Angela reviewed and commented on Group 1: Embodied Learning and Group 3: Transformational Learning.

Debi reviewed and commented on Group 1:  Embodied Learning, Group 4:  Narrative Learning, Group 6: Self-Directed Learning, and Group 7: Social Cognitive Learning.

Javita reviewed and commented on Group 1:  Embodied Learning and Group 4:  Narrative Learning.

Kathy reviewed and commented on Group 1: Embodied Learning  

Rayla reviewed and commented on Group 5: Spiritual Learning and Group 7: Social Cognitive Learning.

GROUP MEMBERS' CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PROGRAM DESIGN: 
Angela researched ideas for ice breakers and action plan activities; Debi researched ideas for action plan activities, found photos on internet of  outdoor activities, co-wrote & proofed paper and created tables; Kathy presented the idea as well as initiated the research for Challenge Education, found photos on internet of outdoor activities, co-wrote & proofed the paper, and served as our facilitator who got our project off & running  as well as ensured each member contributed; Rayla interviewed two students from the Excel program as well as interviewed the program director of the Culver Challenge Education organization; Javita researched action plan activities and reflective activities. 
A Challenge Education Experiential Learning Program Design

Angela Britton

Rayla Dawalt

Deborah DeJesus

Javita Johnson

Kathy Ritter

Ball State University

EDAC 634 – The Adult as a Learner

March 14, 2015

Introduction

            Experiential learning has been defined as “constructing knowledge and meaning from real-life experience” (Yardley, Teunissen & Dorran, 2012 p. 161). Within the program design of Challenge Education, participants develop their knowledge and build meaning through direct, embodied experiences as they work collaboratively to solve problems. Participants in this paper’s program design are enrolled in a math class at the Excel Center for Adults in Kokomo, Indiana. This is a basic math course for students with limited math capabilities. The Excel Center is a second chance program of adult education where students who have not finished high school can attend tuition free and work to earn a high school diploma. The Excel Center students’ academic abilities are limited for a variety of reasons, including an incomplete school experience to no formal school experience at all. There is no age limit for participants in the Excel Center; the students currently attending the program range from twenty-three to sixty years of age. The mission of the Excel Center is “Empowering individuals to maximize their ability to achieve a prosperous and rewarding career.” In connection with this mission, the Excel Center also has the vision of “A collaborative group of students and educators who are partnering together to change our community one graduate at a time” (Excel Center, n.d.).  The students have been chosen to participate in Challenge Education activities in order to assist them in making a connection between physical and mental problem solving experiences as well as to increase their understanding of self. To assist facilitators in determining student needs, both the youngest and the oldest student in the math program were interviewed. The purpose of the interviews was to determine the students’ view on the importance of math as a life skill and how math would parallel with challenge education.  The oldest student interviewed has made several attempts over the years to obtain a high school diploma.  Obtaining this diploma is of utmost importance to this student as her husband is no longer able to work, making her the sole source of income for her family. She is highly motivated and sees math as a major life skill even though she is somewhat leery about her performance. She expressed that she feels comfortable working in a group so that she can collaborate and ask questions as opposed to working alone. She disclosed, “I work best in a class with an instructor and other students so I can ask questions” (B. Wood, personal interview, 2015). She found the lack of face-to-face interaction with others to be a major detriment when she attempted to take an online class. Working in a group problem-solving environment within the Challenge Education program can greatly help her build relationships and trust with her classmates and instructor.

             The youngest student interviewed has struggled with math and problem solving skills throughout her lifetime. Since she has no public school experience, she lacks the basic skills to get a job and make sufficient income for her lifestyle.  She is not afraid of the academic challenge that lies ahead of her because learning new things makes her feel good about herself.  She shared, “Challenge Education sounds like fun because I like to try new things or anything that will help me learn” (C. Johnson, personal interview, 2015). In describing how she feels most comfortable in learning new tasks, she stated that being shown in a hands-on manner with the support of others makes her feel the most confident. Additionally, she revealed that she is most comfortable when she can work at her own pace. Experiencing the various Challenge Education activities can prove beneficial to this student as she gains knowledge and confidence through new tasks within the supportive learning environment.

The goals and objectives of the Challenge Education program are designed to assist students in transferring their learning in math problem solving to application in work challenges and daily life situations. The program is designed to bridge the gap that sometimes exists for learners between the classroom and the real world.  In striving to lessen the gap that exists for learners attending the Excel Center math class, the following objectives have been established:

1. )   Integrate the math curriculum with experiential group learning activities to develop high- level critical thinking skills.

2.)    Build problem solving abilities to meet academic, personal, and life challenges.

3.)    Develop personal, interpersonal, teamwork and leadership skills.

Rationale

Research has suggested the adult learner acquires knowledge and skills through actual involvement and participation (Smith, 2010). The program design of challenge education builds upon this theory by placing students in authentic learning experiences where they must solve problems involving physical interaction with the other members of their team. Additionally, the program design parallels the essential features that should be included in an effective experiential learning program as determined from studying research and conducting program investigations.  These key features include providing meaningful, hands-on learning experiences and support through active participation, offering dynamic, action-based, collaborative learning experiences; and planning for times of reflection to encourage students’ higher-level critical thinking, engagement, and creative problem solving skills. These three key points have served as the guide map for the development of this Challenge Education program design.  

The class instructor is trained to serve as a facilitator and team leader who guides the students through the Challenge Education experiences and provides support and assistance. In order to become Challenge Education facilitators, instructors must earn certification, and be recertified annually in course problem solving and safety standards. The facilitator is responsible for ensuring safety guidelines are followed during the activities and leading the students’ time of processing and reflection that occurs immediately following each activity accomplished by the team. The facilitator’s responsibility and role becomes one of an experiential guide who supports participants’ learning through exploration and embodied experiences. In this manner, Challenge Education equates experiential learning, and places great value on active participation and the encouragement of peer-to-peer interaction (Furman & Sibthorp, 2013). The program design consists of four component parts – classroom instruction, outdoor activities, reflection, and the transfer of learning between problem solving math activities and life experiences.

Action Plans

The initial component requires an in-classroom phase in which learners start the team building process of getting to know each other’s strengths and weaknesses. In order to create a classroom community, adult educators need to encourage students to interact with each other in engaging, non-threatening ways. To begin, the instructor fosters students’ interactions by using a variety of ‘ice-breaker’ activities. These types of activities allow learners to get to know each other and establish a common ground with their classmates. During this phase of the program, students are building the prerequisite skills required to function as a team on the Challenge Education outdoor activities course. The goals are for students to develop skills necessary for building effective relationships with others as well as establishing a group network and support system, both of which are foundations of trust building. These skills will prove valuable as the students encounter problems while engaging in outdoor learning activities requiring participants to physically demonstrate mutual support, cooperation, respect, and trust as they work as a team to  reach their goals. An example of an ‘ice-breaker’ activity is students telling a partner one thing they would like others to remember about them followed by students sharing the partner responses with the whole group (See Table I).

 Table I. Examples of ‘Ice Breaker’ Activities

Activity	Procedure
Find Someone Who …	* Each student is given a clipboard, pen, and paper entitled, “Find Someone Who…” which has twenty different descriptors (ex. Find Someone Who: … has the same number of brothers as you do…drove less than 5 miles to get here…spent more than 30 minutes getting ready to come, can count to 20 in another language, etc.) * Students walk around the room introducing themselves if need be and asking classmates if they meet one of the descriptors. If so, the classmate signs his/her name to the paper; a classmate may not sign another person’s paper more than twice.
Nursery Rhyme Performance	* The class is divided into small groups of 3 – 4 students each. * Each small group draws one index card from the instructor that has the words of a familiar nursery rhyme, and a second  index card naming a particular genre of music. * Each group is given ten minutes to decide what role each member will fulfill, and rehearse their nursery rhyme  (ex. Itsy Bitsy Spider in Rap; Mary Had a Little Lamb in Opera) before performing it in front of the whole class.
Table Group BINGO	* The instructor divides the class into table groups of 4 -5 students each. * Each table group is given a different BINGO sheet and a BINGO marker. * The instructor says a variety of descriptors such as “drinks tea instead of coffee,  has two cats, went on a cruise last year, loves the color orange” and the table groups mark any descriptor found on their BINGO sheet that applies to someone at their table. * The first table group to fill five boxes in a row shouts, “BINGO!” * This activity can be repeated by switching the table groups and using  descriptor cards not used in the previous round.

The second component of the Challenge Education program takes place outside on a course constructed for what are called ‘low element’ group challenge problem solving activities. Low element activities are group-focused physical challenges that occur on or near ground level.  Examples of low element activities include team members walking across a slightly suspended log using peer support to build participants’ confidence, and passing members of the team through a suspended tire with the goal of achieving a higher level of trust within the team and a sense of group accomplishment. Another example of an effective low element activity requires participants communicating and collaborating together in order to get the entire team over a suspended beam. This activity utilizes individual problem solving abilities and differences to benefit the group as a whole. Low element activities are considered to be the backbone of the outdoor challenge course experience and emphasize participation, trusting others, and creative thinking (Culver, n.d.).

During the low elements activities phase, participants are engaged in meaningful and dynamic learning experiences that are action-based and collaborative in design. Before beginning any of the activities, students are trained in safety concerning each physical problem to be solved, and are expected to follow designated safety regulations. A primary safety measure required for the low element activities consists of group spotting to ensure the safety of each participant. Students approach each problem to be solved as a team. All members of the team are expected to participate at some level, and it is the job of the team to ensure the success and safety of each team member. The instructor, serving as the facilitator, asks questions that allow the group to develop insights as they encounter roadblocks during the activities that impact their problem solving process. Problems are solved successfully when all team members have accomplished the designated task or tasks for each particular activity. As students complete the low element activities, they better understand that successful problem solving requires planning, collaboration, and teamwork.

To gain a better understanding of the low element outdoor activities component of the Challenge Education approach incorporated in this program design, an interview was conducted with Ms. Betsy Bontrager, a program director with the Culver Challenge Education program.  She shared how the outdoor courses can be appropriate for all skill levels of participants as well as adapted to be handicapped accessible stating, “If five participants are not able to do an activity but two participants are able to, adjust [the tasks] so all five can do the activity” (B. Bontrager, personal interview, March 9, 2015). Additionally, she discussed the importance of setting both individual and team goals by participants, and how all groups will have different agendas on different days. Furthermore, facilitators need to be aware of and open to different outcomes within a group. In regards to group dynamics, Ms. Bontrager has said, “The outcome will ultimately go where the clients want it to go” (personal interview, March 9, 2015).  

In this program design, Challenge Education participation will consist of students solving various constructed problems presented in low element activities. Throughout the outdoor challenge course experience, participants will focus on building personal strengths through identification and activation. Additionally, participation in the outdoor challenges will focus on how resilience is more than recovering from adversity, and serves as a mechanism to propel one forward in the presence of an opportunity. Lastly, the facilitator will focus on building relationships to aid in bridging the gap between strengths, resilience, and building relationships, thus providing the students with the necessary skills for building positive networks.

Table II. Examples of Low Element Outdoor Activities

Activity	Objective	Task
Criss Cross	To encourage creativity in problem solving, group trust and cohesion.	Two team members traverse on cables that create an “x” with the aid of the group.
Log Jam	To explore different problem solving techniques while physically challenging team members.	Three participants progress from one of the jam to the other by maneuvering the suspended logs on the cable.
Porthole	To achieve a higher level of trust among team members, discover group characteristics and dynamics not previously surfaced, and feel a heightened sense of accomplishment.	Team members work together to pass each participant through a suspended tire.
Swinging Log	To increase one’s sense of physical self and group support.	Participants walk across a moving, slightly suspended log using peer support as needed.
The Traverse	To promote realistic goal setting, and support toward team members physically and emotionally.	Participants move from the first tire to the last tire in a series laid out on the ground.

            The third component of the Challenge Education program design involves student reflection and processing. Processing activities focus on both the individual and the group.  In these planned times of reflection, short discussions are held after the completion of each activity and are designed to foster learning from the challenges encountered. In conducting moments of reflection, the facilitator brings the group together to sit in a close circle of proximity in order to encourage the participants to focus on the events that unfolded during the problem solving process. Sitting in a circle promotes the feeling of unity, and encourages the exploration of needed changes or improvements. The opinions and perspectives of the team members are elicited by the facilitator in an effort to bring forth the group dynamics of teamwork, critical thinking, and creative problem solving. Students must develop the ability to vocalize their needs with others and find their own level of comfort in order to reach their goals. This skill is encouraged through the building of trust in each other as a team and a supportive group structure.  The facilitator models a focus on what was learned from others in the team and helps students explore what knowledge or realization was gained through each problem-solving step. Through this interactive reflection process, the different possible approaches or planning steps are discussed and analyzed. Reflection and group processing consist of the following question types:

1.)    What was the outcome of the first attempt to solve the problem?

2.)    What changes in the problem solving steps need to be made?

3.)    What steps did you take to make the end result successful?

4.)    How did teamwork help in solving the problem?

5.)    What individual skills or strengths were utilized?

In order to achieve the desired reflection and critical analysis of the group processing, the facilitator must design the questions to suit the individual group dynamic and processing needs.

Table III. Examples of Reflection Activities for the Classroom Component

Activity	Procedure
Journaling	*The instructor gives each student a small notebook and tells the students the notebook is only for personal reflection journaling *The instructor posts reflection questions (such as the five listed on page 9) on the wall for students to refer to when journaling *At the end of the week, ask students to share two of their thoughts with the class
Partner Recall	*Students choose another student to partner with and discuss the day’s activities *Students use reflection questions to guide their conversation
Representations	*The instructor provides a variety of supplies the students can use such as play dough, markers, crayons, watercolors, Lego blocks *Students use the supplies of their choice to illustrate their experiences&/or feelings about the day’s activities *Students can choose to share verbally or in writing about with the class about their representation and how it reflects their learning experiences

           

The fourth component of the Challenge Education program design consists of providing for transfer of learning between the challenge problem solving experiences and math activities to the students’ real life challenges. During this final phase, small groups of students led by a group leader who serves as the group’s math facilitator work together to solve math problems by utilizing support strategies developed during the second phase of the outdoor challenge activities.  Throughout the course of the semester, the role of math facilitator rotates among each of the students within the small groups. While answering their math problems, students will recall and discuss the value of the problem solving strategies they have discovered together. They will recognize how the strategic steps they used during the Challenge Education experiences can transfer to solving specific math problems. The facilitators maintain an ongoing list of strategies utilized by the groups to solve the math problems that relate to the strategies they used in the Challenge Education course activities. As the small groups work through and solve the math problems, each group’s facilitator leads the class in a discussion to demonstrate and emphasize how their specific problem solving steps utilized the ideas and input from the group members. In this manner, all groups can learn from the experiences of the other groups in regards to individual perspectives, teamwork, and effective problem solving strategies. One example of students demonstrating the transfer of learning is each group chooses one problem they enjoyed on the outdoor challenge course and creates a math problem to solve using the same problem solving steps they successfully used during the Challenge Education experience.

Table IV. Examples of Transfer of Learning Activities

Activity	Materials Needed	Procedure
Examining a Common Life Problem	·         Large dry erase board or  large flip chart paper ·         Dry erase or Crayola markers	Team members: * Select a problem commonly experienced by adults. * Brainstorm together and write down possible solutions by implementing successful techniques and strategies used in the outdoor experiences. * Discuss pros & cons for each possible solution. * Share findings with the whole class.
Examining an Outdoor  Activities Challenge	·         Large dry erase board or large flip chart paper ·         Dry erase or Crayola markers	Team members: * Select one activity from the outdoor low element group challenge problem solving experiences. * Brainstorm together a math problem to solve using the same problem-solving strategies implemented by the team outdoors.
Technology Project	·         Digital Camera ·         Laptop ·         Team member(s) experienced with creating power point slide shows	Team members: * Take pictures of students completing the outdoor activities and indoor assignments. * Incorporate photos into a power point presentation to reinforce how math concepts such as estimating distance, determining geographical angles and slopes, etc. helped teams solve problems and challenges encountered in the outdoor activities.

The following schedule reflects the incorporation of the four components of the Challenge Education approach into a Kokomo Excel Center student’s day:

Table V. Sample Schedule for Challenge Education activities

9:00 – 9:45 a.m.	Excel students arrive in their classroom and participate in the ‘Ice Breaker’ Activities presented by and facilitated by the classroom instructor.
9:45 a.m. – 10:15 a.m.	Class facilitator explains and practices safety information with the students.
10:15 a.m. – 12:15 a.m.	Students transition outside to participate in the Low Element Outdoor Activities guided by the class facilitator.
12:15 p.m. – 1:15 p.m.	Lunch
1:15 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.	Students participate in Reflection Activities.
2:15 p.m.	Class is dismissed.

Conclusions

Smith (2010) has emphasized the use of concrete experiences and feedback to obtain new perspectives and understandings as two significant aspects of experiential learning. Kolb has greatly influenced adult education beliefs and practices with his descriptors of four features considered essential for learning from one’s experiences:

(1) Concrete experiences – being willing to engage in new experiences;

(2) Reflective observations – possessing the ability to observe and reflect on new experiences from different perspectives;  

(3) Abstract conceptualization – being able to analyze ideas and concepts so knowledge can be gained from one’s observations;

(4) Active experimentation – having decision-making skills and problem-solving abilities enabling the learner to use new concepts and ideas

(Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007, p. 164). The Challenge Education approach provides participants with unique experiences that incorporate each of Kolb’s four descriptors through mental and physical problem-solving activities designed to encourage individuals’ development of effective communication skills and trusting relationships within a group. Furthermore, the Challenge Education approach emphasizes individual strengths, demonstrates how focusing on these strengths can positively affect group dynamics, and illustrates the benefits of identifying and confronting personal fears and limitations (Culver, n.d.).  

Experiential learning is often described as the interaction of a learner’s goal-oriented actions with conditions and circumstances in the environment that affect the learner’s actions. Therefore, adult educators who become certified in Challenge Education must provide an authentic, respectful learning environment in which students feel safe to investigate, ask questions, make inquiries, and engage in risk-taking in order to find answers. Atherton (2013) has stressed that a learner’s reflections are concentrated on what the experience has personally meant to the individual. The third and fourth components of the Challenge Learning approach provide opportunities for reflection allowing students to make connections between personal experiences and academic content.

The main objectives guiding the development of this Challenge Education program have been to provide the math students at Kokomo’s Excel Center with opportunities to face uncommon challenges in order to improve brainstorming and problem-solving skills, increase self-confidence, and build a classroom environment of trust, risk-taking and respect.  By valuing students’ contributions, using creative strategies and making necessary adjustments for individual learners within the supportive network of collaborative interactions, these goals can be realized.

Table VI. Comparing the Challenge Education Approach with Experiential Learning Theory

	The Key Features  of Experiential Learning	Application of Experiential Learning Theory in the Challenge Education approach
Idea 1:	Knowledge is constructed through meaningful experiences.	Adult educators  act as facilitators who: ·         utilize interaction strategies that support experiential learning. ·         ensure safe, respectful learning environments. ·          encourage students to reach course objectives through uncommon outdoor and indoor experiential learning Challenge Education experiences.
Idea 2:	The experiential learning approach has been tested and validated by research.	Adult Educators should examine and implement proven, effective experiential learning characteristics and strategies substantiated by research data.
Idea 3:	Adults benefit from experiential learning strategies and methods.	Educators should utilize a variety of age and developmentally appropriate experiential learning strategies to support learners of every age.
Idea 4:	Reflection is a key feature of the experiential learning approach.	Opportunities for reflection methods should be incorporated in every indoor and outdoor experience to ensure active engagement and meaningful, long lasting learning benefits.

Table VII. Key Features of Organizations Examined in the Program Investigation

Key Features	The Art Institute                                     of Indianapolis	The Crossing of Anderson	Features to Apply to Other Programs
Dynamic, action-based, and collaborative learning process	The student learns through concrete experiences along with supervision by industry and college professionals.	The student learns through concrete experiences and benefits from job classroom teachers and a job coach.	*Design interactive, collaborative, real life learning experiences.
Active participation and learning by doing experiences	The student learns by experiential skill performance under the direction of a sponsor company mentor.	The student learns through on-line coursework and workplace experiences guided by teachers and a job coach.	*Provide meaningful, hands-on, active learning experiences and support.
High level problem solving and critical thinking learner engagement	The learner is encouraged to reflect and apply critical thinking, problem solving, and analytical reasoning concerning personal performance and challenges.	The learner is encouraged to reflect on experiences with fellow students and the job coach resulting in higher critical thinking and problem solving.	*Plan for times of reflection to encourage higher critical thinking and creative problem solving skills.

ONCE AGAIN, THE REFERENCE PAGE DID NOT PASTE CORRECTLY INTO THE BLOG AND I AM UNABLE TO OUTWIT THE COMPUTER TO FIX THE FORMATTING.  ON BEHALF OF GROUP 2, PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGIES! Debi 

References

Atherton, J. (2013). Learning and teaching: Experiential learning. Retrieved January 28, 2015

from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/experience.htm

Benander, R. (2009). Experiential learning in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Journal of

the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), 36-41. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov. proxy.bsu.edu/?id=EJ854893

Culver (n.d.).  Culver challenge course. Retrieved from http://www.culver.org/about-culver/

organization/services/challenge-course

Excel Center,(n.d.). About. Retrieved from http://www.excelcenter.org/about

Furman, N. & Sibthorp, J. (2013). Leveraging experimental learning techniques for transfer.

Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood. San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass                                                                                                                             New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education: v.137, p. 17-26. DOI: 10.1002/ace.2004                                                                                                                              Smith, M.(2010). David a. kolb on experiential learning. The Encyclopedia of Informal

Education. Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/david-a-kolb-on-experiential          learning                                                                                                                                                       Yardley, S.,Teunissen, P., & Dornan, T. (2012). Experiential learning: Transforming theory into  

practice. Medical Teacher, 34(2), 161-164. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.643264