The Challenge Course Experience Questionnaire: A Facilitator’s Assessment Tool

Abstract

Challenge course programs influence a variety of psychological, social, and educational outcomes. Yet, many challenges exist when measuring challenge course outcomes like logistical constraints and a lack of specific assessment tools. This study piloted and tested an assessment tool designed for facilitators to measure participant outcomes in challenge course programs. Data collection occurred in three separate but related studies with participants in two different challenge course environments from two regions of the United States. Through confirmatory factor analysis, a two-factor structure in challenge course participation was supported. The Challenge Course Experience Questionnaire (CCEQ) consists of challenge course participants’ (a) individual experience and (b) feelings of group support. During the first study, the structure was created and initial evidence of reliability was indicated. The second study examined the structure and reliability with a similar population. The third study confirmed the structure and reliability using a different population and challenge course program. The CCEQ is a preliminary step toward helping challenge course professionals improve their programming through statistical evaluation of desired outcomes.

Keywords

adventure education survey development program evaluation challenge course team building

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baldwin

Persing

Magnuson

(2004). The role of theory, research, and evaluation in adventure education. Journal of Experiential Education, 26, 167-183. doi:10.1177/105382590402600307

Belzer

K. D.

D’Zurilla

T. J.

Maydeu-Olivares

(2002). Social problem solving and trait anxiety as predictors of worry in a college student population. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 573-585.

Bloom

G. A.

Stevens

D. E.

Wickwire

T. L.

(2003). Expert coaches’ perceptions of team building. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 129-143. doi:10.1080/10413200390213830

Bronfenbrenner

(1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Curran

P. J.

West

S. W.

Finch

J. F.

(1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16-29.

Dinno

(2009). Exploring the sensitivity of Horn’s parallel analysis to the distributional form of random data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 362-388. doi:10.1080/00273170902938969

Eatough

Chang

C. H.

Hall

(2015). Getting roped in: Group cohesion, trust, and efficacy following a ropes course intervention. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(2), 65-89. doi:10.1002/piq.21183

Ewert

Sibthorp

(2009). Creating outcomes through experiential education: The challenge of confounding variables. Journal of Experiential Education, 31, 376-389. doi:10.1177/105382590803100305

Gillis

H. L.

Speelman

(2008). Are challenge (ropes) courses an effective tool? A meta-analysis. Journal of Experiential Education, 31, 111-135. doi:10.5193/JEE.31.2.111

10.

Glass

J. S.

Benshoff

J. M.

(2002). Facilitating group cohesion among adolescents through challenge course experiences. Journal of Experiential Education, 25, 268-278.

11.

Gross

T. F.

Mastenbrook

(1980). Examination of the effects of state anxiety on problem-solving efficiency under high and low memory conditions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 605-609. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.72.5.605

12.

High 5 Adventure Learning Center. (2016, March 2). Certification. Retrieved from http://high5adventure.org/training/certification.html

13.

Horn

J. L.

(1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185. doi:10.1007/BF02289447

14.

Martin

Davids

(1995). The effects of group development techniques on a professional athletic team. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 533-535.

15.

McKenzie

M. D.

(2000). How are adventure education program outcomes achieved? A review of the literature. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5, 19-28.

16.

Priest

(1986). Redefining outdoor education: A matter of many relationships. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(3), 13-15.

17.

Priest

(1995). Challenge course facilitator competence: A consensus. Journal of Experiential Education, 18, 158-160. doi:10.1177/105382599501800309

18.

Prouty

Panicucci

Collinson

(Eds.). (2007). Adventure education: Theory and applications. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

19.

Qualters

D. M.

(2010). Bringing the outside in: Assessing experiential education. New Direction for Teaching and Learning, 124, 55-62. doi:10.1002/tl.421

20.

Rogers

P. J.

(2000). Program theory: Not whether programs work but how they work. In Stufflebeam

D. L.

Madaus

G. F.

Kellaghan

(Eds.), Evaluation models (pp. 209-232). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.

21.

Schwarzer

Jerusalem

(1995). Generalize Self-Efficacy Scale. In Weinman

Wright

Johnston

(Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.

22.

Signature Research Inc. (2016, March 2). Training. Retrieved from http://www.signatureresearch.com/training/

23.

Streiner

D. L.

(2003). Being inconsistent about consistency: When coefficient alpha does and does not matter. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80, 217-222.

24.

Wagstaff

W. Q.

(2007). Challenge course facilitator technical skills assessment tool mark. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 11, 29-40.

25.

Willis

G. B.

(2004). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

26.

Wolfe

B. D.

Samdahl

D. M.

(2005). Challenging assumptions: Examining fundamental beliefs that shape challenge course programming and research. Journal of Experiential Education, 28, 25-43.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.20 MB