In viewing any advertisement or website for facilitated outdoor programmes an easily identifiable outcome is the promise of increased self-esteem for the participant.  Many teachers, instructors and providers guarantee group development through the use of carefully tailored programmes that will increase teamwork, communication, self-awareness and self-esteem.  Providers aim to deliver programmes that will develop growth and understanding. Outdoor adventure is designed to provide an opportunity to challenge, to develop personal growth, and to focus on intra and interpersonal growth (Meyer and Wenger 1998).

Self-esteem plays a major part in how we behave and engage in certain situations.  Many outdoor facilitators believe that outdoor adventure programs can build self-esteem to the point that almost every company logo or statement will relate to self-esteem development within their material. Bandura (1994) highlighted self-efficacy as a part of self-esteem.  He suggested students high in self-efficacy will undertake more challenging tasks and are intrinsically motivated (self motivated). 

Emler (2002) states that self esteem has been used to explain behaviour and social problems, he also looked at work with low self esteem groups suggesting one should solely focus on raising self esteem as this has shown the best results. Stating self esteem can be measured with scales such as the Rosenberg scale questionnaire.

To be an effective facilitator, all four aspects need to be given appropriate attention. Crisfield (2003) suggests for coaching to effective the learner must be developed holistically and, no matter what teaching style is being used, the student being involved in the process is integral.  Research shows important factors such as the learning environment and teaching method can improve self-efficacy Bandura (1995).  Further evidence comes from Fencl & Scheel (2005) who showed engaging the student in a positive manner can produce increased student learning therefore improving their self-esteem, especially when using teaching styles that incorporate the student.

Higher levels of self efficacy produce more effort from individuals to reach their goals, high self-efficacious individuals will attribute failure to things out of their control such as feeling ill or weather conditions.  High self-efficacious individuals will recover from setbacks and generally have a high level of goal attainment Bandura (1995).  Low self-efficacious students have less self-belief, they avoid extended effort and challenges that require high levels of threat, so avoiding failure, and generally only set achievable goals (Margolis and Mcabe 2006).

There is research into the effects of adventure programmes in relation to personal outcomes, Hattie et. al. (1997) found a positive effect on participants to be growth in self-esteem, as people will be more inclined to take on tasks they believe they can be successful in.  Research by Csikszentihalyi (1997) suggests if self-efficacy is slightly high then partcipants are at an optimum level to seek out challenges that will provide valuable experiences.

There is a range of examples of research in adventure education and the raising of self-esteem in its participants  (Gibbs & Bunyan, 1999; Swarbrick, Eastwood & Tutton, 2004; Larson, 2007; Wong & Louie, 2007). There is also evidence of research that contradict these findings; Kaly & Heesacker (2003) found that participation in a ship based adventure program with adolescents did not significantly influence self-esteem. 

Emler (2001) suggests that these inconsistencies could occur to individual’s state or trait attitudes, which also adds depth to the debate about self-esteem being individualistic. Elmer (2001) further explains that young people with a high self-esteem are more likely to hold ethnic prejudices, reject social influence and engage in physically risky pursuits. During facilitation processes that I undertake I often see students with high self esteem willing to climb, kayak or jump, higher faster or further. Those with situational confidence often push themselves and engage fully in the activities they feel are risky supporting Elmers beliefs. Many outdoor practitioners intuitively understand what is effective during an outdoor programme and what will work for a specific situation, yet are often unable to provide theoretical evidence in support and research is often hard to understand Carson & Gillis (1994).

Roger Greenaway is well known to many facilitators of adventure programmesespecially in relationto reflection, Barrett & Greenaway (1995) proposed a model 'Dynamical Adventure Environment' that was developed through a review of research based on the effectsof development during outdoor programmes. They discovered a correlation between specific processes and outcomes relating to self-esteem and listed five components of outdoor programmes that can determine a raise in self-esteem during an outdoor programme. these components are overcoming a fear, supportive group, facilitative leadership, physical exercise and natural environment.  

During  a recent study of 20 outdoor facilitators (10 maleand 10 female) the participants replied to a questionnaire The first question asked if they believed outdoor adventure can improve self-esteem, all participants responded they agree or strongly agree. The final question related to the 'Dynamical Adventure Model' (Barrett & Greenaway (1995). The particpants had to rate the five components that affect self-esteem in how they believe they will affect self esteem. Natural environemnt and phsyical exercise were voted lowestwith supportive group reciving 40% of the overall vote.

What is it we believe? Is self-esteem just a by product of what we do during an adventure programme, is it the focus for what we do?  Many outdoor practitioners blur the line between self confidence and situational self efficacy. Is it not more important to look at if the benefits of a programme and if they can transfer into life after the adventure and is the use of reflection a vital tool for practitioners.

References.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. (Reprinted in H. Friedman [Ed.], Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998).

Barrett, J. & Greenaway, R. (1995). Why Adventure? The role and value of outdoor adventure in young people’s personal and social development. Coventry: Foundation for Outdoor Adventure.

Cason, D. & Gillis, H, L. (1994). A meta-analysis of outdoor adventure programming with adolescents. Journal of Experiential Education. 17(1), 40-47.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row.

Emler, N. (2001). Self-Esteem. The costs and causes of low self-worth. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Emler, N. (2002) ‘The costs and causes of low self esteem’, Youth Studies Australia, v. 21,n. 3, pp. 45-48.

Fencl, H. & Scheel, K, (2005). Research and Teaching: Engaging Students -- An Examination of the Effects of Teaching Strategies on Self-Efficacy and Course in a Nonmajors Physics Course
Journal of College Science Teaching v. 35, issue 1, p. 20-24

Gibbs, C. & Bunyan, P. (1999). The development of self-esteem through a Duke of Edinburgh’s Award scheme. Horizons. 4, 23-25.

Goldenberg, M., McAvoy, L. & Klenosky, D, B. (2005). Outcomes from the components of an Outward Bound experience. Journal of Experiential Education. 28(2), 123-146.

Hattie, J., Marsh, H, W., Neill, J, T. & Richards, G, E. (1997). Adventure education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting difference. Review of Educational Research. 67(1), 43-87.

Swarbrick, N., Eastwood, G. & Tutton, K. (2004). Self-esteem and successful interaction as part of the forest school project. Support for Learning. 19(3), 142-146.

Wong, E,W. & Louie, L, H. (2007). The effects of camp adventure programs on improving self-concept of youth participants in Hong Kong. Journal of Physical Education & Recreation (Hong Kong). 12(1), 7-33.