What follows is an evaluation of a bushcraft class I taught to a group of countryside management students at Moulton College in May 2013. The evaluation was carried out as part of the work I submitted for the DTLLS teaching qualification.
This session gave students a chance to use bushcraft skills which we had covered
previously in relation to a range of countryside management skills. Bushcraft includes skills such
as outdoor leadership, botany, ecology and green wood work to name but a few.
All these skills are relevant to people working in the countryside, and the
specific skills covered in this session included, plant and tree
identification, green woodwork and team work. I am investigating the link
between bushcraft and countryside management for my action research, with the
aim of showing that practicing bushcraft can improve engagement and attainment
among countryside management students. Observations and comments made by the
observer were used to support my action research (for full details of this piece of research see the autumn edition of the institute of outdoor learnings Horizons journal or follow this link; https://www.academia.edu/4102884/The_Value_of_Bushcraft_in_Formal_Education. ) The activity I chose for this
lesson was for the students to try to make fire by friction.
Planning, Preparation and Resources
To make fire by
friction using the bow drill method four main components are required and the students would have to source
material and carve each of these themselves during the first part of the
session;
·
A
drill and hearth carved ideally from elder but possibly also from willow or
sycamore depending on what the students could find.
·
A
bow made from inflexible green wood as long as your arm
·
A
bearing block made from hard green wood.
To ensure that
this element of the lesson ran smoothly I came prepared with a selection of
pre-fabricated drills and hearths which I had tested previously and which I
knew would produce an ember. If an individual was unable to produce a
functioning drill and hearth they could use on of the pre-fabricated ones so
they didn’t fall behind. This meant that the task was subtly differentiated as
noted by the observer to ensure all students could be involved throughout the
session without falling behind. It also meant that should they make a fire kit
that for whatever reason would not produce an ember they could switch it for
one of mine which had been previously tested and proved to work. To allow
students to make their own friction fire kit I also provided saws and knives so
they could collect and carve the materials they needed.
I had planned for
the first portion of the lesson to be solely an opportunity for students to
prepare their individual friction fire kits. Those who had not finished by that
time could use the extra drills and hearths I provided. The second part of the
lesson was to begin with my demonstration of how to light a fire by friction.
Two essential items which I provided for the students which could have been
collected from the wild was a string for the bow and tinder for lighting the
fire. The length of this session would not allow for this to take place as to
make enough string of a suitable strength and quality for a friction fire bow
would take an inexperienced person over an hour. Also tinder collection could
have been compromised by poor weather.
To make fire by
friction two pieces of wood must be rubbed vigorously together to produce an
ember, this ember forms from the charred saw dust created by the friction
between the two pieces of wood. Using the bow drill method a drill is spun
using the bow against a flat piece of wood (the hearth). The use of a bow makes
spinning the drill much more efficient and allows downward pressure to be
applied more easily to the drill. To maximise friction at the point of contact
between drill and hearth the drill is carved to a blunt point and dry wood of a
suitable species is required. Downward pressure is applied to the drill with
another piece of wood but at the point of contact between drill and bearing
block friction is minimised by using a hard green wood for the bearing block,
carving that end of the drill to a sharp point and lubricating the socket with
crushed leaves. Once a depression has been formed in the hearth by vigorous
drilling, the wood at the point of contact between drill and heart will begin
to smoke and char, at this point the drill is removed and a notch about an
eighth of the depression is removed with a knife or saw to allow an ember to
form from the charred wood dust. Without this notch the ember would not collect
or reach the appropriate temperature for combustion. Once the notch has been
made drilling can re-commence and once the drill is smoking an ember will begin
to build, drilling must continue until the ember is ‘self sustaining’ producing
smoke on it’s own with no drilling required. Once it has reached this stage the
ember can be transferred to a tinder bundle prepared in advance from dry
shredded grass and must then be blow into flame.
Once I had
completed my demonstration the students would then use their completed kits to
try to make a fire, while they worked individually I could move between them
and offer support to those who needed it. As friction fire lighting is such a
difficult skill to master it was entirely possible that the students would not
manage to produce fire but to ensure that they had as much support as possible
so for the final portion of the lesson, before a recap, the students could work
as small groups to try and use their kit’s more efficiently to produce an
ember.
My reason for
choosing this was that these kinds of bushcraft activities can complement all
forms of environmental education, including countryside management, very well. Some
previous research that I carried out indicated that general education students
engaged better with their countryside sessions when bushcraft activities were
integrated with them (Guy, 2011) .
It has also been recognised in research into the delivery of Forest Schools in
the UK this kind of outdoor activity can help students develop personally and
socially (O'Brien & Murray, 2006) (Borradaile, 2006) . Additionally according to
constructionist learning theory (Papert, 1980) as students learn more skills related
to their chosen subject of study they can create more links with their existing
knowledge and develop their understanding based on more points of reference. In
fact this kind of learning which is situated (Lave &
Wenger, 1991)
in the environment where students will eventually work will prepare them even
more for employment that work study which is carried out ‘out of context’ in a
classroom. The context of bushcraft in countryside management is not only in its
value as an indirect method of teaching plant identification, green woodwork,
leadership etc.. but also more directly in the sense that with the increased
popularity of bushcraft as a recreational activity many park rangers are asked
to run activities to attract visitors to country parks, nature reserves and
Wildlife Trust venues and a prospective employee with these skills may well be
attractive to an employer.
Session Description and Reflection
The students participating in this session had been briefed
as to what the lesson would involve the previous week. They had a chance to
practice identifying appropriate materials earlier in the term and a chance to
practice making the hearth and drill that they would need. They were well
prepared for the session which I had hoped would mean that there would be time
for at least some of the students to successfully produce an ember by friction.
Each student was able to identify appropriate resources
without my assistance and most did this in a timely manner which indicated to
me that their tree and shrub identification skills had become well developed.
Once they had selected the appropriate wood they began to carve it to the
appropriate shape and size for use in their friction fire kits unfortunately
some of the students became so preoccupied with making one element of the kit
that they had by the end of the first portion of the lesson only managed to
make either the drill or the hearth. This would have left them without a fire
kit to use in the second part of the session if not for the extra fire kits I
had brought along. During this portion of the lesson I could have tried to
prompt the students to speed up but due to the nature of the task and the fact
that it involved using knives and saws to fabricate their fire kits I felt it
was more important to coach them on safe technique rather than try and speed
them up and possibly cause an accident. In the past I have always taught
friction fire lighting either as an intense day long course or regular short
sessions where the skills of making a fire kit can be practiced in advance
until they can be performed fluently leaving plenty of time for the actual act
of making a fire. When next year countryside students have an opportunity to
study a unit titled skills for land-based outdoor and adventurous activities (Edexcel, 2011) the regular time
tabled sessions will give more opportunities to practice these skills over a
longer period of time and develop fluency.
Some of the students who did work more slowly though did show very good attention
to detail and produced kits that would have been very easy to work with and
would certainly have produced an ember. Those who worked slower created an
excellent opportunity to teach some more advanced knife skills which would
speed up their work, this opportunistic learning (Hager, 2011) is something that
has been noted as often taking place as employees learn on the job at work where
they learn new skills, or develop old ones through performing their duties even
if this learning was not a planned outcome. Although not a planned outcome of
the lesson I was able to teach students a skill called batoning which requires
them to use a short wooden baton to drive a knife along the grain of a piece of
wood splitting it and removing large quantities of wood quickly, thus speeding up
their work.
Once all learners had a functioning friction fire kit I
demonstrated how to light a fire by friction emphasising key points of my technique
which they would need to copy to ensure success. Once my demonstration was
complete they began working themselves. At first I circulated among the
individuals and coached them on their technique. Some were able to adopt an
effective technique with very little help but others required more assistance. Unfortunately
although some of the students managed to make smoke with their friction fire
kits none were actually able to make an ember which they could blow into flame.
Despite the failure of students to make a fire they were
able to perform well in all the skills which the activity supported including
tree ID and green woodworking. They were also able to identify how these skills
would help them in their future careers. To help improve this kind of session
in the future I would, based on feedback
from the observer, ensure I ask more
questions to struggling students to prompt them to diagnose problems with their
technique and put it right sooner.
References
Borradaile, L., 2006. Forest
School Scotland; an evaluation, s.l.: Forestry Commission.
College, S. E. R. C.
@. C., 2012. Cooprative Learning Techniques. [Online]
Available at: http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/cooperative/techniques.html
[Accessed 16 01 2013].
Available at: http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/cooperative/techniques.html
[Accessed 16 01 2013].
Edexcel, 2011. Skills
for landbased outdoor and adventurous activities. [Online]
Available at: http://www.edexcel.com/migrationdocuments/BTEC%20Nationals%20from%202010/Unit_11_Skills_for_Water-based_Outdoor_and_Adventurous_Activities.pdf
[Accessed 24 05 2013].
Available at: http://www.edexcel.com/migrationdocuments/BTEC%20Nationals%20from%202010/Unit_11_Skills_for_Water-based_Outdoor_and_Adventurous_Activities.pdf
[Accessed 24 05 2013].
Texas Collaborative for Teaching Excellence, 2007. Professional Development Module on Collaborative Learning. [Online]
Available at: http://www.texascollaborative.org/Collaborative_Learning_Module.htm#secto3
[Accessed 16 01 2013].
Available at: http://www.texascollaborative.org/Collaborative_Learning_Module.htm#secto3
[Accessed 16 01 2013].
Guy, G., 2011. RESEARCH
INTO THE RELEVANCE OF ‘BUSHCRAFT’ WITHIN REAL WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION. s.l.:unpublished
.
Hager, P., 2011.
Informal Learning - Everyday living . In: P. Jarvis & M. Watts, eds. The
Routledge International Handbook of learning. s.l.:Routledge , pp.
208-209.
Hanks, W. F., 1991.
Forward by William F Hanks . In: Situated LEarning . Cambridge : Cambridge
University Press , p. 14.
Lave, J. & Wenger,
E., 1991. Situated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O'Brien, L. & Murray,
R., 2006. A Marvelous Opportunity for Children to Learn., s.l.:
Forestry Commission and New Economics Foundation.
Papert, S., 1980. Mindstorms;
Children, Computers and Powerful Idead. s.l.:Basic books .
Petty, G., 2004. Teaching
Today. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Ltd.
Tennant, M., 1997. Psychology
and Adult Learning. London: Routledge.
Wilson, L., 2009. Practical
Teaching a guide to PTLLS and DTLLS. Andover: Cengage Learning EMEA.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.