Literature review serves as basis for youth adventure program modelThis paper reviews, analyzes and synthesizes nearly 40 years of research in order to develop a contemporary model of youth adventure programming (YAP) to promote positive outcomes. The resulting model is presented and discussed. The purpose of the review, which it achieves, is to provide value for design of new youth adventure programs as well as to serve as a tool by which to guide and evaluate existing programs.
Empirical studies published on the topic of adventure programming from 1976 to 2013 were included in the review in an effort to update Walsh and Golin's (1976) YAP model. Key terms related to YAP including "wilderness program," "adventure program," and "outdoor education" were entered into multiple social science, education, and psychology databases. Reference lists were screened to identify other relevant studies. Major constructs, methodology, design, program type, sample characteristics, and results were compared and discussed. Findings were organized by outcomes, whether positive, negative or with no effect.
Major outcome categories were those related to self-concept, including confidence, empowerment, self-understanding, and locus of control; connection, referring to attributes like empathy, trust, group cohesion and enhanced relationships; skills and competencies, such as leadership, courage and conflict resolution; and behaviors such as aggression or anti-social behavior. The results informed and substantiated the development of the model.
Its applications and implications are discussed with an emphasis on helping people to design positive, effective and culturally-appropriate youth adventure programs. The authors' methodology is clearly described with sufficient detail that it has the potential to serve as a model for evidence-based approaches to program design in other fields of interest. In addition to developing a valuable design tool based on current evidence, the process yielded important suggestions for research to address gaps in the literature.
The Bottom Line