,initiatives in environmental education havetended to come from passionate individualscommitted to making social, educational andenvironmental changes. The work has been

PA

TH

WA

YS

15

bottom-up rather than implementingprograms and mandates from largeorganizations and/or other jurisdictions. Therehas been much reflection and dialoguethrough informal networks (a Maritimespecialty) as to the most effective approaches.The result has been a priority on principle-based program design and a focus on peopleand programs, rather than physical facilitiesand infrastructure.

The HRM Adventure Earth Centre has adheredto a clear set of principles drawn broadly fromthe philosophy of Earth education (Van Matre,1999) to guide its programs over the past 25years. The principles include a holistic approach,natural world experiences, community-basedlearning, experiential learning, integrated andthematic programming, magic and adventure,and a global perspective (see Table 1).

One program, Mysterious Encounters Earth,designed for grade five children including aday-long outdoor experience and four weeksof activities integrated into the classroomcurriculum, has been running for approximately1,000 children a year for 15 years. It continuesto have a waiting list of classes because itengages students through a detective mysterystoryline and gains teachers’ respect by usingoutdoor experiential learning to teachimportant environmental education outcomeswhile connecting to other classroom activities.

Less is More. The hand-to-mouth Maritimetradition has carried through toenvironmental education. If there is no moneyto buy equipment, make it with what is onhand. If there is no accommodationsallowance, billet with friends oracquaintances. If there is no appropriatefacility, rent what is available and adapt theprogram to suit it. These processes encouragecreativity, build staff commitment, developcommunity support and relationships, andreduce costs, all of which promote quality andlongevity. For example, the Sierra Club’sAtlantic environmental educator spent most oflast spring moving from home to home across

Table 1: Environmental Learning Principlesof the HRM Adventure Earth Centre

Holistic Approach: This type ofapproach develops• feelings, environmental appreciation

and values• ecological understanding and

conceptual knowledge• environmental behaviour change and

actionNatural World Experiences• Essential to build a relationship with

natureCommunity-based Learning• Healthy social relationships, critical to

ecological relationships• Develop and connect resourcesExperiential Learning• The experience does the teaching• Active reflection is essentialIntegrated and ThematicProgramming• Use of a storyline approach• Provide a framework that transfers

learningMagic and Adventure• Engages learnersA Global Perspective

New Brunswick while providing dailyprograms to a wide range of schools. Ofcourse the down side of this approach are thefeelings expressed in the opening paragraph —working too hard and too long with too fewresources over an extended period.

Youth as a Resource. In the early years therewas a constant search for low-cost leadership:How could we keep the leader-to-participantratios low so as to promote quality educationwithout sending budgets through the roof?Thus, we increasingly shifted to deliveringexperiential programs via high school studentleaders. Initially it was a choice made in theinterest of program delivery for the children.Yet it was not long before it became evident

Environmental Education in Nova Scotia

PA

TH

WA

YS

16

that the youth leaders themselves and thebroader environmental education communitygained as much or more than the childrenfrom the youth leadership approach. Seniorleaders put their time into providing qualitytraining and leadership facilitation rather thanburning out on program delivery. New cadresof young people brought fresh perspectivesand new energy to the work, relishing theopportunity to be active leaders in the fieldrather than passive recipients of informationin a high school classroom. The particularlykeen and talented have continued theirinvolvement and developed their skills,moving their expertise to a range ofenvironmental education organizations acrossthe Maritimes. The youth leadership approachhas now evolved such that the focus is on howbest to attract and support the young peopleas the essential resource for delivering a widerange of programs.

Don’t Sit Still. Young people bring freshperspectives to programs. They provide atremendous resource for program developmentand improvement if there is opencommunication and a willingness to acceptfeedback, critique and new ideas. Frequentlylarge organizations or centres develop aspecified program that becomes entrenchedand “canned” over time. Though it originallymay have been sound, it deteriorates withoutinnovation. On the other hand, reinventingthe wheel each time may provide staff oreducators with a challenge, but it is also arecipe for poor quality, scattered outcomesand a lack of a principle-based design process.

Vision 20/20, the HRM Adventure EarthCentre residential Earth education program forgrade 8 students, has been an ongoing exampleof the challenges of balancing continuity andinnovation over the past several years. Initiallya number of young staff were critical of severalelements of the program and there wasongoing debate over how much should bechanged and what would be deleted. Thedialogue has continued to the point thatyounger staff are now taking the lead in

bringing about important changes, but it isbeing done within the context of the principle-based approach. These staff in turn have cometo appreciate the strengths and rationale forthe original program, and the challenges anddilemmas in improving it. Ultimately,programs have to develop and evolve or theystagnate, and young people are a tremendousresource in the innovation process.

Create a Continuum of Opportunities.Residential camps have long recognized thewisdom in creating a sequence of experiencesacross years so that children and youth returnand grow each summer, with older youthleading younger children. This is much moredifficult in community and school settingswhere environmental education programshave specific goals and target groups, andwhere the opportunities for residentialexperiences, and the special bonding thatoften accompanies them, are not readilyavailable. One superb experience results in avery enthusiastic and mobilized young person,but the energy dissipates if there are notopportunities to get involved with ongoingactivities. If there are a series of opportunities,the young people return, build strong peerrelationships and gain skills. In turn theycontribute knowledge and constructivecriticism that improves programming.

One weekend, I coincidentally participated intwo separate campfire programs, one led byfourth year university outdoor recreationmajors and another by a pair of 15-year-oldyouth leaders. The university leaders hadlearned the format from an applied universitycourse while the 15-year-olds had developedtheir skills over several years as participantsand assistant leaders. The 15-year-oldsprovided a program that was far superiordespite their lesser age and lack of formaltraining. There is no replacement for a series ofwell-designed experiences and opportunitiesthat young people can opt into over years.

Reach Out. A principle-based design processwith a focus on quality and powerful

Environmental Education in Nova Scotia

PA

TH

WA

YS

17

Environmental Education in Nova Scotia

experiences has the downside of requiring a lot ofpeople resources andultimately a limited numberof participants. Severalthousand a year in NovaScotia is impressive, but,given the need to changeenvironmental lifestyles andbehaviours, presentenvironmental realitiesdemand that educatorsreach a much broaderaudience quickly. There is aneed to reach out todevelop partnerships andsupport others to developprograms without losing thepower and effectiveness ofthe principle-basedapproach. Thus, theAdventure Earth Centre hasdeveloped a family-ledprogram of environmentaleducation experiencesspecifically developed forlocal parks and trails called“Earth Adventures” (Warner,Barlow & Taylor, 2006).Rather than youth leadersproviding the experiences in local parks,parents are given all of the instructions andtools to provide the experiences for their ownchildren and their friends through a detailedinterpretive trail guide. In reaching outthrough this process, there is inevitably a lossin consistency and quality, but researchindicates that if parents simply bring interestand enthusiasm to their time with the children,increased environmental appreciation results(Morse, 2004). Moreover, the experiencesencourage families to pursue additionalactivities and learning.

Publishing and distributing the EarthAdventures book also alerted a wide range ofnew constituencies to the availability ofenvironmental education resources andprograms across the region. Reaching out

through partnerships is essential tomaximizing effectiveness.

Challenges and Directions

The six lessons — principle-based design, lessis more, youth as a resource, don’t sit still,create an opportunities continuum, and reachout — have been essential to the developmentof environmental education across Nova Scotia.Work in the non-profit sector has flourishedand a wide range of committed teachers,schools and community groups havedeveloped skills and programs from whichmany young people have benefited. There hasbeen much informal dialogue andcollaboration that has borne fruit. Despite thegrowth and success, challenges and problemsmust be addressed, some of which are spin-

PA

TH

WA

YS

18

offs of the very principles that have enabledenvironmental education to flourish.

A major issue is the lack of infrastructure.Despite all of the environmental programsand services offered in Nova Scotia, there is nodedicated environmental education centre orfacility that serves as an effective hub and rolemodel. There are tremendous programresources, but no effective physicalinfrastructure. This speaks in part to the lackof funds in the region and in part to the focusover years on developing meaningfulprograms rather than on developing facilities.

Institutions and large organizations are morelikely to have the resources to developinfrastructure, yet environmental education inNova Scotia has grown up from the grassroots.It seems clear that environmental educatorswill have to work in a stronger partnershipwith government departments and provincialschool systems to gain the support forresources needed to develop facilities. Thisprocess has been happening over the pastseveral years. The private sector has animportant role to play and partnerships in thisrealm are just beginning.

Another challenge is finding roles for thesenior young people who have grown past thepart-time, volunteer or summer workexperiences that have developed their passionand skills for the field over years. Our youth ofyesterday are looking for careers inenvironmental education today and theinstitutional roles and resources are not therein sufficient quantity to employ them. As aresult, we risk losing them to other careers orto other parts of Canada — a traditionalMaritime problem. The direction has to be tostrengthen relationships and partnerships withinstitutions in government, educational andprivate sectors to find meaningful roles forthese gifted young professionals.

Finally, there is a large challenge, not just inthe Maritimes but across Canada, to effectivelyreach out to urban and inner city youth whodo not have the resources or inclination based

on their childhood experiences to embraceenvironmental education opportunities andprograms. Extensive research points to theimportance of childhood experience in natureas an important precursor of the developmentof an environmental ethic (Chawla, 1999).This “nature” experience need not be in the“wilderness” — a vacant lot or park will do.Suburban and rural young people can reachthese locales easily. Yet the combination ofchild safety concerns, less accessibility tonature, and the increased engagement withcomputers and technology make it particularlyhard to reach inner city youth. This pastsummer several inner city youth struggled at aresidential environmental education camp.They simply were not ready for and did notwant to spend much of their week “in thewoods.” Bearing in mind the lessons learned,possibly an approach based on working withinner city youth as leaders of inner citychildren can bear fruit.

Overall, the development of infrastructure,career opportunities, institutional resources,and programming for inner city youth are keychallenges if we are to build on the lessons,growth and success of environmentaleducation in Nova Scotia over the past 25 years.

References

Chawla, L. (1999). Significant life experiencesrevisited: A review of research on sources ofenvironmental sensitivity. The Journal ofEnvironmental Education 29(3): 11–21.

Van Matre, S. (1990). Earth education . . . Anew beginning. Greenville, West Virginia:Institute for Earth Education.

Warner, A., Barlow, J., & Taylor, G. (2006).Earth adventures in the Halifax Region: 24nature trails for fun and discovery. Halifax:Halifax Regional Municipality.

Dr. Alan Warner is an assistant professor in theSchool of Recreation Management and Kinesiologyat Acadia University and has been working as anenvironmental educator in Nova Scotia for morethan 25 years.

Environmental Education in Nova Scotia

PA

TH

WA

YS

19

The Bluenose Coastal Action Foundation(BCAF) and Helping Nature Heal arepartnering with a grade six class at BayviewCommunity School in Mahone Bay, NovaScotia. Together, they aim to teach the conceptof stewardship to local youth through thedevelopment of a natural area on schoolgrounds. The project involves a two-phasedapproach: a practical hands-on section and anin-class component. The objective of the projectis to foster a healthy respect and appreciationfor the natural environment in youth byoffering them the experience of creating asmall nature reserve at their school. This willinclude the planting of native trees and plants,developing interpretive signage for the area,and introducing the area to the rest of theschool and community through guided tours.

The grade six students will be involved in avery hands-on way in all aspects of the project,including the design, development, andimplementation of the entire natural area.

eatureFProjects on the Go: “Baywoods” OutdoorClassroomby Diana Saunders

After its completion, all Bayview students andteachers will have the opportunity to use the“outdoor classroom” at all grade levels andsubject areas.

This outdoor classroom will not only benefitthe students and teachers, but the communityas well. This nature area will become a placewhere families can go for adventure andlearning. This area will provide valuableeducational opportunities as well as greatlyimprove the aesthetics of the school grounds.

With the help of a volunteer landscaper thedesign of the area has been completed andplanting work has begun. Many hardwoodand softwood trees were transplanted to thesite in the spring of 2006. In addition, studentsand volunteers planted approximately 500small trees and a variety of wildflowers.Creation of the riparian zone has also begunand a variety of wildlife has already made theBaywoods outdoor classroom its home. Thereis a lot more to do and learn!

Discover the Acadian Forest with theConservation Council of New Brunswickby Tracy Glynn

The Conservation Council of New Brunswickhosts guided tours for youth of Odell Park, afine example of Acadian forest situated in thecity of Fredericton. The Acadian forest is ameeting place where the northern boreal forestblends with the southern hardwood forestscreating a remarkable variety of forestecosystems. There are 32 species of trees foundin New Brusnwick’s Acadian forest. TheAcadian forest has been designated by the

World Wildlife Fund as one of the mostendangered forest types in North America.Tours offered by wildlife biologists and natureinterpreters introduce students to key conceptssuch as habitat, species, diversity, ecology andthe importance of the Acadian forest. Tourslast approximately 1.5 hours. Contact TracyGlynn at forest@conservationcouncil.ca or506-458-8747 to arrange a tour.

PA

TH

WA

YS

20

In 1999, Nancy MacDonald (pseudonym), havingalways been interested in outdoor pursuits, beganseeking training opportunities in Nova Scotia witha goal to begin leading outdoor trips with her GirlGuide group. She wanted to develop both thetechnical and leadership skills to lead her groupsafely in Nova Scotia’s wilderness, sharing theexperience with others. A quick search brought herto the Nova Scotia Outdoor LeadershipDevelopment (NSOLD) Program and theWilderness Navigation module. After signing upand having a great weekend of learning new andexciting skills, she committed to taking more of theNSOLD program offerings, continuing herdevelopment. With the skills learned throughNSOLD, and through connections to other localprograms, Nancy developed into one of NovaScotia’s shining outdoor leaders. Today, shecontinues to share the outdoors with her family,her Girl Guide troop, and numerous other groupsthroughout the province, spreading the joy of theoutdoors to others — and loving it.

Founded in 1979, The Nova Scotia OutdoorLeadership Development (NSOLD) Programhas been working to improve the quality ofoutdoor leadership in the province, whetherthat leadership is for an organized group, afamily outing, or simply leadership of self.Traditionally, the program has been offered tothose 17 years of age or older. NSOLDparticipants acquire knowledge, skills, andexperience that ensure safer, environmentallysound and more enjoyable outdoorexperiences.

The NSOLD Basic Leadership Course (BLC)consists of seven weekend modules plus amulti-day Leadership School. New to theNSOLD portfolio are the Woman’s OutdoorLeadership Program and Mentoring in theOutdoors offered in partnership withHeartWood Center for Community Youth

Community-based Outdoor Leadership Training inNova Scotiaby Jody Conrad

Development. All NSOLD programs use anexperiential, hands-on approach to learningand are facilitated by some of Nova Scotia’sbest outdoor specialists and educators.NSOLD also offers custom programs tointerested groups or organizations through theResource Leadership Service and promotes otheroutdoor skill training opportunities availablein the province.

Beyond the traditional program deliverystructure, a new approach for NSOLD deliveryis being explored in three different pilot areasacross the province. In each case, shortprograms (typically one day) are beingmarketed to families interested in or currentlyspending time in the outdoors. The shortprogram opens up the opportunity to thosewith families and correspondingtime constraints. While theseshort programs do not go intothe same depth as the fullweekend courses, they domaintain anexperientialapproach tolearning. Ifparticipants

eatureF

PA

TH

WA

YS

21

Training in Nova Scotia

in the short courses desire additional training,they are encouraged to further their learningby attending the corresponding, full-lengthBLC courses offered throughout the province.In this way, the short, local NSOLD programsact as a promotional tool for the largerweekend courses traditionally offered, whilestill providing quality, stand-alone training.

All three pilot sites are relying on partnershipswith local recreation departments and otherlocal organizations to coordinate promotionof the course offerings and participantregistration. This reduces the administrationdemands for NSOLD and allows for a moreeffective “place” to be set for the programwithin the communities.

Another significant benefit to be gained fromthis approach is the development of a localleadership base of new NSOLD instructorswithin the pilot areas. Participants who havetaken the shorter course (in any of the coursetopics) and gone on to take the full-lengthweekend courses can then intern on existingNSOLD courses in their home communities.This process streamlines the progression andremoves some of the geographic barriers tobecoming an instructor. Candidate instructorsare even more excited to participate if theyknow that they can contribute within theirown communities and don’t have to travelhundreds of kilometres to deliver a programoutside of their area.

For more information on the NSOLDprogram, visit the website at www.gov.ns.ca/hpp/physicalActivity/nsold.asp, or contact theCoordinator of Outdoor Recreation at the N.S.Department of Health Promotion andProtection at 902-424-7512.

NSOLD Program Offerings

Outdoor Camping SkillsWilderness NavigationLeave No TraceEnvironmental Interpretation — Sharing

Nature with OthersWilderness Survival

Emergency ProceduresLeadership SchoolWomen’s Outdoor LeadershipMentoring in the Outdoors

NSOLD Affiliated Training Opportunities

Red Cross Wilderness and Remote FirstAid: This is an experiential three-day coursedesigned for individuals who will beparticipating in wilderness activities withinhours or days of advanced medical care. Thecourse will enable participants to have anappreciation of the realities of providing FirstAid in a wilderness and remote environment.Emphasis will be on practical skills, decisionmaking, and management of the outdoorenvironment. www.wrfa.ca

Becoming an Outdoors Woman (BOW):The Becoming an Outdoors Woman (BOW)program invites women 18 years of age orolder to learn and enhance outdoor skillsthrough the guidance of enthusiasticinstructors. BOW weekends and events areheld across Nova Scotia and offer a relaxedand friendly learning environment.

Lost! and Found: Lost! and Found: AnOutdoor Survival Program for Children isdesigned to prepare children to helpthemselves if they become lost in the woods,even if they have nothing but the clothes ontheir back. Activity booklets, posters andinformation brochures are available from theN.S. Department of Health Promotion andProtection, Coordinator of OutdoorRecreation for those wishing to teach Lost!and Found.

Jody Conrad is the Go for Green Consultant withthe N.S. Department of Health Promotion andProtection where he does his best to support ActiveTransportation initiatives, and promote outdoor,winter physical activity within the province. He isa founding board member of Leave No TraceCanada and has been a coordinator and instructorwith the N.S. Outdoor Leaderhip Development(NSOLD) program for 10 years.

PA

TH

WA

YS

22

eatureF

Although there is vast potential for ecotourismgrowth and development in the MaritimeProvinces and examples exist of its success inevery Atlantic Province, significant workremains to develop ecotourism as an integralpart of the Atlantic experience. My reflectionson the potential for ecotourism growth anddevelopment in the Atlantic Provinces are based,in part, on my experience as an educator, anecotourism guide, and an advocate for thetourism industry in Nova Scotia.

Ecotourism is both an activity and an industry.As an activity it typically entails low risk, softadventure such as seakayaking, whalewatching, biking, hiking, canoeing and rafting.Both cognitive and affective functions areessential elements of the ecotourism experienceand it is these aspects that provide the ethicalfoundation for ecotourism. Discoveredknowledge of the flora and fauna of an areaand its people and their culture buildsemotional bridges for individuals to becomeinspired to act as stewards and to contributemoney and, in some cases, time, to the regionand its host community. As an industry,ecotourism is a collection of businesses andservices directly related to the provision ofecotourism activities, the federal and provincialtourism organizations and educational institutesthat provide relevant knowledge and training.

The Maritime Provinces have a rich maritimeheritage based on their connection to the sea.Fiddle music, lobsters, whales, majesticcoastlines, cod fish, and music drawn fromCeltic roots are the stereotypes. These are oftenthe images that come to mind to would-betravellers to the region and these are theimages that have traditionally been used tomarket this region across Canada, the UnitedStates and Europe. It is only recently thatseakayaking, for instance, has appeared intourist promotional material and that theAtlantic Provinces have actively sought the

Ecotourism in the Atlantic Provincesby John Colton

ecotourism market. When people are lookingto invest in adventurous holidays, westernCanada and the territories have been theirprimary destinations, especially for extendedday wilderness trips. It is not that the AtlanticProvinces do not boast spectacular scenery andtracts of wilderness capable of supportingecotourism; it is just that we have not beenentirely successful in marketing theopportunities to potential visitors.Compounding this problem is that manyyoung people from the Maritimes interested inecotourism guiding and business developmentare often drawn westward first for both theireducation and initial professional experiences.Luckily, roots run deep in the Maritimes, andmany of these individuals eventually returnhome and establish new nature-based tourismbusinesses.

Opportunities for ecotourism growth anddevelopment in the Atlantic Provinces aresignificant given the rugged coastlines, forests,rivers and coastal mountains. Ecotourismactivities like whale watching, seakayaking,hiking, biking, canoeing, and rafting abound,yet the industry as a whole is still relativelynew and continues to struggle with a declinein overall visitation to the region. This islargely due to the continued fallout of 9/11and the fact that the Canadian dollar is rising;many Americans are opting to either stayhome or travel domestically. Yet,opportunities for encouraging Canadians toexperience ecotourism adventures in theMaritime Provinces continue to exist.

Another major hurdle for the industry is therising cost of liability insurance. Whereoperators of sea kayak companies, for example,could previously cover their liability costs with$2,500, liability insurance has risen as high as$25,000. These challenges are slowly beingovercome through greater marketing efforts todraw visitors to the region and through work

PA

TH

WA

YS

23

of industry associations to reduce insurancepremiums through group/volume purchases.More problematic for the development ofecotourism is the level of commitment eachprovince is willing to make toward its growth.

Each of the Atlantic Provinces (NewBrunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island,Newfoundland and Labrador) offers similaryet distinctive ecotourism adventures. NewBrunswick has vast forests, waterways, the Bayof Fundy and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. PrinceEdward Island is gentler, with red sweepingbeaches, pastoral countryside, rolling hills andpotato fields. Nova Scotia, Canada’s “OceanPlayground,” offers the ruggedness of CapeBreton with its beaches and precipitouscoastlines, while mainland Nova Scotia facesboth the Atlantic Ocean and the Bay of Fundy.Newfoundland and Labrador embrace the sealike no other province. Wild coastlines and the

jewel of Gros Morne National Park offersignificant opportunities for all types ofecotourism activities.

New Brunswick and Newfoundland andLabrador have developed provincial-wideecotourism development strategies that seek todevelop and enhance ecotourism products, thenatural resources base on which theseproducts depend and the industry as a whole.New Brunswick has been phenomenallysuccessful at marketing the Bay of Fundy as anecotourism destination, and some sea kayakcompanies, like River Valley Adventures basedin St. Martins, have received well-deservedattention for setting high standards for theirbusiness operations and ethical practices.Newfoundland and Labrador offer unparallelednature-based tourism opportunities and havesignificant governmental resources tocontribute to development. In addition, manynature-based tour companies work diligentlyto instil the principles of ecotourism into theiroperating guidelines. Coastal Connections

Ltd., an award-winning tour company, hasfundamental operatingprinciples that include ecology,research and learning. Theinterrelationship of theseelements during a nature-based excursion, coupled witha core set of ethical guidelines,enables their clients tomeaningfully explore theirnatural surroundings and todevelop personal values inkeeping with the principles.The Gros Morne Institute forSustainable Tourism (GMIST),based in Rocky Harbour withinGros Morne National Park,provides numerous workshopson sustainable tourismpractices for ecotourism andadventure tourism operators. Awidely respected institute, theGMIST also deliversworkshops for ecotourismoperators throughout theAtlantic Provinces.

Ecotourism in the Atlantic Provinces

PA

TH

WA

YS

24

Ecotourism in the Atlantic Provinces

Aboriginal ecotourism is growing in theMaritime Provinces as well. On Prince EdwardIsland, for example, visitors to the Mi’kmaqcommunity of Lennox Island can visit theecotourism centre, which houses a sea kayakcompany, a boat charter operation, a nativefoods café, a hostel, and an interpretive centre.Adjacent to this building is a cultural centrewhere visitors can learn regional and localMi’kmaq history and cultural practices. Cross-cultural workshops are provided to those whoplan ahead and close by is a ten-kilometre trailwith interpretive signage. The Bear River FirstNation in Nova Scotia has recently completeda cultural and interpretive centre. Visitors cantour the centre, walk the medicinal trail, andparticipate in birch bark canoe-makingdemonstrations. Other aboriginal nature-based tourism experiences exist throughoutthe Maritime Provinces as well.

Supporting the development of these tourismexperiences are the educational institutionsthat deliver programs and courses related toecotourism. Acadia University’s School ofRecreation Management and Kinesiologyconcentration in Outdoor Recreation andSustainable Tourism offers courses inecotourism, sustainable tourism managementand environmental education. Students canalso elect to take practical courses such as seakayaking, orienteering and navigation, and, afavourite among many, a wilderness skills andsafety course that takes students into thewilderness for an extended duration. NovaScotia Community College has developed atwo-year hands-on ecotourism program thatbalances academic and practical skills and hasstudents applying these skills with ecotourismcompanies in the region. The College of theNorth Atlantic in Corner Brook,Newfoundland offers a two-year adventuretourism program with courses that relatedirectly to ecotourism. Students in thisprogram have the opportunity to apply theirskills in the magnificent Gros Morne NationalPark through sea kayaking, hiking and whalewatching.

Investment in ecotourism development,including building the capacity of thoseinvolved in the industry, is occurringthroughout the Atlantic Provinces. TheAtlantic Canada Opportunities Agency’s(ACOA) Tourism Atlantic group has fundedand provided expertise to communitiesinterested in pursuing ecotourism. Provincialtourism and industry associations are workingto develop the market as well. But to date,ecotourism continues to be a niche market formost Atlantic Provinces, unlike their westerncounterparts that have invested heavily indeveloping the market and industry.To grow into a significant industry throughoutthe Atlantic Provinces, leadership from withinthe industry and government is essential. Astourism is becoming increasingly important tocounter the economic impacts of the collapsedfishery and the closure and reduction of themining and forest industries throughout theMaritime Provinces, it is critical that theprovincial governments take steps to protectthe natural resource base upon which thisindustry depends.

Opportunities for experiencing world-classecotourism in the Maritime Provinces exist.From sea kayaking along the shores of NovaScotia and canoeing the rivers of NewBrunswick to hiking the trails of Gros Mornein Newfoundland Labrador and walking thered beaches of Prince Edward Island, there areopportunities for everyone. With everyopportunity the potential to connect withnature, history and tradition can be realized,and the lessons learned from these experiencescan be transferred to the participants’ homesand communities. Although nascent indevelopment in many respects, ecotourism inthe Maritime Provinces promises to bringsignificant returns to individuals andcommunities committed to realizing itspotential.

John Colton is an assistant professor in the Schoolof Recreation Management and Kinesiology atAcadia University.

PA

TH

WA

YS

25

eatureFMentoring in the Outdoorsby Kathleen Naylor

Memories of outdoor adventures as a child oryouth almost always include a positiveconnection with other people — often adultswho created those opportunities for us. Aninitiative in Nova Scotia called Mentoring inthe Outdoors (MO) is working to encouragemore of that kind of mentorship.

Coordinated by the HeartWood Centre forCommunity Youth Development, MO’spurpose is to offer professional developmentand support to senior youth and adults whoare creating and leading outdoor experiencesfor and with youth. Its goal is to encouragemore adults to share their love of the outdoorswith young people, so that they too mightform positive connections with the wilderness,recognize our place in the Earth’s natural cycles,make outdoor pursuits a regular part of ahealthy lifestyle, and, in the long run, advocateand act for the protection of wild places.

As a small non-profit organization,HeartWood has for years embraced the naturalworld as a prime learning ground for personalgrowth and group development. It works inpartnership with the Nova Scotia OutdoorLeadership Development (NSOLD) Program,supported by the Department of HealthPromotion and Protection, to coordinate anddeliver the MO programs.

MO participants are diverse in theirexperience: some have been working andplaying in the outdoors for many years, someare parents who want to become morecomfortable taking their own children onadventures, and some are staff or volunteers ofcommunity organizations looking to connectwith other outdoor leaders.

Each year, HeartWood hosts one or twoweekend programs in an outdoor location orresidential camp. Learning is based on theindividual’s own participation and the sharedexperiences of all group members. The focus is

on re-connecting with nature, reflecting onearly experiences outdoors, and examining thekey factors that made those adventuresmagical, safe and fun. The program exploreswhat true mentorship is, based on groupmembers’ personal experiences, and debunksthe myths that mentorship is a one-way street,or that the role of a mentor in a youngperson’s life can be ascribed instead of earned.

Other related activities have emerged over theyears, such as one-day “mini-MO” programsfor communities who want a shorter exposureto the concepts. Based on participantfeedback, HeartWood has now developed andhosted two one-day programs that focus solelyon group dynamics, and new games andactivities. It also offers programs for senioryouth leading activities for younger childrenin their communities or schools. New for2006 will be a one-day module fororganizations using outdoor adventure as atherapeutic tool for “at-risk” youth.

The success of MO is largely due to thecommitment of the province in supportingoutdoor leaders through the NSOLD Program.The small group size in this program reflectsthe importance of the group dynamic increating good learning experiences. Finally,simply making time in our increasingly busyschedules to focus on the value of time spentoutdoors is essential. The pause is always agreat reminder, a chance to revisit ourpassions and priorities. Inevitably, we emergewith renewed commitment to making moretime for ourselves to be in the wilderness, and,most importantly, to sharing that passion withchildren and youth.

Kathleen Naylor is Program Manager at theHeartWood Centre for Community YouthDevelopment. She can be reached by phone at902-444-5885. More information about thecentre is available at www.heartwood.ns.ca.

PA

TH

WA

YS

26

Adventure recreation in Atlantic Canada has along history, dating back to the earliestEuropean settlers. It has been argued that the“Order of Good Cheer” instituted in 1605 atthe Habitation in Nova Scotia was the firstwestern style outdoor recreation in NorthAmerica. To alleviate winter boredom in thenew world, Samuel de Champlain devisedweekly banquets requiring hunting parties toprovide needed provisions. Later, in 1855,Captain Campbell Hardy, stationed with theRoyal Artillery in Halifax, chronicled hisbackwoods travels in “Sporting Adventures inthe New World.” And later in that century,Atlantic Canada, notably New Brunswick andNova Scotia, became a haven for well-to-dotravelers, especially hunters and fishers fromNew England, thus spawning a cadre ofoutfitters to service such robust travellers.Their experiences have been expertlyrecounted by Mike Parker in such widelyappealing books as Guides of the North Woods(1990). Since the 1900s and the advent of therailway and then the automobile, the outdoorshas become increasingly utilized by touristsand residents alike; primarily at first forhunting and fishing but more recently by abroad range of adventurers from canoeists,sailors, hikers and cross-country skiers tocyclists, mountain bikers, kayakers and year-round surfers.

Non-consumptive adventure tourism is by nomeans a large industry in Atlantic Canada butover the last two decades it has undergoneconsiderable growth and development. Forexample, Scott Cunningham of CoastalAdventures, operating out of Tangiers on NovaScotia’s Eastern Shore, is a pioneer in sea-kayak touring in Atlantic Canada, and severalkayaking companies operate in New Brunswick,such as River Valley Adventure in St. Martin