Here goes, I'm walking into a mine field "women in outdoor education"

“The outdoor adventure environment is in the main seen as a male domain and although women's participation is increasing (Nolan & Priest, 1994), they continue to be in the minority. This is a factor which can deter other women from becoming involved.” (Boniface 2006)

As an aspiring Mountain Leader I feel that this is an important topic to research and relate my current leading experiences to, as it will not only be interesting as a female leader that may come across difficulties as an instructor, but to also be aware of the problems that female participants may come across whilst being lead as part of a group.

Throughout both my personal involvement in outdoor activities and my leadership in outdoor activities I have never really thought about or researched the topic of women participating in outdoor education or working in the outdoor industry. I personally have always felt as though I have been treated no differently to my male peers and co-workers, and feel that my knowledge of the sports I participate in and lead/ instruct is to the same level as the males who are at a similar experience level to me. On the other hand I have always felt that my performance and skill level has been lower than that of the males who are at a similar experience level to me.

This relates to what Ogilvie (1993) talks about, he presents the theory that until we hit puberty other than the obvious biological differences girls and boys are much the same in both physiological build and physical ability therefor it will only be the mental state that differentiates genders and effects performance. He then goes on to say that after puberty physiological differences will start to play a part in the difference of performance between genders, he says “boys in the main are heavier built and stronger than girls. Beyond this point the way in which these differences are overlain with other misapplied meanings, creates a whole mish-mash of misinterpretations and misconceptions. ‘Stronger’ suddenly becomes ‘better’ or ‘superior’. ‘More powerful’ becomes ‘domineering’ and ‘over-powering’. Power values for weight-strength ratios are discounted as are the benefits of being ‘light’ or having a low centre of gravity.”

I agree with the statement that by and large most boys are bigger built and stronger that girls but I do not feel that I have ever come across a situation whilst leading in which because the male is stronger he feels that he is superior or dominant, this may be because I have only limited leading experience and this type of situation hasn’t ever come about, or the males within the groups I have lead may have been thinking that they have dominance but have not shown it in such a way that it has been obvious to see. In my experiences of not only being a leader but also being a participant in outdoor activities, I have felt that personality traits are far more likely to decide who has dominance over who rather than gender type.

In 1988 Ewert carried out a study on the differences in men and women when it came to “situational fears associated with outdoor recreation”. He found that in various situations relating to physical, social and psychological threats women reported back as having higher levels of fear compared to men. Leary (1983) argued that in his previous research there was no consistent evidence that showed women were more fearful than men. Ewert then concluded that women are more likely to admit their fears. (Ewert. 1988 + Leary. 1983 cited in Boniface 2006)

I have come across this whilst leading the ten tors group. It seemed to be that after a particularly bad weekend on Dartmoor the whole group doubted their ability to carry out the challenge due to various weaknesses like navigational difficulties and fitness levels. None of the boys stepped forward and voiced their fears that they might not be able to go ahead with the challenge, it was the only girl in the group that came forward and talked to myself and another group leader about the fears that she had about the challenge. It was only later on after we had discussed these fears with the rest of the males in the group that they admitted to having some of the same fears.

All of the theories above can relate to both female leaders leading alongside male leaders, and female participants in a group with male participants, but Ogilvie talks about how female leaders are accepted by the groups they lead. He says that with all generalisations not all groups will act the same but in most of his observations groups react differently to female leaders than male leaders. He states this is down to expectations, when participating in a outdoors activity people expect to be led by a male instructor, so when they get a female their ideas about leadership roles in the outdoors is shaken up and this can lead to mixed responses including the feelings of disappointment, resentment, or outrage which will show in a variety of ways which will generally test the worthiness of the leader to gage whether they are worthy of respect.

Generally the groups I have lead have had female leaders before me so are used to the idea of female leaders. I have never been tested yet as female instructor or leader but now I understand the importance of first impressions when leading a group and making sure that they know that even though I am a female operating in a male dominated industry I am perfectly capable of doing the job I am there to do and I would not be there otherwise.

This is still an on-going debate in the outdoor industry and research is still being conducted on the subject. I have only touched lightly on the surface of all the theory behind female leadership and am keen to learn more to hopefully aid my career as a female working in the outdoor education industry.

Reference

Ewert. 1988 cited in Maggie Boniface (2006): The meaning of adventurous activities for ‘women in the outdoors’, Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 6:1, 9-24

 Ken C. Ogilvie (1993) Leading and Managing Groups in the Outdoors: 2^nd edition. Published by the institute for outdoor learning: printed by Fingerprints, Barrow-in-Furness

 Leary. 1983 cited in Maggie Boniface (2006): The meaning of adventurous activities for ‘women in the outdoors’, Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 6:1, 9-24

Maggie Boniface (2006): The meaning of adventurous activities for ‘women in the outdoors’, Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 6:1, 9-24

Team Cohesion and Motivational Needs.

On a recent expedition on Dartmoor with a group of ten tors students, it was interesting to observe how the team worked together to achieve goals and overcome difficulties. Carron (1982) suggested that there are four factors which effect cohesiveness of a team:

-Situational factors e.g. physical factors such as the environment, weather and group size.
- Individual factors such as the characteristics of each individual in the team, what kind of mood each person is in this could be affected by personal issues etc.
-Team factors this includes past experiences the team has had together, team dynamics, communication and collective goals.
-Leadership factors, leadership plays a big part in how cohesive a team is.

Whilst observing the team I noticed how they stopped being cohesive at one moment in particular, at this moment there were several factors playing a part in why they became in-cohesive, but this particular study will concentrate on Individual factors only.

The majority of the group were tired, cold, hungry, and dehydrated. Maslow (1954) created a theory model called the Hierarchy of needs (as seen below), according to this a person will only be motivated to progress to higher levels on the pyramid, once they have sufficiently satisfied the needs of the lower levels such as physiological and safety. So for some of the individuals in the group their basic needs on the bottom physiological levels such as food, sleep and water were not being met therefore their motivations were not concentrated on aspects of the higher levels such as problem solving e.g. map reading to navigate off the moor.

 

Maslow also observed that this theory is backed up by a passage in the bible by Deuteronomy 8:3, He takes the passage and paraphrases it as he interprets it.
“It is quite true that man lives by bread alone — when there is no bread. But what happens to man's desires when there is plenty of bread and when his belly is chronically filled? At once other (and higher) needs emerge and these, rather than physiological hungers, dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new (and still higher) needs emerge, and so on. This is what we mean when we say that the basic human needs are organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency.^”      (Maslow. 1954: cited in Lowry. 1999)

However Diner (2011) questioned Maslow’s theory and did a study into it to see if it worked practically. After the study he said  "Our findings suggest that Maslow's theory is largely correct. In cultures all over the world the fulfilment of his proposed needs correlates with happiness, However, an important departure from Maslow's theory is that we found that a person can report having good social relationships and self-actualization even if their basic needs and safety needs are not completely fulfilled." (Diener. 2011)

So according to Maslow we would have to satisfy all of the lower level needs to encourage the individuals in the group to become motivated to navigate off the moor, but according to Diener it would be down to the individual as to how many of those needs need to be met before they could progress to higher levels. We met some of the individuals needs by providing some of Maslow’s physiological needs, we provided the team with a hot drink, and a bag of sweets. This not only met some of the basic needs but also boosted morale and energy levels.

So bringing it all back to Carron’s theory about group cohesiveness we had now catered for as many of the groups individual needs as possible using Maslow and Diener’s theories, this allowed us to change the individual, personal factors within the team, so we could then go on to think about the other 3 factors that affect cohesiveness and how we could change those factors to bring the team cohesion up to a level at which they could work effectively.  

Reference

Carron, A.V. (1982). Cohesiveness in sport groups: Interpretations and considerations. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 123-138.

Deuteronomy 8:3 cited in Lowry, R. (1999) A.H. Maslow's Vision of Human Nature [Online] Available at: http://www.maslow.org/sub/lowry1.htm[Accessed 14.05.11]

Dina (2007) Social Media Strategies – lets remember Maslow! [Online] Available at: http://dinamehta.com/blog/2007/10/18/social-media-strategies-lets-remember-maslow/ [Accessed 14.05.12]

Maslow 1954 cited in Lowry, R. (1999) A.H. Maslow's Vision of Human Nature [Online] Available at: http://www.maslow.org/sub/lowry1.htm [Accessed 14.05.11]

Needs and subjective well-being around the world.

Tay, Louis; Diener, Ed
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 101(2), Aug 2011, 354-365.

Here come the next two....

So its come to that time when everything on the course is sadly coming to an end and as one of the last pieces of work to had in, two more leadership blogs are due in for the mountain leadership module.

As I am writing them now I am wishing I had started them slightly earlier as I have found that I am actually thoroughly enjoying both researching and writing them, but as per usual I have left everything to the last minute (old habits die hard).

As an introduction to the  next two blogs I have found a few pieces of text that I feel fit nicely on the subject of mountain leadership.

Ogilvie quotes "One of the difficulties for trainee leaders is trying to grasp how everything they have learned about leading theory fits together and works on a practical day out with a group. It is a bold leader these days who, in effect, jumps into the pool in order to learn how to swim. There is nothing to beat experience gained as an assistant leader to a group."
I thought this quote quite nicely sums up the aims of the past year in mountain leadership, learning all about leading groups out on the mountain.

Ogilvie also says "whether or not the training course of your chosen training agency or national governing body requires you to keep a log book of of your experience, it is a good idea to do so. In it the act of writing is an opportunity to reflect on your own experiences and whatever useful or memorable lessons can be drawn from them. To learn requires one to think. Learning only takes place after thinking. The leader who stops thinking is dead"

This quote sums up perfectly the purpose of writing these reflective blogs, I especially like the last part of this quote " The leader who stops thinking is dead"

This theory is backed up well by the popular, well used "plan, do, review and revise" cycle by Greenaway 1991.

one last quote that captured my imagination was by J.M. Burns (1978) "Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth"
This has seemed to become more and more apparent  as I have been researching into the many theories and arguments behind leadership.

As I said before I have thoroughly enjoyed researching and writing these next 2 blogs (so far!) so I hope anyone reading will enjoy them just as much.

On a my recent trip to Snowdonia we encountered some challenging weather conditions (strong winds and cold conditions), as one of two group leaders we decided to carry on up onto the top of the Glyders. This was a questionable decision as conditions were bad and going up into them could of been avoided, we could of decided to go back down to lower more sheltered ground to practice low level micro navigation. This may of benefited the group more, as they would would have been in a better environment and state of arousal to learn new skills.

This relates to the Adventure Experience Paradigm by Priest and Gass (1997) their theory suggests that when people go out on an adventure experience they can go through 5 stages in depending on the amount of risk encountered combined with the amount of competence they have. Stage 1 exploration and experimentation, 2 adventure, 3 peak adventure, 4 misadventure and 5 devastation and disaster. They state that to get the most of the situation and be at a peak level of learning a person must be in a stage of peak adventure. Here is the model that Priest and Gass created.

                                             Priest and Gass (1997)

Before we hit the bad weather some group members were already at a state of peak adventure, this meant that when we hit the bad weather it pushed some members to reach a state of misadventure. As I had more competence I could deal with the higher level of risk putting myself in a state of peak adventure, therfore pushing me into the peak level of learning, and having to take a pro-active leadership role to navigate the group out of bad weather. To make sure the group didn't become to cold and exhausted then becoming pushed into a state of devastation and disaster, we decided to find a more sheltered place to get the bothy out so the group could get something to eat, warm up and prepare themselves for the next leg of the trip before dropping back down into sheltered ground. This brought the members that were in a state of misadventure back into peak adventure, and hopefully they learned about methods to warm up and shelter on the mountains using equipment they can carry. This relates to Senninger (2000) he stated that to learn you have to be taken out of your comfort zone, but not pushed into your panic zone.

 

Senninger (2000)

On the mountain in the bad weather the group were pushed out of their comfort zone into their learning zone (some of the group may of been pushed to far into the panic zone) then they learned how to shelter and keep warm on the mountain bringing them back into comfort zone, to then be pushed back into their learning zone/ peak adventure when we got out the bothy into the bad weather to navigate and find the route back down to sheltered ground.

Through being pushed into my my peak adventure/ learning zone I tested my abilities to lead a group and navigate through bad weather conditions. I learned that just because we had a set route to do,  we didn't necessarily need to carry on the planned route if we think the conditions are to bad and don't think the group will benefit enough.

Reference
Senninger. (2000, cited in ThemPra, ca 2008) The Learning Zone Model. [Online] Available at: http://social-pedagogy.co.uk/concepts_lzm.htm [Accessed: 8.12.11]

 

Priest and Gass (1997, cited in Neill, 2007) The Adventure Experience Paradigm. [Online] Available at: http://wilderdom.com/philosophy/PriestAdventureExperienceParadigm.html [Accessed: 8.12.11]

To be marked

Critically analysing my leadership experiences using theories

Moorhead and Griffin (1998) defined leadership as “the use of noncoersive influence to direct and coordinate the activities of group members to meet a goal”. Overall I think that my leadership experience in Snowdonia was a good one, and I feel that myself and the other group leader made some good decisions when we needed to. However there is always room for improvement so using various theories I am going to analyse my experiences.

Chelladurai (1993) said that leadership requires decision making, however if the factors allow it is possible to let group members do some of the decision making. I agree with this as I think it is important to let the group explore and make decisions to aid their learning, especially as they will be leading next year. I feel that on one of the days we didn't give the group enough chance to do the decision making when we could of done. Chelladurai gives 6 factors in which decision making can be shared between leaders or group depending on the situation:

• Time pressure: decisions that need to be made quickly will be made by the leader, if time allows the group can be given the decision. On this particular day we didn't have a strict schedule and we were making good time so we should of handed over sections of the navigation and decision making to the group to allow them to expand their knowledge.
• Decision importance: If the decision requires one clear answer then the leader should make this. At one point we had to cover some very steep ground with scree and scrambling, this required us to take the safest, easiest route. We were right to take control over which route to take, as we had more experience of working on that type of ground.
• Information location: The person with the information regarding the decision should make the decision. Most of the group members had a map and compass therefore having the information needed to make decisions regarding navigation. Therefore we could of handed over the decision making to one of the group, only stepping in if we knew that they had made an error in their decision.
• Problem complexity: the more complex the problem the more likely it is that the leader would make the decision. One of the group decided that after 10 minutes of walking that they didn't feel up to walking that day due to illness, however they said that they would try to carry on. We knew that due to the route planned that there would be no easy escape routes during the day, so to avoid making the situation more complex We suggested that maybe it would be a good idea to head back then. They decided that they would be happy to walk back by themselves, but due to the problem complexity because they were feeling ill, and as leaders we know we should never let a member separate from the group and walk by themselves in case of an incident, we decided that they would have someone accompany them back to the bus.
• Group acceptance: the group are much more likely to respond positively to decision making if they accept and respect the leader. To allow the group to trust and accept us as a leaders we had to prove to them that we could make decisions responsibly, they could have confidence in our ability, and experience. We did this on the first day by doing a lot of the decision making and providing a successful experience for them.
• Leaders power: the greater power/ experience the leader has over the group the more likely they are to make the decisions. We only have one year more experience than most of the group, so we could of left the decision making to one of the group only giving input if we felt necessary, but having that extra experience allowed us to have a greater influence on the decision making than the group members.

Next time I can use a more democratic style of leading rather than autocratic (lewin et al 1939)

Reference:

Chelladurai (1993, cited in Jarvis 1966) Sport Psychology A Students Handbook. USA: Routeledge

Lewin et al (1939,cited in Jarvis 1966) Sport Psychology A Students Handbook. USA: Routeledge)

Moorhead and Griffin (1998, cited in Jarvis 1966) Sport Psychology A Students Handbook. USA: Routeledge

To be marked

my first taste of leadership

Ok, so I've been to Snowdonia for a week and had my first taste of leading! Super exciting. Although I only spent two of the days I spent there leading I also got some vital experience doing an over night expedition that required walking over some challenging terrain, including steep ground, scree work and scrambling which I learnt a great deal from and came away from the two days feeling confident about my abilities to cope with crossing almost any mountainous terrain with a heavy pack on containing all the equipment needed to do an over night camp, this will be required when I go to to my Mountain Leader training and assessment.

Days 3 and 5 brought with them them the greatly anticipated days of leading, the open door to my hopeful long career ahead doing what I love most and sharing it with people who will almost definitely also develop a passion for the mountains. Day 3 tackled a long demanding route that first climbed more than 600metres up steep ground with slight scree and technical walking, I felt that both myself and the other group leader dealt with this well reminding the group about how to manage their pacing to not only cater for all abilities within the group but to stop themselves from wearing themselves out on the first leg of their walk! We also had to make a decision regarding a member of the group who was not feeling very well that day, they had agreed to start the walk and see how they felt, but after 10 minutes of walking they had started to feel week. As the walk planned would not have many good escape routes we decided that it would not be a wise decision to encourage them to carry on, so walked them back to the start point to be picked up by transport to spend the day recuperating for the next walk planned. The rest of the day went smoothly, the weather conditions were great so navigation was fairly easy which left us to concentrate on our leading skills. After a long day group moral was high and I thought that it was great success, both myself and the other group leader had a fairly straight forward introduction to leading, and the group had a long mountain day with varied terrain and experiences. If I could of lead the day again I would of got the group to navigate a bit more to make the day more interesting for them as well as expanding their knowledge of navigation in the mountains.

Day 5 was planned to be a shorter route due to bad weather and we wanted to get the group doing more navigating. Due to it being the end of the week some members of the group were starting to feel tired and moral had dropped, I know that personally my moral was low due to feeling under the weather and tired, I tried not to let this show but am sure it must of shown through a little! Most of the day myself and the other group leader set navigational legs for the group and had them locating themselves regularly in the effort to get them really thinking about where they were, how they got there and what the lay of the land looked like when it was printed on a piece of paper in an artists impression. As predicted the weather on top was not great with howling winds up to 50mph and low visibility, at this point we decided that it would be best to get the group going and navigate ourselves until we dropped back down into better conditions, other wise the group were going to get cold moral would drop. Whilst walking in these terrible conditions in became clear that some members were struggling and becoming cold, so I sought out somewhere that would be sheltered enough to get the bothy out to create a warm sheltered environment to get some food down, get warm and layer up. This was a great experience as it showed just how useful a bothy was not only to us as group leaders but also to the group who had never used one before.

Overall the two days went well and we had some good feed back from our group. I have gained a lot of experience from this trip and am looking forward to many more leading days.

So.... this is the start I guess

The start of year 2 mountain leadership modules, and I guess my main aim is to have fun! I figure if I'm having fun then it means that everyone else is more likely to be having having fun... right? Which I think is a key quality to have as an instructor. If you’re miserable then it’s more than likely that everyone else will be, so keep the spirits up and say goodbye to Hyde and hello to Jekyll who will be your instructor for today.

So some more aims and objectives:
I know that however skilled or experienced I am there will always be plenty more to learn! and there’s going to be plenty of new stuff being crammed into my cranium this year, just need to focus and make sure
I’m soaking it up and remembering it, and putting it to practice regularly so that these new skills don’t become rusty and forgotten, and let’s face it it’s not hard to forget stuff when your brain cells are fighting a losing battle against alcohol, maybe this should be another aim don’t drink so much this year, especially on ML trips.
Right so let’s get down to the critical stuff, the skills I need to brush up on, I have spent some time in the mountains this summer, but have mainly chosen bright sunny clear days where navigating has been fairly straight forward and easy, so I need to get the compass out and bare the dark, dingey, damp weather to put my navigating to the test and challenge myself.
Something I don’t know much about is aspect of slope, so I aim to learn about this as it could be a useful skill for leading on the mountains.
Something else I could do with improving is estimating distance by sight, instead of “it’s over there a bit, will be there dreckly”.
Most of all I will be learning a lot about leading groups this year, it won’t be easy sometimes but it’s all part of learning and I need to remember that and carry on regardless to how much I might just want to shout at my group and run off into the wilderness and live in a cave.