EnEd 5165 (2007)
Theories and Models in Outdoor Education
2 Credits
Instructor: Dr. Julie Athman Ernst
Office: Engr 241
Office Hours: M-Th 1:00 – 2:00 pm (or by appointment)
Phone: 726-6761
Email: jernst@d.umn.edu
Class Email: ened5165-1-f2007@d.umn.edu
Course Website: www.d.umn.edu/~jernst (select EnEd 5165)
Schedule: (Please note times and locations, as they vary class to class!)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Friday, Sept. 21
Friday, Sept. 28
Friday, Oct. 5
Friday, Oct. 12
Friday, Oct. 26
UMD Humanities 480 (2-6 pm)
Wolf Ridge (12:30-4:30 pm)
UMD Humanities 480(2-6 pm)
Wolf Ridge (12:30-4:30 pm)
Wolf Ridge (12:30-4:30 pm)
Course Description:
This course examines the theoretical foundations of outdoor, environmental, and adventure
education. Professional delivery requires knowledge of instructional strategies and resources,
but it also requires an understanding of why we do what we do and an ability to translate theory
into practice. This course explores those theories that drive program development and
implementation, helping answer how programs can be designed to promote learning, skill
development, personal growth, and responsible environmental behavior.
Course Goal:
The goal of this course is for you to become a deliberate and reflective practitioner – one who
can apply theories and research in outdoor, environmental, and adventure education to program
design and delivery, one who can provide justification for their program development, and one
who can anticipate what outcomes can be expected from a given program.
Textbook:
There is no required textbook for this course. There will be assigned readings and a reading list
for each course topic. These readings will be available online at the course website (see above)
or directly through the UMD Library Electronic Reserve (go to www.d.umn.edu/lib/ and select
“Reserve” from the links in the left-hand column; then search for “Ernst” or “EnEd 5165.” It is
your responsibility to make copies of the readings and bring a copy of your assigned reading to
class for discussion (hard copy OR electronic). You are encouraged to print off or save an entire
set of the readings, especially if you are a Master’s student or plan on becoming one.
1
Course Schedule:
Class Topics
1 Course Overview
Framework for OE/EE/AE
Theories/Models (What
and Why)
Logic Models
2
Learning Theories:
- Experiential Learning
- Multiple Intelligences/
Learning Styles
- Culturally-Relevant
Learning
- Piaget’s Theory of
Cognitive Development
(DevelopmentallyAppropriate Pedagogy)
- Constructivism
- Brain-Based Learning
3
Environmental Education
Theories
- Environmental Citizenship
Behavior model
- Value-Belief-Norm model
- Reasonable Person model
- Significant Life Experiences
- Theory of Planned Behavior
- Elaboration Likelihood
Model of Persuasion
- Motivational Theories
- Stages of Change
- Diffusion of Innovation
Objectives
1. Explain the importance of
having a theoretical
understanding of outdoor/
environmental/adventure
education
2. Describe how “Logic Models”
can be used for program
development and evaluation
3. Create a “Logic Model” to
describe an EE,AE, or OE
program
1. Explain the learning theories
that drive the development and
implementation of effective
outdoor/environmental
education programs
2. State practical applications of
those learning theories to
OE/EE/AE program development
and implementation
1. Define EE
2. State the goals of EE
3. Describe the primary theories
and models used to encourage
responsible environmental
behavior and state practical
applications of those theories to
EE program development
4. Describe the primary theories
and models used to encourage
specific behavior change and
state practical applications of
those theories to EE program
development
Readings/Assignment Due
 Part 1 of Concept Map
assignment due (in-class
assignment; worth 10 of
the 20 Concept Map
points)
 Description and Logic
Model of an OE/EE
program (Steps 1-3) of
final assignment (worth 15
of the 45 final assignment
points)
 One assigned reading
 Find and read two articles
on your assigned learning
theory (you can access
journals online through
the UMD library webpage);
be prepared to share your
articles, explaining the
learning theory and
practical applications to
others (5 points)
 Informal presentation (inclass assignment)
 5 assigned readings; be
prepared to share and
discuss content and
practical applications with
others
 One summary for assigned
article in Strand 1and one
summary for assigned
article in Strand 2 (typed,
1-2 pages each); summary
should provide a
description of the theory
and then program
implications (based on this
theory, what does it mean
for the way we teach or
develop EE programs); 10
points
2
4
Adventure Education
Theories
-
5
Fear
Optimal Arousal
Competence-Effectance
Self-Efficacy
Attribution Theory
Expectancy Theory
Sequencing
Facilitation
Transfer of Learning
Course Synthesis
1. Define AE and OE
2. State the goals of AE and OE
3. Briefly summarize the historical
development of OE/AE
4. Describe the primary theories
and models relating to AE/OE
and state practical applications
of those theories to AE/OE
program development
1. Synthesize course content and
apply concepts to an OE, EE, or
AE program
 4 assigned readings; be
prepared to share and
discuss content and
applications with others
 Typed 1-2 page summary
of assigned article (Bisson,
Gass, or Priest); include
description of theory and
program implications (5
points)
 Part 2 of Concept Map and
Reflection due (in-class
assignment; worth 10 of
the 20 Concept Map
points)
 Course Assignment due;
present assignment to
class (remaining 30 points
of final assignment)
Attendance:
Because this class meets only 5 times, the attendance policy is as follows: One excused absence
will result in loss of preparation/participation points for that day; any in-class assignments can be
made up through an alternative assignment relating to course content. Two or more absences
result in course failure.
Expectations
1. Respect the formal learning environment. This includes arriving and leaving on time,
being open to the opinions and ideas of others, and professional presentation of
assignments. This also includes abiding by the University’s academic integrity and student
conduct policies: Academic dishonesty is regarded as a serious offense; this course will
adhere to UMD’s Student Academic Integrity Policy
(www.d.umn.edu/assl/conduct/integrity). Students are expected to follow the
University’s Student Conduct Code (www.d.umn.edu/assl/conduct/code). Disruptive
behavior (including inappropriate use of technology in the classroom) that substantially or
repeatedly interrupts either the my ability to teach or student learning is prohibited.
2. Ask for assistance. We each have different learning needs and preferences; if something
is unclear or if you need alternative opportunities to learn the course topics, please ask!
Individuals who have any disability, either permanent or temporary, which might affect
their ability to perform in this class, are encouraged to inform the instructor at the start
of the quarter. Adaptations of methods, materials or testing procedures may be made as
required to provide for more equitable participation.
3. Attendance, preparation, and participation (Each of you has something to contribute to
this class; by coming to class prepared and actively participating, you will get the most
out of this course and help others learn from your experiences.)
Assignments
25 points
5 points
10 points
5 points
Preparation and Participation (5 points/class)
Learning Theory Articles and Presentation
Two EE Article Summaries (5 points each)
OE/AE Article Summary
3
20 points
45 points
Concept Maps and Reflection
Final Course Assignment
Grades: Grades will be posted on eGradebook (see link from course website). Final
grades will be awarded as follows:
A 93-100%
B 83-86%
C 73-76%
A- 90-92%
B- 80-82%
C- 70-72%
B+ 87-89%
C+ 77-79%
D+ 67-69%
Description of Final Course Assignment
To synthesize the course content and demonstrate a practical understanding, you may choose one
of the following assignments:

Option 1: Analysis of an existing OE, EE, or AE program
1. Select an OE, EE, AE program (not a lesson or activity; the EE program at Wolf
Ridge, for example; not one of the programs we worked with during the class on
logic models)
2. Provide a written description of the program, including its mission or goals, a
description of its components and a description of how it operates.
3. Create a logic model for the program (all of the logic model components should be
addressed; refer to the color logic model handout; you may need to speculate on
the situation, assumptions, and external factors)
4. Provide a written critique of the likelihood of the program achieving it’s goals,
based on what you know about learning theories and AE/EE/OE theories and
models; provide recommendations to increase the likelihood of achieving desired
outcomes or recommendations for program improvement. Include a REFERENCE
LIST or WORKS CITED section.
5. Present your analysis to the class (handout encouraged)

Option 2: Analysis of an envisioned OE, EE, AE program
1. Envision an OE, EE, AE program (one you’d like to create someday)
2. Provide a written description of the program, including its mission or goals, a
description of its components, and a description of how it operates
3. Create a logic model for the program that supports the program goals (all of the
logic model components should be addressed; refer to the color logic model
handout; you may need to speculate on the situation, assumptions, and external
factors)
4. Provide a written justification for your program, including the situation/need and
the underlying assumptions (theories/models) that drove the program; critique of
the likelihood of the program achieving it’s goals, based on what you know about
learning theories and AE/EE/OE theories and models; Include list of works cited or
a reference list.
5. Present your analysis to the class (handout encouraged)
4
Scoring Rubric for Final Assignment
Student Score
Possible
Score
5
10
20
5
5
Criteria
Written description of the program, including location/context,
mission or goals, description of components and description of
operations (background information)
*I’m looking for approximately 1-2 pgs, a brief but thorough
description - thorough enough so that I can see if you logic
model adequately portrays your program.
Logic model (visual/graphic representation) of program); see
logic model visual; you may need to speculate on situation,
assumptions, external factors;
*I’m looking for a typed, professional-looking graphic that
depicts your program and that you’ve included all the
components of the logic model and that you understand the
meaning of these components (output v. outcome for ex); should
be in graphic format, not paragraph or bulleted list format
Written critique of the theories grounding your program and the
likelihood of the program achieving it’s goals, based on what you
know about both learning and AE/EE/OE theories; Written
summary of recommendations to increase the likelihood of
achieving desired outcomes or recommendations for program
improvement
*I’m looking for approximately 3-5 pages where you apply the
learning theories, EE theories, and OE/AE theories in the
context of program assumptions: What assumptions is your
program making based on the program components and the
program outcomes, and are these assumptions sound based on
the theories we’ve studied? Based on what you learned in class,
is it likely the program will achieve its goals? Why or why not?
What could be improved based on what you learned from class,
that would help make the program more likely to reach its
goals? Your score will reflect the depth and application of
course content!
*This critique and recommendations need to be backed by
research - by the theories and research you’ve just learned
about. Thus, I’m not looking for your opinions here, unless they
are supported by research!
Quality of writing (grammar, writing mechanics, spelling,
organization, flow, works cited according to APA format, etc.)
Share your analysis with the class; you’ll be in small groups.
*I’m looking for a 10-15 minute, informal sharing of your
analysis, where you describe your program, show your logic
model, share your analysis and recommendations, and get peer
feedback. You’ll be scored on your preparedness in sharing your
project and the seriousness in which you approach this sharing.
It would be helpful to have a handout for your small group
(approx 6), but no PPT presentation.
5
ENED 5165
Course Bibliography
*Readings are available online at the course website (www.d.umn.edu/~jernst) or
directly through the UMD Library Electronic Reserve (go to www.d.umn.edu/lib/ and
select “Reserve” from the links in the right-hand column; then search for “Ernst” or
“EnEd 5165.”
**************************************************************************************************************************
Class 1: Logic Models (1 Reading)
McCawley, P. (date unknown). The logic model for program planning and evaluation (CIS
1097). Moscow, ID: University of Idaho Extension. *All Read
**************************************************************************************************************************
Class 2: Learning Theories (1 Assigned and 2 Student Selected Readings)
Reading Group Assignments:
1.Alexis, Emily, Nathan; 2. Sean, Jennifer, Joshua.; 3.Andrea, April, Dean; 4. Philip, Courtney,
Erin; 5.Allison, Jill, Ryan; 6.Willie, Jessamy, Dorothy
Jacobson, S., McDuff, M., & Monroe, M. (2006). Learning and teaching with adults and youth. In
Conservation Education and Outreach Techniques (pp. 35-62). *All Read (you should have
an awareness/familiarity of all of the learning theories presented); use the table
provided in class for taking notes as your read this chapter and for during class when
theories are presented
Student-Selected Readings: You are assigned to one of the following six groups, based on your
assigned reading group number from above: 1. Experiential learning; 2. Multiple
intelligences/learning styles; 3. Culturally-relevant learning; 4. Piaget’s Theory of
Cognitive Development/Developmentally-appropriate pedagogy; 5. Constructivism; 6.
Brain-based learning. Your task: find two articles relating to your learning theory (at least
one should be a scholarly, primary source); read and bring to class prepared to share and
discuss.
Oaks, J.& Lipton, M. (2003). Learning is social and cultural. In Teaching to change the
world, pp. 69-98. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. *Optional/Supplemental
Kraft, R. (1999). Experiential learning. In J. Miles and S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure
programming (pp. 181-186). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
*Optional/Supplemental
**************************************************************************************************************************
Class 3: Environmental Education (5 Readings)
Reading Group Assignments:
1. Willie, Emily, Nathan; 2. Alexis, Jennifer, Joshua.; 3. Sean, April, Dean; 4. Andrea, Courtney,
Erin; 5. Philip, Jill, Ryan; 6. Allison, Jessamy, Dorothy
Disinger, J. (2005). Environmental education’s definitional problem. In H. Hungerford, W. Bluhm,
T. Volk, and J. Ramsey (Eds.), Essential readings in environmental education (pp. 17-29).
Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing. *All Read
Jacobson, S., McDuff, M., & Monroe, M. (2006). Changing conservation behaviors. In Conservation
6
Education and Outreach Techniques (pp. 63-84). *All Read; use the table provided in
class for taking notes as your read this chapter and for during class when theories are
presented (excellent overview of major theories; you may want to come back to this on
your final assignment!)
Monroe, M. (2003). Two avenues for encouraging conservation behavior. Human Ecology
Review, 10(2), 113-125. *Optional (a good summary and synthesis of two strands
with important program implications)
Strand One: Theories to Build Environmentally Responsible Behavior
Hines, J., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. (1986/87). Analysis and synthesis of research on
responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education,
18(2), 1-8. *1s Read
Hungerford, H. & Volk, T. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental
education. Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8-21. *2s Read
Stern, P. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior.
Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407-424. *3s Read
Kaplan, S. (2000). Human nature and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Social
Issues, 56(3), 491-508. *4s Read
Chawla, L. (1999). Life paths into effective environmental action. Journal of Environmental
Education, 31(1), 15-26. *5s Read
Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and
what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research,
8(3), 239-260. *6s Read
Hwang, Y., Kim, S., & Jeng, J. (2000). Examining the causal relationships among selected
antecedents of responsible environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Education,
31(4), 19-25. *Optional (builds on Hine’s 1986 model, stressing importance of locus of
control)
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant life experiences revisited: A review of research on sources
of environmental sensitivity. Environmental Education Research, 4(4), 369-382. *Optional
(significant life experience)
Zelezny, L. (1999). Educational interventions that improve environmental behaviors: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 31(1), 5-14. *Optional (important
program implications, including effectiveness of formal v. nonformal ed)
Stand Two: Theories to Change Specific Behavior
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action-control:
From Cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). *1s and 2s Read
Petty, R. & Priester, J. (1994). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Bryant, J. &
Zillmann, D. (Eds.), Media effects advances in theory and research (pp. 98-122). *3s and
4s Read
Rogers, E. (1995). The innovation-decision process. In Diffusion of Innovations (pp. 161-203). New
York: Free Press. *5s and 6s Read
De Young, R. (2000). Expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible
7
behavior. Journal of Social Issues. 56 (3): 509-526. *Optional (motivation theories)
Madden, T., Ellen, P, & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the Theory of Planned Behavior
and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3-9.
*Optional
Hernandez, O. & Monroe, M. (2000). Thinking about behavior. In B. Day and M. Monroe
(Eds.), Environmental education and communication for a sustainable world (pp. 7-15).
Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development. *Optional (program implications)
The Next Steps
Coyle, K. (2004). A plan for improved environmental literacy. In Understanding
environmental literacy (pp. 102-115). Washington, DC: National Environmental and
Training Foundation. *All read
********************************************************************************************************************
Class 4: Outdoor/Adventure Education (4 Readings)
Reading Group Assignments:
1. Dorothy, Allison, Emily; 2. Nathan, Willie, Jennifer; 3. Joshua, Alexis, April; 4. Dean, Sean,
Courtney; 5. Erin, Andrea, Jill, 6. Ryan, Philip, Jessamy
Priest, S. (1986). Redefining outdoor education: A matter of many relationships. Journal
of Environmental Education, 17(3), 13-15. *All Read
Ewert, A. (1989). Models and theories in outdoor adventure pursuits. In Outdoor
adventure pursuits: Foundations, models, and theories (pp. 83-102). Scottsdale, AZ:
Publishing Horizons, Inc.
Characteristics of needed for learning through adventure
*1s Read
*(found under Ewert, Adventuring as An Educational Analog citation)
Optimal Arousal
*2s Read
Competence-Effectance
*3s Read
Self-Efficacy
*4s Read
Attribution Theory
*5s Read
Expectancy Theory
*6s Read
Bisson, C. (1999). Sequencing the adventure experience. In J. Miles and S. Priest (Eds.),
Adventure programming (pp. 205-214). State College, PA: Venture Publishing. *1s, 2s Read
Priest, S. & Gass, M. (1999). Six generations of facilitation skills. In J. Miles and S. Priest
(Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 215-218). State College, PA: Venture Publishing. *3s,
4s Read
Gass, M. (1999). Transfer of learning in adventure programming. In J. Miles and S. Priest
(Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 228-233). State College, PA: Venture Publishing. *5s,
6s Read
Hanna, G. (1995). Wilderness-related environmental outcomes of adventure and ecology
education programming. Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 21-32. *All Read
Goldenberg, M. (2001). Outdoor and risk educational practices. In A. Fedler (Ed.), Defining
best practices in boating, fishing, and stewardship education (pp. 129-141). Washington,
DC: Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation. *Optional/Reference
8
Martin, A. (200?). Adding value to the Outward Bound educational process. Paper
presented at Outward Bound International Conference in Singapore. *Optional/Reference
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. *Optional/Reference
Riggens, R. (1986). Effective learning in adventure-based education: Setting directions for
future research. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(1), 1-6. *Optional/Reference
9