Simon Priest

Factor exploration and confirmation for the dimensions of an adventure experience.

Behavior in an adventure recreation experience is based in part on perception of risk and competence. If incorrectly perceived, an unexpected condition may result, the outcomes of which may be soci...

The adventure experience paradigm and non-outdoor leisure pursuits

This paper considers the applicability of the Adventure Experience Paradigm (Martin and Priest, 1986) in non-outdoor leisure pursuits. This paradigm was conceived in relationship to outdoor adventure leisure pursuits and, to date, has only been discussed in these terms. In this paper, the paradigm is first presented and clarified within the context that it was created; adventure experience. It is then applied to non-outdoor adult leisure settings and experiences. In presenting the paradigm and discussing examples related to both outdoor and non-outdoor leisure pursuits and settings, the authors suggest that a broader interpretation and application of the paradigm to the leisure experience is possible.

Research note: Functions of privacy in Australian wilderness environments

Abstract This study was a replication and extension of Hammitt and Browns (1984) original research on Westins (1967) privacy theory. Hammitt and Browns study identified five factors related to Junctions of wilderness privacy: Emotional Release, Personal Autonomy, Reflective Thought, Limited Communication—Personal Distance, and Limited Communication—Intimacy. This study followed a similar approach but was concerned with Australian wilderness privacy rather than American. Fifty‐five experienced wilderness users rated 24 wilderness privacy items for level of importance. Confirmatory factor analysis failed to fully support Hammitt and Browns original five‐factor model or Westins four‐function theory. However, exploratory factor analysis produced six meaningful factors that lent support to the original work. Once again, emotional release was found to be the most important function of wilderness privacy in Australia, as was the case with Hammitt and Browns original study in America.

Blueprint For Qualification, Certification And Accreditation In Oz And NZ

Until recently, I hadnt visited Australia or New Zealand in almost three years. Now, after having enjoyed a couple of trips to both in the past three months, I note that the outdoor education fields of each country are struggling with the leader certification and program accreditation issues that the UK and US have been through in decades past. On the basis of my past observations, recent interviews and discussions with leading folks in the fields, at least two years of living and travelling in both nations, and 20 years of research on these very topics, I feel confident that Australia and New Zealand can do a better job of addressing these issues than either the UK or US and can do so without repeating their mistakes. I will try to explain my reasoning in brief and concise terms. First, Ill define some key words. second, Ill review some history regarding the three issues titled above. Third, Ill outline a blueprint for how these issues can be better addressed by Australia and New Zealand. Last, 111 set a challenge for folks to take up at their next national meetings. Hope it works! Definitions Outdoor Education is about relationships concerning adventure (intrapersonal and interpersonal), the environment (ecosystemics and ekistics) and the interaction of all these (spirituality). Although outdoor education has historically had an adventurous meaning in Australia and New Zealand, I am suitably impressed fay recent efforts to develop the Australian model of OE that incorporates elements of critical thinking with a deeper understanding of place and ones connection to a particular environment while engaged in challenging experiences. Leaders are people trained and assessed to be competent in the dozen skills of outdoor leadership (activity, safety, environment, organization, instruction, facilitation, style, ethics, communication, problem solving, decision making, and judgement). Leaders are the principle catalyst for helping people learn about the five relationships noted above. While I also understand leadership to be a process of influence, and recognize that leadership can emerge from within a group process, I will not use the word in this way during this discussion. Programs are collections of learning experiences held together by many logistics such as scheduling, staffing, equipment, meals, housing, transportation, communication, finances, etc. Each learning experience is a specific event that participants engage in and that Subsequently changes the way they feel, think, or behave in connection with the five relationships noted above. Staff are the leaders designated by the program to have the responsibility for participant safety, environmental protection, program effectiveness, and for facilitating participant changes as repeatedly noted earlier. Qualification is a systemic process and sequential approach to screening, training, assessing, developing, and apprenticing people in the dozen outdoor leadership skills listed. I use the term in reference to leaders only. My notion of qualification differs somewhat from British and other NCVQ schemes. Certification is a process whereby an evaluating body gaurantees that standards of competence have been achieved by leaders after their qualification. I use the term in reference to staff working in programs only. Certification is only effective when a program designates their staff as appropriate to work in their program and not when the certificate is generalized to other outside programs. My notion of certification differs drastically from the old BMLC scheme (or any of the so-called leadership certificates currently in use around the world) which support transferability of the certificate to many and various situations. Accreditation is a process whereby an evaluating body recognizes that a program has met standards of operation, which includes the staffs abilities to lead appropriate learning experiences. …

Towards a new theory of outdoor leadership style.

This study introduced the Conditional Outdoor Leadership Theory (COLT) and examined the contributory relationships among the COLT variables: concern for task, concern for relationships, concern for conditional favourability, and outdoor leadership style. Stepwise multiple regression was employed in an effort to predict style on the basis of how concerned expert outdoor leaders were for the task, relationships, and conditional favourability of 12 scenarios. Predictions were made for expert responses which fit the model and for those which did not fit. Outcomes for both predictory equations were similar, suggesting that perceived concerns do indeed strongly contribute to the expression of outdoor leadership style, regardless of the manner in which a scenario might be interpreted.

The Influence of National Characteristics on Attitudes and Approaches to Outdoor Leadership Preparation

Abstract An international study was undertaken to determine the differences in attitude and approach to outdoor leadership preparation for experts from five nations: Australia, Canada, Great Britain, New Zealand, and the United States. Canonical discriminant function analysis was used to predict experts nationality with 90 percent accuracy. The content of the first function, coupled with comments provided by the experts themselves, helped establish key national characteristics. These unique characteristics were used to explain the established differences in attitude and approach to outdoor leadership preparation in North America and provide the foundation for a model program.