Some of the present approaches for studying adventure education are based on grounded theory, folk pedagogies, and existing social science theory. These approaches share some problems, including: (a) an overemphasis on outcomes without specifying processes, (b) a misunderstanding of how different types of evaluation contribute to theory, and (c) under-theorized evaluation and program models. As an alternative, program theory evaluation, which focuses on a “theory-program-outcome” model, in which all three components are specified simultaneously, can help avoid these mistakes while contributing a more sophisticated understanding of how programs have effects.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeringerA. (1990). Understanding moral development and environmental values through experience. Journal of Experiential Education, 13(3), 29–34.
2.
BrittD. W. (1997). A conceptual introduction to modeling: Qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
ChenH.RossiP. H. (1992). Using theory to improve program and policy evaluations. New York: Greenwood Press.
4.
CookT. D. (2000). The false choice between theory-based evaluation and experimentation. In RogersP. J.HacsiT. A.PetrosinoA.HuebnerT. A. (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 27–34). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
CreswellJ. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
EasterlingD. (2000). Using outcome evaluation to guide grant making: Theory, reality, and possibilities. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 482–486.
EwertA.SibthorpJ. (2000). Multivariate analysis in experiential education: Exploring the possibilities. Journal of Experiential Education, 23(2), 108–117.
9.
FettermanD.BowmanC. (2002). Experiential education and empowerment evaluation: Mars rover educational program case example. Journal of Experiential Education, 25, 286–295.
10.
FinneyJ. W.MoosR. H. (1992). Four types of theory that can guide treatment evaluations. In ChenH.RossiP. H. (Eds.), Using theory to improve program and policy evaluations (pp. 49–69). New York: Greenwood Press.
11.
GarveyD. (1999). Outdoor adventure programming and moral development. In MilesJ. C.PriestS. (Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 133–139). State College, PA: Venture.
12.
HamiltonS. F. (1979, April). Evaluating experiential learning programs. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. (ERIC Document Reproductive Service No. ED170357)
13.
HamiltonS. F. (1980). Experiential learning programs for youth. American Journal of Education, 88, 179–215.
14.
HarterS. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York: Guilford Press.
15.
HattieJ.MarshH. W.NeillJ. T.RichardsG. E. (1997). Adventure education and outward bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting difference. Review of Educational Research, 67, 43–87.
16.
KlintK. A., (1999). New directions for inquiry into self-concept and adventure experiences. In. MilesJ. C.PriestS. (Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 163–168). State College, PA: Venture.
17.
LernerR. M. (1989). Developmental contextualism and the life-span view of person-context interaction. In BornsteinM. H.BrunerJ. S. (Eds.), Interaction in human development (pp. 217–239). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
LernerR. M. (1995). America's youth in crisis: Challenges and options for programs and policies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
LernerR. M.MillerJ. R.KnottJ. H.CoreyK. E.BynumT. S.HoopferL. C.. (1994). Integrating scholarship and outreach in human development research, policy, and service: A developmental contextual perspective. In FeathermanD. L.LernerR. M.PerlmutterM. (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (pp. 249–273). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
LewinK. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper.
21.
McKenzieM. D. (2000). How are adventure education program outcomes achieved? A review of the literature. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5, 19–28.
22.
MillerP. H. (1993). Theories of developmental psychology (3rd ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman.
23.
PriestS. (1999a). The adventure experience paradigm. In MilesJ. C.PriestS. (Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 159–162). State College, PA: Venture.
24.
PriestS. (1999b). Research in adventure programming. In MilesJ. C.PriestS. (Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 309–317). State College, PA: Venture.
25.
PriestS. (2001). A program evaluation primer. Journal of Experiential Education, 24(1), 34–40.
26.
ReynoldsA. J. (1998). Confirmatory program evaluation: A method for strengthening causal inference. American Journal of Evaluation, 19, 203–221.
27.
RogersP. J. (2000). Program theory: Not whether programs work but how they work. In StufflebeamD. L.MadausG. F.KellaghanT. (Eds.), Evaluation models (pp. 209–232). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
28.
RogersP. J.HacsiT. A.PetrosinoA.HuebnerT. A. (Eds.). (2000). Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities. (New Directions for Evaluation, Series No. 87). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
RowleyJ. (1987). Adventure education and qualitative research. Journal of Experiential Education, 10(2), 8–10.
30.
TrochimW. M. K.CookJ. (1992). Pattern matching in theory-driven evaluation: A field example from psychiatric rehabilitation. In ChenH.RossiP. H. (Eds.), Using theory to improve program and policy evaluations (pp. 49–69). New York: Greenwood Press.
31.
WalshV.GolinsG. (1976). The exploration of the Outward Bound process. Garrison, NY: Outward Bound.
32.
WeissC. H. (2000). Which links in which theories shall we evaluate? In RogersP. J.HacsiT. A.PetrosinoA.HuebnerT. A. (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 35–45). (New Directions for Evaluation, Series No. 87). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
WilsonS. J.LipseyM. W. (2000). Wilderness challenge programs for delinquent youth: A meta-analysis of outcome evaluations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 1–12.
34.
YinR. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
