AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
An Assessment of Therapeutic Skills and Knowledge of Outdoor Leaders
in the United States and Canada
Matthew M. McCarty
Submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of Master of Arts from Prescott College
in Adventure Education
May, 2014
Christine Lynn Norton, Ph.D.
Graduate Mentor
Mark Wagstaff, Ed. D.
Second Reader
Denise Mitten, Ph.D.
Core Faculty
1
UMI Number: 1557626
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI 1557626
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Abstract
Using an online survey methodology and descriptive statistics, 92 self-identified outdoor leaders,
representing a spectrum of wilderness experience programs in the United States and Canada,
were surveyed to ascertain their knowledge of select psychological theories and concepts
relevant to outdoor leadership. This study explores personal leadership philosophies, attitudes,
and practices and knowledge regarding the facilitation of trip participants’ relational
development with self, others, and the natural world. General findings indicate that leaders
possess a range of knowledge and skills to facilitate participants’ relational development.
Therapeutic outdoor leadership is tripartite relational theory emerging from outdoor
programming literature. This study finds that leaders are actively nurturing participant well-
being through a relational framework, indicated by the 34% of respondents who agree with the
author’s definition of outdoor leadership, addressing relational development of intra, inter, and
transpersonal domains. However, findings indicate that leaders do not necessarily have, or are
being educated in content and skills to maximize their abilities to develop outdoor program
participants’ relational abilities. Less than 13% of outdoor leaders are familiar with the concepts
of therapeutic alliance, transference, and countertransference. Nearly all outdoor leaders claim
to facilitate participant-nature relationships, approximately 80% use nature based metaphors,
72% use ceremonies or rituals, and most of the benefits attributed to contact with nature were
identified. Most participants are unfamiliar with conservation psychology, the biophilia
hypothesis, or ecopsychology. Almost half of outdoor leaders understand what self-efficacy
describes and 55% of respondents were familiar with locus of control. Additionally, this survey
explores leaders’ perceptions about trust factors, how they define emotional safety, relevant
professional boundaries, and feedback giving strategies.
2
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Keywords: outdoor leadership, therapeutic leadership, adventure education, relational
leadership, relationship-based programming, therapeutic outdoor leadership
3
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Copyright © 2014 by Matthew M. McCarty
All rights reserved.
No part of this thesis may be used, reproduced, stored, recorded, or transmitted in any form or
manner whatsoever without written permission from the copyright holder or his agent(s), except
in the case of brief quotations embodied in the papers of students, and in the case of brief
quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.
Requests for such permission should be electronically addressed to:
Matthew M. McCarty
m.m.mccarty.ae@gmail.com
4
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................12
Chapter 1: Introduction..............................................................................................................14
Purpose of Study.........................................................................................................................14
Research Question......................................................................................................................15
Definitions of Key Terms...........................................................................................................16
Being Therapeutic Versus Doing Therapy.................................................................................17
The Author’s Background and Paradigm...................................................................................19
Grounding Research Theories.....................................................................................................19
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature..........................................................................................22
The Centrality of Relationships..................................................................................................22
The Need for Relationships.....................................................................................................23
Psychopathology Characterized by a Lack of Relationships...................................................25
Relational Leadership.................................................................................................................26
Therapeutic Alliance and Influences.......................................................................................30
Ethical Leadership...................................................................................................................32
An Ethic of Care......................................................................................................................34
Emotional Intelligence.............................................................................................................36
Self-Awareness and Values.....................................................................................................37
Outdoor Leadership and Relationships.......................................................................................39
Competency Approaches to Outdoor Leadership....................................................................39
Relationship Driven Outdoor Leadership................................................................................42
Emotional safety......................................................................................................................44
5
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Psychological Depth................................................................................................................46
A Tripartite Relational Model for Outdoor Leaders................................................................48
Relationship with self...........................................................................................................49
Locus of control.................................................................................................................50
Self-efficacy.......................................................................................................................50
Facilitating a sense of self..................................................................................................51
Relationship with others.......................................................................................................52
Facilitating a relationship with others................................................................................53
Relationship with nature.......................................................................................................55
Facilitating a relationship with nature................................................................................57
Benefits of nature...............................................................................................................58
Attentional improvements...............................................................................................58
Stress reduction...............................................................................................................59
Affective improvements..................................................................................................60
Cognitive improvements.................................................................................................60
Transcendent experiences...............................................................................................61
Other benefits..................................................................................................................61
Relationship Influences Upon Outdoor Programming Outcomes...........................................62
Techniques of Relational Leaders............................................................................................63
Communication.....................................................................................................................64
6
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Trust and rapport development.............................................................................................66
Feedback...............................................................................................................................67
Ceremonies and rituals..........................................................................................................69
Use of metaphors..................................................................................................................70
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY............................................................................................72
Research Design..........................................................................................................................72
Survey Characteristics................................................................................................................73
Sampling Procedure....................................................................................................................73
Participant Characteristics..........................................................................................................76
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS...........................................................................................................79
Training and Beliefs of Outdoor Leaders...................................................................................79
Motives for Working Outdoors................................................................................................79
Decision-Making Influences....................................................................................................82
Characteristics of Outdoor Program Participants....................................................................83
Participant Needs: Motivational and Relational......................................................................84
Relational Leadership.................................................................................................................85
Therapeutic Alliance................................................................................................................85
Professional boundaries........................................................................................................87
Emotional disclosure.............................................................................................................88
Managing Acting Out Participants...........................................................................................88
Relationship with Self..............................................................................................................89
Self-efficacy..........................................................................................................................89
7
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Locus of control....................................................................................................................90
Interpersonal Relationships......................................................................................................91
Relationship with Nature.........................................................................................................92
Nature-based psychological theories....................................................................................93
Benefits of nature..................................................................................................................94
Techniques of Relational Leaders............................................................................................95
Trust and rapport development.............................................................................................95
Feedback strategies...............................................................................................................96
Ceremonies and rituals..........................................................................................................97
Use of metaphors..................................................................................................................99
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS...........................................................100
Outdoor Leadership..................................................................................................................101
Why People Work as Outdoor Leaders.................................................................................101
What is Outdoor Leadership..................................................................................................101
Influences to Decision-Making..............................................................................................103
Risk-management as primary influence. ............................................................................104
Need for therapeutic emphasis in decision-making............................................................105
Factors Influencing Relationship Development.....................................................................106
Therapeutic alliance............................................................................................................106
Transference and countertransference................................................................................107
Professional boundaries......................................................................................................108
Trust and rapport development...........................................................................................109
Feedback strategies............................................................................................................111
8
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Implications for practice: Education and Training Needs for Relationally Oriented Outdoor
Leaders......................................................................................................................................112
Academic Training.................................................................................................................112
Employer Provided Training..................................................................................................114
Training Needs in Psychological Constructs.........................................................................115
Self-efficacy........................................................................................................................118
Locus of control..................................................................................................................119
Environmental psychologies...............................................................................................120
Human needs.......................................................................................................................121
Emotional Risk Management.................................................................................................123
Self-Awareness......................................................................................................................125
Advancing Outdoor Leaders’ Personal Growth.....................................................................126
Technical Training Needs for Relational Leaders.................................................................127
Sequencing activities..........................................................................................................127
Ceremonies and rituals.......................................................................................................127
Wilderness solos..............................................................................................................128
The use of metaphors..........................................................................................................129
Implications for Practice: Relationship Development with Self, Community, and the Natural
World........................................................................................................................................130
To be Therapeutic..................................................................................................................130
Fostering Relationships with Self..........................................................................................131
Fostering Relationships with Community.............................................................................133
9
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Fostering Relationships with Nature......................................................................................135
An Emerging Model: Therapeutic Outdoor Leadership..........................................................143
Limitations................................................................................................................................147
Areas for Future Research........................................................................................................149
References...................................................................................................................................154
Appendix: A Complete list of survey questions with provided answers..............................167
10
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Tables and Figures
Tables
Table 1 Characteristics of Outdoor Leaders.................................................................................79
Table 2 Reasons for Working as an Outdoor Leader (non-relational)...........................................80
Table 3 Relational Motives for Working as an Outdoor Leader..................................................81
Table 4 Employer Provided Training...........................................................................................83
Table 5 Mental Health and Life Issues of Outdoor Program Participants....................................84
Table 6 Work Related Boundaries Outdoor Leaders are Mindful of ...........................................87
Table 7 How Outdoor Leaders Facilitate Relationships Between Participants and the Natural
Environment.......................................................................................................................93
Table 8 Assumed Human Benefits From Exposure/Immersion in Nature...................................94
Table 9 The Most Important Traits Fostering Trust in Outdoor Leaders.....................................95
Table 10 Rapport Development Strategies Used by Outdoor Leaders.........................................96
Table 11 Feedback Strategies Used by Outdoor Leaders.............................................................97
Table 12 Types of Ceremonies and Rituals Outdoor Leaders Facilitate......................................98
Table 13 Rituals Fostering Relationships in Three Domains.......................................................99
Table 14 Outdoor Leadership Experience..................................................................................100
Table 15 Education of Outdoor Leaders: Comparing Medina (2001) and McCarty (2014)......113
Table 16 Outdoor Leaders’ Familiarity with Environmental Psychology Constructs................121
Table 17 Comparison of Substantiated and Assumed Benefits of Nature..................................138
Figures
Figure 1 Ranking of Factors Affecting Outdoor Leaders’ Decision-Making Processes..............82
Figure 2 Assumed Motivational Needs of Participants in Outdoor Programming.......................85
11
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Acknowledgements
Graduate school has been a multi-year endeavor, at two institutions and in two different
fields. I feel fortunate to have attended Prescott College as both an undergraduate and graduate
student. The opportunities to pursue my academic passions and design my own academic
program are unrivaled in academia. “Trust the process” is Prescott’s motto, and the result is this
thesis on outdoor leadership.
I am grateful to all the scholars, presenters, and participants I’ve met and talked with at
professional conferences hosted by the Therapeutic Adventure Professional Group, the
Association of Experiential Education, the Wilderness Education Association, the National
Association of Therapeutic Schools and Programs, and the Wilderness Risk Management
Conference, as well as the many presenters and fellow students at colloquia hosted by Prescott
College.
As for my thesis committee, profound heartfelt gratitude is what I wish to express. I met
Dr. Mark Wagstaff at an AEE international conference. He expressed interest and willingness to
serve on my committee, with limited introduction to me or my ideas. Mark’s feedback has been
through the lens of outdoor leadership, and he has helped me see how my ideas can make an
impact in the field of outdoor programming. Dr. Denise Mitten has been instrumental in me
reaching the end of my graduate studies. Her administrative, academic, and interpersonal
flexibility have been critical to my development as a student, scholar, and adventure educator.
Denise and I started in Prescott’s Master of Arts Program at the same time, and I’m so impressed
to watch it grow with her vision. Lastly, I owe a tremendous debt to Dr. Christine Lynn Norton.
From our first meeting, where I broke down emotionally-trying to figure out my place in the
12
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
world of helping others, to every conversation where she has been an unwavering cheerleader,
ceaselessly motivating me to get my thesis done! Christine, your zest for life, academic rigor,
and passionate approach to mentorship has been so appreciated by me. I do not think I would
have finished this project without your ongoing support.
Lastly, I wish to thank my partner Charity Pape, for both her patience and support in
accomplishing the monumental task of completing this thesis. To my nine-month old daughter,
Scout, I hope I am able to be both a father and a therapeutic outdoor leader to you, helping you
with your relational development, and supporting your life long process towards well-being.
13
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Study
Among the many variables that exist in outdoor recreation, education, or adventure,
relationships prove to be fundamental to human experience. The inherent relational aspects of
outdoor and adventure education is articulated within academic literature. For example, Priest
(1986) described four types of relationships relevant to outdoor education: intrapersonal,
interpersonal, ecosystemic, and ekistic. Gair (1997) described outdoor education as, “an
approach or a methodology by which challenging activities and the natural environment provide
an arena for the personal, social and educational development” of people (p. 2). However, there
is a lack of consistent emphasis upon the knowledge and skills outdoor leaders should possess
and exhibit in order to support the relational development of outdoor program participants, and
the importance or duty of outdoor leaders to nurture participant relationships.
The goal of this research project was to explore outdoor leaders’ knowledge of select
psychological theories and concepts applicable to working with participants out of doors;
specifically those relevant to relationship development, as well as their practices in facilitating
relationships for participants they lead. This thesis research represents a shift from studying
leadership traits and practices, the application of leadership, competency models, and leadership
theories, to exploring outdoor leaders’ understanding of psychological theories and universal
human needs when working with diverse populations across diverse wilderness experience
program types.
The rationale guiding this project is that outdoor leaders have a great responsibility, and
potentially a great influence on the participants they lead. Outdoor leaders can positively
influence participant well-being across multiple dimensions through the development of
14
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
relationships. This thesis introduces a relational matrix that may simplify the focus and practice
of outdoor leadership and highlights the need to advance applicable psychological theories and
professional practices within outdoor leadership training and education. This can be
accomplished when outdoor leaders are knowledgeable of relevant psychological theories and
counseling psychology approaches. With this knowledge, outdoor leaders can adopt professional
practices that generate improved participant outcomes in the dimension of personal well-being.
This author contends that outdoor programming begins not with content, but with people, and
that a fundamental purpose of outdoor leaders is to improve the well-being of those they lead.
The facilitation of the three-fold relational matrix of self, community, and nature is described in
this paper as therapeutic outdoor leadership.
Survey questions were designed to capture information about outdoor leaders’ awareness
and understanding of theories and constructs relevant to working with people generally, and
working in nature specifically, as well as how they facilitate relationships. Psychological topics
explored include rapport and trust development, self-efficacy, locus of control, transference and
countertransference, professional boundaries, benefits of human connection to nature, and
awareness of ecopsychology, the biophilia hypothesis, and conservation psychology. Outdoor
leaders were asked about their techniques for: giving feedback and developing rapport; creating
or facilitating rituals; using metaphors for personal growth; facilitating connection to the natural
world for their participants; intervening with isolative participants; creating emotional safety in
groups; and influences affecting their decision-making processes.
The Research Question
This thesis research is guided by the question: what therapeutic knowledge and relational
skills do outdoor leaders, representing a spectrum of wilderness experience programs (WEP),
15
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
have that directly relate to modeling, facilitating, and building healthier relationships within
participants, within communities, and between participants and the natural world?
Definitions of Key Terms
Adventure education: describes a field of study and body of practices that attempt to encourage
personal growth through adventure-based experiences.
Adventure programming: “is the deliberate use of adventurous experiences to create learning in
individuals or groups, that results in change for society and communities” (Priest, 1999,
p. xiii).
Adventure therapy: specialized outdoor programming attempting to treat clinical mental health
issues.
Ecopsychology: an interdisciplinary field exploring the reciprocal relationship between human
health and the health of the natural world.
Locus of control: describes how individuals attribute outcomes in their lives.
Outdoor education: is an umbrella term that includes environmental education and adventure
education.
Outdoor leader: a person responsible for the physical and emotional safety of outdoor
participants and is responsible for implementing activities to achieve desired outcomes.
Self-efficacy: describes how someone perceives their abilities, which influences personal
performances.
Relational leadership: a leadership orientation that starts with people first, as opposed to task
accomplishment, and involves the conscious intention to foster relationships.
Therapeutic: describes intentional approaches and interventions that yield healing, restorative,
reparative, or positive effect upon well-being.
16
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Therapeutic alliance: in specific terms it refers to the relationship between a psychotherapist and
client, in general terms it describes the nature of relationships between helpers and those
being helped.
Therapeutic outdoor leadership: a relationally oriented approach to leadership that involves
fostering and facilitating relationships across intrapersonal, interpersonal, and
transpersonal domains.
Well-being: can be understood as a multi-dimensional construct, expressed across spiritual,
intellectual, social, physical, emotional, and occupational domains.
Wilderness experience programs (WEPs): the broadest label used to describe any type of
program operating outdoors. Examples of WEPs might include recreation programs or
outdoor ministry, among others.
Being Therapeutic Versus Doing Therapy
This paper explores how and if outdoor leaders are interacting with participants in a
therapeutic manner, within their scope of practice and training, that foster the fulfillment of
human relational needs. For clarity, it is important to distinguish and define therapeutic
interactions from therapy (clinical psychotherapy), as these terms and roles may be confusing for
some outdoor leaders. Describing the similarities between therapists and outdoor guides Bodkin
and Sartor (2005) wrote,
In some ways a [wilderness] guide is similar to a therapist. Both therapists and guides
must have excellent listening skills and be able to help clients clarify important issues.
Both need to assess potential participant/client risks (physical and psychological), and be
capable of intervening in crisis situations. Both need to be aware of power dynamics in
17
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
relationships with participants/clients, especially potential abuses of power with
vulnerable people. (p. 46)
Despite these similarities, the differences between the processes of being therapeutic versus
conducting therapy are evident. Berman and Davis-Berman (2000) help distinguish the
differences of these terms. Therapeutic is
an adjective, [and] indicates factors that may be conducive to emotional well-being and
may apply to a variety of activities and programs….[Therapy], a noun, involves a process
of assessment, treatment planning, the strategic use of counseling techniques…and the
documentation of change. (p. 2)
To provide therapy requires professional, academic, and clinical training for addressing
problematic and sometimes significant, psychologically driven life challenges. However, to be
therapeutic, one needs simply to contribute to the well-being of another. In this thesis, the term
therapeutic describes intentional approaches and interventions that yield healing, restorative,
reparative, or positive effect upon well-being.
Research has demonstrated that relationships, and the drive to develop and maintain
them, are essential to human well-being (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Well-being can be
understood as a multi-dimensional construct, expressed across spiritual, intellectual, social,
physical, emotional, and occupational domains (National Wellness Institute, 2014). Well-being
and personal growth are used interchangeably in this paper. Hendee and Brown (1987) defined
personal growth as, “a range of effects toward expanded fulfillment of one’s capabilities and
potential” (p. 2). Adventure and nature-based programming clearly promote well-being across
multiple dimensions, such as physical, social, cognitive, emotional, and even spiritual (Bobilya,
18
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Akey, & Mitchell, 2009). Therapeutically oriented outdoor leaders, assisting people in
actualizing their relational and psychological needs, can enhance well-being.
The Author’s Background and Paradigm
The author’s employment history working in nature spans twenty five-years, starting at
the age of 15. However, it was not until his early 30s, working in the field of wilderness therapy
that he embarked and matured as an outdoor leader. This occupational pursuit initiated graduate
study in counseling psychology; however, the author subsequently left this discipline to study
adventure education, which felt more pertinent to his personality, interests, and professional
ambitions. Initially the author was not interested in leadership, but during his adventure
education studies he was struck by what he considered the minimal focus on relationship
development and facilitation within outdoor leadership textbooks, particularly the human
connection with nature. This thesis embodies the author’s interests in both counseling
psychology and adventure education.
This study’s intention is to situate outdoor program participant well-being as a central
focus of outdoor leadership, using a tripartite relationship development framework. It is the
author’s assertion and assumption that when outdoor leaders actively nurture participant
relationships within the three domains of self, community, and nature that participant well-being
is improved and program outcomes are positively affected. The author’s ambition is to actively
promote germane therapeutic practices and knowledge found in counseling psychology and
ecopsychology within adventure education theory and practice.
Grounding Research Theories
This thesis is rooted in the belief that humans have an innate need for relationships: with
themselves, human communities, and with the natural world, and that outdoor leaders have a
19
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
responsibility to facilitate and foster these relationships. The belongingness hypothesis
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and ecopsychology are the grounding theories of this relationship-
oriented approach. The belongingness hypothesis advanced by Baumeister and Leary (1995) has
been cited extensively (over 7,400 times according to http://scholar.google.com/, retrieved May
18, 2014). This theory asserts that “human beings have a pervasive drive to form and maintain at
least a minimum quantity of lasting, positive, and significant interpersonal relationships” (p.
497), and that a lack of belongingness can cause a variety of ill effects. Baumeister and Leary
(1995) asserted that the human need to belong has an evolutionary basis, stating that social bonds
presumably provide survival and reproductive benefits.
Ecopsychology is “a blending of environmental philosophy, ecology, and psychology
that…explores how our psychological health is related to the ecological health of the planet”
(Mitten, 2009, pp. 22). Norton (2009) explained how ecopsychology focuses on human well-
being in relation to the natural environment. Ecopsychology aims to transform “humankind’s
dissociative relationship with the other than human natural world” (Adams, 2005, p. 269).
Ecopsychology research explores how the human need for belonging includes relationship with
the natural world and asserts that human well-being is inextricably tied to the health of the
natural world-that they are mutually dependent.
Wilson (1993) postulated that humans have an evolutionary urge to connect to nature and
an innate need to affiliate with biological life and lifelike processes. Wilson (as cited in McVay,
1993) named this urge biophilia, and defined it as “the innate tendency to focus on life and
lifelike processes” (p. 4). This proposition “suggests that human identity and personal
fulfillment somehow depend on our relationship to nature” (Kellert, 1993a, p. 42).
Ecopsychology, along with the biophilia hypothesis, provide a philosophical framework for why
20
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
humans need connection with nature. If the ecopsychology paradigm is well-founded, it seems
appropriate that outdoor leaders understand human psychology, particularly elements relevant to
humans and their connection with nature. This exploratory and descriptive research examines
outdoor leaders’ education and training, and beliefs and practices regarding the relational
development of the people they lead.
21
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The Centrality of Relationships
The literature reviewed explores the nature of relationships broadly and their role in
outdoor programming specifically. Additionally, components important in relationship
development and facilitation, along with select psychological theories and concepts that are
relevant to outdoor programming outcomes, as well as skills outdoor leaders may use to foster
relationships in their participants are examined. Referencing specific concepts acknowledged in
the literature, such as self-efficacy, this paper contributes to the subject matter by ascertaining
outdoor leaders’ skills and knowledge of concepts that have been shown to influence outcomes
in adventure and nature programming. Likewise, this author reviewed important psychological
topics in the literature in order to guide the development of the survey used to assess outdoor
leaders’ knowledge and skills in these areas.
The idea of personal identity being formed through relationships is foundational to the
ideas of well-being, adventure education, and therapeutic outdoor leadership. McLean’s (2005)
research found, “identity is made up of meaning-filled experiences and also of self-defining fun
experiences that induce pleasure and enjoyment” (p. 689). Uhl-Bien (2006) explained that self-
concept is “constructed in the context of interpersonal relationships and larger social systems” (p.
664). Thus, personal identity is constructed through meaning making and personal narrative, and
the resulting insights are definitional to intrapersonal relationships. Relationships, including
their quality, are a cornerstone of self-concept. Burke, Nolan, & Rheingold (2012) summarized
Noddings’ contention “that humans are relational beings who construct meaning out of
encounters with other people, objects, and environments and then use these encounters both to
define ourselves and to be defined by them” (p. 6). Relational-ontology is the perspective that
22
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
the self is always a self in relationships, or as Slife (2004) succinctly wrote, “Each thing,
including each person, is first and always a nexus of relations” (p. 159). Furthermore, Slife
(2004) explained a relationalist ontology “assumes we are always and already community” (p.
168), and that differences between members of a community are essential and serve as a strength
within communities, and conflict is perceived as opportunities for “learning, growth, and
intimacy” (p. 173). Another relevant concept is the term holon. This describes how an entity is
both autonomous, yet simultaneously a component of other systems. For example, each person
is imbedded in a network of co-occurring and interrelated relationships, while also being self-
sufficient. Humans often refer to the self, forgetting that the self is bound within larger systems.
Conn (1995) cautioned us about how we establish boundaries between systems. If the boundary
around self is too rigid, we separate ourselves from larger systems, and if they are too diffuse, we
may lose our perspective and get lost in the larger whole. When we consider all the relationships
we as humans are part of, it is the collection of these relationships, perennially changing through
time that informs our personal identity.
The Need for Relationships
Relationships, including their presence, absence, and strength, figure prominently in
human experience, human well-being and development, and outdoor programming. Baumeister
and Leary (1995) postulated that humans have a pervasive drive to form a minimum quantity of
lasting interpersonal relationships that involve mutual caring for one another. In essence,
humans need relationships. Relationships can be discerned on a continuum from mindful,
intentional connection, to connection by happenstance, and by looking at relationship
development and maintenance in both temporal and environmental contexts. Mitten (1995)
distinguished two types of relationships: those that are based on healthy bonds, leading to
23
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
trusting and secure relationships, and those based on reactionary bonding leading to potentially
unhealthy relationships. Unhealthy relationship formation may be rooted in a person’s family of
origin. Healthy relationships are based upon “mutual respect, trust, and experience with one
another” (Mitten, 1995, p. 83).
Two pervasive human motivational theories widely cited in psychology and outdoor
related literature are Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (1943) and Glasser’s (1998) Choice Theory.
Both address the principle need for caring relationships. Maslow’s hierarchy highlighted the
human need for belongingness and love, relationships and friends. Glasser also identified love
and belonging as one of our five essential needs. Subsequent research substantiates the belief
that relationships are essential to well-being, from a physiological standpoint. Allan, McKenna,
and Hind (2012) wrote, “evidence supports the notion that relationships and their inherent
qualities are brain rewiring agents which protect and provide potential for growth” (p. 8).
In addition to intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships, there are an increasing
number of professionals and nonprofessionals advocating for human well-being by promoting
the human-nature relationship. Newer lines of inquiry, such as ecopsychology, are expanding
the prominence of human relationships with the larger than human world. Traditional
perspectives of psychotherapy are being critiqued because of the lack of prominence given to the
human-nature relationship. Beringer (2004) stated that traditional psychology views the
relational self as a human-to-human relationship, and emphasizes an atomistic reduction of the
individual. Beringer identified social psychology’s lens for viewing humans in a contextual
perspective, acknowledging humans are defined by their relationships. He advocated for the
acknowledgement of the “ecological self.” Norton (2009) encouraged social workers to include
the natural world in their systems approach to mental health. Watkins, (2009) in critiquing
24
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
psychotherapy wrote, “Euro-American psychotherapeutic practices have largely left out the
relational web among person, community, and natural and built environments” (p. 224).
Psychopathology Characterized by a Lack of Relationships
But what are the potential consequences of unhealthy relationships, or a lack of
relationships? Adams (2005) explained, “psychopathology involves merely part of a person
relating with part of the world” (p. 277). Chalquist (2009) wrote, “Disconnection from the
natural world...produces a variety of psychological symptoms that include anxiety, frustration,
and depression” (p. 70). A focus on autonomy, or self, begins the process of psychopathology.
“The illusion of separateness we create in order to utter the words ‘I am’ is part of our problem
in the modern world” (Christie, as cited in Roszak, 1995, p. 12). Ecopsychologists voice the
need for humans to have relationships with nature in order to enhance well-being. “As human
beings we have a need for place-where we can be connected to a community of people, plants,
animals, and the land. Without this, we feel lost, alone, and alienated” (Robinson, 2009, p. 29).
And in popular culture, Louv (2005) introduced the term nature deficit disorder to the general
public’s vocabulary and consciousness, clearly highlighting the fact that a lack of connection
with nature negatively affects mental health.
Baumeister and Leary (1995) articulated that the human need to belong is so strong, it
explains why individuals maintain relationships with people who abuse them.
Many of the emotional problems for which people seek professional help (anxiety,
depression, grief, loneliness, relationship problems, and the like) result from people’s
failure to meet their belongingness needs. Furthermore, a great deal of neurotic,
maladaptive, and destructive behavior seems to reflect either desperate attempts to
establish or maintain relationships with other people or sheer frustration and
25
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
purposelessness when one’s need to belong goes unmet. (Baumeister & Leary, 1995, p.
521)
Teo, Choi, and Valenstein (2013) note empirical evidence that “social isolation and negative
social interactions are associated with depression and suicide” (p.1). Robinson (2009) described
one source of psychopathology:
Most people in our culture have been treated like objects all their lives. This is the source
of the wound to the soul underlying most of the human misery that therapists encounter.
Because people have come to experience themselves as objects, they in turn objectify
other people and commodify the world. They feel alienated, isolated, and empty,
believing their lives hold no meaning. (p. 25)
Relationships are a human need. Ryan and Deci (2000), wrote about needs and explained,
“whether it be a physiological need or a psychological need, is an energized state that, if
satisfied, conduces toward health and well-being but, if not satisfied, contributes to pathology
and ill-being” (p. 74). In summation, insignificant relationships, or the absence of meaningful
relationships-with self, others, or nature, can result in detrimental mental and physical issues,
which compromise personal well-being. One framework to prevent psychopathology in others is
relational leadership.
Relational Leadership
Uhl-Bien (2006) defined relational leadership “as a social influence process through
which emergent coordination (i.e., evolving social order) and change (i.e., new values, attitudes,
approaches, behaviors, ideologies, etc.) are constructed and produced” (p. 668). She conceived
relational leadership theory, which “sees leadership as the process by which social systems
change through the structuring of roles and relationships” (Uhl-Bien, 2006, p. 668). However, in
26
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
this paper the term relational leadership is not intended to refer to any specific theory, rather it
should be interpreted as simply describing a framework of leadership emphasizing relationships.
Universal among all leadership encounters is the human element, and as Reiman and
Rollenhagen (2011) pointed out, “human behavior is always contextual” (p. 1265). Similarly,
human growth is also contextual. Human behavior can be observed in our relationship networks,
and our relationships are contextual to our physical, as well as psychic environments. Ringer
(1999) wrote, “leadership of groups is one of the most complex tasks that human beings can
undertake” (p. 19). Part of this complexity is due to the multifaceted relationships each outdoor
participant is a part of.
Relational leadership is the perspective that the function of leadership is to develop
relationships in those being led. Uhl-Bien (2006) identified two relational leadership
perspectives that may enhance our conceptual understanding: entity and relational. An entity
perspective frames leadership at the individual level, whereas a relational perspective holds that
social reality is a nexus of relationships. Cunliffe and Eriksen (2011) wrote that relational
leaders are responsive to the present moment and problem solving and are able to anticipate what
matters in people’s relational nexuses. “Relational leadership requires a way of engaging with
the world in which the leader holds herself/himself as always in relation with, and therefore
morally accountable to others” (Cunliffe & Eriksen, 2011, p. 1425). Supporting this statement,
Fox and Lautt (1996) wrote, “Moral practice...encompasses relational characteristics: love,
friendship, compassion, caring, passion, and intuition” (p. 22). Relational leadership links
leadership to morality, to the practical elements of relationship formation and effective leader
attributes. However, moral frameworks should not be limited to just interpersonal ethics. Fox
and Lautt (1996) asserted that ethical leaders must “attend to personal development and change”
27
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
(p. 25), and expressed the need to foster relationships between humans and the natural world, as
well as “an urgent need to articulate ethical frameworks and moral practices that respect the
Earth” (p. 23). Supporting this, Burke et al. (2012) wrote, “by fostering positive relationships
between and among students, outdoor programs become a means of moral education, helping
students learn how to be a better person in the world through the group experience” (p. 4).
Cunliffe and Eriksen (2011) stated, “moral responsibility is embedded within relational integrity”
(p. 1439) and explained that relational integrity “encompasses being attuned to the situation,
knowing what to question and how to maintain one’s integrity” (p. 1440). Relational integrity
involves “respecting and being responsive to differences, being accountable to others, acting in
ways that others can count on us, and being able to explain our decisions and actions to others
and ourselves” (Cunliffe, & Eriksen, 2011, p. 1444).
A well-known type of leadership is transformational leadership. “Transformational
leadership involves inspiring followers to commit to a shared vision and goals...challenging them
to be innovative problem solvers, and developing followers’ leadership capacity via coaching,
mentoring, and provision of both challenge and support” (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 4). There are
four components of transformational leadership: idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Influence is attributed to the leader’s
behavior and followers’ perceived attributes of the leader. Hayashi and Ewert (2006) found that
outdoor leaders, when compared to the general population, “demonstrated a more
transformational leadership style” (p. 230). According to Bass and Riggio (2006),
“Transformational leaders behave in ways that motivate and inspire those around them by
providing meaning and challenge” (p. 6). Transformational leaders do not publically criticize
their followers, they “pay special attention to each individual follower’s needs for achievement
28
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
and growth by acting as a coach or mentor” (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 7). Leaders accept
individual differences and listen effectively. “Transformational leaders gain follower trust by
maintaining their integrity and dedication, by being fair in their treatment of followers, and by
demonstrating their faith in followers by empowering them” (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 43). This
author considers transformational leadership to be closely related to relational leadership.
Emphasizes a shared commonality, Brower, Schoorman, and Tan (2000) acknowledge that risk
and trust are central elements to relational leadership. “A leader who is concerned but calm, who
is decisive but not impulsive, and who is clearly in charge can inspired the confidence and trust
of followers” (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 57). Important to this study, Bass and Riggio (2006)
noted, “Transformational leaders enhance the self-concept and sense of self-efficacy of
followers” (p. 50).
Hayashi and Ewert (2006) posited that intrapersonal and emotional elements of
leadership have been less acknowledged. When leaders are relationally oriented, emotional
elements of leadership are critical to effectiveness. Knowledge informs human decision-making
and actions. It seems logical then that greater knowledge can improve the effectiveness of
leading others and facilitating personal growth. Various fields in psychology are dedicated to
exploring human behaviors, relationships, well-being, and needs. Operating from the
perspective that humans have universal needs, as well as individual needs, leaders should have
an understanding of basic relational needs, and how best to allow those they lead to achieve
these. Relational leaders can utilize knowledge from counseling psychology and relevant
psychological constructs when attempting to foster personal growth, as well as addressing
general intrapersonal and interpersonal issues.
29
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Therapeutic Alliance and Influences
One of the most intentional human relationships focused on well-being and developing
intrapersonal relationships is professional psychotherapy. This type of relationship can inform
our opinions about the essential need for relationships, relational quality, and their therapeutic
power. The interpersonal connection between a therapist and client is referred to as therapeutic
alliance. Psychological research has shown that the variable most likely to positively affect
clinical treatment progress and therapy outcomes is the therapeutic alliance between therapist
and client (Green, 2009; Flückiger, Del Re, Wampold, & Horvath, 2011; Homrich, 2009).
Therapeutic “alliance is portrayed as the most consistent in-treatment predictor of outcomes and
possessing significant explanatory power in treatment research across numerous
psychotherapeutic approaches and client populations” (Harper, 2009, p. 46). Just as therapeutic
alliance exists between therapists and clients, alliance elements are often present between
outdoor leaders and those they lead.
The determinants of alliance are still being researched, but there are three elements
clearly prominent in therapeutic alliance: mutually agreed upon goals, mutually agreed upon
tasks, and the quality of the attachment between client and therapist (Harper, 2009). Several
therapist qualities have been identified as positively contributing to therapeutic alliance: empathy
and genuineness (Mitten, 1995), caring and openness (Gass, Gillis, and Russell, 2012), and
warmth (Mitten, 1995; Gass et al., 2012). Therapeutic alliance in the medical field is also critical
to patient outcomes. Freshwater and Stickley (2006) found that the most common complaint
regarding medical services is poor communication by medical providers. Affirming these
findings, Baumeister and Leary (1995) asserted that human belongingness needs can only be
fulfilled when the bonds between people are marked by caring and positive concern. The take
30
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
away from this research is that the most important thing a healing person can do is to establish a
meaningful, ethical and caring interpersonal connection with others.
Knapp (1999) believed that outdoor leadership entails facilitating outdoor activities safely
and skillfully, but also involves facilitating “the process of making sense from what is learned”
(p. 219). A purpose of meaning making, is to shift personal narratives, which can inform
intrapersonal relationships. Thus, it is logical that outdoor leaders must understand the value,
purpose, and development of therapeutic alliance with participants in order to foster well-being
through facilitating participating relationships with self, community, and nature, which can
positively affect individual and program outcomes.
Transference and countertransference are two concepts that can influence psychotherapy
and therapeutic alliance and are pertinent to outdoor leadership. Transference, in a therapy
context, describes the “unconscious transferring of experiences from one interpersonal situation
to another. It is concerned with revisiting past relations in existing circumstances. Thoughts
[attitudes] and feelings about significant others from one’s past are projected onto a therapist (or
others) and influence the therapeutic relationship” (Jones, 2004, p. 14). Countertransference is
the opposite experience, in which a therapist is unable to remain unbiased and reacts to the client
as someone from her or his own life. Sources of transference involve people in roles of power,
such as parents, teachers, spouses, or other authority figures. In remote and challenging
environments, amidst foreign and intimate social environments, where there are potential safety
risks, leaders are responsible for making decisions and processing experiences that affect
participants. These dynamic factors influence how participants perceive and relate to their
leaders, both positively and negatively. Through being mindful of these dynamics, and self-
31
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
aware, outdoor leaders can forge more therapeutic relationships when they are familiar with the
concepts of therapeutic alliance, transference, and countertransference.
Ethical Leadership
Ethical leadership is a complex set of relationships and interactions among elements such
as power, empowerment, ethical decision-making, self-awareness, reflection, role of
followers and leaders, connection with the natural environment and an ability to laugh, all
directed toward achieving a specific task. (Fox & McAvoy, 1995, p. 21)
This definition underscores the dynamics of leadership, but does not reference a specific
or general goal, or end point. Fox and Lautt (1996) stated that when outdoor educators focus on
relationships, they may “discover invisible connections that structure moral practice in the
outdoors” (p. 23). The assertion that relational leadership is inherently a moral process supports
the idea that outdoor leadership focusing on participant well-being is therapeutic.
Understanding that there is profound intimacy and vulnerability (and hierarchy) in
professional counseling relationship, reviewing the ethical code for counselors may improve the
competence level of ethical leaders. The American Counseling Association’s (ACA) (2014)
Code of Ethics presents guidelines and practices that are also relevant to outdoor leaders,
particularly those that are relationally oriented. “Counselors encourage client growth and
development in ways that foster the interest and welfare of clients and promote formation of
healthy relationships” (p. 4). This is aligned with adventure education’s purpose of fostering
personal growth. “Counselors interact appropriately with clients in both developmental and
cultural contexts” (p. 5). They “avoid harming others, are self-aware of their own values and
avoid imposing such values on clients” (p. 5). Awareness of one’s values is central to leadership
effectiveness. “Counselors are prohibited from sexual or romantic “interactions or relationships
32
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
with current clients, their romantic partners, or their family members” (p. 5) for at least five
years from their last professional contact. This speaks to the importance of professional
boundaries held by outdoor leaders. Professional responsibilities for counselors include open
and honest communication, to “practice in a nondiscriminatory manner within the boundaries of
professional and personal competency” (p. 8). Non-discrimination includes the areas of “age,
culture, disability, ethnicity, race, religion/spirituality, gender, gender identity, sexual
orientation, marital status/partnership, language preference, socioeconomic status, or any basis
proscribed by law” (p. 9). Outdoor programming involves individuals from all walks of life;
therefore outdoor leaders should be impartial with those they work with. “Counselors practice
only within the boundaries of their competence, based on their education, training, supervised
experience, state and national professional credentials, and appropriate professional experience”
(p. 8) and counselors are expected to behave “in an ethical, and legal manner” (p. 18). These
points parallel the responsibility of outdoor leaders to operate within legal requirements,
standards, industry common practices, and employer policies and procedures. Lastly, counselors
are expected to address ethical dilemmas with the parties involved, and through supervisors and
professional colleagues. Ethical issues are often addressed in the field with co-workers, or with
management as needed.
The ACA code of ethics exclusively addresses interpersonal dynamics and boundaries
between therapists and clients. A code of ethics for outdoor leaders also needs to address the
ethical issues involved when working in the natural world. Berger (2008) forwarded his ideas
germane to a code of ethics for nature therapy. Berger highlighted issues of physical safety,
appropriate physical challenges, the ethical responsibility for the care of the land, and promoting
ecological stewardship and respect among clients.
33
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
An Ethic of Care
Outdoor leadership theory and outdoor leaders need to be critical examiners of
underlying theories and assumptions that drive practice. A component of healthy relationships is
compassion. Relevant to both the human need for belonging and relational and ethical
leadership, there is an additional theory that may guide how leaders act towards participants to
foster growth: Noddings’ (2002) ethic of care. Articles by McKenzie and Blenkinsop (2006)
and Burke et al. (2012) assert that an ethic of care has an important role in both the theory and
practice of outdoor and adventure education, and can serve as a theoretical foundation for WEPs
to assess the role of care and compassion in programs. Noddings (2002) describes four
conditions that define a caring relationship: one person demonstrates conscious attention and
directed energy towards serving another (needs, goals); this person acts on his or her awareness;
the recipient recognizes the actions as demonstrating care; and the caring person is “consistently
present.”
An ethic of care can guide leaders in how they foster and facilitate relationship formation
and highlights elements present in caring relationships, as well as affirming the best in others
(McKenzie & Blenkinsop, 2006). According to Burke et al. (2012), “An ethic based on care is
one that puts relations and the needs of the other at the center of any moral decision-making” (p.
13). Relationships positively affected by an ethic of care include intrapersonal and interpersonal.
Quay, Dickinson, and Nettleton (2000) wrote, “Caring provides a strategy for meeting our need
for recognition as individuals as well as our need to belong within a community” (p. 7), and that
caring for others meets the human need for belonging to community. “With care theory as a
foundation, caring for individuals is never set aside or secondary in effective leadership” (Burke
34
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
et al., 2012, p. 10). This perspective acknowledges the human need for relationships and situates
caring as central to effective leadership.
Caring is acknowledged as a crucial element of leadership. Burke et al. (2012) wrote,
“The purpose of the caring relation is to promote growth, prevent harm, and meet the needs of
the other” (p. 5). Expanding the notion of the “other”, McKenzie and Blenkinsop (2006)
described how teaching low impact camping techniques and environmental ethics demonstrates
an ethic of care towards the natural world. One element of moral education is confirmation,
which “involves looking for the best in the acts of an individual and affirming and encouraging
that part of their actions which one believes is good and has good intentions” (Quay et al., 2000,
p. 10). This is akin to positive psychology, which is a growth-oriented therapy model where
individual strengths and positive traits are emphasized rather than focusing on individual
problems and deficits (Berman and Davis-Berman, 2005). Positive psychology asserts human
development is best facilitated through “leveraging natural talents rather than merely remediating
his or her weaknesses” (Passarelli, Hall, & Mallory, 2010).
Care can be applied across a broad spectrum of intentions. A leader can care about and
emphasize the physical safety of those he or she leads. A leader can care about and emphasize
the learning of those he or she leads. Or, a leader can care about the overall well-being and
personal development of those he or she leads. A caring outdoor leader encourages personal
development through adventure and nature-based experiences and teaching environmental ethics,
philosophy, and nature dominated psychological theories to build relationships within people,
between people, and with nature. McKenzie and Blenkinsop (2006) acknowledged that
adventure education curricula often addresses issues of interpersonal communication, group
process issues and development, and environmental stewardship. They conclude that an ethic of
35
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
care should address care for self, others, and the natural world. This conclusion embodies the
values and practices of therapeutically oriented outdoor leaders. Thus, a tripartite relational
matrix is already integrated in adventure education, but the domains of these three relationships
may not be explicit identified or addressed in relevant literature.
Emotional Intelligence
Outdoor leadership education, research, and competencies often address concepts such as
interpersonal skills, communication skills, judgment, and decision-making. A more integrated,
and possibly more useful construct is emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence is a
wholistic construct that has more recently been explored in the context of leadership generally,
and outdoor leadership specifically. Mayer and Salovey (as cited in Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso,
2004) define emotional intelligence as:
the capacity to reason about emotions, and of emotions to enhance thinking. It includes
the abilities to accurately perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to
assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively
regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth. (p. 197)
Hayashi and Ewert’s (2006) research found that higher levels of emotional intelligence were
positively related to the level of the leader’s outdoor experience. Because the concept of
emotional intelligence includes intrapersonal, interpersonal, and situational elements, Hayashi
and Ewert (2006) suggested it is a useful framework for researching outdoor leaders. Martin,
Cashel, Wagstaff, and Breunig (2006) affirmed this point, when they stated that emotional
intelligence is “important to outdoor leaders in understanding the motivations, attitudes, and
behaviors of program participants” (p. 127). Hayashi and Ewert (2006) explained that research
suggests there is a relationship between transformational leaders and emotional intelligence,
36
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
while Palmer, Walls, Burgess, and Stough (2001) found preliminary evidence that there is a
relationship between effective leadership and the emotional intelligence of leaders. Mayer et al.
(2004) explained, “emotional information processing is an evolved area of communication
among mammals…[which] involves understanding of relationships among people and, to a
lesser extent, animals” (p. 199). Individuals with higher levels of emotional intelligence have a
greater ability for relatedness, to communicate motivating messages, to better perceive emotions
and understand their meaning, and manage emotions, which result in openness and agreeableness
yielding higher levels of cooperation (Mayer et al., 2004). Considering the research that links
emotional intelligence to effective and transformational leadership, it seems logical to emphasize
emotional intelligence within a relational framework of outdoor leadership.
Self-Awareness and Values
Self-awareness is required for leaders to effectively foster well-being and relationships.
Connecting self-awareness to emotional intelligence, Sosik and Megerian (1999) stated that self-
awareness is the theoretical foundation of emotional intelligence. Referencing the work of
renowned psychologist, Carl Rogers, Thomas (2008) extrapolated the importance of self-
reflection by person-centered therapists, to facilitators, and makes a covert reference to
countertransference. He wrote, “facilitators must be aware of, understand, and be able to manage
their internal reactions to their participants, especially in challenging situations” (p. 180). For
Thomas, an effective outdoor leader is one who is educated in what he described as person-
centered outdoor leadership education. He described person-centered leadership education as
“content focused on the attitudes, personal qualities, or self-awareness of the outdoor leader”
(Thomas, 2011, p. 6). In an earlier paper, Thomas (2008) described person-centered facilitator
education approaches as being intentional, emphasizing “the attitudes, personal qualities, or
37
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
presence of the facilitator” (p. 170) as well as being “focus[ed] on… the interpersonal
relationships between the facilitator and group” (p. 170). Thomas’ (2008) research into skills
needed by facilitator educators include “high levels of self-awareness and self-management” (p.
184) as well as “better understand[ing] their relationships with groups and their presence in the
group” (p. 184). Passarelli et al. (2010) highlighted the critical element of self-reflection by
outdoor leaders when they suggested instructors “would benefit from a deep understanding of the
patterns of thought, feeling, and behavior that their own unique strengths produce” (p. 131). Fox
and McAvoy (1995) declared that self-awareness and self-assessment are aspects of ethical
outdoor leadership, while Sosik and Megerian (1999) found in their corporate research that
leaders with high levels of self-awareness exhibited higher levels of “personal efficacy,
interpersonal control, and social self-confidence” (p. 384).
Values are an important focus area of self-awareness. Each outdoor leader brings to her
or his facilitation underlying assumptions and work related experiences that shape the leader’s
intentions. It is essential for outdoor leaders to be cognizant of their values, filters, and held
paradigms, for leaders consciously and subconsciously teach these perspectives to others.
Values research within the field of psychotherapy has found that “therapists hold important
values in actual practice, but they also inevitably seek to persuade their clients to hold them”
(Slife, 2004, pp. 172-173). This supports the assertion that leadership is inherently a process of
influence. Fox and McAvoy (1995) wrote, “It is important for the outdoor leader to understand
her or his values or ethics and how those ethics shape his or her decisions and behavior” (p. 21).
Slife (2004) and Fox and McAvoy (1995) have highlighted the reality that we are
subconsciously, yet actively persuading those around us to adopt, in some form, our own values
or to mimic our decision making processes. Schumann et al. (2009) explored instructor
38
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
influences on transfer of learning, and found that expressed leader behaviors could not be
separated from who the instructor is. Hamachek (1999) provided an illuminating quote
regarding self-awareness and leadership: “Consciously, we teach what we know; unconsciously,
we teach who we are” (p. 209). This notion of “teaching who we are” is topically explored in
this thesis survey.
Besides instructor values, there are values inherent within outdoor programming goals.
Fox and Lautt (1996) stated that “the common ground between outdoor recreation, outdoor
education, environmental education, and experiential education can be found in a value base of
respect, social responsibility, self-actualization, justice, and freedom for all living beings and the
Earth” (p. 19). Raiola (1997) asserted that adventure educator academic curricula should cover
the topic of values including care and respect for oneself, respect and acceptance of others, and
respect for nature. The points outlined in this section situate self-awareness, including values
awareness, as necessary for relational leaders.
Outdoor Leadership and Relationships
Competency Approaches to Outdoor Leadership
Outdoor leadership theories and practices have been defined, and are continually refined,
as research provides information that can improve leadership efficacy, better facilitate desired
outcomes, and enhance the training of leaders. Past discussions and research on outdoor
leadership have often focused on models of competency. Often cited works by Buell (1981),
Swiderski (1981), and Priest (1984) among others, attempted to name and categorize skills
essential to outdoor leadership. Competency models imply a level of objectivity and consistency
across WEPs, that outdoor leaders approach their duties and responsibilities with similar
perspectives. In contrast, Thomas (2008) highlighted the subjective nature of group facilitators,
39
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
stating that a leader’s interpretation and assessment of their group is rooted in the subjectivity of
perception, stemming from differences in feelings, thoughts, and intuitions, but does not mention
that values also influence a leader’s perceptions. Shooter, Sibthorp, and Paisley (2009) reviewed
multiply outdoor leadership competency models and concluded, “there is not a universal set of
outdoor leadership competencies that is valued across all outdoor settings, with all client groups,
and for all programs” (p. 2). Regrettably, Shooter, Sibthorp, and Paisley (2009) did not
acknowledge that regardless of outdoor settings, client groups, or program type, there is one
consistent variable: participants. All leaders can contribute to the well-being of others, yet the
ability to be therapeutically oriented is not discussed. One competency model that emphasizes
relational awareness is Ringer’s (1999), who included relational awareness as one of six group
leadership competencies. Shooter et al.’s assertion, along with Ringer’s identification of a
relational awareness competency, inspires this author to ask, is there a universal skillset that
leaders can possess that supports relationship development?
Contemporary outdoor leadership literature and textbooks (Prouty, Panicucci, &
Collinson, 2007; Martin et al., 2006; Priest & Gass, 2005; Priest, 1994) continue to emphasize
and promote models of leadership competency, including skills and processes related to
decision-making, risk management, group safety, and communication among others. Thomas
(2011) criticizes four often-utilized textbooks on outdoor leadership: Effective Leadership in
Adventure Programming (Priest & Gass, 2005), Outdoor Leadership: Theory and Practice
(Martin et al., 2006), Adventure Education: Theory and Practice (Prouty et al., 2007), and
Teaching Adventure Education Theory: Best Practices (Stremba & Bisson, 2009). He wrote, “I
am not convinced that the choice of content in the texts analysed [sic] has been based on careful
research to ensure that they focus on the skills, knowledge, and experience that are essential to
40
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
effective outdoor leadership practice” (Thomas, 2011, p. 6). Thomas’ assertion supports this
author’s perspective that leadership cannot begin with the transfer of content; it must begin with
an outdoor leader, conscious of her or himself, leading from a place of conscious intent, to
enhance participants’ well-being.
Several authors have distinguished between different WEPs based on programmatic
goals. Priest and Gass (2005) identified four: recreation, education, development, and therapy.
Ringer (1999) developed a more detailed categorical framework. He identified recreation,
development, enrichment, adjunctive therapy, and primary therapy as different types of outdoor
programs. Ringer elaborated on the roles of outdoor leaders for each program type: safety
supervisors/limit setters (recreation), enthusiastic adventurers and instructors/coaches
(development and enrichment programs), expert communicator (adjunctive therapy), and human
behavior experts/clinicians (primary therapy programs). The notion of different programmatic
goals implies that outdoor leaders have different skills to fulfill programmatic goals. However, a
vital universal element in outdoor programming, regardless of outdoor program type, is
relationships, specifically the relationship between leaders and participants.
The field’s focus on leader competencies and skills development has potentially
distracted discussions and research from exploring the intentional processes and purpose of
outdoor leadership. This being said, emphasis on outdoor leadership competencies have yielded
significant contributions to the topics of communication and group management, which are
repeatedly identified as essential outdoor leadership skills. However, these competencies are not
commonly described or organized around the concept or intent of being therapeutic, nor are they
situated within a relational framework. For example, what is communication used for, and how
does it benefit outdoor participants? In other words, communication is valued as part of a model
41
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
of leadership, but the desired outcome is not identified as being therapeutic in nature. Note the
following quote as an example: “the primary task of the group establishes the reason for its
existence” (Ringer, 1999, p. 7). By addressing a group task, without simultaneously addressing a
process or underlying intention, is to ignore both the participants and critical elements of
interpersonal facilitation. Also, therapeutic opportunities can present themselves at any time,
regardless of some pre-decided outcome. People are the foundational element for all group
activities and tasks. This paper specifically focuses on the manner in which outdoor leaders
interact relationally with their participants, and explores their philosophies of the relational needs
of their participants.
Relationship Driven Outdoor Leadership
The emphasis of outdoor leadership literature has predominantly focused on what leaders
do (ex. decision-making), rather than why they perform these actions (ex. towards what desired
outcome?), focusing on the transactional elements of outdoor leadership, not the transformational
process that is co-occurring. “Transformational leaders…are those who stimulate and inspire
followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes” (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 3), as well as
“inspiring followers to commit to a shared vision and goals for… [a group], challenging them to
be innovative problem solvers, and developing followers’ leadership capacity via coaching,
mentoring, and provision of both challenge and support” (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 4).
Transformational leadership processes and experiences are best understood through
understanding and viewing leadership as a relational dynamic, especially considering the
nuanced roles outdoor leaders manifest, such as instructor, teacher, coach, leader, mentor, guide,
facilitator, and counselor. The type of leader relationship varies depending on program type,
desired program outcomes, and a leader’s personal values and intentions.
42
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
The relational nature of outdoor programming is clearly described in the literature.
Within outdoor programming and leadership literature, Mitten (1999), Mitten and Clement
(2007), and Graham (1997) have promoted a relational leadership emphasis. Raiola (1997)
described effective leadership as focusing on “cognitive, communication, and social skills” (p.
9), while Sibthorp, Paisley, and Gookin (2007), after studying factors leading to trip participant
development outcomes, asserted that outdoor leaders “should be working to establish personal
relationships and strong connections with their students” (p. 15), so that outdoor programs may
become more worthwhile for participants. Priest (1986) stated that adventure education is
primarily focused on the development of interpersonal and intrapersonal relationship capabilities.
Priest (1986) forwarded at that time a new definition of outdoor education. He wrote, “In
outdoor education the emphasis for the subject of learning is placed on RELATIONSHIPS,
relationships concerning people and natural resources” (p. 13). Fox and Lautt (1996) wrote that
outdoor education is fundamentally “about connecting humans with the natural world and each
other” (p. 23). Distinguishing outdoor education from adventure education, Priest and Gass
(2005) declared that outdoor education focuses on relationships between participants and natural
resources, whereas adventure education addresses intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships.
Martin (2004) observed, “in recent years, outdoor education’s contribution to curriculum has
shifted from personal and group development towards seeking to understand humans and their
relationship with the non-human natural world” (p. 20).
Social constructionism is the theory and belief that reality and meaning are socially
constructed, and that personal identity is renegotiated through relationships (Richert, 2002).
Leadership and outdoor programming are married to relationship cultivation, and therefore the
onus of outdoor leaders is to foster relationships for their participants. Critical constructionism
43
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
asserts that meaning is not wholly socially created, but is also constructed by individuals
(Richert, 2002). When physical or psychological challenges are presented to participants, and
leaders actively coach engagement and the triumph of both perceived and projected challenges,
they are in effect supporting the change of a person’s patterned, limiting, self-narrative. Richert
advocated combining critical constructionist views with narrative based therapy as a means for
counseling individuals. This approach seems analogous with the goals of outdoor programs
fostering therapeutic growth.
Outdoor programming occurring in small groups creates a unique social system that can
transform individuals’ lives through a nexus of relationships: with self, community, and nature.
Priest (1986) described four categories of relationships relevant to outdoor education:
intrapersonal, interpersonal, ekistic, and ecosystemic. A relationally oriented outdoor leader is
mindful of these categories, and actively creates and facilitates relationships accordingly. Raiola
(2003) claimed “Leadership is an interactive process, requiring us to be actively engaged in
dynamic situations” (p. 54). What are more dynamic phenomena than intrapersonal dissonance,
interpersonal conflict, immersion in nature, and personal growth? Outdoor leaders are constantly
monitoring and managing issues pertinent to all of these characteristics. Therefore, leadership
should begin with an understanding of emotional safety, psychological depth, and human
relational needs—including intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal.
Emotional Safety
Emotional safety is one concept useful for gaging participant stress levels, for facilitating
authentic self-expression, and is an area of managed concern. Stress, fear and emotional safety
amongst outdoor participants have been explored for at least the past several decades. Ewert
(1989), while researching fear in Outward Bound participants, found that psychological or
44
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
sociological issues were more prevalent and more concerning than physical fears. A topic
widespread in adventure education literature is the role of stress and anxiety in outdoor programs
as a contributor to personal growth; where it has been assumed that stress is good and growth
inducing (Kimball & Bacon, 1993). The idea of eustress (or healthy stress) is often married with
the conceptual pairing of perceived risk and actual risk, and this is tied to the concept of a
personal “comfort zone.” Some authors have advocated that stress is a source of personal growth
and that the intentional creation of stressful situations can facilitate personal growth.
The perspective of stress being beneficial for participants has been critiqued as being
detrimental (Estrellas, 1996). Research has shown that the historical emphasis on intentional
stress induction as a means for providing growth through challenge has been overstated. Brown
(2008) stated that the value of using disequilibrium/dissonance is not well supported in
educational literature. Berman and Davis-Berman (2005) argued that “moving participants out
of their comfort zones is in need of more examination” (p. 21). They are critical of outdoor
education programming that focus on disequilibrium as an intentional foci because one,
increased “exposure to perceived risk and anxiety can become debilitating for people” and two,
“anxiety and perception of risk are very subjective experiences” (Berman & Davis-Berman,
2005, p. 20). Corresponding with Berman and Davis’Berman’s claims, Bandura (1997) found
people perform optimally under moderate levels of stress. Ewert (1989) asked, “can instructors
be sure…that the level of stress and anxiety that their students experience is both appropriate and
beneficial?” (p. 19). This question clearly highlights the need to examine outdoor leaders’
motivations driving their leadership decisions.
Important when thinking about emotional safety is an understanding that this is an
individually based, subjective perception. Thus, a relationally oriented outdoor leader must
45
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
ascertain each participant’s level of emotional safety. Vincent (as cited in Vincent, 1995) defines
emotional safety
as the perceived freedom from psychological harm that can be measured on a continuum
from feeling threatened to feeling safe. An individual’s position on the continuum at any
given moment is dependent on the amount of trust he/she has in herself/himself and in the
group members. (p.76)
Of course, this raises the question, what is “psychological harm?” Is this an infliction of harm
that lasts a mere ten minutes, or an entire lifetime? Also pertinent in this definition, and to this
research project, is the recognition that trusting relationships are essential for participants to
experience emotional safety. In general, emotional safety levels increase as the group focus
advances from recreational programming to therapeutic. However, when outdoor leaders
consciously operate within a relational framework of intention, awareness, and actions, they
consequently create safer environments. This thesis research attempts to shift the personal
growth paradigm from emphasizing stress to facilitating relationships. Personal growth comes
from healthy relationships within a relational matrix. Psychology is showing that growth
actually requires supportive communities (Mitten, 1999; Warren, 1999) as well as safety and
security in order to occur, which is antithetical to intentionally inducing experiences outside
individuals’ comfort zones (Berman & Davis-Berman, 2005).
Psychological Depth
Psychological depth describes a level of emotional inquiry and disclosure that is
occurring within a group environment. Ringer and Gillis (1995, 1998) presented an eight-step
model for managing psychological depth (including a concept they refer to as emotional arousal)
for outdoor trip participants. These levels include; surface, personally experienced, current task,
46
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
encounter, contextual, identity formation, historic/cultural, and universal. They attempt to
coordinate the elicitation of psychological depth with types of adventure programming:
recreation, education/training, development, and psychotherapy. Ringer and Gillis (1995)
claimed that an appropriate level of psychological depth is contingent on agreed upon group
goals preceding group experiences. Furthermore, they asserted the language occurring in groups
can indicate the level of psychological depth of a group. A concern with this regulated approach
is that it precludes ephemeral and unanticipated opportunities that may arise that can foster
deeper relationships and well-being. Enforcing some type of mutual agreement among group
members assumes that all possible goals are articulated before commencing a therapeutic
process. In the course of psychotherapy, issues often emerge naturally, sometimes unexpectedly.
To limit depth exploration to a priori understanding of issues seems to limit a leader’s
therapeutic effectiveness. Another problem with favoring group consensus over a leader’s skill
set, competency, and initiative, is that a group might chose minimal challenge or depth, either
due to lack of trust in the outdoor leader, or due to feelings of discomfort, thereby underutilizing
a leader’s knowledge and skills. In a more recent article on psychological depth (Ringer &
Gillis, 1998), the relationship between psychological depth and emotional safety is clearly
summarized. For instance, a group can address deep and profound psychological issues in a safe
environment. However, emotional safety may be compromised when group members explore
psychological issues deeper than those agreed upon by the group. This model serves as a
reminder of an important boundary for outdoor leaders when interacting with participants:
outdoor leaders need to operate within their scope of training, education, grasp of theory (Ringer
& Gillis, 1995), certifications, and licenses. It is important to emphasize the relationship
between facilitating psychological depth and the role of a leader’s training, experience,
47
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
assumptions, and comfort in leading individuals in emotional and personal growth realms. As a
new wilderness therapy field staff, one of the author’s mentors gave him the following advice
when working therapeutically with people: “you have to know when to push, when to stop, and
when to process.”
A Tripartite Relational Model for Outdoor Leaders
A primary agent of change in human experience is relationships, (Baumeister & Leary,
1995) and relationships are elementary to human well-being. Due to the unique nature and
program structure of outdoor programming, such as small group dynamics, immersion in nature,
and opportunities for personal reflection, a unique nexus of potentially healthy relationships for
fostering outdoor participants’ well-being exists. One simplified tripartite relational lens is to
observe a person’s relationship with the self, with others, and with the natural world. This
tripartite lens is particularly salient since adventure education is a field attempting to develop
whole persons (Medrick & Mitten, n.d.). The power and influence of outdoor leaders, working
in diversified wilderness experience programs, to foster participant relationship with themselves,
their peers, and with the natural world are remarkable to the out of doors working and living
environment and the contingent social milieu, while being germane to the explicit purpose of
adventure education. When leaders are able to facilitate these relationships, program outcomes
can be improved, and with improved skills, leaders can be more efficacious in facilitating intra,
inter, and transpersonal relationships for those they lead.
This survey research endorses Mitten’s (1999) assertion that outdoor leaders have
incredible power, responsibility, and capacity to foster well-being through relational
development, and that core human needs can be met (or hindered) through outdoor leadership.
To inspire participants requires an understanding of human motivations, perceived limitations,
48
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
influences to task accomplishment, and beliefs about such activities. If an outdoor leader has an
understanding of core human needs, particularly human relationship needs, they can improve
participant well-being through facilitating activities that improve relationship with self,
community, and nature. Based on these assertions, it seems important that outdoor leaders
possess the knowledge of humans’ need for belonging, the skills to foster participant growth in
their relational capacities, and acquisition of skills relevant to a relational matrix involving self,
community, and nature.
As mentioned, we are always in a nexus of co-occurring relationships across intra, inter,
and transpersonal domains. Therefore, it is nearly impossible to wholly isolate the three
relationships included in the author’s tripartite model. For example, Ringer and Gillis (1995)
highlighted one cross-domain interdependence: “the interpersonal world is intimately connected
with the internal world, so many persons respond to interpersonal challenges by describing an
aspect of their internal experience” (p. 48). Also, Ringer and Gillis (1995) noted that
intrapsychic issues can be intensified by small group dynamics and adventure activities, which
manifest in the totality of one’s relational world. Nevertheless, the three relationships identified
in this thesis provide a relational framework for outdoor leaders.
Relationship with the self.
Quinn (1999), in a brief yet perceptive quote wrote, “self-knowledge is always an
outcome of adventure” (p. 151). Experiential learning is nearly synonymous with personal
reflection, and experiential learning is quintessential to outdoor programming. Personal insight
can be considered the embodiment of a relationship with oneself. McKenzie (2000) reviewed
outdoor program outcome literature to ascertain how specific outcomes are obtained. She
discussed literature that found personal autonomy and the process of self-reflection made
49
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
significant contributions to personal development. Similarly, studies have shown that “teachers
who are autonomy supportive...catalyze in their students greater intrinsic motivation, curiosity,
and desire for challenge” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 71). Other elements found in outdoor
programs that encourage personal growth include physical exercise, self-care skills, healthy diet,
and removal from potentially detrimental social environments/milieu (Russell, 2001). Locus of
control and self-efficacy are two theories of self-concept that are pervasive in outdoor
programming literature, and are elements of this thesis research.
Locus of control.
Locus of control has been a theoretical moderator of personal change in adventure
programming (Priest & Gass, 2005; Hans, 2000). Locus of control describes one’s perceptions
of the influences affecting their own successes and failures. An internal locus of control
describes a person attributing outcomes to their intrinsic selves. As an example, an athlete
believes they succeed because they have innate natural abilities. A person who has an external
locus of control attributes success and failure to external phenomena. Continuing with the
athlete example, they might ascribe their success to their coach or supporters. Adventure
programming explicitly and implicitly attempts to assist individuals in increasing personal
challenges, self-awareness, personal accountability, and informed decision-making, and
improved personal narratives. In a meta-analysis by Hans (2000), she found that participants’
locus of control became more internal as a result of participating in an adventure program. The
concept of locus of control can inform and educate outdoor leaders about how their leadership
may affect participants and the attribution of their successes.
Self-efficacy.
50
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
The theory of self-efficacy is the brainchild of psychologist Albert Bandura (1997), and is
a component of his social learning theory. Self-efficacy describes one’s perceptions of one’s
own abilities, “and has provided a conceptual framework utilized by many fields to understand
behavior and to explain success and/or continued participation in a variety of domains” (Propst
& Koesler, 1998, p. 321). Self-efficacy is found throughout adventure programming literature as
a personal growth concept (Klint, 1999; Martin, 1999; Stremba & Bisson, 2009, Propst &
Koesler, 1998). Priest and Gass (2005) discussed self-efficacy briefly in a chapter on individual
behavior and motivation. They wrote, “To deliver your adventure program more effectively, it
helps to understand individual behavior during adventure experiences” (Priest & Gass, 2005, p.
46). Hans (2000) concluded that studies of moderators of personal growth during adventure
programming may be more fruitful and more useful if they focus more on self-efficacy than on
locus of control. Thus, outdoor leaders who possess an understanding of self-efficacy and how it
influences participants’ behaviors, will be more effective at meeting course goals. Because self-
efficacy is enhanced when goals are achieved (Propst & Koesler, 1998), this fact supports the
practice of sequencing activities from less to more challenging through time, to improve self-
efficacy beliefs overall by expanding participants’ past mastery experiences.
Facilitating a sense of self.
Self-concept, self-efficacy, and perceived competence are directly addressed in adventure
programming literature (Klint, 1999). Because many programs seek to improve individuals’
perceptions of their abilities, the conceptual understanding of self-efficacy and locus of control
can inform and educate outdoor leaders about how their leadership is affecting participants.
Intrapersonal relationships are fostered when leaders facilitate and help process experiences that
instigate reflection. Regarding processing and intrapersonal insight, relational leaders view
51
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
communication “as a way of working out what is meaningful and possible” (Cunliffe & Eriksen,
2011, p. 1434). In other words, leaders help participants make sense of their experiences.
Outdoor leaders may use a variety of skills to nurture intrapersonal relationships in their
participants. A widely referenced and facilitated adventure experience is the wilderness solo.
This experience can serve to deepen a person’s relationship with herself or himself (McKenzie &
Blenkinsop, 2006), as well as develop a connection with the natural world.
Relationship with others.
Baumeister and Leary (1995) assert that humans need “regular social contact with those
to whom one feels connected” (p. 501). Interpersonal relationships are quintessential to the
leader-participant dynamic, and in peer-to-peer relationships. An important aspect of peer
relationships is that they can provide a milieu in which people can explore and learn about
relationships, about morality, about caring, about community, about what it means to be
interdependent with others” (Quay et al., 2000, p. 9). The group experience archetypal to
outdoor programming has been described as a manner of “forced intimacy” (Vogel, 1991, p.
666). Halamova (2001) provided a succinct definition for a sense of community: “the feeling an
individual has about belonging to a group and involves the strength of the attachment people feel
for their communities or group” (p. 137). Quay et al. (2000), in a review of literature, used a
slightly different definition of community: community describes a psychological sense of we-
ness. Quay et al. (2000) wrote, “interdependence is the essence of any concept of community”
(p. 5), while Burke et al. (2012) asserted that fostering a community of caring individuals is
essential for participants and leaders to care for one another. Healthy peer interactions can
contribute to participants learning to take personal accountability and accept social responsibility
(Russell, 2001). Contributing to feeling a sense of community is the element of group
52
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
cohesiveness (Wilson, 2005). Facilitating group cohesion results in feeling a sense of belonging,
which is considered a basic human need (Kimball & Bacon, as cited in McKenzie, 2000). From
this citation, readers can see that adventure education literature has acknowledged the need for
belonging for at least the past 20 years. Todd et al. (2008) stated that, “leaders who are more
focused on the relationship function of the group would have a greater impact on sense of
community and cohesion than those with a focus on the task function of the group” (p. 29).
When people feel a sense of security and relatedness, intrinsic motivation is more likely to
flourish (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Important to this process, Knapp (1999) identified behaviors and
actions that are contrary to building a supportive community: “dishonesty, competition, rigidity,
mistrust, avoidance of conflict, defensiveness, pessimism, and criticism” (p. 221). Summing up
the findings about the role of groups in personal growth, Ewert and Heywood (1991) wrote, “
Theory and empirical literature suggest that achieving personal goals is optimized when
members operate within a supportive and well-functioning social group” (p. 613).
Facilitating relationships with others.
In order for an outdoor leader to foster community, and substantiate some of the points
made about the benefits of groups, they must understand the human need for belongingness, and
possess skills that facilitate interdependence amongst participants. Ringer (1999) believed a key
leadership competency is recognizing unconscious group processes and being able to interpret
and intervene at symbolic levels. Similar to assisting individuals with meaning making, Ringer
described how leaders also assist meaning making at the group level. Thus, social bonding can
be manipulated through an outdoor leader’s choice and sequence of activities, challenge levels,
and the way they use communication to process. This is why group facilitation and relationship
building skills of a leader are critical to effective outdoor leadership. McAvoy et al. (1996)
53
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
shared earlier research that identified four influences contributing to team building and
socialization: “identifying as a group, making personal contributions, recognizing the symbiotic
nature of the relationships, and acknowledging the temporal aspects of team building and
socialization” (p. 54). If outdoor leaders are cognizant of these contributing factors, they could
emphasize these points through activities and discussions, which may subsequently facilitate
group cohesion. When leaders facilitate interpersonal relationships, they both develop one-on-
one relationships between others, but also a nexus of interpersonal relationships, which
collectively create the social milieu. Goldenberg and Pronsolino (2008) utilized means-end
theory to research outdoor program outcomes for participants of Outward Bound and National
Outdoor Leadership School courses. They found that group activities that were challenging
resulted in group bonding. They wrote, “the most important aspect of programming is fostering
the group experience through group challenges” (Goldenberg and Pronsolino, 2008, p. 273).
Relatedly, Baumeister and Leary (1995) asserted that relationships take time to develop,
requiring shared, sometimes intimate, experiences to flourish, and that “positive bonding will
occur even under adverse circumstances” (p. 502). Adverse circumstances and physical
challenges, along with higher than normal levels of intimacy, are prototypical of outdoor
programming, which provide rich opportunities for relationships to be developed, and supports
the contention that challenge can build stronger communities.
An essential primary skill used to develop relationships between outdoor leaders and their
participants is rapport building. Raiola (2003) cited Carl Roger’s person-centered therapy
approach as essential to establishing and maintaining an environment of trust, safety, and care for
clients. Conditions essential for developing rapport include being authentic, acceptance, caring,
and deep understanding, tone of voice (supportive, not sarcastic) and language use (respectful
54
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
and supportive) (Mitten, 1995). Raiola (2003) identified the techniques of active listening,
rephrasing, and reinforcing positive behaviors as all contributing to rapport, while Mitten (1995)
adds affirmations (of being, doing, and improving), which are “messages that are supportive and
nurturing” (p. 86). Related to a leader’s skill at group management, Ringer (1999) wrote, “the
group leader’s own emotional state is inextricably linked with the emotional ‘field’ that exists in
the group” (p. 16). Implied in this statement is the belief that outdoor leaders should be
cognizant of their own intrapersonal states and processes.
Relationship with nature.
Embedded in outdoor programming literature is the persistent description of nature as a
“novel environment.” The idea that wilderness serves as a novel environment, and that personal
development and adventure programming efficacy are dependent upon it, permeates outdoor
programming literature and can be traced back to the seminal work of Walsh and Golins (1976).
Outdoor programming does not occur in urban warehouses, which can also be described as a
novel environment. Criticism regarding the lack of recognition of nature’s role in outdoor
leadership is increasing. For example, Beringer (2004) criticized Gillis and Ringer’s (1999)
definition of adventure therapy because it lacks acknowledgement of the environmental setting
for adventure programming. Beringer (2004) asserted, “The role of nature as a force in human
development needs to be considered” (p. 51). What is clearly limited by describing nature as a
novel environment is the appreciation and acknowledgement that nature is not simply a new or
unusual environment; it is the source of human evolutionary development, and possesses
intrinsic benefits for human well-being.
Priest’s (1986) exploration of relationships in outdoor education discussed two that are
relevant to the human-nature connection. Ecosystemic relationships basically describe
55
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
ecological knowledge at a systemic level. Ekistic relationships “refers to the interaction between
people and their surroundings; how humans impact on natural resources and how threats might
have a reciprocal effect, with the quality of the land influencing the quality of society’s life”
(Priest, 1986, p. 14). Priest does not mention the term ecopsychology, but his definition of
ekistic relationships is synonymous with ecopsychology’s primary assertion. In addition to
ecopsychology, there are several fields of psychology that are especially pertinent to outdoor
adventure and nature programming, which can inform leaders’ framework for leading.
Several academic fields and theories investigate and describe the environment as a
context for human growth and develop. Environmental psychology, an interdisciplinary field,
investigates the influences of natural and human-created physical environments upon psyches
and behaviors (Bell, Greene, Fisher, & Baum, 2001). Conservation psychology explores how
human well-being is related to relationships with ecological systems. This ethically driven
branch of psychology takes a proactive stance toward understanding the relationships between
humans and nature (Scull, 2008). Conservation psychology actively promotes healthy and
sustainable relationships, including conservation strategies (Scull, 2008) and asks the questions,
“What is the human place in nature, and what is nature’s place in the human being?” (Clayton &
Myers, 2009, p. 4). The biophilia hypothesis is one theory attempting to explain relational bonds
between humans and their ecological context. Kellert (1993b) identified five reasons for human
biophilic inclinations: they are biologically based, part of Homo sapiens’ evolutionary heritage,
connected to genetic fitness and competitive advantages, and increases the potential for creating
individual meaning and personal fulfillment. Confirming the human-nature bond, Kahn (1999)
wrote, “Research suggests…that people often prefer natural environments to built environments,
56
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
and built environments with water, trees, and other vegetation to built environments without such
features. These preferences may fit patterns laid down deep in human history” (p. 22).
Facilitating a relationship with nature.
Fox and McAvoy (1995) articulated the need for outdoor leaders to foster relationships
among participants and the natural world. Harper (2009) mentioned the role of the natural
environment in mediating therapeutic alliance. This idea supports the need for outdoor leaders to
have skills in facilitating relationships between the natural world and participants as a way of
advancing the therapeutic alliance between outdoor leaders and participants.
When outdoor leaders actively foster relationships for those they lead, they are explicitly
addressing the theoretical perspectives of ecopsychology and the human need for belonging. Of
course adventures occurring in nature do not necessarily mean outdoor leaders fully understand
the role of nature as a contributor in adventure experiences. One approach to fostering
connection between people and place is using the landfull framework, described by Baker
(2005). It consists of four levels of awareness and relationship to place. First, one must be
deeply aware of their surroundings and location. Second, a person should have knowledge of the
natural and cultural history of a place. Third, a person should understand a place in the present
moment in time. Last, one uses the knowledge she or he has of a place to connect and relate it to
other landscapes and places. Supplementing knowledge of place, Martin (2004) discussed the
acquisition of language and skills as benefiting students in his outdoor education program.
Specifically, students learned a language that allowed them to discuss relationships in nature, and
skills that fostered comfort and competency in the out of doors. However, he found that the
language taught in environmental sciences was inadequate for students to describe their feelings
about nature. One assumption held by some outdoor leaders is that simply being in nature
57
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
fosters connection and concern for it. However, Martin (2004) found “that more skill focused
activit[ies], essential to develop[ing] living and travelling skills for comfort in the outdoors, did
not in itself develop a more caring nature relationship, and may sometimes work against such
relationship development” (p. 23). He described this as a paradox, the tension between learning
technical skills and developing relationship with nature. Importantly, Martin (2004) found that
being safe and comfortable outdoors was a precursor to developing a relationship with nature.
Benefits of nature.
The out of doors might be a new environment for outdoor program participants, but the
natural environment is a specific environment, which humans have evolved from, and for which
we have a natural affinity (Kellert &Wilson, 1993). Nature also possesses intrinsic properties
that support and facilitate human well-being and growth. Research has highlighted and
measured the benefits people experience through contact, immersion, and relationships with
nature across physiological and psychometric improvements. For outdoor leaders to successfully
facilitate relationships between participants and nature, they need to be aware of research
findings that validate benefits derived from nature. This allows leaders to consciously lead
individuals and facilitate activities to reap such benefits. Benefits to humans can be grouped into
several broad categories: attentional improvements, stress reduction, affective improvements,
cognitive improvements, transcendent experiences, and other benefits.
Attentional improvements.
Rachel and Stephen Kaplan have studied natural landscapes positive effects on humans
for several decades. Their findings culminated with their attention restoration theory (ART).
Explicit to this theory are two types of human attentional experiences: fascination where paying
attention to something is natural; unforced, requiring little effort; and directed attention, which
58
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
involves forcing oneself to pay attention to something. Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) suggested that
fatigue is the result of prolonged directed attention, that it compromises effectiveness (Kaplan,
1995), and they described this condition as directed attention fatigue (DAF). Restorative
environments can instigate the resolution and avoidance of DAF. Kaplan and Kaplan asserted,
“Restorative environments offer a concrete and available means of reducing suffering and
enhancing effectiveness” (1989, p. 176). Kaplan (1995) claimed that restorative experiences
increase human effectiveness, specifically the ability to maintain attention. Elements of
restorative environments include fascination-inducing effortless attention, being away, extent-or
a sense of grand landscapes, and compatibility-or resonance between the natural setting and
human inclinations.
Taylor, Kuo, and Sullivan (2001) showed that attention deficit disorder symptoms were
milder for children with greener play settings, and attentional abilities were significantly
improved after a twenty-minute walk in a park (Taylor & Kuo, 2009). In a longitudinal study,
Wells (2000) explored how nearby nature affected children’s attentional abilities. She found that
the directed attention capacity (DAC) of children growing up in urban housing projects was
increased as natural elements in their home-life increased. Thus, if outdoor leaders understand
that nature improves people’s attentional abilities (Kaplan, 1995), then that leader may
intentionally facilitate activities in restorative environments to improve participants’ attentional
abilities.
Stress reduction.
“Findings from over 100 studies… have shown that stress reduction is one of the key
perceived benefits of spending time in a wilderness area” (Kahn, 1999, p. 13). People become
calmer and less hurried (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989). Ulrich et al. (1991) discussed previous
59
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
experimental research that demonstrated that outdoor recreational experiences induce stress
recovery, derived, in part, from the “strong attention holding abilities of natural phenomenon”
(Ulrich et al., 1991, p. 206). Ulrich and colleagues (1991) found that exposure to outdoor
videotapes after stress-inducing experiments reduced arousal rates faster than videotapes of
urban scenes. Research has demonstrated that visiting nature, as well as simply viewing images
of nature result in restorative effects (Bell et al., 2001). Parsons, Tassinary, Ulrich, Hebl, and
Grossman-Alexander (1998) found that when research participants watched films of driving
through outdoor environments, immediately after a stressful experience, that stress recovery is
quicker and greater than those viewing films of “artifact-dominated drives” (p. 113).
Transferring the benefits of wilderness environments, Clayton and Myers (2009) discussed that
in domestic living situations, “Companion animals have been found to reduce anxiety, increase
reported happiness, and buffer stressful periods” (p. 98). Thus, natural elements, even out of
context from the natural world, still possess benefits to humans.
Affective improvements.
“Improved mood, enhanced concentration and self-discipline” (Clayton & Myers, 2009,
p. 86) are benefits derived from natural environments and views of nature from one’s home.
Shin, Shin, Yeoun, and Kim (2011) found positive improvements in moods in participants who
participated in just a 50-minute walk in a forested urban park. Berman et al. (2012) researched
the effects of walking in nature on adults diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder and found
affective improvements in their research participants.
Cognitive improvements.
Shin et al. (2011) conducted research comparing cognitive functioning differences
between walking in a forested urban park and an urban downtown area. They found that
60
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
cognitive functioning, as measured by the Trail Making Test Part B and the Profile of Mood
States, improved. Berman et al. (2012) found that walking in nature improved cognitive
functioning in adults diagnosed with major depressive disorder. And Berman, Jonides, and
Kaplan (2008) found that nature can improve cognitive functioning, not only through immersive
experiences, but also simply by viewing images of nature.
Transcendent experiences.
Nature experiences can also benefit peoples’ spiritual development (Terhaar, 2009).
Transcendent experiences, where one feels a connection or belonging to something greater than
themselves, are characterized by a “sense of union and timelessness” (Williams & Harvey, 2001,
p. 249) and appear to be fostered in natural environments (Williams & Harvey, 2001). These
researchers found “evidence of close relationships between transcendence and both aesthetic and
restorative functions of nature” (Williams & Harvey, 2001, p. 256). Tuan (1977) asserts that
man-made things cannot equal nature and natural objects in their “cosmic or transcendental
significance” (p. 114).
Other benefits.
In a meta-analysis of 24 articles addressing human health and nature, Bowler, Buyung-
Ali, Knight, & Pullin (2010) found beneficial changes in energy, anxiety and anger reduction, as
well as improvements in fatigue and sadness upon exposure to natural environments. Self-
reflection and self-knowledge are increased (Clayton & Myers, 2009), physical well-being
improves (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989), and privacy can be experienced (Clayton & Myers, 2009).
Clayton and Myers (2009) wrote, “A natural environment can enhance autonomy because social
regulations, oversight, and consequences are fewer” (p. 60). Exercising self-sufficiency and
physical skills in the outdoors can result in feelings of competency and increased self-efficacy
61
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
(Clayton & Myers, 2009). Brown and Bell (2007) discussed how nature is being promoted as a
space where people can “perform techniques of self-care” (p. 1351). Kaplan and Kaplan (1989),
in discussing human satisfaction, wrote, “The longer-term, indirect impacts [of access to nearby
nature] also include increased levels of satisfaction with one’s home, one’s job, and with life in
general” (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989, p. 173). (Hansen-Ketchum, Marck, & Reutter (2009) noted
that feeling a sense of community, and accelerated recovery from illnesses are benefits of nature.
Relationship Influences Upon Outdoor Programming Outcomes
Research continues to dissect variables affecting participant outcomes of outdoor
programming. Sibthorp et al. (2007) explored participant and course-level predictors that may
affect participant development, defined as gains in the areas of leadership, communication, small
group behavior, environmental awareness, judgment, and outdoor skills. “Consciously and
actively fostering and attending to the group’s cohesion [i.e. interpersonal relationships] seems to
be a valuable and viable way that instructors can make adventure programs more beneficial to
participants” (Sibthorp et. al, 2007, p. 15). Breunig et al. (2008) conducted a study to ascertain
elements contributing to group cohesiveness. They found that leadership styles and group
composition, among others, were factors that led to feelings of community. Breunig et al.
furthermore asserted that their results indicated the importance of shared emotional connections,
and the fulfillment of human needs as determinants for developing a psychological sense of
community. These findings enforce the idea that relationally oriented leaders can directly
influence program outcomes by fostering interpersonal relationships in outdoor groups.
Research by Schumann, Paisley, Sibthorp, and Gookin (2009) investigated the influences
of instructors on student perceived learning at the National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS).
They categorized these influences into leader characteristics, such as patience, knowledge,
62
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
empathy, being inspirational, and being fun; and leader behaviors, such as providing feedback,
role modeling, direct instructing/coaching, creating a supportive learning environment, managing
risk, providing formal curricula, and using a personal quote or phrase. Another research project
found that “Overall, clients perceived their relationship to the [wilderness treatment program]
leader as the most important contribution to their treatment process” (Harper, 2009, p. 49), even
more important than group cohesion or relationships with other group members. Harper (2009)
cited research in which paraprofessional staff (non-clinically trained wilderness leaders at
therapeutic wilderness programs) may have a stronger influence upon client outcomes than
trained therapists working alone. Bocarro and Witt (2003) studied after school recreation
programs, and found that it was not activities themselves that helped youth, but the relationships
that developed between recreation leaders and participants. Shooter, Paisley, and Sibthorp
(2009) found that the relationships between outdoor leaders and participants are both important
and influential in affecting program outcomes. Schumann et al. (2009) wrote, “an instructor who
exhibits an ethic of care may, indeed, influence student outcomes” (p. 17). Understanding that
therapeutic alliance positively affects outcomes in psychotherapy, it seems logical to assume that
positive adventure programming outcomes are more likely to be attributed to the interpersonal
connection between leaders and participants than the actual activities they facilitate.
Techniques of Relational Leaders
Kosseff (2010) declared that outdoor leadership is taxing: physically, intellectually, and
psychologically. These statements underscore the importance of skills and knowledge pertinent
to nurturing well-being and facilitating relationships. Fostering relationships across
intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal domains requires specific skills.
63
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Communication.
Discussions and articles about interpersonal and communication skills have been
embedded in outdoor leadership literature for decades.
Communication permeates virtually all facets of adventure education and yet is one of the
soft skills often overlooked in leadership development programs and in our profession as
a whole…. Communication is a leadership skill, which acts as a catalyst for participants’
growth by reflection on experience. (Chase & Priest, 1990, p. 7)
“Communication can be thought of as [a] process of exchange, directed toward conveying
meaning and understanding between two [or more] people” (Chase & Priest, 1990, p. 7). Chase
and Priest (1990) articulated four basic elements of communication: sender, message, receiver,
and channel or pathway. Outdoor leaders, therefore, should understand both these elements of
communication, but also barriers to effective communication. Barriers include different types of
noise, such as semantic, internal, external, as well as issues of overload, distractions, barriers,
mental blocks, personal values, selective perception, and social and environmental norms (Chase
& Priest, 1990). Because outdoor leaders are tasked with helping individuals and groups with
extracting meaning from their experiences, it is critical that leaders are proficient
communicators.
Chase and Priest (1990) claimed that effective communication accomplishes four core
tasks in adventure education: it establishes leadership through influence and persuasion, it
“enhances the socialization process by strengthening intrapersonal and interpersonal
relationships” (p. 7), it empowers teaching through effective dissemination of material, and it
facilitates learning via reflection. Furthermore, effective communication has been identified as
an important leadership competency (Priest & Gass, 2005; Phipps & Swiderski, 1990) for
64
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
outdoor leaders and as a significant tool for establishing rapport, fostering relationships, and
building therapeutic alliances. Stickley and Freshwater (2006) contended that communication
skills “enable reflective and empathetic relationships to be formed” (p. 13). Equating adventure
education with improving participant well-being, it seems essential that therapeutic outdoor
leaders be competent in communication. Chase and Priest (1990) stated that communication is
improved when a speaker serves as “a trustworthy and credible sender” (Chase & Priest, 1990, p.
4). Stickley and Freshwater (2006) state that individuals with fewer ego needs make better
listeners. This distinction could be applied to outdoor leaders, when comparing ego needs of
new outdoor leaders versus those with significant outdoor and leadership experiences.
Communication is a process that is ubiquitous in daily life, yet this thesis research
examines a specific dimension of communication, communication in the realm of healing and
wellness. Stickley and Freshwater (2006) distinguish between normal conversations and
therapeutic conversations. Therapeutic communication is focused on predetermined goals,
attention is primarily given to the client, and a code of conduct is required of the listener.
Furthermore, it involves an imbalance in needs satisfaction, professional boundaries are present,
there is restricted disclosure by the listener, and non-judgmental listening occurs. Therapeutic
exchanges involve the identification of a problem and an identified goal; attention is focused on
the client (not mutually focused) and their needs; professional boundaries exist for conduct; the
helper is non-judgmental and restricts personal disclosure and emotional and cognitive
expression; and the helpers’ actions are conveyed from the position of being a so-called “expert,”
informed by training, theory, and practice. This type of non-reciprocal communication is
intrinsic to the hierarchical relationships between outdoor leaders and their participants.
65
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Trust and rapport development.
Because relationships are fundamental to outdoor programming, it is important to explore
trust development. “Trust is often a crucial and influential feature of good, beneficial, and
satisfying relationships…[and it] depends heavily on mutuality, especially the mutual
recognition of reciprocal concern and attachment” (Baumeister & Leary, 1995, pp. 514).
Believing that the purpose of adventure education, and much of outdoor programming, is to
contribute to the growth and well-being of people, it seems clear that trust is a critical issue for
outdoor leaders to be aware of, and to foster. Trust is described as a psychological state and
attitude of willingness to be vulnerable to others (Brower et al., 2000; Shooter Paisley, &
Sibthorp, 2010). According to trust level theory, trust is formed through “repeated interpersonal
interactions” (Shooter Paisley, & Sibthorp, 2010, p. 192). Trust originates in dyadic
relationships (Brower et al., 2000). Trust perception between leaders and participants is bi-
directional: a leader perceives the trustworthiness of the participant, while the participant
perceives the trustworthiness of the leader (Brower et al. 2000). Mitten (1995) highlighted the
significant power differential between outdoor leaders and participants. In relationships with a
power differential, such as with outdoor leadership, both members in a dyadic relationship do not
equally trust one another, nor do they perceive the relationship the same (Brower et al., 2000).
As defined, trust involves vulnerability. An essential risk outdoor leaders must monitor and
address are psychological issues related to emotional expression and social vulnerability of those
they lead. This can be accomplished through forming therapeutic bonds.
In order for a leader to foster relationships for participants, he or she must be able to
foster trust in her or himself. Research has demonstrated that positive therapeutic alliances foster
positive therapy outcomes (Homrich, 2009). Thomas (2011) wrote, “Carl Rogers considered the
66
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
personal qualities and attitudes of the facilitator to be more important than any methods they
employ” (p. 4). Thus, we can extrapolate that trust is foundational to therapeutic alliance, as well
as to positive and healthy relationships between leader and participants. But what are the
elements of therapeutic communication and alliance? Skills involved in listening to others
involve non-judging language, not prioritizing problem solving, asking open questions, the use
of silence, honesty, para-verbals, eye contact, mirroring body language, open gestures, smiling,
nodding, being attentive and focused, appropriate use of touch, and congruence (Stickley &
Freshwater, 2006). Green (2009) writes that the skills fostering therapeutic alliance “are
probably the time-honoured [sic] ones of respectful awareness, patient centeredness, and
informed active listening coupled with accurate empathy” (p. 300). Shooter, Sibthorp, and
Gookin (2010) have also supported a person-centered approach to outdoor leadership practices
for fostering participant trust in leaders. Thus, in order for an outdoor leader to effectively
facilitate relationships for her or his participants, it is more important that leaders be authentic
and genuine. This approach is more influential than using any specific methodology, for leaders
to effectively foster relationships. Mitten (1995) maintained that for participants to learn healthy
relationship skills and develop self-esteem there must be acceptance and trust between the
outdoor leader and participant, and in fact high participant trust in outdoor leader appears to have
positive influential outcomes (Shooter, Paisley, & Sibthorp, 2009).
Feedback.
Feedback is foundational to outdoor leadership and education. Feedback has been
defined as “a response to a person’s behavior that influences the continuance of that behavior”
(Claiborn & Goodyear, 2005, p. 210). Leaders provide feedback to participants so that they can
improve their skills and performance and encourage insight during outdoor programming.
67
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Paisley, Furman, Sibthorp, and Gookin (2008) found that instructor feedback and coaching were
methods by which students reported learning communication skills. Propst and Koesler (1998)
discussed how feedback can improve self-efficacy, especially when people are unable to
accurately judge their own performance. Propst and Koesler (1998) found “positive feedback
was more important for females and immediate feedback more important for males in raising
levels of short-term self-efficacy” (p. 340). These finding are important to more detailed
discussions about gender factors affecting leadership practice, but this falls outside the scope and
focus of this thesis research. In psychotherapeutic relationships, Claiborn and Goodyear (2005)
asserted that an essential task of a therapist is “building and maintaining a relationship of open
inquiry, within which feedback can be requested by the client, delivered by the therapist, and
processed by the two of them to a productive end, whether that means acceptance or rejection of
the feedback” (p. 213).
Providing feedback to participants is fundamental to outdoor education, therefore
understanding ways to provide effective feedback is essential to ensure it is of value and received
appropriately by the participant. Priest and Gass (2005) wrote, “appropriate feedback is
descriptive, specific, well-intended, directed toward change, solicited, well-timed, checked out
with the sender, and checked out with the group” (p.238). Claiborn and Goodyear (2005)
identify four features of deliberate and effective feedback: descriptive (observational, not
inferential), evaluative (assess behavior in relation to a performance criteria), emotionally
disclosing instead of behaviorally descriptive (avoid causality), and interpretive (brings a new
perspective). Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick (2006) discuss seven principles of good feedback for
facilitating self-regulation in learners: it clarifies what good performance is, provides
opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance, facilitates the
68
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
development of self-assessment in learning, delivers information to students about their learning,
encourages dialogue around learning, encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem,
and provides information to teachers that may improve their teaching abilities. In psychotherapy
relationships, Chesley, Gillett, and Wagner (2008) cautioned therapists to consider child clients’
receptivity to feedback, but this caution is applicable to anyone providing feedback to another,
regardless of context.
Ceremonies and rituals.
An important skillset to assess in outdoor leaders is their knowledge of the importance
and utility of ceremonies. Metzner (2009) identified two purposes for rituals: healing and
problem solving, and seeking guidance or a vision. Identifying one difference between therapists
and life coaches, Metzner (2009) stated coaches are more focused on helping clients articulate a
vision of their future, whereas therapy often explores the past. The use of rituals, ceremonies, or
rites of passage are techniques outdoor leaders use to foster deeper intrapersonal connections and
insight for participants (Russell, 2001). Metzner (2009) defined a ritual as: “the purposeful,
conscious, arrangement of time, space, and action, according to specific intentions” (p. 257).
Human culture is both a process and construction that reinforces community, social norms, and
informs one’s sense of personal identity. Cultures, using the element of language and the
practice of ceremonies, have evolved significantly over the eons of human existence on earth.
There is power in symbolic action and symbolic language. According to Harper (2009), “The
use of experiential initiatives, metaphor, story, ritual and rites of passage are also commonly
employed in the wilderness treatment milieu” (p. 51), with the goal being personal growth.
Lertzman (2002) references several researchers who have asserted that various western social
pathologies are rooted in the loss of rites of passage within mainstream culture. Instead of
69
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
healthy, safe, and facilitated rites, contemporary western youth in particular engage in “pseudo-
rites,” which are often unhealthy, dangerous, and unfacilitated by experienced elders. The power
of ceremonies or rites of passage may lie in their ability to transfer learning from one experience
to another, and to transcend strictly cognitive dimensions of being. Bodkin and Sartor (2005)
assert that, “enacting or symbolizing a situation or problem has a greater impact than just
thinking about it” (p.37). There is a human need for reflection, contemplation, introspection,
meaning-making, and a connection with the natural world through symbolic ceremonial practice.
Lertzman (2002) articulated an insightful reason why rites of passage are so transformative;
“Isolation in a wilderness setting also has a disarming effect that can make people emotionally
vulnerable and open to life-changing experiences” (p.7).
Use of metaphors.
Using adventure and/or nature to facilitate personal growth and improve well-being is a
common rationale given for outdoor programming. The use of metaphors by outdoor leaders can
be directly used towards this end. Individuals, along with cultures, construct personal
mythologies. These mythologies are composed of patterns of metaphors that create meaning and
identity for the individual (Kopp, 1995). Metaphors are ultimately a method of communication,
and by definition are symbolic or abstract representations of objects and/or actions. Metaphors
can be expressed in both verbal and non-verbal ways, such as play, music, and other creative acts
(Chesley et al., 2008), and can convey a multitude of thoughts and feelings in a relatively simple
expression. Evans (1988) stated it is the ambiguity of metaphors that makes them so
transformative, while Kopp (1995) asserted the power of metaphors is in their combination of
both images and words, and this combination creates new ideas and experiences.
70
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Understanding environmental specific metaphors, such as the power of water and wind to
transform landscapes, or the foraging styles of specific animals, ensures outdoor leaders can
maximize the unique elements of the natural environment towards personal insight, a precursor
to personal change. Chesley et al. (2008) use the example of a book: The Fall of Freddie the
Leaf, as a metaphorical story drawn from nature that can be used in clinical psychotherapy.
Chesley et al. (2008) claimed that when counseling children, “there are three important creators
of therapeutically useful metaphors: the child, the counselor, and the family” (p. 405). In
outdoor programming, the sources of metaphors are slightly different, and may include the
participant, the outdoor leader, the social group, and the natural environment. Metaphoric
language can be a tool utilized for the betterment of self-esteem, personal growth, and stories for
personal reflection. Foster and Little (1989) help bridge the gap between ceremony and
metaphor when they write, “The wilderness quest is the briefest of metaphors for the candidate’s
visionary journey” (p.182). Thus, a physical undertaking serves as a metaphor for intrapsychic
experiences. This truly is the embodiment of adventure programming.
71
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Research Design
This survey research project was descriptive in nature, cross-sectional, non-experimental,
and basic, which utilized a self-administered, Internet-based survey methodology.
SurveyMonkey, a private online survey service company, was used for hosting the questionnaire,
storing and collecting data, and for some data analysis. Due to the nature of web-based surveys,
nonprobability sampling methods were used. W. Trochim (Retrieved February 29, 2012,
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampnon.php) separates non-probability sampling
methods into two categories: accidental and purposive. Because participants were actively
solicited for this research, purposive sampling was used, and due to the nature of the web-based
survey, survey efforts utilized convenience and referral/snowball sampling techniques. The
questionnaire gathered all three types of survey data that Rea and Parker (1997) identify:
descriptive, behavioral, and opinion. The survey generated both quantitative data (such as age,
years worked in field) and qualitative data (such as reasons for becoming an outdoor leader, and
how outdoor leaders facilitate relationships between participants and the natural world).
An attempt was made to measure outdoor leaders’ knowledge levels of therapeutic
concepts and skills related to fostering and facilitating relationships deemed important by
existing literature. Quantitative survey data is presented in the form of descriptive statistics. No
formal statistical analysis of this data was done for this thesis, which this author recognizes as a
limitation. However, qualitative survey data was analyzed using a coding system based upon the
framework proposed by Ryan and Bernard (2003): “(1) discovering themes and subthemes, (2)
winnowing themes to a manageable few (i.e. deciding which themes are important in any project,
(3) building hierarchies of themes or code books, and (4) linking themes into theoretical models”
72
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
(p. 85). This method works in conjunction with what Willis (2007) describes as the constant
comparative method.
Survey Characteristics
The survey questionnaire contained fifty-one questions, using both closed and open,
multiple choice, ranking, and short answer question formats. Only four questions did not require
an answer. The author created the survey without utilizing existing measures or instruments, as
none were found to be comprehensive enough. The questionnaire used in this study was
composed of questions probing self-reported knowledge and skills pertinent to human
development, psychology, and forming and fostering therapeutic relationships. The institutional
review board of Prescott College approved this survey. See the appendix for a complete listing
of survey questions, including answer choice options.
Sampling Procedure
Internet searches were conducted using the terms adventure programs, adventure outings,
mountain guides, wilderness therapy, adventure expeditions, outdoor leadership, outdoor
leadership+Canada, outdoor education, adventure education, adventure education+Canada, and
outdoor experiential education. Internet search responses were then reviewed for programs that
would either employ outdoor leaders, or that might provide referral sources for disseminating the
Internet link for the survey, such as colleges and universities.
Research participants were solicited through their employers, academic institutions,
relevant professional organizations and associations, participation at professional conferences the
researcher attended while attending Prescott College, personal referrals, and through various
Internet websites, including social media sites pertinent to outdoor leadership. This resulted in
contacting more than 150 individual businesses or organizations, 80 colleges and universities
73
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
providing undergraduate and graduate degrees in outdoor leadership or related disciplines.
Schools such as Prescott College, Radford University, Central Oregon Community College, Fort
Lewis College, and Mt. Hood Community College were contacted, along with Wilderness
Education Association affiliated schools. Contacts were made with organizations such as the
Association of Experiential Education, the Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research
Cooperative, the National Association of Therapeutic Schools and Programs, the National
Association of Therapeutic Wilderness Camping, the American Mountain Guide Association,
Association of Canadian Mountain Guides, and The Wilderness Guides Council. Large and
well-established institutions such as Outward Bound and the National Outdoor Leadership
School (NOLS) were solicited to have field staff participate. Administrators, field directors,
executive directors, among other potential titles at the programs mentioned were initially
contacted to assess interest and willingness to partake in this research project. It was hoped that
they would make reference to this survey and ask field staff to participate.
Programs were contacted exclusively via email. Depending on website designs and
layout, if specific email addresses were provided, a survey solicitation was emailed directly to
individuals. Some websites only provided a general information email address, and the survey
solicitation was emailed to these general inboxes in hopes it would be forwarded to potential
survey respondents. Additional efforts were made to post web links to the survey on related
websites, blogs, and in social media outlets relevant to outdoor leadership (such as the
Therapeutic Adventure Professional Group’s Facebook page and the adventure therapy listserv at
UGA). The survey was posted on 20 various social media sites. In addition to Internet
searching, the researcher shared the survey solicitation with his professional network, and asked
74
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
those contacted to pass on the survey web link to their professional networks as well. The survey
collected data for 85 days.
Of the 151 private organizations contacted, 18 confirmed they would disseminate the
survey, as well as three of the 11 professional organizations, plus 16 of 82 colleges and
universities contacted. The two largest outdoor programs in the United States, NOLS and
Outward Bound, have formal processes to approve research projects before disseminating them
to employees. This study did not receive approval in the time frame needed by these
organizations.
Survey participants meeting the stated outdoor leadership eligibility criteria voluntarily
completed the online survey. Eligibility criteria required participants to be at least 18 years of
age, currently employed either part-time or full-time, work in the United States or Canada in a
paid outdoor leadership capacity, and work out of doors. Research participants needed to
primarily work in the field leading adventure and nature-based activities, such as hiking,
camping, boating, climbing, ecotherapy activities, etc. These activities could occur in
recreational, therapeutic, educational, therapy, and mentoring contexts. Persons primarily
working in logistical or administrative roles were ineligible for participating. By limiting
participation to staff actively working in the field, the therapeutic knowledge and relational
abilities of outdoor leaders who work directly with participants was assessed, not the skills and
knowledge of administrative, managerial, or training staff. Due to the nature of an anonymous
online survey methodology, participants self-selected themselves as being eligible. The
researcher is unable to verify that all participants met all eligibility criteria. Due to the nature of
web-based surveys, non-probability sampling methods were used. Because participants were
actively solicited for this research, sampling was primarily purposeful, but convenience and
75
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
referral/snowball sampling techniques were also utilized. No compensation, of any kind, was
provided to survey respondents.
Participant Characteristics
Ninety-two responses yielded 91 identified ages. Survey respondents’ ages ranged from
18 to 63, with a mean age of 33.5. Categorizing respondents into age categories, 12 respondents
(13.0%) were aged 18-24, 46 (50.0%) between the ages of 25-34, 23 (25.0%) between the ages
of 35-44, 7 (7.6%) between the ages 45-54, and three (3.3%) over the age of 55. Male
respondents numbered 48 (52.2%), female 41 (44.6%), plus three transgender respondents
(3.3%). Eighty-eight outdoor leaders self-identified as white (95.7%), two as American Indian
or Alaska Native, (2.2%) one as Middle Eastern (1.1%), and one as Asian (1.1%). Eighty-three
respondents were American (90.2%), while nine were Canadian (9.8%). Respondents worked in
three Canadian provinces, with British Columbia most represented, and in 32 different states,
with the four most represented states being California, Oregon, Washington, and Colorado.
Participants were employed by 43 different programs/organizations, in addition 19 different
colleges and universities employ survey participants.
Survey respondents answered two questions about their academic backgrounds. The
most achieved degree was the bachelor’s, which 81 respondents possess (88.0%), followed by 38
respondents possessing a master’s degree (41.3%), 13 pursuing their master’s degree (14.1%), 11
respondents are pursuing a bachelor’s degree (12.0%), seven possess an associate’s degree
(7.6%), six hold a doctorate degree (6.5%), four are pursuing a doctorate degree (4.3%), two
have no degree (2.2%), and one is pursuing an associates (1.1%). Additional questions asked
about specific academic training in the areas of outdoor leadership, psychology, and biology.
Fifty-five respondents (59.8%) have studied outdoor leadership academically, 57 respondents
76
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
(62.0%) have studied psychology or related subjects (ex. social work), and 67 (72.8%) have
studied biology or a related field.
The mean number of years working as an outdoor leader is 5.5 years (for 90
respondents). Seventy-five of the 92 survey respondents (81.5%) indicated having supervisory
experience. The mean number of years in a supervisory/training role is 4.4. The minimum
amount of participant field experience was one month while the most experienced outdoor leader
has worked outdoors for over 500 months. Fifty-eight responding outdoor leaders work full-time
(63.0%), while 34 work part-time (37.0%). Survey respondents possess a variety of job titles,
from academic faculty, executive and program directors, to guides and instructors with varied
titles. Seventy discrete employers are represented, plus several respondents identified as self-
employed. Twenty-two respondents are employed by a college or university.
Several questions asked outdoor leaders about the programs they work at and the
participants they work with. Respondents were allowed to select multiple descriptors for the
program type for which they worked. The four most identified programs they work for are
adventure education (57.6%), education (55.4%), recreation (52.2%), and leadership education
programs (46.7%). Therapeutic (21.7%), wilderness therapy (13%) and adventure therapy
programs (8.7%) represent a smaller percentage of employer program type. Other program types
described by respondents included outdoor orientation programs (1), outdoor ministry (1), and
equine assisted therapy (1). Additionally, one respondent specified his work as mountain
guiding, another as using character-based curriculum, and another as environmental restoration.
The survey asked respondents to select the length of their programs from a list of options;
however, they could select all that were applicable. The greatest response rate (66) was for day
programs (including one day only, and daily programming that recurs weekly). The second most
77
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
common format was weeklong courses (45), followed by one to three week courses (36), three-
week to two months (17), two months or longer-including semester courses (16), two to seven
day courses (8). Respondents were asked about the gender and ages of the participants with
whom they work. Eighty-two outdoor leaders worked primarily with mixed gender groups
(89.1%), while six worked exclusively with males (6.5%) and four worked exclusively with
females (4.3%). Leaders selected as many age ranges as applicable for the outdoor participants
they work with. The most common ages of participants were adolescents (58) and young adults
(50), with fewer young participants age 10-14 (33), and even fewer children under age 10 (15).
Adult participation in outdoor programming decreases with age. Twenty-seven outdoor leaders
worked with people 25-34, 23 leaders worked with 35-45 year olds, 21 indicated they work with
45-55 year olds, 17 lead 55-65 olds, and only 10 leaders indicated they work with participants
over age 65.
78
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
Training and Beliefs of Outdoor Leaders
Ninety-two individuals completed the online survey. Table 1 is an overview of
respondent characteristics. Survey respondents were asked several questions about their motives
for being outdoor leaders, how they define outdoor leadership, and factors that influence their
decision-making processes.
Table 1
Characteristics of Outdoor Leaders
Age
Mean
(Years) Gender
33.5 Male
#/% Nationality #/%
Race
48/52.2 American 83/90.2 White
#/%
88/95.7
Range
18-63 Female
41/44.6 Canadian 9/9.8 American
Indian/Alaska
Native
Transgender 3/3.3
Middle
Eastern
Asian
Field
Employment
Experience (Avg.) Status
Program Type
As leader
5.5 Full-time 58/63.0 Adventure 57.6% Therapeutic
education
As
4.4 Part-time 34/37.0 Education 55.4% Wilderness
supervisor
therapy
Recreation 52.2% Adventure
therapy
Leadership 46.7%
education
Note: Program types are only represented by percentages, as leaders could select multiple employer program types.
2/2.2
1/1.1
1/1.1
21.7%
13.0%
8.7%
Motives for Working Outdoors
Leaders were asked, “Why have you chosen the career of an outdoor leader?” Responses
from this open-ended question were qualitatively analyzed and categorized. Non-relational
motives, including sub-categories, for working as outdoor leaders are listed in Table 2.
Responses exploring relational motives for working outdoors are shown in Table 3.
79
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 2
Reasons for Working as an Outdoor Leader (non-relational)
Major Category
Subcategory
Rate
Personal satisfaction Enjoy being outside
27
Reasons
Sharing the outdoors
13
Love of teaching and education
7
Rewarding and meaningful work
7
Witnessing growth in others
6
Desire to play, have fun
5
Opportunities to travel the world
2
Lifestyle/outdoor culture
1
Personal occupational Best personal and professional fit
13
reasons
Enjoy work related challenges (from environment to
participants)
7
Happenstance
5
It chose me/a calling
3
The outdoors are more effective for the work done
3
Desired career change/improvement
2
Prefer non-traditional work environment, doesn’t feel like
work
2
Provide world-class outdoor experiences
1
Pay rate
1
Personal well-being and Source of personal and professional growth and learning
12
life experience reasons Personal experiences in early life
8
Personal mentors
2
Influence of outdoor related academic program
2
Learning about own relationships with self, others, nature
1
Spiritually connected when out-of-doors
1
Attracted to a way of being
1
Healthy active lifestyle
1
Fosters personal opportunities for stewardship
1
Philosophical/
Being outside/in nature is therapeutic
3
theoretical perspectives Experiential education and AE are important, effective,
and serve as personal growth catalysts
3
80
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 3
Relational Motives for Working as an Outdoor Leader
Self
Fostering/facilitating
growth in others
Creating opportunities for
person reflection
Empowering others, assist
decision making choices
Increase self-efficacy
Foster lifetime of physical
activity
Fostering Relationships
With:
Rate
Community
Rate
Nature
Rate
Work and/or
Connect people to
13 connecting with
10 nature for
8
people (nonspecific)
conservation reasons
2
Developing resilient
communities
1
Connect people to
nature (nonspecific)
4
Connect people to
2
nature for human
4
well-being
1
Provide access to
nature
3
1
Connecting people to
God in Creation
1
Survey respondents were asked to define outdoor leadership by selecting one of seven
provided definitions. Six definitions were culled from adventure programming literature plus
one crafted by the author. (Refer to question 22 in the appendix for a listing of all seven
provided leadership definitions.) A combination of two definitions captured nearly 70% of total
selections, each garnering 31 selections (33.7%). None of the remaining five definitions
individually garnered more than nine percent. The first definition read, “Outdoor leadership
involves ‘purposefully taking individuals/groups into the outdoors for: recreation or education;
teaching skills; problem-solving; ensuring group/individual safety; judgment making; and
facilitating the philosophical ethical, and aesthetic growth of participants’” (Ewert, as cited in
Hayashi & Ewert, 2006, p. 222). The author’s definition read, “Outdoor leadership involves
fostering relationships within participants, between participants, and between participants and the
natural world through the deliberate use of activities and guided by a process of personal
reflection.” When looking at outdoor leadership definitions based on whether participants had
81
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
studied psychology academically, differences appear. Forty-two percent of respondents who had
studied psychology selected the author’s relationship-based definition, compared to only 20% for
non-psychology educated respondents. Ewert’s definition was selected only 26.3% by
psychology trained respondents, but 45.7% of non-trained leaders selected his definition. Though
these differences exist, descriptive statistics do not permit an analysis to determine if this
difference is statistically significant. The author realizes this is a limitation of this study and
suggests exploring these variances in future research.
Decision-Making Influences
Participants were asked to rank in order of importance five factors that influence outdoor
leaders’ decision-making processes, from most important (Rank 1) to least (Rank 5). Rankings
of categories are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Ranking of Factors Affecting Outdoor Leaders’ Decision-Making Processes
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rank
1
Rank
2
Rank
3
Rank
4
Rank
5
Safety/risk
management
Situation/context
Program's
mission
Therapeutic
factors/needs
of
participants
Personal
mission
Outdoor leaders were asked about on-the-job training (OTJ). Leaders selected amongst
18 training subjects, which are ranked in descending order (Table 4).
82
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 4
Employer Provided Training
% of
Content/Subject
% of
Content/Subject Matter Rate Respondents
Matter
Rate Respondents
Technical skills
64
69.6 Rituals/ceremonies 28
30.4
Group dynamics
63
68.5 Traditional/primitive 26
28.3
skills
Leadership
63
68.5 Self-efficacy
23
25.0
Communication
54
58.7 Environmental
22
23.9
philosophy
Group development
54
58.7 Psychology
20
21.7
Personal development
51
55.4 Motivational
15
16.3
interviewing
Cultural sensitivity
44
47.8 None of the above 11
12.0
Environmental ethics
44
47.8 Ecopsychology
10
10.9
Rapport/trust development 44
47.8 Not applicable
2
2.2
Personal ethics/values
33
35.9
Characteristics of Outdoor Program Participants
Respondents were asked about the mental health and life experiences of the participants
they lead (Table 5). Nineteen conditions were listed as possible selections, plus respondents
could identify additional conditions.
83
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 5
Mental Health and Life Issues of Outdoor Program Participants
Condition or Issue Rate
ADHD
71
Depression
64
Anxiety disorders
58
Drug and alcohol issues 48
Involved in juvenile or 45
criminal justice system
Marginalized population 41
Eating disorder
41
Taking psychiatric
40
medications
Traumatic experiences 38
(other than physical or
sexual)
Physical or sexual abuse 37
Autism spectrum
36
disorders
% of
Respondents
77.2
69.6
63.0
52.2
48.9
44.6
44.6
43.5
41.3
40.2
39.1
Condition or Issue
Developmental
challenges
Self-harm/mutilation
Conduct disorder
Mood disorder (other
than depression)
Physically disabled
Veterans
Personality disorder
Psychotic disorder
Unsure
Not applicable
Educationally at risk
(respondent category)
% of
Rate Respondents
35
38.0
34
37.0
33
35.8
32
34.8
30
32.6
22
23.9
18
19.6
15
16.3
10
10.9
8
8.7
1
1.2
Participant Needs: Motivational and Relational
Respondents were asked several questions exploring their beliefs about the perceived
needs of the people they lead out of doors. First they were asked if they believed allowing
outdoor trip participants time for introspection was important. A five-point Likert scale was
used; answers ranged from definitely not important to very important. Sixty-eight respondents
(73.9%) believe that introspective time in the outdoors is very important. Twenty-two (23.9%)
believe it is important, while only two (2.2%), remain neutral.
Outdoor leaders were polled about their perceptions of the relational needs of their
participants. The survey asked respondents to rank the need for relationships with self,
community and nature. Intrapersonal relationships were believed to be the greatest need (58
respondents, 63.0%), followed by relationship with community (43 respondents, 46.7%), while
84
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
relationships with nature was believed to be the least important (58 respondents, 63.0%). This
data represents the highest selection rate per rank.
Respondents were also asked to rank six needs that are important for people:
achievement, autonomy/freedom, fun, self-esteem/competency, service, and survival/
physiological needs. These needs are elements of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (1943) and
Glasser’s Choice Theory (1998); both theories speculate about influences to human motivations
(Figure 2).
Figure 2 Assumed Motivational Needs of Participants in Outdoor Programming
60
50
Achievement
40
Autonomy/freedom
30
Service
Fun
20
Self-‐esteem/competency
Survival/physiological
10
0
Rank
1
Rank
2
Rank
3
Rank
4
Rank
5
Rank
6
Relational Leadership
Therapeutic Alliance
Respondents were asked, “What is the strongest predictor (element of therapy) of positive
psychotherapy outcomes?” There was a binary answer choice, where respondents could select “I
don’t know” or provide an answer. Single responses that included multiple answers were
separated by content. Answers were coded as correct (i.e. therapeutic alliance/relationship
85
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
between client and therapist), or incorrect. Fifty-four respondents (58.7%) indicated they did not
know. Of the 38 (41.3%) who answered assuming they knew the most influential factor to
successful therapy, only seven identified therapeutic alliance. This means that only 7.6% of all
survey takers are aware of the paramount importance of the therapeutic relationship in
determining successful therapy outcomes. The most commonly stated incorrect beliefs involved
the willingness and motivation for personal change (7), followed by personal readiness (2),
participant involvement (2), and a supportive environment post therapy (2).
One of the few questions that respondents could skip asked respondents to define the
psychotherapy terms transference and countertransference. Sixty respondents (65.2% of total
respondents) believed they could define transference. Answers were sorted into three categories:
correct, partially correct, or incorrect. Twelve of the 60 responses (20.0% of respondents
answering question, 13.0% of all 92 survey takers) were coded as correct if the respondent
described the pattern of transferring feelings about someone in their past life to either a therapist
or instructor/leader (i.e. a person in which there is a positional power hierarchy difference). An
example coded as correct was: “To place feelings or emotions, normally directed toward a
person or type of person, onto a leader or therapist.” Sixteen partially correct answers (26.7% of
submitted answers) referenced the transfer of feelings for one person to another, but were non-
specific, such as “transferring feelings about one thing or person onto another.” Thirty responses
(50.0%) were coded as incorrect. A majority of incorrect answers (86.2%) referred to the
experiential education concept of transfer of learning, exemplified by this answer: “Transferring
new knowledge or skills from one context to another.” Another incorrect example is:
“displacing emotional issues of self on another.” Fewer respondents were familiar with the
concept of countertransference. Only 23 respondents (25.0%) submitted codable definitions,
86
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
nine of which were correct (39.1% answering question, 9.8% of total survey takers). The correct
definition was exemplified by the response, “A therapist projects a person or feelings onto a
client.” Ten answers (43.5%) received partial credit, for answers such as, “when a leader puts
their values/judgment on a participant.” Lastly, five definitions were coded incorrect (21.7%),
such as, “two people taking on each other’s feelings/issues.”
Professional boundaries.
Outdoor leaders were asked to identify three boundaries they are mindful of when
working with participants. The open-ended question, which allowed subjective interpretations of
the term “boundaries,” generated numerous responses (59 total) that were either difficult to code
or too obscure to ascertain meaning or intent. Codable data is found in Table 6.
Table 6
Work Related Boundaries Outdoor Leaders are Mindful of
Major Category
Rate
Subcategory
Rate
General
22
Physical
51
Personal space
Touch
14
10
Sexual
5
Personal disclosure or inquiry
26
Emotional
18
General
12
Safety
14 Physical only
1
Physical and emotional
1
Professional
13
relationships/professionalism
Confidentiality
7
Appropriate depth and topics of
6
conversation
Culture
5
Personal
4
Respect
4
Risk related
4
Language usage
3
Triggers
3
Gender
2
Ethical
2
87
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
There may be some overlap of implied meaning between the categories “personal,” and
“personal disclosure or inquiry.” Due to the nature of brief responses, respondent meaning might
have been inadvertently miscategorized. Examples of identified boundaries that were unclear
were all referenced only once, except program structure, which was referenced twice. Examples
of responses difficult to interpret include, education level, “being in thirds,” parental, and
dependence among others.
Emotional disclosure.
Regarding outdoor leaders showing emotion in front of participants, 83 respondents
(90.2%) believe it is appropriate for outdoor leaders to show their emotions. Only one
respondent (1.1%) thought it was inappropriate for outdoor leaders to show emotions to their
participants, while eight respondents (8.7%) were unsure.
Managing Acting Out Participants
Outdoor leaders were asked how they would address the situation of an isolating
participant in a group they led. Eighty-nine respondents provided categorizable answers. Two
dominant interventions were identified. Fifty-seven outdoor leaders (62.0%) stated they would
inquire about the isolation; however, responses varied in specifics. Some leaders specified they
would talk to the isolating participant one-on-one, some would identify their reasons for
isolating, help problem-solve issues, determine if needs were being met, and some indicated they
would co-create an action plan. The second dominant intervention was to utilize interpersonal
relationships and the group dynamic to address isolation. Forty-nine respondents (53.3%)
indicated they would use this approach. Interventions mentioned included peer encouragement,
creating group inclusivity or opportunities for an isolating participant to contribute to their group
and therefore feel of value, or discussing isolation with group. Five survey respondents stated
88
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
they would allow alone time. Four respondents specifically stated they would intentionally
develop rapport and a therapeutic alliance.
Respondents were asked when they would refer a participant to a professional therapist.
The most often cited motive involved potential harm to self or others (25, plus 6 respondents
who only identified harm to self). Sixteen respondents indicated they would refer a participant to
a therapist when the issues exceeded their scope of training or practice, eight would refer if they
suspected or if abuse was disclosed, another eight indicated that general (unspecified) mental
issues would initiate a referral, seven would refer if a participant’s behavior negatively affected
the group (process, dynamics, or safety), five respondents indicated they would not make a
referral as it is beyond the scope of their responsibilities, while two indicated they would address
concerns with a supervisor or participant guardian. Four respondents indicated if either the
therapy or therapeutic work was ineffective. Specific mental health conditions were mentioned
as a reason for making a referral: depression (5), violence/aggression (4), suicide ideation (2),
drug use/abuse (2), self-destructive behavior (2), and an eating disorder. Personality disorders,
psychotic disorders, need for coping skills, and to initiate personal change were all identified
once. Four respondents would make a referral based on participant initiation. Two respondents
were unsure about when they would make a referral, and another two (both therapists) indicated
they would make a referral due to countertransference.
Relationship with Self
Outdoor leaders were asked about their knowledge regarding two self-concept
psychological constructs pertinent to outdoor leadership: self-efficacy and locus of control.
Self-efficacy.
89
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Respondents were asked two questions about self-efficacy. The first asked to select the
best definition among four provided definitions or acknowledge they lack term familiarity.
Twelve individuals (13.0%) admitted to not knowing the definition. The most accurate
definition provided read, “self-efficacy describes one’s perception of their capabilities.” Forty-
three people (46.7%) selected this definition. The next most selected response, “self-efficacy
describes personal effectiveness,” was selected by 21 people (22.8%). When analyzing
responses based on whether respondents had studied psychology academically, the results are
insignificantly different. Only 49% of the 57 respondents who have studied psychology selected
the best definition of self-efficacy. Another question asked respondents to select from among
eight sequences ranking the four factors that influence self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997) from most
to least influential: past mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, physiological arousal, and
verbal persuasion. Results indicate 56 respondents (62.9%) selected one of two sequences that
correctly listed past performance accomplishments as the most influential of the four factors.
The intent of this question was to have respondents select the correct sequence of influential
power each factor possessed. Upon subsequent research, it was determined that this question
was poorly constructed, as there is no consistent ranking of factors beyond past mastery.
However, in her research on education and self-efficacy, E.L. Usher (personal communication,
May 7, 2013) has found the influence of each source varies upon the individual and contextual
situation in which people evaluate their capabilities.
Locus of control.
The question about locus of control (LOC) asked respondents to select between three
provided definitions, or acknowledge they did not know what LOC was. Nineteen respondents
(20.7%) were unfamiliar with LOC. Fifty-one respondents (55.4%) selected the most accurate
90
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
locus of control definition: “locus of control describes if a person believes they can influence
events in their life.” Nineteen people (21.7%) believe LOC “describes influences for how one
makes decisions.” The familiarity of locus of control varied minimally between the 57
respondents who have studied psychology academically (54.4% selected the correct answer), and
the 35 who have not (51.4% selected the correct answer).
Interpersonal Relationships
Respondents were asked to subjectively describe emotional safety. Three dominant
categories emerged from 91 categorized responses. The most often referenced description of
emotional safety was typified by safe self-expression (25 responses), which was distinguished
from safe emotional expression (20 responses). Self-expression includes thoughts, ideas, and
physical expression in addition to emotional expression, whereas responses categorized as safe
emotional expression only made reference to emotions. Another 20 responses described group
inclusivity and support as indicative of emotional safety. Responses included in this category
were language use boundaries, mutual respect, anti-bullying management practices, non-judging
or coercive social environment, and participation encouragement. Another category was
respectful/emotionally non-injurious. Seventeen responses were included in this category, such
as “psychological well-being,” respect and openness, and participants’ emotional needs being
met. Eleven responses described emotional safety as indicated by participants feeling
comfortable and/or staying within their comfort zones.
A related question asked how leaders create safe environments for their participants.
Eighty-five respondents provided categorizable responses. Safety embodied in planning,
preparation, and teaching was indicated in 11 responses. Specific practices included familiarity
with intake forms, educating participants about potential risks, and orienting participants to the
91
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
physical environment. Eleven respondents described modeling desired behavior as a way to
create a safe environment. Risk management practices were identified by 29 respondents; from
following employer policies, re-conning activity areas, challenge-by-choice, to emphasizing
safety. The most popular way outdoor leaders create a safe environment is through shaping and
establishing group culture. Forty-one respondents identified practices related to this, including
setting tone, norms, and boundaries, creating group inclusivity, fostering respect for one another,
being supportive and facilitating an open group culture, conducting check-ins with participants,
and open communication. Lastly, eight survey respondents specifically identified relationship
development, which involves rapport development, processing experiences, ongoing check-ins
and acceptance.
Relationship with Nature
Nearly all outdoor leaders (84 respondents, 91.3%) claimed to actively facilitate
relationships between outdoor program participants and nature. Those who do were asked to
elaborate on how this was accomplished. Coded results are shown in Table 7.
92
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 7
How Outdoor Leaders Facilitate Relationships Between Participants and the Natural
Environment
Rate
Method
Example
Conceptual methods
23
Environmental education/natural
history
Education on environmental awareness,
impacts, relationships
16
Solo/solitude experiences
11
Leave No Trace
Use Leave No Trace to foster respect for
nature
10
Observational/awareness related
Nature sit spot, have participants get
activities
close to ground, or use magnifying
glasses
9
Journaling/reflection activities
Readings, specific writing exercises,
provide time for quiet reflection
5
Hiking
Silent walks, solo hikes
Reference to specific activities
13
Specific activities (not otherwise
Photography, teaching natural
categorized)
consequences, tasting wild edibles, using
metaphors, art in nature, teaching
survival skills, bow drill fires
12
Non-specific lessons or activities
Team building on ropes course, nature
specific meditation activities
Nature-based psychological theories.
Survey respondents were asked about specific psychology disciplines and theories and
benefits related to working outdoors. Fifty-three respondents (57.6%) indicated familiarity with
the concept of ecopsychology. This question was not refined enough to ascertain depth of
understanding. For those acknowledging familiarity, the question did allow respondents to
elaborate on their responses. Answers varied from mere term familiarity, several acknowledged
in-depth academic training, and several respondents stated their employer’s programs are based
upon ecopsychology. A separate question asked if human health and well-being are related to
the integrity and health of the natural environment. Eighty-seven respondents (94.6%) agreed,
two disagreed (2.2%), and three were unsure (3.3%). This data indicates that regardless of a
93
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
theoretical or conceptual understand of ecopsychology, the vast majority of outdoor leaders
believe a fundamental tenant of ecopsychology. Two other concepts related to ecopsychology
were assessed for understanding. Significantly fewer respondents were familiar with the
biophilia hypothesis and conservation psychology. Only 26 responding outdoor leaders (28.3%)
were familiar with the biophilia hypothesis. Elaborated responses varied from vague
understanding, to accurate descriptions of Wilson’s (1984) hypothesis. Even fewer respondents,
13 respondents (14.1%), were familiar with the discipline of conservation psychology.
Benefits of nature.
One survey question asked how humans benefit through contact with the natural world.
Respondents were asked to list no more than three benefits. Eighty-two respondents shared what
they believe are the benefits of being in nature. Responses were textually categorized based on
themes (Table 8). Because individuals identified one or more benefits, numbers indicate the
number of times a benefit was indicated, not the number of different respondents.
Table 8
Assumed Human Benefits From Exposure/Immersion in Nature
Category
Rate
Category
Rate
Physical fitness related
28 Spirituality
7
Personal insight/growth
27 Personal accomplishment
6
Connection with something larger than self 22 Respect for natural world
6
Social benefits
16 Increased creativity
5
Stress reduction
14 Opportunities for learning
4
Reduced mental distractions/mental clarity 12 Mindfulness related/being present 4
Relaxation/calming effect
10 Fights anxiety
4
Personal reflection
9 Awe inspiring
3
Encourages conservation attitudes
7 Fights depression
3
General emotional benefits
7 Improves ADHD
1
94
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
When recategorizing the data in Table 8 into the tripartite model of fostering relationships, 36
responses referenced intrapersonal development, 16 responses indicated social benefits, and 35
responses referenced connecting with nature.
Techniques of Relational Leaders
Trust and rapport development.
Trust within relationships is essential to positive outcomes and healthy interpersonal
dynamics. The survey provided 34 factors that may contribute to trust development, and
respondents were asked to select what they believe are the 10 most important factors from this
list that foster participant trust in their leaders (Table 9). Results for all 34 traits are listed in
descending order.
Table 9
The Most Important Traits Fostering Trust in Outdoor Leaders
Trait
Effective communicator
Authenticity
Competency
Patience
Non-judgmental
Accepting
Good listener
Compassionate
Genuineness
Honesty
Intelligence/knowledgeable
Encouraging
Self-aware
Calmness
Technical abilities
Empathetic
Positivity
Rate
%
61 66.3
54 58.7
52 56.5
50 54.3
44 47.8
44 47.8
43 46.7
41 44.6
39 42.4
36 39.1
35 38.0
32 34.8
32 34.8
31 33.7
31 33.7
30 32.6
30 32.6
Trait
Rate %
Flexibility
29 31.5
Fun/entertaining
28 30.4
Fairness
23 25.0
Inspiring
23 25.0
Transparent intentions
21 22.8
Maturity
18 19.6
Unconditional positive
regard
16 17.4
Vulnerability
14 15.2
Inquisitive
13 14.1
Likeability
13 14.1
Appropriate self-expression 8 8.7
Non-defensive
8 8.7
Nurturing
8 8.7
Tolerant
8 8.7
Equanimity
3 3.3
Benevolence
1 1.1
Similar values/lifestyle
1 1.1
95
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Respondents could also identify traits that foster trust that were not listed. The following themes
were only referenced once: selflessness, willingness to participate, esprit de corps, humor,
anticipate participant needs, firm and consistent, adaptability, and one respondent wrote “all of
the above.”
Respondents were asked to select three strategies, from a list of seven, they use most
often to develop rapport with others. The ranking order of their selections are in Table 10.
Table 10
Rapport Development Strategies Used by Outdoor Leaders
Strategy
Effective communication
Demonstrate Respect
Positive support and
encouragement
Use of humor
Rate %
Strategy
67 72.8 Model imperfection/humanness
63 68.5 Share personal information
63
68.5
Demonstrate technical skills and
abilities
37 40.2 Share limits of confidentiality
Rate %
16 17.4
14 15.2
13 14.1
3 3.3
Respondents also identified additional strategies they use. These include getting participants to
talk about themselves, demonstrating interest in participants, showing trust in others,
demonstrating willingness to participate, demonstrating authenticity, curiosity, and conducting
end-of-day debriefs.
Feedback strategies.
Outdoor leaders were asked about their feedback giving strategies. Nine feedback
strategies for giving feedback to others were provided. Respondents were asked to select the
three strategies they most use (Table 11).
96
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 11
Feedback Strategies Used by Outdoor Leaders
Strategy
Non-judgmental (based on observation)
Pairing supportive with critical feedback
Address issues person can change
Provide feedback 1-on-1, not in group setting
As soon as possible after incident
Frequent, or ongoing nature
Considerate
Accurate
Non-coercive
Response Rate
48
46
44
42
26
25
23
16
6
% of Leaders
52.2
50.0
47.8
45.7
28.3
27.2
25.0
17.4
6.5
Ceremonies and rituals.
Sixty-six outdoor leaders (72.0%) created or facilitated rituals or ceremonies for their
participants. Their answers are categorized and described in Table 12.
97
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 12
Types of Ceremonies and Rituals Outdoor Leaders Facilitate
Category
Rate
Examples
Rituals as part of
• Many ropes course elements are fairly ritualized
(pamper pole especially), but outside of that context,
programming and/or daily
no.
routine
39
• Every night of our program we have council fire
which has a variety of different ceremonial aspects
• feedback circles have a specific progression and are a
type of ritual.
Solo experiences/
rites of passage
• Our program is based upon rites of passage work.
15
There is also a culminating Solo Journey that
symbolizes the rite of passage into adulthood.
• I now do a bracelet ceremony at the conclusion of our
26 day leadership trips to serve as a reflection and
debrief technique.
Closing/graduation
13
• Our last day of camp we have a closing ceremony and
spread positive energy among the campers before
they return home, they pass compliments to each
other as well as receiving them from staff too.
Program transition/level
progression
9
• Between phases students move through a ceremonial
rite of passage into the next phase
• On longer courses every phase completion is marked
by a large intentional ceremony marking our
achievement and our challenges to come
• A variety of rituals to mark growth areas, milestones,
emotional moments, etc.
Honor participant insight,
growth, and skill
5
• A student comes to a realization about something in
their life that is important to them. Ritual marks a
acquisition
special moment and helps participants to have an
anchor this moment and carry it for themselves in the
future.
Season related
3
• Moon, fires, seasonal changes
Note: Programming based rituals include: miscellaneous 11, campfires 5, meals 5, bead ceremonies 4, talking circles 4, rose, bud,
thorn 3, sweats 3 make participants comfortable 2, stretching 2.
In addition to categorizing rituals by description, rituals were also examined through the tripartite
relational framework referenced throughout this thesis (Table 13).
98
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 13
Rituals Fostering Relationship in Three Domains
Type of
relationship Rate
Intrapersonal 23
Interpersonal 19
Survey Examples
• When I worked wilderness therapy, we had ‘hallowed ground’
ceremonies where we incorporated Native American traditions
into our therapy. We also had heart pouches that we used as a
reflection and reward system for our weeks.
• Ceremonies of initiation and inclusion.
• We have an opening ceremony at camp each year and we also
facilitate a counsel once each surf camp session. It’s an
opportunity for girls to connect in more meaningful ways and
share important life lessons together.
With nature 17
• Have participants write letters to nature
Note. Solo experiences, due to their multi-relational dynamics, are included in both intrapersonal and with nature relationship rate
numbers. Rituals involving graduation or closing ceremonies are included in interpersonal relationships.
Use of metaphors.
Respondents were asked, “Do you use metaphors involving the natural world with your
participants?” Twelve respondents (13.0%) said they do not, eight respondents (8.7%) answered
that they did not understand the question, while 71 outdoor leaders (78.3%) acknowledged using
nature-based metaphors with their participants. Outdoor leaders who answered yes were asked
to elaborate. Most descriptions comprise two categories: nature based metaphors (referenced 21
times) and activity based metaphors (referenced 12 times). Another five respondents mentioned
that they cater their metaphors specifically to their participants, and two mentioned metaphors
referencing mythology and stories.
99
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The intent of this Internet-based survey was to ascertain working outdoor leaders’
knowledge and skills that are pertinent to fostering outdoor program participant well-being, and
present these via a descriptive (non-analytic) methodology. This was accomplished through
asking outdoor leaders about their philosophies, beliefs, knowledge, and skills. The summation
of these factors manifest directly in their outdoor leadership practices. Several characteristics of
survey respondents may help interpret the findings of this survey. Table 1 is a general overview
of respondent characteristics. Table 14 shows the years of experience of both working outdoors
(with no supervisory responsibilities) and as a supervisor or training.
Table 14
Outdoor Leadership Experience
Years of Experience
1-1.5
1.5-3
3-5
5+
Note. Two respondents did not provide data.
As an outdoor leader
33
19
13
26
As a supervisory
33
8
10
22
The average age of respondents was 33.5. Nearly all the respondents identified their race as
white (95.7%). Participants are quite educated with 88% of respondents possessing a bachelor’s
degree, and 41% possessing a master’s degree (refer to Table 15 for more detailed information).
Fifty-eight percent of respondents describe their employer’s program as adventure education,
55% as education, 52% as recreation, 47% as leadership education, 22% as therapeutic, 13% as
wilderness therapy, and 9% as adventure therapy. Nearly three quarters of respondents have
studied biology or a related field, 60% have studied outdoor leadership, and 62% have studied
psychology or a related field. Sixty-three percent of respondents work full time, and most either
work at day or weeklong programs.
100
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Outdoor Leadership
Why People Work as Outdoor Leaders
Leadership involves intention, and leaders’ intentions are driven by their values,
knowledge, and awareness. All of these influences inform practice. Understanding the reasons
individuals work as outdoor leaders is informative as to their beliefs and values, desired
outcomes for outdoor program participants, and how these may manifest in a leader’s method of
decision-making. Research has demonstrated that outdoor leaders influence the participants they
lead, as well as programming outcomes.
Identifying specific values of outdoor leaders is beyond the scope of this thesis, but some
fundamental values of outdoor leaders are explored when examining why people work as
outdoor leaders (Table 2). Survey respondents provided many reasons for why they work as
outdoor leaders. Some reasons are self-oriented, such as leaders simply enjoying the outdoors,
or the outdoors being a good professional fit, as well as a more preferable career. Other reasons
are more altruistic in nature. In examining outdoor leaders’ rationales through the tripartite
relational leadership lens referenced in this thesis, leaders shared motives supporting
intrapersonal, interpersonal, and human-nature relationship development.
Leaders identified their desires to foster, facilitate, and witness growth in others, enjoying
working with and connecting to others, and providing access and connecting people to nature.
For example, respondents’ motives for leading people outdoors included encouraging participant
stewardship and conservation values, fostering personal growth, and connecting people.
Leaders’ motives for working outdoors are intrinsic to what they perceive outdoor leadership
entails, and what they believe outdoor leaders do.
What is Outdoor Leadership?
101
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
A critical aspect of outdoor leadership are the assumptions leaders make about their role
and responsibilities. How do they define their job and what expectations do they have of
themselves? The two most selected definitions of outdoor leadership explicitly describe a goal
of contributing to the personal growth of participants. Ewert (as cited in Hayashi & Ewert, 2006)
mentions “facilitating the philosophical, ethical, and aesthetic growth of participants,” while the
author’s definition described fostering relationships across the three domains discussed in the
tripartite relational model. Interestingly, definitions that described leadership as a process of
influence or based on an ethic of care garnered less than 6% selection individually, and
definitions that mentioned safety or risk management were selected by fewer than 8% of survey
respondents. Underlying outdoor leaders’ practices is their rationale for working as a leader, as
well as leaders’ personal understanding of the scope and practice of outdoor leadership. These
two influences affect leaders’ decision-making processes.
This study advocates reframing outdoor leadership practice through a tripartite relational
perspective. If relationships are situated as the primary focus of outdoor leadership, then
participants can experience greater levels of well-being through a transformational leadership
experience. This belief is reinforced by a significant number of survey respondents who also
believe that outdoor leadership is a relationally driven occupation. In fact 33.7% of sampled
outdoor leaders agreed with the author’s definition of outdoor leadership: “Outdoor leadership
involves fostering relationships within participants, between participants, and between
participants and the natural world through the deliberate use of activities and guided by a process
of personal reflection.” The other definition also selected by 33.7% of respondents, attributed to
Ewert (as cited in Hayashi & Ewert, 2006), references participant growth. This is a significant
102
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
finding, as it moves beyond what leaders do (task oriented perspective) to how they do it
(transformatively).
Graham (1997) recommended leaders find opportunities to “develop caring relationships
with one another” (p. 73). However, this emphasis is not well-supported by this survey,
considering less than 6% of outdoor leaders define outdoor leadership as involving an ethic of
care.
Influences to Decision-Making
Examining influences to leadership practice, respondents were asked about the influences
affecting their decision-making processes (Figure 1). Respondents were asked to rank five
factors that influence their decision-making processes as outdoor leaders: situation/context,
personal mission or intention, their program’s mission/curricula, safety/risk management, and
therapeutic factors and needs of participants. These terms were not explained further, thus
interpretation of these ranking factors may not be consistent among survey respondents. The
reason for exploring decision-making influences was to see how or if leaders’ intentions, or their
operational definitions of outdoor leadership, influence their decision-making processes.
Kosseff (2010) wrote, “at its simplest, leadership can be thought of as the activity of
influencing others in order to set and achieve group objectives” (p. 84). But don’t leaders have
agendas? Kosseff’s explanation of leadership seems inadequate. Decision-making and judgment
are frequently emphasized as outdoor leadership skills and competencies; however, in discussing
these skills the intentions and influences guiding leaders’ decision-making and judgment
processes are typically not addressed. For example, Martin et al. (2006) include decision-making
and judgment as one of eight outdoor leadership competencies. What is striking is that there is
not a single mention of the word “intention.” Rather Martin et al.’s (2006) discussion of
103
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
decision-making is focused on desired outcomes and variables, which is at odds with their
assertion that leadership is both intentional and interactional. There is always a potential
disconnect between a leader’s intention and actual outcomes. Furthermore, when decision-
making models are situationally influenced, such as conditional outdoor leadership theory (Priest
& Chase, 1989), there is no acknowledgement that a leader’s intention is foundational to each
situation, and therefore decision-making is in fact contingent on intentions. One striking finding
was that leaders’ personal mission was ranked the least influential factor, by 72.0% of
respondents. This seems in discord with the reasons individuals work as outdoor leaders. It is
the author’s assertion that outdoor leaders’ motives for working outdoors influences decision-
making processes, potentially at a subconscious level.
Risk-management as primary influence.
Knowing that only eight respondents (8.7%) selected a definition of outdoor leadership
that explicitly references risk management (physical and emotional), and that not a single motive
for working as an outdoor leader explicitly identified keeping people safe or minimizing risk, it
is noteworthy that safety and risk management are the greatest influences to outdoor leaders’
decision-making processes. Risk management is a huge responsibility of outdoor leaders;
however, this author contends that leadership begins with participants, and that effective risk
management requires an understanding of participants’ therapeutic needs. Furthermore, it is the
participants’ needs that inform situational contexts. How can one manage emotional risk without
comprehending an individual’s mental state or history, or therapeutic and relational needs?
Similarly, if 33.7% of respondents believe that outdoor leadership involves the facilitation of
relationships, which are necessary according to the belongingness hypothesis, it seems odd that
the therapeutic needs of participants is ranked lower than safety and risk management and
104
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
situational contexts. This may be analogous to the chicken and the egg conundrum, which came
first, the chicken or the egg? Considering influences to decision-making, do therapeutic factors
dictate a situational context, or do situations dictate therapeutic factors?
Need for therapeutic emphasis in decision-making.
Martin et al. (2006) described decision-making and judgment as a core competency, and
describe several decision-making models. However, throughout their discussion, they do not
identify participant well-being as a major justification for making decisions. When discussing
decision-making models, NOLS (Gookin & Leach, 2009) also omits any reference to why
decisions are made. It appears an emphasis on leadership skills and competencies development
has sidetracked leadership training, and neglects to acknowledge human well-being as a central
factor in outdoor leadership facilitation.
When why they work as outdoor leaders, respondents identified connecting people to
nature and fostering participant personal growth as reasons. It seems logical then, that these
motivations should and do influence outdoor leaders’ decision making processes, albeit,
subconsciously. Therapeutic factors were ranked as the third strongest influence to outdoor
leadership, after risk management and situational factors. There appears to be a discrepancy
between outdoor leaders motives for leading others outdoors and a knowledge base that would
increase their ability to fulfill their leadership intentions. The author’s research is rooted in
ecopsychology and the belongingness hypothesis. Both of these articulate the human need for
relationships with nature and with other people. Assuming these needs are essential, then should
not the primary influence guiding decision-making be the assessment of therapeutic factors and
participant needs? This is particularly relevant when looking at Table 5, which lists the
presumed mental health and life experiences of outdoor program participants. A strikingly high
105
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
percentage of participants exhibit a variety of mental health conditions or have had significant
life experiences that affect how they interact in the world. These experiences or conditions
should inform effective risk management practices (which include emotional elements).
Supporting the author's advocacy for decision-making based upon therapeutic factors, Burke et
al. (2012) asked, do outdoor programs emphasis decision-making based on programmatic
policies or care for participants?
Factors Influencing Relationship Development
Therapeutic alliance.
It is clear from multiple studies of psychotherapy relationships that the quality of the
relationship between therapist and client is the major influence upon positive therapeutic
outcomes (Homrich, 2009; Flückiger et al., 2011), yet less than 10% of outdoor leaders knew
this. Therapeutic alliance is highlighted in this thesis because it serves as a reminder of how
important relationships are to well-being and personal growth, as well as being an important
element in professional relationships. Gass et al. (2012) identified warmth, caring and openness
as being critical characteristics for developing therapeutic alliance. These characteristics are
inherent in a relationally oriented leadership approach. Alliance is also forged through
transparency and honesty. In fact, Outward Bound believes this approach creates a “culture of
sharing and emotional risk taking” (Raynolds, 2007, p. 78). Nearly all outdoor leaders believe it
is appropriate to express emotions. This aligns with Dasborough and Ashkanasy’s (2002)
assertion that leadership is inherently emotional, where a leader’s display of emotions evokes
emotional reactions of others. This is particularly relevant in transformational leadership where
inspirational motivation is used to encourage followers.
106
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
In contrast to the author’s assertion that therapeutic alliance should be central to outdoor
leadership, Harper (2008) questions the applicability of therapeutic alliance to outdoor leaders.
Harper writes, “the majority of alliance literature is from community and institutional treatment
settings, its relationship to wilderness treatment is questionable” (p. 49). Harper (2008) found
that adolescent outcomes in wilderness treatment were not predicted by the quality of therapeutic
alliance (which did not distinguish between therapists and paraprofessionals). Harper and this
author both believe the issue of therapeutic alliance between participants and non-clinically
trained outdoor leaders is a topic for future research.
Transference and countertransference.
This thesis research asked outdoor leaders about their familiarity with two related
relational concepts foundational to psychotherapy training and professional relationships:
transference and countertransference. This optional question was asked to ascertain outdoor
leaders awareness of how participant behaviors, and their own, can be triggered and rooted in
past relational experiences-particularly in hierarchical relationships. Transference was correctly
explained by 13% of all 92 respondents, while only 10% of survey respondents were familiar
with the psychotherapy term countertransference. Responses indicated that many respondents
were unclear or unable to distinguish between the psychotherapeutic concept of transference and
the adventure education term transfer, or transfer of learning. It is possible that knowledge of the
psychotherapy definition of transference may better prepare therapeutic outdoor leaders by
providing an understanding of the origins and patterns of interpersonal behaviors. It appears that
referring to learning experiences specifically as “transfer of learning” could clarify that this
concept is educational in nature, and allow the psychotherapeutic concept of transference to be
included within outdoor leadership writings.
107
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Professional boundaries.
Ringer (1999) stated that effective leaders are able to manage professional boundaries.
An important aspect of leading others is the inherent nature of hierarchical relationships, which
Mitten (1999) believes is sometimes minimized. Relationships entail boundaries, particularly
hierarchical relationships, and respondents were asked to identify work-related boundaries
(Table 6). Five predominant types of boundaries emerged: physical, personal disclosure or
inquiry, emotional, safety, and professionalism/professional relationships.
Looking at the boundaries professional counselors are held to can help identify specific
boundaries pertinent to nurturing well-being in outdoor participants. The 2014 ACA Code of
Ethics cautions therapists about sexual/romantic relationships, avoiding nonprofessional
relationships, and to work within the boundaries of professional competence. Respondents
definitely are mindful of physical, sexual, and touch boundaries, as well as the nature of
professional relationships, including appropriate personal disclosure. Potentially at odds with
personal disclosure, ninety percent of outdoor leaders think it is appropriate for leaders to show
their emotions. When it comes to group management: boundaries involving confidentiality,
conversation topics, acceptable use of language, and culture were identified. Unique to the
outdoor milieu, safety and risk management and the physical abilities of participants were
identified as important boundaries. Appropriate physical challenges is a ethical boundary
identified by Berger (2008). Three leaders identified triggers. Their responses were not detailed
enough to ascertain an exact meaning, but it could be that they are referencing the idea of
transference. A critical component of counselor education is the importance of detachment. A
therapist should not be attached to outcomes and/or behaviors of their clients. Mitten and
Clement (2007) advocated for such detachment in leaders. Over investment in participant
108
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
performance was not identified by any survey respondents as a professional boundary to be
mindful of.
Trust and rapport development.
Shooter, Paisley, and Sibthorp (2010) studied trust development in two different studies,
and concluded “a leaders’ ability and a leader’s character can influence participants’ trust” (p.
201). Furthermore, trust development is a critical component of effective leadership, and is
critical to cooperative and constructive interpersonal relationships (Shooter, Paisley, & Sibthorp,
2010). In this survey, outdoor leaders were asked to select the 10 (from a list of 34 choices)
most important traits fostering trust (Table 9). They selected (in descending order) effective
communication, authenticity, competence, patience, acceptance, non-judgmental, good listener,
compassionate, genuineness, and honesty.
Schumann et al. (2009) found several instructor characteristics that are positively
associated with student learning: patience, knowledgeable, empathy, inspiring, and being
fun/entertaining. Survey results indicate that patience is the fourth most important trait in
fostering trust (54% of respondents), being knowledgeable is 11th (38%), empathy is 16th (32%),
fun/entertaining is 19th (30%), and inspiring 21st (25%). Interestingly, Schumann et al. (2009)
reported that patience has not been mentioned in AE empirical research. Considering patience
was ranked fourth in this survey, the author believes this attribute should be further studied.
Shooter, Paisley, and Sibthorp (2010) found that honesty, calmness in crisis, knowing
itinerary, showing respect, and effective communication were the most positive influences to
developing trust. Their study and this one are unable to be exactly compared due to differences
in language use and factor selection criteria. Despite this fact, some comparisons can still be
made. In this survey, the top five traits (in descending order) selected in this survey were
109
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
effective communication, authenticity, competence, patience, and accepting. The only factor
common to both studies is effective communication. However, two other factors from Shooter et
al. (2010), including honesty, was ranked 10th (39% of respondents selected this as one of the ten
most important traits) while calmness was ranked 14th (34%).
Shooter et al. (2012) found “technical ability was the most influential predictor of trust,
followed by benevolence, interpersonal skills, and integrity” (p. 231). Based on their finding of
the most influential trust factor, they believe outdoor leaders
might consider the value of making overt displays of their technical ability; they might
focus considerable effort on practicing and implementing effective communication skills;
they should treat group members with equity and fairness; and they should make
authentic, outward displays of their investment in the participants’ experiences. (Shooter
et al., 2012, pp. 233-234)
In this survey, 33.7% of respondents believed a leader’s technical abilities inspires participant
trust in them, while only 14.1% of outdoor leaders believe that demonstrating technical
competence is a method for building rapport. It seems prudent that Shooter et al.’s (2012)
findings be strongly promoted in outdoor leadership curriculum.
Contrary to Shooter et al.’s (2012) findings that benevolence is the second most
influential predictor of trust, in this survey this concept was tied for the least influential factor.
This finding may indicate a lack of knowledge regarding factors of therapeutic relationships. For
example, relational concepts intrinsic to person-centered psychotherapy such as benevolence,
equanimity, and unconditional positive regard, were only selected 1.1%, 3.3%, and 17.0%
respectively. This data can be interpreted three different ways. One, the low selection rate may
reflect leaders’ beliefs that these concepts are not important for trust development. Two, outdoor
110
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
leaders may lack knowledge of techniques used in building therapeutic rapport. Or three, the
low response rate may simply indicate outdoor leaders are unfamiliar with these terms.
Sibthorp et al. (2007) found at NOLS that, “rapport with the instructors was a significant
predictor for gains in communication” (p. 13), while Outward Bound asserted that good
communication enables a leader to: develop rapport, establish trust, motivate and inspire, help in
meaning making, convey information, and act up on decisions (Raynolds, 2007). Sixty-one
outdoor leaders (66.3%) identified effective communication as the number one trait that fosters
trust. Additionally, nearly 60% of the employers represented in this survey train outdoor leaders
in communication skills. Relating communication skills to a relational model of outdoor
leadership, Priest and Gass (2005) wrote, effective communication “enhances socialization by
strengthening intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships” (p. 254).
Feedback strategies.
Supporting this thesis’ assertion that leadership is relational and should be oriented
towards participant growth, Claiborn and Goodyear (2005) wrote, “relationship is centrally
important to feedback exchange” (p.213) and that “feedback promotes change through
interpersonal influence” (p. 212). Outdoor leaders were allowed to select their three most used
feedback strategies from a list of nine (See Table 11). The top four strategies were,
observational (non-judgmental), pairing constructive with positive feedback, addressing issues a
person can change, and providing feedback one on one (not in front of a group). Bass and
Riggio (2006) assert that transformational leaders do not publically criticize those they lead.
People are more likely to accept positive than negative feedback. A strategy to use when giving
negative feedback is to pair it with positive feedback; one can either provide positive feedback
before negative feedback, or sandwich negative feedback between two positive feedback pieces
111
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
(Claiborn & Goodyear, 2005). One of the most beneficial outcomes of feedback is on the self-
concept construct of self-efficacy. McKenzie (2003) studied course outcomes of participants
with Outward Bound Western Canada. She found “instructors’ expectations, feedback, and
personalities can increase students’ self-concept, motivation, and interpersonal skills” (p. 18).
According to Propst & Koesler (1998), “Feedback can significantly enhance self-efficacy,
particularly in situations where students are unable to judge their own performance” (p. 322).
Furthermore, “Positive feedback was more important for females and immediate feedback more
important for males in raising levels of short-term self-efficacy” (Propst & Koesler, 1998, p.
342). Noteworthy, and especially relevant to self-concept ideas, “receivers who have high self-
esteem tend to consider positive feedback as more accurate than negative” (p. 214), yet this type
of feedback may be more desirable as a source of growth, and it is not perceived as threatening,
because of their high self-esteem. Additionally, low moods increase the reception of negative
feedback (Claiborn & Goodyear, 2005). This collective research helps highlight the significant
effect feedback can have on participants, and how judicious feedback is a therapeutic process
and tool.
Implications for Practice: Education and Training Needs for Relationally Oriented
Outdoor Leaders
Academic Training
One comparison of the level of education outdoor leaders possess can be made between
this survey and Medina (2001) (Table 15). Medina (2001) surveyed attendees at the 2000
International Conference of the Association of Experiential Education who identified as
“someone who uses indoor and outdoor adventure activities in a variety of settings for the
112
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
purpose of promoting individual growth and group development” (p. 152). Her inclusion criteria
is similar enough to this survey’s that it may be of value to compare results.
Table 15
Education of Outdoor Leaders: Comparing Medina (2001) and McCarty (2014)
Degrees Earned
None
Associates
Bachelor’s
Master’s
Doctorate
Pursuing Degrees
Associates
Bachelor’s
Master’s
Doctorate
Study
Medina (2001) -203 responses McCarty (2014)-92 responses
29.1%
2.2%
1.5%
7.6%
32.5%
88.0%
31.5%
41.3%
5.4%
6.5%
0%
8.8%
8.8%
2.5%
1.1%
12.0%
14.1%
4.3%
Although the survey participants cannot be compared precisely, the results do indicate a
significant increase in education at the Bachelor level of outdoor leaders, with minor increases in
masters and associate degrees. When asked whether leaders have academic training in outdoor
leadership, psychology, and biology and related fields respondents report significant educational
training in these subjects: 60%, 62%, and 73% respectively.
Beringer (2004) asserted that many adventure therapy practitioners are trained in
psychology related disciplines rather than being trained in the environmental sciences. Survey
finding indicate this is not entirely accurate. Reviewing the academic backgrounds of the 92
outdoor leaders in the three domains of psychology, outdoor leadership, and environmental
studies, the majority of survey participants have studied these subjects. A more accurate
assessment of counseling psychology/social work studies appears when examining outdoor
leaders’ achieved or pursued degrees. Twenty-one outdoor leaders (23% of all respondents) are
pursuing or have achieved a degree in counseling fields (most degrees are bachelor’s and
113
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
master’s). Thirteen (14.1%) possess a natural science degree. A more in-depth analysis of the
three highlighted subjects studied academically reveals seven participants (7.6%) studied
leadership and psychology, 13 (14.1%) studied leadership and biology/related fields, 12 (13.0%)
studied psych and biology/related fields, and 32 (35.0%) studied all three subjects. Because the
survey only collected information on whether respondents had studied the three specific subjects
academically, and did not probe the depth of studies, this data should be regarded merely as
exploratory. Other required subject training for outdoor leaders voiced by Raiola (1997)
included communication and group dynamics, and the topic of values including care and respect
for oneself, respect and acceptance of others, and respect for nature. By advocating for this
three-fold values education, he is describing the foci of therapeutic outdoor leadership.
Employer Provided Training
When looking at on the job (OTJ) training for outdoor leaders (Table 4) through the
tripartite relationship model of self, others, and nature, training subjects can be attributed to each
of these domains. Outdoor leaders received the least training in subject matter relevant to
fostering relationships between participants and the natural world. This includes ecopsychology
(11%), environmental philosophy (24%), however nearly half (48%) of leaders are trained in
environmental ethics. Content relevant to working with groups and individuals are some of the
most common OTJ training subjects. Topics relevant to working with groups: group dynamics
(69%), communication (59%), and group development (59%) are commonly taught. Participant
trust in a leader appears to positively influence program outcomes (Shooter, Paisley, & Sibthorp
2009) and yet less than half of outdoor leaders’ (48%) employers train in the area of rapport and
trust development. Training material relevant to fostering participant intrapersonal relationships
was not easily separated into discrete categories. For example, the content of personal
114
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
ethics/values (36%) is applicable to both leaders and participants developing these skills.
Twenty-two percent of outdoor leaders are trained in the broad subject matter of psychology.
Similarly, only 25% of outdoor leaders are trained in self-efficacy. Rituals and ceremonies can
be used to foster relationships in all three domains, yet only 30% of outdoor leaders are on being
trained in this area. Furthermore, professional training should be relevant to issues experienced
by participants. This is a particular concern given the mental health issues exhibited by outdoor
programming participants (Table 5). It is assumed that outdoor programs specifically focused on
mental health issues would dedicate more training time to these topics. However, the high
percentage of participants across WEPs who have mental issues highlights the value and need for
psychology trainings to address current and pervasive outdoor program participant issues.
Data infers that outdoor leaders are receiving notable training in group leadership
knowledge and skills. This, in combination with outdoor leaders acknowledging the value of
interpersonal relationships as a definition of outdoor leadership, indicate outdoor leaders believe
one of their tasks is interpersonal development and that they are receiving commensurate OTJ
training to foster interpersonal relationships.
A limitation of this survey was its inability to determine the prevalence of OTJ
conservation psychology or biophilia training. These topics may be addressed within larger
training subjects such as environmental ethics, environmental philosophy, or the broader
category of psychology. Future studies could expand or refine the training subject categories to
better understand training germane to fostering human-nature connections.
Training Needs in Psychological Constructs
Sibthorp and Arthur-Banning (2004) wrote, “research needs to continue dissecting
adventure-based experiential education programs to better ascertain which programmatic
115
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
variables are most related to developmental outcomes” (p. 47). Their assertion bolsters this
researcher’s perspective that outdoor leaders need more training regarding psychological
elements affected by adventure programming in general, and specific training and education to
enhance their leadership abilities to foster relationships and the well-being of participants they
lead within the three domains of self, community, and nature.
A shortcoming within outdoor leadership literature is the cursory treatment of the
discipline of psychology in general, and counseling psychology and environmental psychologies
specifically. While issues related to psychology are sometimes explicitly discussed, rarely are
leadership competencies, skills, or decision-making models framed as therapeutic interventions.
Outdoor education literature frequently appears self-referential, in that contributions from
relevant and related disciplines are not adequately referenced or even critiqued. Specific
therapeutic skills and psychological theories taught within the discipline of counseling
psychology are predominately omitted and/or not acknowledge as such in adventure
programming writings. This study has emphasized the importance of understanding
psychological concepts germane to outdoor programing and fostering participant well-being.
Supporting this assertion, Russell, Gillis, and Lewis (2008) advocated that therapeutic field staff
should have specific academic training in the disciplines of “psychology, social work, outdoor
education, outdoor recreation, or education programs” (p. 71), while Richardson and Simmons
(1996) maintained that outdoor leadership training should include childhood development.
Harper (2009) identified several therapeutic orientations common in wilderness treatment
programs: “structural family, family systems, humanistic, narrative, cognitive behavioural, and
existential psychotherapy” (p. 51). It seems fitting then that outdoor leaders working specifically
at therapeutic programs should have some knowledge of these different approaches, experiential
116
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
techniques, and practices. This knowledge can also serve leaders working in other types of
WEPs. Another therapy orientation is group practice. Priest (1984) identified group counseling
skills as one of five competencies for effective outdoor leadership, which he describes as the
ability
to assess and facilitate personal development and group growth during the adventure
experience. Leaders must structure the activities and tasks, process the feelings and
emotions that result, and apply a closure to the entire experience in a manner that leads to
positive group dynamics and the participants’ realization of their abilities and limitations.
(p. 34)
Ryan and Deci (2000) discuss another theory that may prove fruitful in future training and
education of outdoor leaders who are committed to participant well-being: self-determination
theory (SDT). “SDT aims to specify factors that nurture the innate human potentials entailed in
growth, integration, and well-being, and to explore the processes and conditions that foster the
healthy development and effective functioning of individuals, groups, and communities” (p. 74).
It is likely outdoor leaders will work with people who are experiencing a variety of
mental and physical conditions, or have life experiences that influence their ability to develop
working relationships and to communicate in appropriate manners. Survey respondents
indicated a high level of mental health issues among outdoor participants (Table 5). Obviously,
outdoor leaders should have a functional understanding of mental health and life issues of those
they lead. When looking at estimated rates of mental health issues of participants, these rates
grossly exaggerate rates among Americans as reported by the National Institute of Mental Health
(retrieved May 5, 2014, http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-
disorders-in-america/index.shtml). The author is unable to determine if this discrepancy is due
117
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
to gross overestimation by outdoor leaders, or if these figures demonstrate that outdoor
programming is overly representative of people possessing mental health issues. The prevalence
of, and potential for, mental health issues in the United States is a solid justification for why
outdoor leaders need sufficient psychology training.
Taylor, Segal, and Harper (2010) in their critique of adventure therapy and the relative
lack of reference to the natural world in the therapy process, introduced the term holon. The
term, borrowed from Koestler (as cited in Taylor et al., 2010) may be very useful in outdoor
programming, particularly when there’s a focus on relationships and an individuals’ sense of
self. Holon describes the intricacies that are present in systems, where one part of a system is
concurrently unique and separate, but also a component functioning within interconnected
systems. For example, an outdoor participant is both independent as a person, yet interdependent
with their social group. Increasing in system complexity and scale, they are also part of the
natural world. Holon, may be term ripe for inclusion in outdoor leadership programming
literature to stimulate leaders to think about the multitude of roles their participants express and
live.
Self-efficacy.
Because adventure education aims to foster personal growth in participants, it seems
evident that understanding internal influences that affect participant behaviors, performances,
and beliefs about their abilities are critical to both effective and therapeutic leadership. Self-
efficacy is a cornerstone of personal growth and adventure programming. It is a central concept
of therapeutic outdoor leadership. A noteworthy finding from this survey is that only 49% of the
57 respondents who have studied psychology selected the best definition of self-efficacy.
Extrapolating this finding, this leads the author to believe that this concept is not adequately
118
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
understood among outdoor leaders, regardless of training in psychology. Referring back to the
historic outdoor programming emphasis on healthy stress, high levels of anxiety can undermine
self-efficacy, and generally speaking, “increasing students’ physical and emotional well-being
and negative emotional states strengthens self-efficacy” (Usher & Pajares, 2008, p. 754).
Therefore, more outdoor leaders need to become cognizant of self-efficacy—its meaning,
influences, and centrality to the concept of personal growth.
A second question asked respondents to rank, in order of influence, the four influences of
self-efficacy: past mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, physiological state, and verbal
persuasion. All of these influences are incredibly influential in outdoor participants’ ability to
excel, learn, and attempt new activities. Unfortunately, this question was poorly constructed.
Bandura (1997) specifies that past mastery experiences is the single most influential of the four
factors; however, he does not rank the remaining three in terms of their influence on self-
efficacy. Anderson and Betz (2001) conducted research in the context of career development,
and found that sources of self-efficacy concentrated in two dimensions, direct (past mastery
experiences, physiological states, and social persuasion) and indirect (vicarious learning), but
again they did not find a hierarchy of influential power. If a leader understands that the greatest
influence in one’s perception of their abilities is having past mastery experiences, it makes sense
that sequencing activities to facilitate success (i.e. past mastery experiences) is foundational to
personal growth and positive outdoor activity experiences.
Locus of control.
Locus of control (LOC) is another influence affecting participants’ actions and behaviors.
Hans (2000) found that participants’ LOC became more internal as a result of participating in an
adventure program. Davis-Berman and Berman (1994) wrote, “one of the most often discussed
119
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
changes participants experience as a result of outdoor adventure pursuits is an increase feeling of
responsibility of the events in their lives” (p. 118). This is an explicit description of locus of
control. Understanding this concept, along with self-efficacy, may affect how outdoor leaders
use verbal persuasion, as well as utilizing the group to influence individuals. Only half of the
survey respondents understood that LOC describes a person’s belief about the influences to
events in their life, while 20% were completely unfamiliar with the concept. Outdoor leaders
could benefit from understanding that locus of control is a continuum between an internal state (a
person has a direct influence in life events) and external state (outside influences, such as life
circumstance, have a greater influence on one’s life than their direct actions).
Environmental psychologies.
Beringer and Martin (2003) argued that it is time for adventure programming to shift
from an anthropomorphic paradigm to an ecocentric one, where there is explicit
acknowledgement of nature’s “curative relationship.”
The psychological image of the person, and, to a considerable extent, the experience of
personhood, are today based on a reduced form of the self—one largely shorn of
intuition, spirituality, and relatedness to natural context. Overwhelmingly, psychology
has adopted, with little critical reflection, the same anthropocentric, individualistic
ideology that, I have argued, has resulted in the current environmental crisis. (Kidner,
1994, p. 372)
Familiarity of three psychological constructs and fields especially relevant to outdoor
programming, and pertinent to Kidner’s quote, were assessed. Crucial knowledge for fostering
participant relationships with nature is found in the fields of ecopsychology and conservation
psychology. Nearly all survey respondents believe that the health of humans and the natural
120
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
world are intertwined, yet knowledge of psychological concepts germane to fostering this type of
relationship is limited amongst survey respondents (Table 16).
Table 16
Outdoor Leaders’ Familiarity with Environmental Psychology Constructs
Subject
Ecopsychology
Conservation psychology
Biophilia hypothesis
Familiar with all 3 concepts
Ecopsychology and conservation
psychology
Ecopsychology and biophilia
hypothesis
Ecopsychology (only)
Biophilia hypothesis (only)
Conservation psychology (only)
% of
Rate respondents
Subject Relevance
39
42.2 Human-nature relationship
13
14.1
Stewardship/ecological
conservation
26
28.3 Human-nature relationship
9
9.8
3
3.3
11
12.0
16
17.4
6
6.5
1
1.1
Only 14% of respondents were familiar with conservation psychology. This disparity is
noteworthy when reviewing respondents reasons for working outdoors, namely to connect people
to nature, especially for conservation reasons. This goal appears hard to actualize considering
many of the responding outdoor leaders are unfamiliar with fields of knowledge that could
directly improve their effectiveness of connecting participants to the natural world. Furthermore,
Clayton and Myers (2009) state that understanding influences to behaviors can promote positive
human-nature relationships. Ultimately “nature and the natural environment are social
constructs” (Clayton & Myers, 2009, p. 15). Outdoor leaders are a critical element to helping
define and describe the natural world.
Human needs.
Awareness and acknowledgement of the human need for belonging is critical for outdoor
leaders to understand. How can one effectively lead people without understanding and
121
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
facilitating their needs? Also of concern is whether outdoor leaders factor participant needs into
their decision-making processes. The human need to belong must be explicitly explained within
adventure education and textbooks devoted to outdoor leadership. Supporting this assertion,
Raiola (2003) wrote, “One of the most critical tasks of a leader in adventure education is to assist
the individual and group in defining needs, and encourage people to make choices about those
needs” (p. 51). Raiola (2003) did not explicitly state what these needs are, but for a therapeutic
outdoor leader, the human need for intrapersonal insight, belongingness, and for a relationship
with nature should be at the forefront. Because these needs are central to human life, outdoor
leaders need to recognize, attend to, and devote time and activities for facilitating participant
relationships with the natural world in addition to themselves and their social community.
It would be prudent for outdoor leaders to be cognizant of human needs and motivations,
particularly those addressable by outdoor programming. This is the first step in facilitating and
supporting well-being. A therapeutic outdoor leader initiates her or his leadership from this
knowledge along with a commitment to the relational development of their participants. Kosseff
(2010) noted that participant willingness and motivation for task accomplishment is influenced
by “the extent to which their needs are being met” (p. 88), and that people usually focus on their
unmet needs. The identification of humans’ relational needs is central to this thesis. Survey
respondents were asked to speculate about the needs of the people they lead, in relationships
specifically, and motivational needs in general (Figure 2). In order of highest perceived
relational need, outdoor leaders believe participants need relationships with themselves, with
others, and then with nature. Because the two grounding theories of this paper are
ecopsychology and the belongingness hypothesis, it appears that this subject matter is
122
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
underrepresented in leadership training as reflected in these two needs being of secondary and
tertiary importance.
Fulfilling human needs is elemental to facilitating personal growth. Therefore, if outdoor
leaders are committed to supporting the well-being of participants they lead, they must be
knowledgeable of universal human needs, able to assess the changing needs of those they lead,
and proactively facilitate activities and discussions, while using their knowledge and skills to
help individuals meet needs that will strengthen their self-concept. It is imperative that outdoor
leaders be cognizant of basic (and some advanced) knowledge related to addressing issues of
human development and well-being and possess the skills to manage group dynamics, regulate
their own emotions, effectively communicate, and proficiently facilitate. Noteworthy among
various theories, and keenly relevant to outdoor programming are universal human needs, which
have been postulated in numerous motivational/psychological theories of human behavior.
Additionally, Ryan and Deci’s (2000) SDT identifies three needs essential to human well-being:
competence, relatedness, and autonomy. All three of these can and are addressed by outdoor
programming.
Emotional Risk Management
Risk management skills are acquired through training, education, and previous
experiences. If outdoor leaders receive training or education about factors relevant to
psychological well-being, they will be better able to manage risk in several arenas of human
experience. Prouty et al. (2007) explained that risk includes the potential exposure to physical
and/or emotional trauma. Linking this definition to relational leadership, they believe “physical
and emotional safety...depends very much on relationships” (p. 58). Supporting the ideas of
Ringer and Gillis (1995, 1998), Raynolds (2007) cautions leaders to avoid forcing conversations
or eliciting deep emotions, as these can actually alienate leaders from their participants.
123
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Outdoor leaders, responding to this survey, manage emotional risk in their groups
through their development and shaping of group culture, through setting norms, setting
behavioral expectations, building group unity and support, and encouraging open and honest
communication. Leaders model desired behaviors such as communication and appropriate
emotional expression. One scenario used to assess leaders’ emotional risk management skills
involved the question, “under what circumstances would you refer a participant to a therapist?”
Responses indicate a clear awareness of the seriousness of participants being a danger to
themselves and others, as well as making referrals when presenting issues exceed the leaders’
skillset. Additionally, leaders stated that when an individual negatively affects a group, or safety
is compromised, that it’s time to take action.
Regarding activities intended to transfer learning or acknowledge personal growth,
Levine (1994) wrote, “it is not helpful to provide a major transformative event for someone and
then send her back to her life without adequate processing” (p. 181). Her assertion accentuates
the need for leaders to be therapeutic in intent and practice when using metaphors and/or trying
to transfer learning from adventure programming to their home lives. Paralleling Levine’s
contention, Bell (2003) discusses the limitations of wilderness-based rites of passage when
participants’ home communities do not honor or acknowledge their transition and growth. These
two thoughts should remind leaders that emotional safety endures after outdoor experiences end.
Table 5 shows the perceived rates of outdoor program participants with mental health
issues. This survey is unable to overlay specific training (academic or OTJ) with the mental
health and life issues that outdoor program participants possess. Knowledge about specific
psychological conditions is necessary to effectively manage emotional risks. Future studies
should refine training topics into narrower subjects to investigate if outdoor leaders are receiving
124
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
training to address emotional or behavioral issues actually exhibited by outdoor program
participants they serve. This may be most effective when looking at characteristics of program
participants based upon WEP type.
Self-Awareness
The concept of self-awareness was not specifically examined in this survey, however, this
topic is integral to effective and therapeutic outdoor leadership. Bunting (1991) believed leaders
should be introduced to the concept of self-examination. Supporting the underpinnings of
therapeutic outdoor leadership, Kosseff (2010) identified three realms leaders should be aware
of: themselves, their group, and the environment.
Ringer (1999) described the essential role of leader self-awareness as it pertains to leading
others:
awareness of what is happening in the group is derived directly from the group leader’s
awareness of his or her own emotional/intuitive state because that provides the
information about what is occurring at an unconscious level in the group. In other words,
the group leader’s own emotional state is inextricably linked with the emotional ‘field’
that exists in the group. (p. 16)
Through self-reflection, facilitators can exhibit authenticity, presence, and manage their own
reactions to participants (Thomas, 2008). Kosseff (2010) identified two foci for leader self-
awareness: one’s emotional and physical state-in the moment-which is ever in flux, and one’s
“competencies, weaknesses, fears, motivations, and biases” (p. 55). Additionally, he discussed
how self-awareness can reinforce or undermine participant trust in their leaders, as well as
potentially put participants of risk, such as when a leader is physically or mentally exhausted. In
other words, self-awareness can lead to self-care. Ringer (1999) noted that due to the subjective
element of leaders making assessments based upon their own “implicit patterns of perceiving and
125
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
making meaning from life events” (p. 2), a leader’s subjective assessment of a group may be
flawed. Kosseff (2010) highlighed an important reality in outdoor programming, “never forget
that many people are not comfortable in the outdoors and don’t know how they should feel or
behave” (p. 55). Simply considering participants’ motivational and relational needs can guide a
leader’s implementation of programming, which then influences their decision-making towards
supporting the therapeutic needs of participants, instead of a steadfast emphasis on risk
management. These assertions requires outdoor leaders to be cognizant of individual perceptions
and experiences, which ultimately better prepare outdoor leaders in nurturing participant well-
being.
Advancing Outdoor Leaders’ Personal Growth
Conger (as cited in Sadri, 2012) identified four approaches to leadership development
“personal development, conceptual understanding, feedback and skill building” (p. 541). Sadri
(2012) stated that activities emphasizing personal growth help people reconnect with their
values, talents, and passions. The author believes that when outdoor leaders engage in their own
personal growth they are better able to facilitate growth in others. Bunting (1991) believed that
“interpersonal effectiveness” should be integral to training outdoor leaders. Thomas (2008)
believed that in order for facilitators to be fully aware of group processes they need to do their
own “innerwork.” Just as outdoor leaders’ career paths most likely started with being a
participant, Thomas (2011) suggested that outdoor leaders may advance their developmental
journey by engaging in personal psychotherapeutic sessions with qualified practitioners.
Additionally, tools that help outdoor leaders develop professionally, particularly with a relational
framework of leadership, could advance the field of outdoor leadership.
Technical Training Needs for Relational Leaders
126
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Sequencing activities.
The concept of sequencing activities, which is a mainstay of experiential education, is
well-rooted in outdoor programming. Bisson (1999) conducted doctoral research into activity
sequencing for groups. He identified a sequence of eight categories of adventure activities. Four
are relevant to working relationally as a therapeutic leader: acquaintance activities, de-inhibitizer
activities, communication activities, and trust activities. This activity sequence establishes a
framework for building trust and rapport with participants, resulting in well-being, and is
congruent with discussions of managing psychological depth. Prouty et al. (2007) stated that
“personal growth most commonly occurs through a skillfully designed adventure education
curriculum with trained and experienced leaders” (p. 29). Relating outdoor education practices
to therapy, Tucker and Norton (2009) claimed that successful adventure therapy involves a
clinician selecting and processing activities participants engage in, plus the ability to manage
physical and emotional safety. They concluded that successful outcomes are contingent on
activity selection and processing. Exploring this topic is beyond the intention of this survey;
however, this research has explored and emphasized the concepts of self-efficacy and locus of
control. Knowledge of these concepts should inform therapeutic practice: including activity
selection, foundations for processing, and providing feedback to participants.
Ceremonies and rituals.
This study asserts that participants’ needs can be met, or undermined, by outdoor leaders,
and one method for meeting their needs is through the use of rituals. Respondents were asked if
they facilitated ceremonies or rituals for their participants. The 66 leaders (71.7%) who
answered yes were asked to elaborate, however the majority of their responses only yielded basic
information, and were not answered or worded in a way to allow a comprehensive examination
127
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
of contemporary field practice. Despite a lack of detail, several specific rituals were identified in
Table 12. The most commonly referenced rituals involve solo experiences or rites of passage,
closing/graduation ceremonies, program transitions, honoring participant growth, and a variety
of rituals that are inherent to daily routines or programming routine. When sharing why they
facilitate rituals, one respondent wrote, “The intention in each of these is to connect the campers
more directly into their outdoor experience.” Another theme is ceremony used to affirm
participants, both during programs and also at their conclusion (such as graduations). Rituals
were reviewed to determine if they foster relationship development across intra, inter, and
transpersonal domains (Table 13).
Wilderness solos.
Because solos and rites of passage were the most frequently facilitated ceremony, it is
worthwhile to elaborate on this. Angell (1994) described several types of wilderness solos: the
Vision Quest, the reflective solo, the survival skills solo, and self-imposed isolation in
wilderness. Of relevance to this paper are leader-facilitated solos. However, Bobilya (2005)
pointed out that solos that are voluntarily chosen have prove to be more productive than those
mandated upon people. Knapp (2005) discussed several roles of a solo facilitator: briefing and
debriefing solo experiences and helping participants with meaning making. The process of
meaning-making can be enhanced when leaders are cognizant of concepts relevant to
relationship development as outlined in this thesis. One rationale for using solo experiences is
the reality that people in industrial cultures spend very little time alone, where distractions from
self are ever present. McKenzie (2003), researching outcomes for Outward Bound Western
Canada found that solo opportunities provide participants with time for reflection. Additionally,
a “solo provides individuals the opportunity to break away from the intensity of group dynamics
128
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
and the constant influence of participant attitudes and moods. This allows the individual to
change his/her personal attitude and mood” (Quinn, 2005, p. 193). Participants of solo
experiences acknowledge benefits such as increased trust in one’s self, self-acceptance,
improved sense of purpose, increased self-reliance and self-confidence, increased maturity, an
increase in caring and acceptance, and a sense of responsibility to care for others and the larger
community (Bodkin & Sartor, 2005). Thus, judiciously facilitating ceremonies or rituals can
foster participant well-being.
The use of metaphors.
Metaphor use in adventure programming has been addressed in the literature for many
decades. Outdoor leaders were asked about a specific framing of metaphors: those that involve
the natural world. This number of outdoor leaders who craft such metaphors was very high (71
respondents, 78.3% of all leaders). The percentage is very close to the number of outdoor
leaders who have studied biology or a related field (67 respondents, 72.8% of leaders). The
author believes that outdoor leaders with greater knowledge of the natural world would be better
able to craft appropriate and meaningful nature-based metaphors to foster personal growth. In
agreement is Shapiro (1995) who asserted, “A skilled facilitator can increase metaphorical
learning through weaving relevant scientific information into stories” (p. 234). The elements of
metaphors help individuals find meaning, and these insights contribute to a rewriting of one’s
personal narrative. Tying the use of metaphors to leadership, Cunliffe and Erikson (2011) wrote,
“Relational leaders see communication...as a way of working out what is meaningful and
possible” (p. 1434). Baker (2005) discussed how outdoor gear and gadgets and even maps can
distract participants from an engagement and awareness of the land. These moments of
distractibility can prove timely to introduce metaphors that actually connect participants with the
129
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
natural world. Using natural consequences for teaching lessons in outdoor programming is
common practice. The author wonders if the use of natural and logical consequences by outdoor
leaders is a basis for metaphoric transfer of learning.
Implications for Practice: Developing Relationships with Self, Community, and the
Natural World
This thesis frames outdoor leadership in relational terms, comprised of three interrelated,
yet equally important relationships intrinsic to outdoor programming: with self, with community,
and with nature.
To be Therapeutic
Relationships meet the human need for belonging, whether they are inspiring and
supportive, or destructive. When outdoor leaders actively facilitation relationships for their
participants, they are in fact being therapeutic. Why then does a program such as Outward
Bound claim that their programming is not therapeutic? They assert that because their
instructors are not trained counselors, their programming is not therapeutic (Raynolds, 2007).
Yet this contradicts Chase (1981), who identified the following Outward Bound goals (which
this author considers therapeutic): increase in self-esteem, movement toward an internal locus of
control, compassion, cooperation and independence, increased sense of responsibility for self,
others and society, improved awareness of dysfunctional behaviors, appropriate expression of
human reactions, and increase in trust. Again, there seems to be confusion about the distinction
between therapy and being therapeutic, even at one of the best known outdoor programs in the
United States. Even Davis-Berman and Berman (1994) muddy this point when they describe
“therapeutic wilderness programming” when meaning to discuss wilderness-based therapy
programming. And again they wrote, “Despite the fact that these [early 20th century] camps
130
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
were not decidedly therapeutic, they did attempt to facilitate personal growth among their
campers” (p. 194). Again, to be therapeutic simply means to contribute to the well-being or
personal growth of others.
Fostering Relationships with Self
Communicating via metaphors, providing time for introspection, perceiving participants’
needs, and helping participants make meaning from their experiences are essential to nurturing
intrapersonal relationships. Ryan and Deci (2000) found, “contexts supportive of autonomy,
competence, and relatedness were found to foster greater internalization and integration than
context that thwart satisfaction of these needs” (p. 76), which “is of great significance for
individuals who wish to motivate others in a way the engenders commitment, effort, and high-
quality performance” (p. 76). Ninety-eight percent of outdoor leaders believe it is either very
important or important to allow participants time for introspection. Introspection is useful in the
prediction, control, and modification of future behaviors (Lieberman, 1979), and Jäkel and
Schreiber (2013) link introspective processes to successful problem solving. Supporting the
importance and need for personal introspection, 63% of outdoor leaders believe the most
important relationship for participants is an intrapersonal one. Combined together, these two
ideas reinforce the idea that adventure programming is person-centered in its emphasis upon the
individual experience. The question then arises, what skills and knowledge do outdoor leaders
possess to foster intrapersonal relationships?
Ringer (1999) stated leaders help “group members in the process of managing their
internal/emotional worlds” (p. 15). As mentioned when discussing solos, Knapp (2005) made
reference to the role of outdoor leaders to help participants make meaning out of their
experiences. Martin et al. (2006) stated that learning is transferred when leaders bring attention
131
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
to similarities and/or differences. This provides a rationale for using metaphors as a tool to link
outdoor experiences with front country lives. Seventy-eight percent of outdoor leaders
acknowledged using metaphors that involve the natural world with their participants. Five
respondents indicated the metaphors they use are participant specific, and several acknowledged
they use metaphors as a tool in learning transfer.
Gass et al. (2012) discussed the philosophical orientation of a wilderness therapy
program, Soltreks. This program’s primary intention is fostering personal growth and change
by: limiting distractions, separating individuals from familiar/habitual environments and negative
influences, providing a structured daily routine that require accountability, operating in small
groups, progressively moving through phases, individual and group therapy, providing skills and
tools for effective relationships, and a focusing on relationship with self and family. In
reviewing these key practices, the goal of fostering intrapersonal development and insight is
achieved by placing individuals in nature for an extended time with less distractions (physically
and socially). The development of an intrapersonal relationship, occurring in nature, is an overt
goal of therapeutic outdoor leadership.
Not all research has demonstrated that outdoor programming has positive effects upon
self-concept. Sheard and Golby (2007) studied the effects of outdoor adventure education on
positive psychological developments, including self-efficacy, self-esteem, positive affectivity,
mental toughness, hardiness, and dispositional optimism. They write, “contrary to hypothesized
expectations, activities with an OAE curriculum, conducted over a three-month timeframe, failed
to significantly raise participants’ levels of measured positive psychological constructs” (p. 203).
This finding supports the ongoing need to ascertain outdoor programming influences upon self-
132
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
concept constructs, as well as the need to identify which program components influence self-
concept.
Fostering Relationships with Community
Baumeister and Leary (1995) proposed that “people need frequent personal contacts or
interactions with…other people,” and that “people need to perceive…stability [and] affective
concern” in the context of long-term interpersonal relationships (p. 500). Outdoor leaders caring
for participants, and creating caring group cultures, can fulfill a basic human need. Survey
respondents indicated they encourage emotional safety by creating positive and accepting group
cultures. McKenzie (2003) found, “working as a group, interacting with [and]...relying on other
group members, taking care of others, and trying new behaviors in the group setting can increase
students’ self-awareness, self-confidence, motivation, interpersonal skills, concern for others,
and concern for the environment” (p.19). When asked what outdoor leaders would do with an
isolating participant, a number of leaders described how they would get group members
involved. This action is fortified by Teo et al. (2013), who found that quality social relationships
can mitigate risks of major depression episodes in adults.
“Leadership...must focus on benefitting the group” (Kosseff, 2010, p. 85). Outdoor
programming begins with a group, working in nature, which produces individual experiences.
Some leaders indicated that working with, and connecting with people is a reason they work as
outdoor leaders. When considering the relational needs of program participants, outdoor leaders
believed that interpersonal relationships is secondary to intrapersonal relationships, but more
important than human-nature relationships.
The concept of group and emotional safety is elementary to outdoor programming.
Prouty et al. (2007) stated, “Building a community is a personal matter because we must trust
133
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
others with our personal and psychological safety” (p. 5). Discussing the benefits of a safe group
environment, Priest and Gass (2005) wrote, “Client investment in the group and willingness to
change stem from a safe and supportive atmosphere” (p. 198). In this survey, outdoor leaders
primarily defined emotional safety as safe self-expression (including emotions) and
inclusivity/group support. This indicates that leaders are attuned to interpersonal relationships.
Additionally when leaders were asked how they create a safe environment for participants, result
demonstrated that they primarily do this by shaping group culture. Plante, Lackey, and Hwang
(2009) found that college students participating in an immersive community-based learning
experience increased the level of empathy of students. This finding hints that a course framed
around learning, and well facilitated by leaders, can increase empathy abilities of participants.
And, “when conditions of empathy are met, change is more likely to occur” (Gass et al., 2012, p.
86). Thus, therapeutic outdoor leaders foster growth through their management of group
dynamics, a topic that nearly 70% of leaders are trained in on the job. Breunig et al. (2005)
wrote, “the importance of shared emotional connections, as well as the integration and
fulfillment of needs [are] key determinants of psychological sense of community” (p. 260). This
statement is aligned with therapeutic outdoor leaderships’ emphasis on meeting core human
needs.
Eys, Ritchie, Little, Slade, and Oddson (2008) explored how participants’ status
(including assessment of one’s own within a group, and by being assessed by fellow participants)
is associated with perceptions of group cohesion. They found that there is a relationship between
group cohesion perceptions and status perceptions. Also, when group members with a higher
status were in formal leadership positions, there was a perception of greater group cohesion (Eys
et al., 2008). Furthermore, outdoor leaders can facilitate greater group cohesion by educating
134
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
participants about the determinants of group status and an awareness of leadership status (Eys et
al., 2008). Also, trust levels may be undermined when an individual’s assessment of their status
in a group is higher than their peers perceive it to be. “Consciously and actively fostering and
attending to the group’s cohesion seems to be a valuable and viable way that instructors can
make adventure programs more beneficial to participants” (Sibthorp et al., 2007, p. 15).
One finding of this study is that rituals are specifically used to foster interpersonal
relationships. The most common examples of community building types of rituals are
graduation/closing ceremonies, which were described by 15 leaders (16.3%). Other rituals that
may be used to build group culture have been categorized as rituals as part of the routine or daily
programming, but their descriptions were not specific enough to determine leader intentions.
Breunig et al. (2008) highlighted the value of leaders encouraging community building
through group social structures. These researchers identified several primary factors in
increasing a sense of community: leadership styles, a variety of factors (group activities, physical
challenge, food, debriefs, etc.), the post-trip experience, group composition, and each
participant’s individual contributions.
Fostering Relationships with Nature
Clayton and Myers (2009) described how conservation psychology actively seeks to
promote a sustainable and healthy relationship between nature and humans, and that “promoting
human welfare requires awareness of how intimately connected it is to the natural environment”
(p. 3). The goal of conservation psychology is aligned with the explicit goals of outdoor
education, and some of the personal intentions of outdoor leaders taking this survey. In addition,
outdoor leaders, when explaining why they work as such, identified a desire to connect people
with nature, for conservation, and less specific reasons. Richardson and Simmons (1996)
135
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
asserted, “outdoor leaders should have the knowledge and skills they need to awaken in students
an environmental sensitivity or appreciation” (p.4). The desires by outdoor leaders to connect
outdoor program participants to nature require specific skills and knowledge. The question is, do
they have the knowledge and skills to foster participants’ relationship with nature?
This survey found that nearly 95% of respondents believe that human health is related to
the integrity of the natural world, 91% claim to actively facilitate relationships between
participants and the natural environment, and nearly 78% state they use metaphors involving the
natural world, yet leaders’ lack of knowledge of pertinent environmental psychology constructs
is noteworthy (refer to Table 16). When survey respondents were asked why they chose to work
as outdoor leaders, some indicated it was to connect people to the natural world in general, while
some identified their desire to develop conservation and stewardship minded participants. Three
conceptual indices: ecopsychology, conservation psychology, and the biophilia hypothesis,
indicate knowledge limitations that may inhibit outdoor leaders from effectively nurturing
human-nature relationships. Berns and Simpson (2009) analyzed studies researching the
connection between participation and environmental concern and found conflicting data;
however, when looking at the sum of the research there does appear to be a link between outdoor
recreation and environmental attitudes, but “the aspects of the recreation experience that are
specifically linked to environmental concern remain unclear” (p. 88).
Martin et al. (2006) stated the goal of environmental education addresses the relationship
between humans and the natural world by highlighting interdependencies by increasing
awareness and sensitivity to them. Martin (2004) has noticed that outdoor education is changing
from an emphasis on individual and group development to exploring the relationships between
136
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
humans and nature. Kahn (1999) describes how the human-nature relationship requires self-
awareness:
In fostering the human relationship with nature we need to pay attention not only to
nature but to human nature—and it is deeply within our nature to use our intellects to
construct increasingly sophisticated ideas, and to depend on them, physically and
psychologically. (Kahn, 1999, p. 226)
When outdoor leaders are knowledgeable about the benefits of human-nature
relationships, they can share this knowledge and facilitate various activities to intentionally
foster this relationship. Mitten (2009) proposed a blending of environmental education and
outdoor leadership in which leaders learn about contributions to human well-being from the
natural world. Sharing knowledge about the benefits of nature is one way to transfer learning
from the backcountry to participants’ home lives. Table 17 is a comparison between empirical
findings of benefits derived from nature, and the benefits survey participants believe it provides.
137
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Table 17
Comparison of Substantiated and Assumed Benefits of Nature
Authors
Kaplan, 1995; Wells, 2000,
Berto, 2005; Taylor & Kuo,
2009
Kahn, 1999; Ulrich, 1991;
Parsons et al., 1998; Kaplan &
Kaplan, 1989
Shin et al., 2011; Berman et
al., 2012
Shin et al., 2011; Berman et
al., 2008; Berman et al., 2012
Williams & Harvey, 2001;
Terhaar, 2009; D’Amato, L.G.
& Krasny, M.E., 2011
Hansen-Ketchum et al., 2009
Herzog, T.R., Black, A.M,
Fountaine, K.A., & Knotts
D.J. (1997)
Bowler et al. 2010
D’Amato, L.G. & Krasny,
M.E., 2011
Empirical benefits
Attentional
improvements
Stress reduction
Affective
improvements
Cognitive
improvements
Transcendent
experiences
Sense of community
Self-reflection and
self-knowledge
Environment as
setting for physical
activity
Development of
pro-environmental
attitudes
Assumed benefits by outdoor leaders
Reduced mental distractions-12
Mindfulness related/being present-4
Improves ADHD-1
Stress reduction-14
Relaxation/calming effect-10
Fights anxiety-4
General emotional benefits-7
Fights depression-3
increased creativity-5
Opportunities for learning-4
Connection with something larger than
self-22
Spirituality-7
Personal accomplishment-6
Awe Inspiring-3
Social benefits-16
Personal insight/growth-27
Personal reflection-9
Physical fitness related-28
Conservation related-7
Respect for natural world-6
Reviewing the mental health and life characteristics of outdoor program participants
(Table 5), it is clear that many suffer from conditions that can be ameliorated through contact
with nature, especially the most prevalent conditions: ADHD, depression, and anxiety.
Consistent with research findings, survey respondents believe nature can improve attentional
abilities, improve depression and anxiety issues.
Not only is knowledge of the benefits of the human-nature relationship important for
outdoor leaders, but so are the skills required to facilitate this relationship. Various techniques
are used to foster a closer bond with the natural world. A limitation of this study is that skills
138
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
and activities used to stimulate human-nature relationships were not assessed in any depth. Gass
et al. (2012) reported that adventure therapy programs and therapists prohibit the possession of
watches, in order for clients to practice being present in the moment. The author’s experience in
wilderness therapy found this to be a common practice. However, it was part of a larger concept
of not providing future information. There is value in facilitating a more basic relationship with
biorhythms, sans technology, but success is more likely to be achieved by how such practices are
framed. Reducing dependence on technology, and increasing an emphasis on an individual’s
own perceptions, is one method to facilitating intrapersonal relationships. In this example, the
natural environment may catalyzes intrapersonal insight.
The lack of emphasis upon the human-nature relationship in outdoor programming
literature has been increasingly criticized (Beringer & Martin, 2003; Taylor et al., 2010). Results
from this thesis research have noted a discrepancy between the believed intention of outdoor
leaders and their education and training. For example, 91% of respondents claim they actively
facilitate relationships between participants and nature, yet only 33.7% of outdoor leaders
selected the author’s definition of outdoor leadership that includes fostering participant
relationships with the natural world. A strong majority of respondents (72.8%) have studied
biology or a related field, yet only 42% of respondents were familiar with ecopsychology, and
only 11% of respondents receive employer training in ecopsychology. Only 24% receive
training in environmental philosophy, while twice as many (48%) receive training in
environmental ethics. Yet, outdoor leaders are still fostering human-nature relationships,
consistent with Sibthorp, Furman, Paisley, Gookin, and Schumann (2011) who found that
instructors were very influential in fostering appreciation of nature in NOLS students. In this
thesis survey, the two most consistent methods and rituals leaders use include teaching
139
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
environmental education and natural history, and providing opportunities for solitude and
facilitating solos.
Leave No Trace (LNT) is a widely known and taught outdoor practice, and eleven
respondents (12%) indicated they use leave LNT to promote participant-nature relationships.
However, is this an effective way to foster relationships between people and nature? Moskowitz
and Ottey (2006) critique LNT on several accounts. Relevant to this thesis, they asserted LNT
“encourages wilderness visitors to view the natural world as an environment in which humans do
not belong, disconnecting them from the landscape” (p. 16). This author agrees that the LNT
pedagogy may hinder the human-nature relationship. Primarily, when immersion in nature is
relegated to the visual realm, and people are prohibited from touching or harvesting wild
materials, the human-nature connection may be compromised, disconnecting humans from their
evolutionary dependence on the natural world. Some wilderness experience programs,
particularly wilderness therapy and survival schools, foster relationships with nature through the
application of primitive technology via harvested materials from nature. Commenting on the
disconnection that LNT may encourage, Kahn (1999) writes,
In our relationship with nature, let us not drive a wedge between the intellect and
experience. Rather, by embracing both...let us affirm what it means to be human in a
world, if we choose wisely, of human goodness and natural splendor. (p. 227)
Finally, a shift is needed in viewing nature, as more than just a therapeutic context and as
a therapeutic variable in and of itself. Only more recently has the discussion of experiential
environments moved away from the generic label, “novel environment,” and is now
acknowledging the role of nature in adventure programming (Baker, 2005; Beringer, 2004;
Mitten, 2004). The principle milieu for adventure education is land most often described as
140
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
wilderness. However, some authors, such as Baker (2005), are challenging this homogenous
way of thinking about the land in which adventure education occurs. The natural environment is
not simply a backdrop, but has the potential for profound connection and relationship
development for participants. Baker (2005) forwarded a landfull framework for integrating
wholistic environmental education into adventure-based programming. Although the particular
elements are not totally relevant to this thesis project, the valuation of fostering relationship with
the natural world is quite relevant. In essence, outdoor adventuring and learning are inseparable
from the tenets of ecopsychology. It may be that contact and immersion in nature is paramount
to human livelihood. A body of research supports the assertion that nature’s power of influence
is not due to its so-called “novel” characteristics; rather, it is due to intrinsic benefits and values
for humans. Mitten (2009) states that many outdoor practitioners focus more on adventure and
challenge, subsequently underestimating the intrinsic benefits of nature. Mitten claims that
outdoor programming has substituted doing things in nature for being in nature. This distinction
supports the author’s belief that outdoor programming needs to clearly delineate (as much as
possible) adventure-based programming from nature-based programming. The first category
includes an orientation towards challenge and physical embodiment, while the latter type of
programming is more specific to emotional, cognitive, and possibly spiritual embodiment.
Relating the human need for fun and the value of human-nature relationships, Martin
(2004) wrote:
Outdoor education, which seeks to promote a positive relationship with nature needs to
carefully monitor student learning and ensure that students are coping with the demands
imposed by the activity and/or environment. Enjoying a relationship, or having fun,
141
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
remains as important a part of a human/nature relationship as it is in a human-to-human
relationship. (p. 26)
Wilderness solos are an activity that can foster dual relationships with self and nature,
and survey answers indicated this is a widespread practice. “Allowing participants quiet time to
engage in ‘mindfulness’ of their own thoughts and sensations and just experiencing nature
without focus may be a vital and underutilized component of processing and integrating change
following disequilibrium” (Taylor, Segal, & Harper, 2010, p. 81). Participants in solo
experiences acknowledge benefits such as increased connection with the natural world,
conservation desires, a desire to spend more time in nature, and in interest in healing the natural
world (Bodkin & Sartor, 2005), which some outdoor leaders also believe. Intention is an
important consideration when facilitating solos. Benefits included intrapersonal growth, but also
connection with nature. How leaders frontload a solo may affect the outcomes of the experience.
Martin (2004) found that in the undergraduate outdoor education courses he taught in
Australia, students’ connection to and care for nature increased. He found two notable
influences for this: language abilities and comfort and competence in outdoor settings. However,
he noted that science-based language did not contribute to students’ abilities to communicate
their feelings about nature. Furthermore, it is direct experiences in nature that are foundational
to developing a relationship with nature. Martin asks if technical outdoor activities, such as rock
climbing, foster relationships with nature? He found that adventurous activities build
relationships with nature. As an example, he found participants who engaged in rock climbing
repeatedly visited the same location-which developed connections over time. Martin (2004)
argued “adventure activities are a powerful medium to elicit emotional connections to the natural
world” (p. 27).
142
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
An Emerging Model: Therapeutic Outdoor Leadership
Priest and Gass (2005) explained that outdoor education emphasizes relationships
between people and natural resources, while adventure education is primarily concerned with
intra and interpersonal relationships. More specifically, adventure education addresses
intrapersonal relationships, including self-concept, self-efficacy, spirituality, and confidence
(Priest, 1999), while “adventure programming is the deliberate use of adventurous experiences to
create learning in individuals or groups, that results in change for society and communities”
(Priest, 1999, p. xiii). Martin et al. (2006) wrote, “one of the primary goals of outdoor leadership
is to serve as a source of transformation in the lives of people” (p. xiv), moreover they asserted,
“the fundamental premise for providing adventure services is the fact that participants grow and
become better people as a result of participation” (p. 128). In summarizing the definitions of
outdoor education and adventure education, it is clear that the intent of these endeavors is to
improve the well-being of individuals through a group process, operating in nature, which
produce outcomes at the individual level. This author believes these statements can be framed
by the concept: therapeutic outdoor leadership. When one describes therapeutic outdoor
leadership, the end goal is specified: healing and improved well-being conducted in both an
ethical and professional manner. Not only does outdoor leadership literature describes
therapeutic functions and goals, but outdoor leaders taking this survey define outdoor leadership
to be relationally oriented to personal growth of program participants.
The literature review in Chapter 2 clearly recognizes humans’ need for relationships, how
this need can be meet in adventure programming, and the correlation between positive leader-
participant relationships with positive outdoor programming outcomes. When leadership is
preceded by the term outdoor, it is clear where the leadership occurs. When the word therapeutic
143
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
precedes both of these terms, the primary intention of the outdoor leader is clear. Therapeutic
outdoor leadership promotes mindfulness amongst outdoor leaders towards an understanding of
the essential human need for relationships, and the intentionality of fostering and creating
relationships for participants, with themselves, with others, and with nature, towards the goal of
improving participant well-being. Participant well-being and personal growth can be enhanced
through knowledge of therapeutic and psychological concepts, along with the implementation of
non-clinical therapeutic skills involved in fostering therapeutic, healthy, and affirming
relationships. It seems clear that therapeutic outdoor leaders can work in a variety of WEPs, but
that their level of depth, areas of focus, or depth of impact will vary depending on their program
type. As an example, one could function as a therapeutic outdoor leader at a recreation program,
but what manifests as therapeutic leadership will look and feel different than a therapeutic leader
working with the same participants for 50 consecutive days.
After accepting the concept of therapeutic outdoor leadership, the next question is, how
do outdoor leaders foster well-being in those they lead? It seems imperative that outdoor leaders
be cognizant of factors that may influence behaviors during outdoor programming activities and
processing, as well as responding appropriately and professionally to varied participant
behaviors. Effective leaders mobilize and connect with those they lead. Leadership education
and training needs to move away from content and instead emphasize intention: from teaching
lessons, to addressing human needs. However, the intentional task of nurturing well-being in
outdoor participants could benefit through the distinction of using adventure versus nature
focused programming, even those these orientations are wholly indivisible. Therapeutic outdoor
leadership begins with an intention: to support the well-being of those being lead. The intention
to foster well-being in others, through relationship formation in three realms, is a conscious
144
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
influence upon leaders’ decision-making processes. They are cognizant of the therapeutic
benefits of people having relationships with themselves, with others, and with the natural world,
and they have the skills and knowledge to both initiate these therapeutic relationships as well as
build them, resulting in improved well-being.
Priest and Gass (2005) highlighted seven ethical guidelines outlined by the Association
for Experiential Education: concern, integrity, respect, competence, objectivity, recognition, and
responsibility. These ethical guidelines can inform the practice of therapeutic outdoor
leadership. Priest and Gass (2005) explained how outdoor leaders should be sensitive to client
needs and conduct activities and experiences while regarding participant well-being. Martin et
al. (2006) wrote, “the goals of outdoor education are twofold: to create opportunities for personal
and interpersonal growth and to create opportunities for people to learn about the natural
environment” (p. 12).
There are numerous definitions that distinguish between “doing” therapy and “being”
therapeutic. This professional distinction may need better clarification in outdoor education
programs. This would fit well when discussing outdoor leaders’ scope of practice. This author
contends that any program (or leader) that seeks to build character, improve self-concept, or
encourages personal growth or reflection, is fundamentally being therapeutic. Relational
leadership is inherently a moral process, further supporting the construct of therapeutic outdoor
leadership, where leaders focus on participants’ well-being. Results from this survey suggest
that outdoor leaders, even those who would not describe themselves as therapeutic, are
committed to, and contributing to, the well-being of those they lead, through the nurturance of
intra, inter, and transpersonal relationships. In essence, therapeutic outdoor leaders are already
working across the WEP spectrum. Furthermore, when asked to select a definition of outdoor
145
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
leader, leaders define leadership to be therapeutic and relationally oriented. It is time that this
philosophical orientation be named and acknowledged.
As Graham (1997) pointed out, leadership is not reserved for a select few, rather “it’s a
continuum of abilities, with all of us leaders-in-training” (p. 12). Relating this to being
therapeutic, the depth of healing can range from creating group inclusivity to addressing
significant maladaptive behaviors, and the ability to serve others is contingent on training,
education, and abilities. This thesis asserts that outdoor leaderships training and education
should focus on an intention of serving outdoor participants by actively fostering and facilitating
their well-being through the meeting of fundamental human needs, which is accomplished
through relationship development with self, others, and the natural world. Brown (2008) wrote,
“we [in adventure education] tend to draw on some foundational texts that have not been
critically examined, are repeatedly referenced, and through which the field continues to
perpetuate taken-for-granted assumptions as defining principles of adventure education theory
and practice” (p. 10).
This thesis adds to a growing number of voices that maintain outdoor leadership needs to
be person-centered, relationally oriented, and intentional about connecting participants to the
natural world. The reality of outdoor programming is that individual experiences are rooted in
both social and natural environments. To truly maximize the transfer of learning and gaining of
experiences, outdoor leaders need to foster intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal
relationships. More specifically, the results of this research indicate that outdoor leaders do not
have sufficient knowledge to maximize activities in nature to manifest known benefits from
contact and immersion in nature, nor do leaders understand the ideas of self-efficacy and locus of
146
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
control, which are foundational to actually influence personal insight and growth in participants,
which is the basic definition of adventure education.
The most obvious application of the findings in this survey is for employers and outdoor
programs. Program managers and staff trainers can look at their programmatic goals and
mission, and then ascertain if their field staff have the requisite knowledge and skills required to
meet their programmatic goals.
Limitations
Unfortunately, the survey utilized in this study was not comprehensive enough to survey
respondents regarding all the knowledge and techniques authors and researchers have suggested
outdoor leaders possess for nurturing outdoor program participant’s personal growth. Also, open
ended questions did not elicit a significant amount of descriptive answers for many questions.
The major limitation of this survey is the descriptive methodology that does not include an
analytic analysis of survey data. This prevents a calculation of effect size, statistical significance
of findings, and generalizability of the findings. Also, a survey such as this would yield more
substantive results if participant numbers were significantly greater.
Other limitations pertain to specific question wording and formats. Several questions
were poorly worded, not explicit enough, or allowed the selection of more than one answer, and
therefore did not yield discrete or useable data. For example, when asking outdoor leaders to
identify the type of WEP they work for, respondents could select more than one. This meant
answers from leaders working for different types of programs could not be compared.
Furthermore, the representation of outdoor leaders working in therapeutic, wilderness, or
adventure therapy programs is probably underrepresented, and had more such outdoor leaders
been surveyed, the aggregate results may prove different. Respondents were asked to identify
147
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
boundaries outdoor leaders should be mindful of when working with participants. In reviewing
the answers to this question, it appears this question could have been better worded. Many
answers were unable to be coded and/or their meaning was unascertainable. One question asked
respondents to select the correct sequences of the four factors contributing to self-efficacy in
order of their influence. Of the options presented, there were only two answers that correctly
sequenced past performance accomplishments first. Self-efficacy research has been unable to
determine a universal ranking of influences affecting self-efficacy beliefs, therefore this was a
poor question. Several questions asked respondents about their familiarity with terms such as the
biophilia hypothesis, ecopsychology, and conservation psychology. Respondents could
elaborate, but due to these vague instructions, narrative responses were not very informative.
Therefore the depth and accuracy of conceptual understanding could not be determined.
Additionally, two questions asked about the use of metaphors and rituals. These questions
elicited a spectrum of answers, from descriptive to unintelligible. Answers to these questions
could provide useful information about the specifics of how outdoor leaders create relationships
between participants and the natural world. There has been much research into the general use
of metaphors in outdoor programming, but fewer references to the execution of rituals and
metaphors.
Another challenging aspect of this survey is its broad, yet topical exploration of
therapeutic knowledge and skills. This study could have been broken into fewer research
projects, better able to probe the extent of knowledge and application of therapeutic skills.
Lastly, the high number of questions may have deterred respondents from providing more
information to open ended questions. Several responses, on multiple questions reported the
respondent was too tired to elaborate.
148
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Areas for Future Research
This thesis was a very broad and topical investigation of the knowledge and skills
outdoor leaders have and use that might foster well-being and relationship development for
outdoor participants. Because of its breadth, most topics could be studied more in-depth by
future research, particularly through observational research in the field, as opposed to self-
reporting surveys.
The issue of program duration as a factor in outdoor programming affecting program
outcomes has been voiced. Sibthorp et al.’s (2007) study supported previous research, which
found that longer course lengths can have a greater impact on participant development. From a
relational leadership perspective, course duration could be studied to ascertain how it effects
relationship development, particularly across the domains of self, others, and the natural world.
Future research could investigate how specific biogeographic locations affect humans’ relational
development. For example, how might deserts, high alpine, temperate rain forests, or aquatic
environments affect intrapersonal development?
More research needs to delve into actual practices (skills) outdoor leaders use to facilitate
relationships across intra, inter, and transpersonal domains. What facilitation strategies do
therapeutic outdoor leaders use? This could include the use of specific language, metaphors, and
rituals. Self-reported use of metaphors was not descriptive enough to determine outdoor leaders’
intentions for using metaphors, beyond a general tool for facilitating transfer of learning. The
use of metaphors is firmly engrained in outdoor programming literature, but how are metaphors
used specifically for relational development? Future studies could explore how outdoor leaders’
academic and professional training and life experience influence their creation and use of
metaphors. Outdoor leaders described many non-specific activities, including various rituals
149
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
they use to foster relationships between people and the natural world. Future research may want
to explore these activities in-depth to ascertain empirical outcomes and activity effectiveness for
relational development. The survey question about feedback giving strategies was not
comprehensive enough to examine outdoor leaders on all the variables and techniques authors
and researchers have suggested they use when providing feedback. Future studies should
attempt to reference other feedback components and elements when surveying this subject.
When looking at trust development between outdoor leaders and participants, how can leaders
build trust either faster or deeper by intentionally creating specific experiences? Do adventures
deemed to have greater adversity advance trust development faster?
A large topic of exploration is the training and education of outdoor leaders. Future
studies could look at college and university curriculum, and explore courses pertinent to
relational leadership across intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal development.
Similarly, employer provided training could be examined.
Finally, future research should determine what outdoor leadership training is most
effective for working therapeutically with participants. Does training in ecopsychology or
ecotherapy improve leaders’ abilities to foster relationships between participants and nature?
What training content can be borrowed from counselor education to develop rapport and
facilitate groups? Referring back to Table 5, we see that a high number of outdoor program
participants are perceived to have potentially life devitalizing issues. This may prove a fruitful
line of inquiry into leader training programs. What are the actual mental health issues of outdoor
participants and are outdoor leaders adequately trained to address and comfort the people they
serve?
150
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
It is the author’s hope that the data generated in this thesis can become fodder for more
involved research looking at leader philosophies and skills and participant learning and
therapeutic outcomes. The influences of outdoor leaders’ values and rationales for working as
outdoor leaders has been underexplored, particularly as it pertains to programmatic outcomes.
As highlighted in this thesis, decision-making research and models have avoided exploring how
leaders’ values and intentions affect decision-making. Additionally, the influence of
participants’ therapeutic needs in decision-making has also been inadequately discussed or
researched within outdoor programming.
When studying trust factors related to outdoor leaders, it may prove useful if future
studies use the same traits or statements to allow direct study comparisons, i.e. instruments.
Noteworthy research has explored competencies and traits of effective leaders, but not
from a therapeutic orientation. Future research could explore the traits and characteristics of
leaders who are exemplars in nurturing relationships for their participants, including an
examination of what can be learned from investigating therapeutic alliance.
Researching therapeutic outdoor leadership concepts and approaches should be examined
across the wilderness experience program continuum, not just in therapeutic or wilderness or
adventure therapy programs. But first the language used to describe WEP categories must be
both sufficiently descriptive and consistently used. Relatedly, the fact that respondents listed
multiple employer program types (i.e. adventure education, therapeutic, etc.) indicates that
program missions may not align perfectly with WEP descriptors found in the literature. A
common description of adventure program types includes recreational, educational,
developmental, and therapeutic (Priest, 1999). Berman & Davis-Berman (2000) described other
types of WEPs such as therapy, rehabilitation, leadership, growth, organizational development,
151
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
adventure therapy, personal growth, college orientation, and camping programs. Other program
labels include enrichment and adjunctive. This author believes the descriptor “developmental
program” may be misleading. As Miles and Priest (1999) described it, development “involves
processes of growth like self-esteem and self-concept, and enhancement of group and team
effectiveness” (p. 1). But in the context of psychology, human development is a specific
construct pertaining to the physical, cognitive, and emotional-social development through the
human lifespan. The author proposes a spectrum described by the following program types:
entertainment, recreation, education (emphasizing the transfer of knowledge), therapeutic, and
clinical. In reality, these titles primarily describe intended program outcomes. Therapeutic
programs would include religious-based programs, equine assisted therapy, and “character-based
curriculum.” Prior to soliciting survey respondents, this author was unaware of the significant
number of Christian colleges that offer outdoor leadership degrees. One respondent described
their program type as Outdoor Ministry. This type of programming may be inadequately
described in outdoor education literature and outdoor programming textbooks, and may be
unique enough to distinguish as its own WEP type. In summation, whether WEPs intentionally
or incidentally address personal growth issues, the facilitation of well-being and personal growth
is a unifying thread that connects all WEPs (Berman & Davis-Berman, 2000).
Research is always conducted through a particular lens. An important distinction, and
one not regularly made in outdoor programming research, is the difference between adventure-
based programming and nature-based programming. The author believes this is a necessary
endeavor to improve the specificity and quality of research related to outdoor programming. Of
course there can be no comprehensive separation, but outdoor activities need to be better
152
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
described in order to better understand factors influencing program outcomes and those
contributing to participant well-being.
153
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
References
Allan, J.F., McKenna, J., & Hind, K. (2012). Brain resilience: Shedding light into the black box
of adventure processes. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education 16(1), 3-14.
American Counseling Association. (2014). 2014 ACA code of ethics. Retrieved from
http://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf
Anderson, S.L., & Betz, N.E. (2001). Sources of social self-efficacy expectations: Their
measurement and relation to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior 58, 98-
117.
Angell, J. (1994). The wilderness solo: An empowering growth experience for women. In E.
Cole, E. Erdman, & E. Rothblum (Eds.), Wilderness therapy for women: The power of
adventure (pp. 85-99). New York, NY: Harrington Park Press.
Baker, M. (2005). Landfullness in adventure-based programming: Promoting reconnection to the
land. Journal of Experiential Education 27(3), 267-276.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and
Company.
Bass, B., & Riggio, R. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Psychology Press.
Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-
529.
Bell, B. (2003). The rites of passage and outdoor education: Critical concerns for effective
programming. Journal of Experiential Education 26(1), 41-50.
Bell, P.A., Greene, T.C., Fisher, J.D., & Baum, A. (2001). Environmental psychology (5th ed.).
Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
Berger, R. (2008). Developing an ethical code for the growing nature therapy profession.
Australian Journal of Outdoor Education 12(2), 47-52.
Beringer, A. (2004). Toward an ecological paradigm in adventure programming. Journal of
Experiential Education 27(1), 51-66.
Beringer, A., & Martin, P. (2003). On adventure therapy and the natural worlds: Respecting
nature’s healing. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 3(1), 29-40.
Berman, D.S., & Davis-Berman, J. (2000). Therapeutic uses of outdoor education. Retrieved
from ERIC database. (ED448011).
154
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Berman, D.S., & Davis-Berman, J. (2005). Positive psychology and outdoor education. Journal
of Experiential Education 28(1), 17-24.
Berman, M.G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with
nature. Psychological Science 19(12), 1207-1212.
Berman, M.G., Kross, E., Krpan, K.M., Askren, M.K., Burson, A., Deldin, P.J., Kaplan, S.,
Sherdell, L., Gotlib, I.H., & Jonides, J. (2012). Interacting with nature improves cognition
and affect for individuals with depression. Journal of Affective Disorders 140(3), 300-
305.
Berns, G.N., & Simpson, S. (2009). Outdoor recreation participation and environmental concern:
A research summary. Journal of Experiential Education 32(1), 79-91.
Berto, R. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity.
Journal of Environmental Psychology 25(3), 249-259.
Bisson, C. (1999). Sequencing the adventure experience. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 205-214). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Bobilya, A.J., Akey, L, & Mitchell Jr., D. (2009). Outcomes of a spiritually focused wilderness
orientation program. Journal of Experiential Education 31(3), 440-443.
Bocarro, P., & Witt, P.A. (2003). Relationship-based programming: The key to successful youth
development in recreation settings. Journal of Parks and Recreation Administration
21(3), 75-96.
Bodkin, M., & Sartor, L. (2005). The rites of passage vision quest. In C.E. Knapp & T.E. Smith
(Eds.), Exploring the power of solo, silence, and solitude (pp. 31-48). Boulder, CO:
Association for Experiential Education.
Bowler, D.E., Buyung-Ali, L.M., Knight, T.M., & Pullin, A.S. (2010). A systematic review of
evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments. BMC
Public Health 10, 456.
Breunig, M., O’Connell, T., Todd, S., Young, A., Anderson, L., & Anderson, D. (2008).
Psychological sense of community and group cohesion on wilderness trips. Journal of
Experiential Education 30(3), 258-261.
Brown, M. (2008). Comfort zone: Model or metaphor? Australian Journal of Outdoor
Education, 12(1), 3-12.
Brown, T., & Bell, M. (2007). Off the couch and on the move: Global public health and the
medicalization of nature. Social Science & Medicine 64(6), 1343-1354.
155
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Brower, H.H., Schoorman, F.D., & Tan, H.H. (2000). A model of relational leadership: The
integration of trust and leader-member exchange. Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 227-250.
Buell, L.H. (1981). The identification of outdoor adventure leadership competencies for entry-
level and experience-level personnel. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
Bunting, C.J. (1991). The foundation of interpersonal effectiveness. Journal of Experiential
Education 14(2), 39-42.
Burke, J., Nolan, C., & Rheingold, A. (2012). Nel Noddings’ care theory and outdoor education.
Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership 4(1), 3-15.
Chalquist, C. (2009). A look at the ecotherapy research evidence. Ecopsychology 1(2), 64-74.
Chase, N.K. (1981). Outward Bound as an adjunct to therapy. Retrieved from ERIC database.
(ED241204)
Chase, R., & Priest, S. (1990). Effective communication for the reflective outdoor leader.
Journal of Adventure Education 7(1), 7-12.
Chesley, G., Gillett, D., & Wagner, W. (2008). Verbal and nonverbal metaphor with children in
counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development 86, 399-411.
Claiborn, C.D., & Goodyear, R.K. (2005). Feedback in psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical
Psychology 61(5), 209-217.
Clayton, S., & Myers, G. (2009). Conservation psychology: Understanding and promoting
human care for nature. West Sussex, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Conn, S.A. (1995). When the earth hurts, who responds? In T. Roszak, M.E. Gomes, & A.D.
Kanner (Eds.), Ecopsychology: Restoring the earth, healing the mind (pp. 156-171). San
Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books.
Cunliffe, A.L., & Eriksen, M. (2011). Relational leadership. Human Relations 64(11), 1425-
1449.
D’Amato, L.G., & Krasny, M.E. (2011). Outdoor adventure education: Applying transformative
learning theory to understanding instrumental learning and personal growth in
environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education 42(4), 237-254.
Dashborough, M.T., & Ashkanasky, N.M. (2002). Emotion and attribution of intentionality in
leader-member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly 13, 615-634.
156
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Davis-Berman, J., & Berman, D.S. (1994). Wilderness therapy: Foundations, theory and
research. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
Evans, M.B. (1988). The role of metaphor in psychotherapy and personality change: A
theoretical reformulation. Psychotherapy 25(4), 543-551.
Ewert, A. (1989). Managing fear in the outdoor experiential education setting. Journal of
Experiential Education 12(1), 19-25.
Ewert, A, & Heywood, J. (1991). Group development in the natural environment: Expectations,
outcomes, and techniques. Environment and Behavior 23(5), 592-615.
Estrellas, A. (1996). The eustress paradigm: A strategy for decreasing stress in wilderness
adventure programming. In K. Warren (Ed), Women’s voices in experiential education
(pp. 32-44). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
Eys, M.A., Ritchie, S., Little, J., Slade, H., & Oddson, B. (2008). Leadership status congruency
and cohesion in outdoor expedition groups. Journal of Experiential Education 30(3), 78-
94.
Flückiger, C., Del Re, A.C, Wampold, B.E., & Horvath, A.O. (2011). How central is the alliance
in psychotherapy? A multilevel longitudinal meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling
Psychology 59(1), 10-17.
Foster, S., & Little, M. (1989). The roaring of the sacred river: The wilderness quest for vision
and self-healing. New York, NY: Prentice Hall Press.
Fox, K.M., & Lautt, M. (1996). Ethical frameworks, moral practices, and outdoor education. In
Coalition for Education in the Outdoors Research Symposium Proceedings, L.H.
McAvoy, L.A. Stringer, M.D. Bialeschki, & A.B. Young, (eds.), (pp. 18-33). Bradford
Woods, IN: Coalition for Education in the Outdoors.
Fox, K.M, & McAvoy, L.H. (1995). Ethical leadership in outdoor recreation. Trends 32(3), 21-
26.
Gair, N.P. (1997). Outdoor education: Theory and practice. London, England: Cassell.
Garvey, D. (1999). Outdoor adventure programming and moral development. In J.C. Miles & S.
Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 133-139). State College, PA: Venture
Publishing.
Gass, M.A., Gillis, H.L., & Russell, K.C. (2012). Adventure therapy: theory, research, and
practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
Glasser, W. (1998). Choice Theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. New York, NY:
HarperCollins.
157
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Goldenberg, M., & Pronsolino, D. (2008). SEER 2007 Abstract: A means-end investigation of
outcomes associated with Outward Bound and NOLS programs. Journal of Experiential
Education 30(3), 271-276.
Gookin, J., & Leach, S. (Eds.). (2009). NOLS leadership educator notebook: A toolbox for
leadership educators. Lander, WY: The National Outdoor Leadership School.
Graham, J. (1997). Outdoor leadership: Technique, common sense and self-confidence. Seattle,
WA: The Mountaineers.
Green, J. (2009). The therapeutic alliance. Child: care, health and development, 35(3), 298-301.
Halamova, J. (2001). Psychological sense of community: Examining McMillan’s, Chavis’ and
Peck’s concepts. Studia Psychologica, 43(2), 137-148.
Hamachek, D. (1999). Effective teachers: What they do, how they do it, and the importance of
self-knowledge. In R. Lipka & T. Brinthaupt (Eds.), The role of self in teacher
development (pp. 189-224). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Hans, T.A. (2000). A meta-analysis of the effects of adventure programming on locus of control.
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy 30(1), 33-54.
Hansen-Ketchum, P., Marck, P., & Reutter, L. (2009). Engaging with nature to promote health:
New directions for nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing 65(7), 1527-1538.
Harper, N.J. (2009). The relationship of therapeutic alliance to outcome in wilderness treatment.
Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 9(1), 45-59.
Hayashi, A., & Ewert, A. (2006). Outdoor leaders’ emotional intelligence and transformational
leadership. Journal of Experiential Education 28(3), 222-242.
Hendee, J.C., & Brown, M.H. (1987). How wilderness experience programs facilitate personal
growth: The Hendee/Brown model. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the World
Wilderness Congress (4th, Estes Park, CO, September 16, 1987).
Herzog, T.R., Black, A.M, Fountaine, K.A., & Knotts, D.J. (1997). Reflection and attentional
recovery as distinctive benefits of restorative environments. Journal of Environmental
Psychology 17(2), 165-170.
Homrich, A.M. (2009). Gatekeeping for personal and professional competence in graduate
counseling programs. Counseling and Human Development 41(7), 1-22.
Jäkel, F., & Schreiber, C. (2013). Introspection in problem solving. Journal of Problem Solving
6(1), 20-33.
158
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Jones, A.C. (2004). Transference and countertransference. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care
40(1), 13-19.
Kahn, P.H. (1999). The human relationship with nature: Development and culture. Cambridge,
MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal
of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182.
Kellert, S., & Wilson, E.O. (Eds.). (1993). The biophilia hypothesis. Washington D.C.: Island
Press.
Kidner, D. (1994). Why psychology is mute about the environmental crisis. Environmental
Ethics 16(4), 359-376.
Kimball, R.O., & Bacon, S.B. (1993). The wilderness challenge model. In M.A. Gass (Ed.),
Adventure therapy: Therapeutic applications of adventure programming (pp. 11-41).
Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Klint, K.A. (1999). New directions for inquiry into self-concept and adventure experiences. In
J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 163-168). State College, PA:
Venture Publishing.
Knapp, C. (1999). Processing the adventure experience. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 219-225). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Knapp, C. (2005). The mountains can’t always speak for themselves: Briefing and debriefing the
solo experience. In C.E. Knapp & T.E. Smith (Eds.), Exploring the power of solo,
silence, and solitude (pp. 19-30). Boulder, CO: Association for Experiential Education.
Kopp, R. (1995). Metaphor Therapy: Using client-generated metaphors in psychotherapy. New
York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.
Kosseff, A. (2010). AMC guide to outdoor leadership (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Appalachian
Mountain Club Books.
Lertzman, D. (2002). Rediscovering rites of passage: Education, transformation, and the
transition to sustainability. Conservation Ecology 5(2), 1-15.
Levine, D. (1994). Breaking through barriers: Wilderness therapy for sexual assault survivors. In
E. Cole, E. Erdman, & E.D. Rothblum (Eds.), Wilderness therapy for women: The power
of adventure (pp. 175-184). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.
Lieberman, D.A. (1979). Behaviorism and the mind: A (limited) call for a return to introspection.
American Psychologist 34(4), 319-333.
159
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder.
Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.
Martin, B., Cashel, C., Wagstaff, M., & Breunig, M. (2006). Outdoor leadership: Theory and
practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Martin, P. (1999). Practical stories in a theoretical framework. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 169-178). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Martin, P. (2004). Outdoor adventure in promoting relationships with nature. Australian Journal
of Outdoor Education, 8(1), 20-28.
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50(4), 370-396.
Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D.R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and
implications. Psychological Inquiry 15(3), 197-215.
McAvoy, L.H., Mitten, D.S., Stringer, L.A., Steckart, J.P., & Sproles, K. (1996). Group
development and group dynamics in outdoor education. In Coalition for Education in the
Outdoors Research Symposium Proceedings, L.H. McAvoy, L.A. Stringer, M.D.
Bialeschki, & A.B. Young, (eds.), (pp. 51-61). Bradford Woods, IN: Coalition for
Education in the Outdoors.
McLean, K.C. (2005). Late adolescent identity development: Narrative meaning making and
memory telling. Developmental Psychology 41(4), 683-691.
McKenzie, M., & Blenkinsop, S. (2006). An ethic of care and educational practice. Journal of
Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 6(2), 91-106.
McKenzie, M.D. (2000). How are adventure education program outcomes achieved?: A review
of the literature. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education 5(1), 19-28.
McKenzie, M. (2003). Beyond “the Outward Bound process:” Rethinking student learning.
Journal of Experiential Education 26(1), 8-23.
McVay, S. (1993). Prelude: “A Siamese connexion with a plurality of other mortals”. In S.R.
Kellert & E.O. Wilson (Eds.), The biophilia hypothesis (pp. 3-19). Washington, D.C.:
Island Press.
Medina, J. (2001). Types of positions, job responsibilities, and training backgrounds of
outdoor/adventure leaders. Journal of Experiential Education 24(3), 150-159.
Medrick, R., & Mitten, D. (n.d.). Adventure education. Prescott College Master of Arts Program
[course handout].
160
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Metzner, R. (2009). Green psychology, shamanism, and therapeutic rituals. In L. Buzzell & C.
Chalquist (Eds.), Ecotherapy: Healing with nature in mind (pp. 256-261). San Francisco,
CA: Sierra Club Books.
Mitten, D. (1994). Ethical considerations in adventure therapy: A feminist critique. In E. Cole, E.
Erdman, & E.D. Rothblum (Eds.), Wilderness therapy for women: The power of
adventure (pp. 55-84). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.
Mitten, D. (1995). Building the group: Using personal affirming to create healthy group process.
Journal of Experiential Education 18(2), 82-90.
Mitten, D. 1999). Leadership for community building. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 253-261). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Mitten, D. (2004). Adventure Therapy as a Complimentary and Alternative Therapy. In S.
Bandoroff & S. Newes, (Eds.). Coming of age: The evolving field of adventure therapy
(pp. 240-257). Boulder, CO: Association for Experiential Education.
Mitten, D. (2009). Under our noses: The healing power of nature. Taproot Journal 19(1), 20-26.
Mitten, D., & Clement, K. (2007). Responsibilities of adventure education leaders. In D. Prouty,
J. Panicucci, & R. Collinson (Eds.), Adventure education: Theory and practice (pp. 79-
99). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Moskowitz, D., & Ottey, D. (2006). Leaving “Leave No Trace” behind: Towards a holistic land
use ethic. Green Teacher 78, 16-19.
Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z., & Stough, C. (2001). Emotional intelligence and effective
leadership. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal 22(1), 5-10.
Parsons, R., Tassinary, L.G., Ulrich, R.S., Hebl, M.R., & Grossman-Alexander, M. (1998). The
view from the road: Implications for stress recover and immunization. Journal of
Environmental Psychology 18(2), 113-140.
National Wellness Institute. (n.d.) The six dimensions of wellness. Retrieved from
http://www.nationalwellness.org/?page=Six_Dimensions
Nicol, D.J. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A
model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education
31(2), 199-218.
Noddings, N. (2002). Starting at home: Caring and social policy. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Norton, C.L. (2009). Ecopsychology and social work: Creating an interdisciplinary framework
for redefining person-in-environment. Ecopsychology 1(3), 138-145.
161
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Paisley, K., Furman, N., Sibthorp, J., & Gookin, J. (2008). Student learning in outdoor education:
A case study from the National Outdoor Leadership School. Journal of Experiential
Education 30(3), 201-222.
Passarelli, A., Hall, E., & Anderson, M. (2010). A strengths-based approach to outdoor and
adventure education: Possibilities for personal growth. Journal of Experiential Education
33(2), 120-135.
Phipps, M., & Swiderski, M. (1990). The “soft” skills of outdoor leadership. In J.C. Miles & S.
Priest (Eds.), Adventure Education (pp. 113-118). State College, PA: Venture.
Plante, T.G., Lackey, K., & Hwang, J.Y. (2009). The impact of immersion trips on development
of compassion among college students. Journal of Experiential Education 32(1), 28-43.
Priest, S. (1984). Effective outdoor leadership: A survey. Journal of Experiential Education 7(3),
34-36.
Priest, S. (1986). Redefining outdoor education: A matter of many relationships. Journal of
Environmental Education, 17(3), 13-15.
Priest, S. (1999). The semantics of adventure programming. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 215-218). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Priest, S., & Chase, R. (1989). The conditional theory of outdoor leadership: An exercise in
flexibility. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership 6(2), 10-17.
Priest, S, & Gass, M.A. (1999). Six generations of facilitation. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 133-139). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Priest, S., & Gass, M.A. (2005). Effective leadership in adventure programming (2nd ed.).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Propst, D.B., & Koesler, R.A. (1998). Bandura goes outdoors: Role of self-efficacy in the
outdoor leadership development process. Leisure Sciences 20(4), 319-344.
Quay, J., Dickinson, S., & Nettleton, B. (2000). Community, caring and outdoor education.
Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5(1), 4-17.
Quinn, W. (1999). The essence of adventure. In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure
programming (pp. 149-151). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Quinn, W.J. (2005). Solo’s effect on group attitude. In C.E. Knapp & T.E. Smith (Eds.),
Exploring the power of solo, silence, and solitude (pp. 191-196). Boulder, CO:
Association for Experiential Education.
162
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Raiola, E.O. (1997). Praxis: The education and training of outdoor adventure educators. The
Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership 14(4), 7-11.
Raiola, E. (2003). Communication and problem-solving in extended field-based outdoor
adventure education courses. Journal of Experiential Education 26(1), 50-54.
Raynolds, J. (2007). Leadership fundamentals. In R. Chatfield, C. Ummel Hosler, & K. Fulsaas
(Eds.), Leadership the Outward Bound way: Becoming a better leader in the workplace,
in the wilderness, and in your community (pp. 19-123). Seattle, WA: The Mountaineers
Books.
Rea, L.M., & Parker, R.A. (1997). Designing and conducting survey research: A comprehensive
guide (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bates.
Reiman, T., & Rollenhagen, C. (2011). Human and organizational biases affecting the
management of safety. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 96(10), 1263-1274.
Richardson, M., & Simmons, D. (1996). Competencies for outdoor educators. Retrieved from
ERIC database. (ED391624).
Richert, A.J. (2002). The self in narrative therapy: Thoughts from a humanistic/existential
perspective. Journal of Psychotherapy Interventions 12(1), 77-104.
Riley, M. F., Hendee, J. C., Watson, A. E., & Aplet, G. H. (2000). Wilderness vision quest
clients: motivations and reported benefits from an urban-based program 1988 to 1997.
Proceedings-Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, (RMRS-P-14),
128-135.
Ringer, M. (1999). The facile-itation of facilitation? Searching for competencies in group work
leadership. Scisco Conscientia 2(1), 1-19.
Ringer, M., & Gillis, H.L. (1995). Managing psychological depth in adventure programming.
Journal of Experiential Education 18(1), 41-51.
Ringer, M., & Gillis, H.L. (1998). Case studies in managing psychological depth. In exploring
the boundaries of adventure therapy: International perspectives. Proceedings of the
international adventure therapy conference (1st Perth, Australia, July 1997).
Robinson, L. (2009). Psychotherapy as if the world mattered. In L. Buzzell & C. Chalquist
(Eds.), Ecotherapy: Healing with nature in mind (pp. 24-29). San Francisco, CA: Sierra
Club Books.
Roszak, T. (1995). Where psyche meets Gaia. In T. Roszak, M.E. Gomes, and A.D. Kanner
(Eds.), Ecopsychology: Restoring the earth, healing the mind (pp. 1-17). San Francisco,
CA: Sierra Club Books.
163
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Russell, K.C. (2001). What is wilderness therapy? Journal of Experiential Education 24(2), 70-
79.
Russell, K., Gillis, H.L, & Lewis, T.G. (2008). A five-year follow-up of a survey of North
American outdoor behavioral healthcare programs. Journal of Experiential Education
31(1), 55-77.
Ryan, G.W., & Bernard, H.R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods 15(1), 85-
109.
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55(1), 68-78.
Sadri, G. (2012). Emotional intelligence and leadership development. Public Personnel
Management 41(3), 535-548.
Schumann, S.A., Paisley, K., Sibthorp, J., & Gookin, J. (2009). Instructor influences on student
learning at NOLS. Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership 1(1), 15-
37.
Scull, J. (2008). Ecopsychology: Where does it fit in psychology in 2009? The Trumpeter 24(3),
68-85.
Shapiro, E. (1995). Restoring habitats, communities, and souls. In T. Roszak, M.E. Gomes, and
A.D. Kanner (Eds.), Ecopsychology: Restoring the earth, healing the mind (pp. 224-239).
San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books.
Shin, W.S., Shin, C.S., Yeoun, P.S., & Kim, J.J. (2011). The influence of interaction with forest
on cognitive function. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 26(6), 595-598.
Shooter, W., Paisley, K., & Sibthorp, J. (2009). The effect of leader attributes, situational
context, and participant optimism on trust in outdoor leaders. Journal of Experiential
Education 31(3), 395-399.
Shooter, W., Paisley, K., & Sibthorp, J. (2010). Trust development in outdoor leadership.
Journal of Experiential Education 33(3), 189-207.
Shooter, W., Paisley, K., & Sibthorp, J. (2012). Fostering trust in outdoor leaders: The role of
personal attributes. Journal of Experiential Education 35(1), 222-237.
Shooter, W., Sibthorp, J., & Gookin, J. (2010). The importance of trust in outdoor education:
Exploring the relationship between trust in outdoor leaders and development outcomes.
Research in Outdoor Education 10, 48-56.
Shooter, W., Sibthorp, J., & Paisley, K. (2009). Outdoor leadership skills: A program
perspective. Journal of Experiential Education 32(1), 1-13.
164
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Sibthorp, J., Arthur-Banning, S. (2004). Developing life effectiveness through adventure
education: The roles of participant expectations, perceptions of empowerment, and
learning relevance. Journal of Experiential Education 27(1), 32-50.
Sibthorp, J., Furman, N., Paisley, K., Gookin, J., Y Schumann, S. (2011). Mechanisms of
learning transfer in adventure education: Qualitative results from the NOLS transfer
survey. Journal of Experiential Education 34(2), 109-126.
Sibthorp, J., Paisley, K., & Gookin, J. (2007). Exploring participant development through
adventure-based programming: A model from the National Outdoor Leadership School.
Leisure Sciences 29(1), 1-18.
Slife, B.D. (2004). Taking practice seriously: Toward a relational ontology. Journal of
Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24(2), 157-178.
Sosik, J., & Megerian, L. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and Performance:
The role of self-other agreement on transformational leadership perceptions. Group &
Organization Management, 24(3), 367-390.
Stickley, T., & Freshwater, D. (2006). The art of listening in the therapeutic relationship. Mental
Health Practice 9(5), 12-18.
Stremba, B., & Bisson, C.A. (Eds.). (2009). Teaching adventure education theory: best
practices. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Swiderski, M.J. (1981). Outdoor leadership competencies identified by outdoor leaders in five
western regions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.
Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E., & Sullivan, W.C. (2002). Views of nature and self-discipline: Evidence
from inner city children. Journal of Environmental Psychology 22(1), 49-33.
Taylor, D.M., Segal, D., & Harper, N.J. (2010). The ecology of adventure therapy: An integral
systems approach to therapeutic change. Ecopsychology 2(2), 77-83.
Teo, A.R., Choi, H., & Valenstein, M. (2013). Social relationships and depression: Ten-year
follow-up from a nationally representative study. PLoS ONE 8(4), 1-8. doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0062396
Thomas, G. (2008). Facilitate first thyself: The person-centered dimension of facilitator
education. Journal of Experiential Education 31(2), 168-188.
Thomas, G. (2011). Outdoor leadership education: Do recent textbooks focus on the right
content? Australian Journal of Outdoor Education 15(1), 3-11.
165
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Todd, S., O’Connell, T., Breunig, M., Young, A., Anderson, L., & Anderson, D. (2008) The
effect of leadership style on sense of community and group cohesion in outdoor pursuits
trip groups. In A.B. Young & J. Sibthorp (Eds.), Abstracts from the Coalition for
Education in Outdoors Ninth Biennial Research Symposium, (pp. 27-29). Martinsville,
IN: Coalition for Education in the Outdoors.
Tripoli, L. (2009). Ecopsychology: Mind, body, sprit…and planet: An interview with Thomas
Joseph Doherty, Psy.D. Alternative and Complimentary Therapies 15(6) 315-317.
Tucker, A.R., & Norton, C.L. (2013). The use of adventure therapy techniques by clinical social
workers: Implications for practice and training. Clinical Social Work Journal 41(4), 333-
343.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership
and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly 17(6), 654-676.
Usher, E.L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the
literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research 78(4), 751-796.
Vincent, S.M. (1995). Emotional safety in adventure therapy programs: Can it be defined?
Journal of Experiential Education 18(2), 76-81.
Vogel, J. (1991). Manufacturing solidarity: Adventure training for managers. Hofstra Law
Review 19(3), 657-724.
Walsh, V., & Golins, G. (1976). The exploration of the Outward Bound process. Denver, CO:
Colorado Outward Bound School.
Warren, K. (1999). Women’s outdoor adventures. In J. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure
programming (pp. 389-393). State College, PA: Venture.
Wilson, E.O. (1984). Biophilia: The human bond with other species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Wilson, E.O. (1993). Biophilia and the conservation ethic. In S.R. Kellert & E.O. Wilson (Eds.),
The biophilia hypothesis (pp. 31-41). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
166
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Appendix
An Assessment of Therapeutic Skills and Knowledge of Outdoor Leaders in the United States
and Canada
1. What country do you work in?
2. What state or province do you work in?
3. What is your sex?:
• Male
• Female
• Transgender
• I prefer the following identifier:
4. What year were you born?
5. What is your ethnicity?
• White
• African American
• Asian
• Hispanic
• Middle Eastern
• Pacific Islander
• Multiple races, other
6. In your outdoor leadership role, do you work:
• Full-time
• part-time
7. How many months have you worked out-of-doors, leading or guiding
167
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
participants? (A month includes both time you work in the field, plus your time off. For
example, if you work 15 days at a time, with 13 days off, record this as one month.)
_____months
8. How many months have you served as supervisory outdoor staff? (This means you have
primary responsibility for participants and co-staff, and also facilitate on-the-job training
for newer staff.)
9. What is your current job title?
10. Who is your current employer. (When responding to subsequent questions, please
answer in regards to this employer.)
11. Please identify the type of program you work for. (Select all applicable labels.)
• Recreation ["Aimed at having fun, learning new activities, or becoming reenergized
through adventure" (Priest & Gass, 2005).]
• Education [These programs focus on teaching concepts, "enriching the knowledge of
old concepts, or generating an awareness of previously unknown needs through
adventure" (Priest & Gass, 2005).]
• Adventure Education ["is a multi-dimensional and multi-disciplinary field that serves
a variety of ends and audiences. These range from the simplest form of self-discovery
learning...[to] corporate teambuilding, or therapeutic treatments. AE is a process-
oriented approach to learning and discovering...among humans and between humans
and the more-than-human world (Medrick & Mitten, 2011).]
• Leadership Education [Educational programming that emphasizes teaching leadership
skills, teaching skills, and coaching (Gookin & Leach, 2009).]
• Therapeutic [Programs that focus on improving participant well-being in a general
168
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
sense, which do not focus on specific client issues or diagnoses. Programs may or
may not have professionally trained therapists as staff (Williams, 2004).]
• Adventure Therapy ["The prescriptive use of adventure experiences provided by
mental health professionals, often conducted in natural settings that kinesthetically
engage clients on cognitive, affective, and behavioral levels" (Gass, Gillis, & Russell,
2012). Furthermore, treatment focuses on addressing specific psychological or
behavioral disorders, guided by specific theoretical frameworks (Williams, 2004).]
• Wilderness Therapy ["The use of traditional therapy techniques [by trained mental
health professionals], especially those for group therapy, in outdoor settings, utilizing
outdoor adventure pursuits and other activities to enhance growth. Wilderness therapy
is a methodical, planned approach to working with troubled youth" (Davis-Berman &
Berman, 1994).]
12. What is your programming format? Are your courses: (check all that apply)
• Day program (one day only)
• Day program (recurs weekly)
• Week-long
• Between 1-3 weeks
• Three-week
• Between 3 weeks and 2 months
• Two months or longer
• Other duration
13. What is the average age range of the participants you work with?
• <10, 10-14, 14-18,18-24,25-35,35-45,45-55,55-65, >65, other range
169
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
14. What is the sex of the participants you work with? (Answer according to who you work
most with. If your outings are mostly co-ed, select mixed. If you work most of the time
with males, select males.)
• Female
• Male
• Mixed
15. Have you worked with participants who have the following conditions or experiences?
(Please select all that apply.)
• Anxiety, ADHD, Autism spectrum, Depression, developmental challenges, drug and
alcohol issues, eating disorder, conduct disorder, mood disorder (other than
depression), personality disorder, psychotic disorder, involved in juvenile or criminal
justice system, physically disabled, self-harm/mutilation, taking psychiatric
medications, Veterans, physical or sexual abuse, traumatic experiences (other than
physical), marginalized populations, not applicable, unsure, other
16. Please indicate the subject matter of training your current employer provides. (Select all
that apply.)
• Communication, cultural sensitivity, ecopsychology, environmental ethics,
environmental philosophy, group development, group dynamics, leadership,
motivational interviewing, personal development, personal ethics/values, psychology,
rapport/trust development, rituals/ceremony, self-efficacy, technical skills,
traditional/primitive skills, none of the above, not applicable, other
17. Please select your level of academic training. Select degrees you either possess or are
pursuing. (For example, if you possess a B.A., and are currently pursuing a master’s
170
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
degree, you would select both the bachelors and masters buttons.)
• No degree
• pursuing associates
• associates
• Pursuing bachelors
• Bachelors
• Pursuing masters
• Masters
• Pursuing doctorate
• doctorate
18. Please identify the subject you studied, or are studying, for each degree you selected in
the previous question.
19. Have you studied outdoor leadership in an academic setting?
20. Have you studied psychology or related fields (Ex. Social work) in an academic setting?
21. Have you studied biology or related fields in an academic setting? (Ex. Ecology,
environmental studies, etc.)
22. Which of the following outdoor leadership definitions is closest to your own?
• “Leadership is intentional, aiming toward the accomplishment of particular goals and
outcomes….[It also] is interactional, involving relationships between two or more
individuals in a particular situation” (Martin, Cashel, Wagstaff & Breunig, 2006).
• Outdoor leadership involves fostering relationships within participants, between
participants, and between participants and the natural world through the deliberate use
of activities and guided by a process of personal reflection.
171
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
• Outdoor leadership involves minimizing risks (physical and emotional) to
participants, minimizing impacts on the natural environment, maximizing participant
enjoyment and learning (Kosseff, 2010).
• “Outdoor leadership is the practice of leading individuals and groups into natural
settings via a variety of modes of transportation", ensuring participant safety,
environmental protection, and enhanced outdoor experiences (Martin, Cashel,
Wagstaff & Breunig, 2006).
• Leadership is a process of influence in the creation, identification, and achievement of
"mutually acceptable goals" (Priest, 1999).
• Leadership is relational in nature, involving the teaching about and facilitation of
relationships based upon an ethic of caring for others (Mitten, 1999.)
• Outdoor leadership involves “purposefully taking individuals/groups into the
outdoors for: recreation or education; teaching skills; problem-solving; ensuring
group/individual safety; judgment making; and facilitating the philosophical ethical,
and aesthetic growth of participants (Ewert, 1983).
23. Why have you chosen the career of an outdoor leader?
24. What does it mean to you to be a therapeutic outdoor leader?
25. Please select the 10 most important traits [from the list below] you believe foster
participant trust in their leader(s).
• Accepting, appropriate self-expression, authenticity, benevolence, calmness,
compassionate, competent, effective communicator, empathetic, encouraging,
equanimity, fairness, flexibility, fun/entertaining, genuineness, good listener, honest,
inquisitive, inspiring, intelligence/knowledge, likeable, maturity, non-defensive, non-
172
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
judgmental, nurturing, patient, positivity, self-awareness, technical abilities, tolerant,
transparent intentions, unconditional positive regard, vulnerability, other traits
26. Please think about the factors that affect your decision-making process when working as
an outdoor leader. Please rank the following options: (1=most important, 5=least
important).
• Situation/context
• My personal mission/intention
• My program’s mission/curriculum
• Safety/risk-management
• Therapeutic factors/needs
• Other (please specify)
27. Do you believe it is appropriate for outdoor leaders to show their emotions to their
participants?
• No
• Unsure
• Yes (if answered no or yes, please elaborate)
28. Is it important for outdoor leaders to allow participants time for introspection?
• Very important
• Important
• Neutral
• Not important
• Definitely not important
29. Please select the best definition of self-efficacy.
173
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
• Self-efficacy describes how someone thinks of themselves.
• Self-efficacy describes one's ability to make choices.
• Self-efficacy describes one's perception of their capabilities.
• Self-efficacy describes personal effectiveness.
• I don’t know what self-efficacy means.
30. What does “locus of control” describe?
• It describes how one makes decisions.
• It describes influences to how one makes decisions.
• It describes if a person believes they can influence events in their life.
• I don’t know what locus of control means.
31. Please explain the following psychoanalytic terms: (If you do not know, skip this
question.)
• Transference
• Countertransference
32. There are several factors that influence people's perception of their abilities. Please select
the answer with the best sequence of responses, where the first factor listed is the most
influential and the last factor is the least influential. (Term definitions: physiological
arousal describes moods, stress levels, etc. Vicarious experiences includes observing
other people's successes or failures. Verbal persuasion describes coaching or support by
other people.)
• Physiological arousal, past performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences,
verbal persuasion.
• Physiological arousal, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, past performance
174
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
accomplishments.
• Verbal persuasion, vicarious experiences, physiological arousal, past performance
accomplishments.
• Vicarious experiences, past performance accomplishments, verbal persuasion,
physiological arousal.
• Past performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences, physiological arousal,
verbal persuasion.
• Past performance accomplishments, physiological arousal, verbal persuasion,
vicarious experiences.
• Vicarious experiences, physiological arousal, verbal persuasion, past performance
accomplishments.
• Verbal persuasion, past performance accomplishments, physiological arousal,
vicarious experiences.
33. Thinking about the majority of participants you lead on trips, please rank participant
needs in order of what you think they need most. (From highest need to less important
need.)
• Achievement
• Autonomy/Freedom
• Service
• Fun
• Self-esteem/competency
• Survival/physiological needs
175
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
34. Thinking about the majority of participants you lead on trips, please rank participant
relational needs in order of what you think they need most. (From highest need to less
important need.)
• Relationship with community
• Relationship with self
• Relationship with nature
35. What is the strongest predictor (element of therapy) of positive psychotherapy outcomes?
36. Please select the 3 most common strategies you use to develop rapport with others (co-
workers and participants).
37. Please identify three boundaries that you (as an outdoor leader) need to be mindful of
when working with participants.
38. There are multiple styles for providing feedback to others. Please select the three most
used aspects you use when giving feedback.
39. Are you familiar with ecopsychology?
• No
• Yes (please elaborate)
40. Are you familiar with the field of conservation psychology?
• No
• Yes (please elaborate)
41. Are you familiar with the theory of biophilia?
• No
• Yes (please elaborate)
176
AN ASSESSMENT OF THERAPEUTIC SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
42. Do you believe that human health and well-being is related to the integrity and health of
the natural environment?
43. Research has demonstrated humans benefit through their contact with the natural world.
Please list up to three benefits, and why you think exposure/immersion in nature provides
these benefits.
44. How do you, as a group leader, create a safe environment for your participants?
45. When you hear the term “emotional safety,” what do you think this describes?
46. What would you do if you had a participant consistently isolating themselves from a
group you are leading?
47. Under what circumstances would you refer a trip participant to a professional
psychotherapist? (If you are an outdoor leader and a therapist, when would you refer a
client to another therapist?)
48. Do you actively facilitate relationships between participants and the natural environment?
49. Do you use metaphors involving the natural world with your participants?
• No
• I don’t understand this question
• Yes (please elaborate)
50. Have you ever created or facilitated a ritual or ceremony for participants?
• No
• Yes (please elaborate)
51. Is there anything else you would like to share in the context of outdoor leadership and
therapeutic knowledge or relational skills?
177