Beyond “The Outward Bound Process:” Rethinking Student Learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is based on a research study that explored the means by which students learn at Outward Bound Western Canada. For this study, data were collected from 92 students through questionnaires, interviews, and observation. Twenty-nine course components were found to influence course outcomes, including various aspects of course activities, the physical environment, instructors, and the group. Certain course components were found to be most influential in determining increases in students' self-awareness, self-confidence, self-reliance, self-esteem, self-concept, motivation, self-responsibility, interpersonal skills, concern for others, and concern for the environment; while several course components impacted course outcomes in negative ways. The gender, age, and population of students were also found to play a role in determining the course outcomes students experienced and which course components caused those outcomes. The study is discussed in terms of how it supports, extends, and refutes existing adventure education theory, as well as in relation to contemporary theories on modernity. A model is proposed as an alternative to the well-known Walsh and Golins' (1976) model of “the Outward Bound process” in consideration of the study's findings and the need for a renewed commitment to compassion and service within Outward Bound.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it