The Catch 22 of Bushcraft In Schools

B25 Bomber by Frank Kovalchek from Anchorage, Alaska, USA [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The only significance of the picture of the B-25 above is that it was the type of aircraft which the main character of Joseph Hellers classic novel 'Catch 22' Captain John Yossarian serves aboard as a bombardier. The popular phrase 'Catch 22' comes from this novel and defines a situation from which there is no escape due to contradictory rules.

That is how I feel about the idea of teaching bushcraft in schools; it absolutely should happen, I'm convinced that it would be in the best interest of young people to be taught bushcraft skills, particularly skills which increase their appreciation for and understanding of the natural world. BUT although I think it SHOULD happen I'm equally convinced that school would be a terrible place for that learning to occur.

Teaching about the natural world and environment is something which the curriculum is not very good at facilitating and something which schools are notoriously bad at. The situation was almost worsened during Michael Gove's disastrous stint as Secretary of State for Education when he almost succeeded in having topics such as climate change and sustainability dropped from England's national curriculum. For someone with that level of apparent disdain for the environment and sustainability to now fill the role of  Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is frankly disturbing.

Michael Gove by Paul Clarke [CC BY 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], from Wikimedia Commons

Although I think learning bushcraft skills is a great way not only to learn about the environment but is also a fantastic way to develop resilience in children as well as benefit their physical and mental health. However; just because I think buschraft skills should be taught to children of school age doesn't mean that school would be a good place to do it. As a further education lecturer, forest schools leader and trainer of forest school leaders and having worked with schools delivering extra curricular environmental education, Duke of Edinburgh's Awards and various other things I don't think schools are really equipped to deliver bushcraft in a meaningful way. Also because schools are so driven by the National Curriculum and a desire to satisfy the whims of OFSTED and be ranked favourably amongst other schools in the area teachers and leadership teams in schools will struggle to justify adding something else to what the school delivers.

While many schools do now run very commendable outdoor education programmes the pursuit and delivery of outdoor and environmental education in schools has often been down to the whims of one or two particular teachers who might have a personal enthusiasm for the outdoors or environment. While this enthusiasm might be commendable in an individual it isn't always backed up by technical expertise or subject knowledge.

I have seen some excellent good practice amongst Forest School practitioners I have had the privilege of working with and teaching but this is unfortunately not consistent and is demonstrated by people who already have considerable outdoor experience or experience of other skills such as woodworking, bushcraft and who are experienced teachers already rather than by people who are coming to forest schools leadership because they have a little bit of enthusiasm for it and their school has nominated them to run forest schools. In those cases activities come out of books or from the internet and there is little innovation to their programmes and no challenge for the students. Also a lack of environmental knowledge on the part of forest school leaders seriously undermines it's constant comparisons to the more well established outdoor learning programmes from Scandinavia as most British Forest Schools simply can't deliver the quality of environmental learning that could be provided by a subject expert. That's not to say they have to as Forest Schools in the UK is largely focused on social and emotional development and principles such as free play rather than nature as the Scandinavian (particularly Swedish) equivalents are.

The progression towards being able to influence society on environmental issues as described by the Swedish Friluftfrämjandet and as delivered by their programmes including Skogsmulle which  influenced and is often compared to the UK's forest Schools

I have drawn attention to this issue in the past as it affects the outdoor education sector as a whole:  There is a well used claim by outdoor educators that outdoor education teaches an appreciation of the environment and delivers the objectives of environmental education and have been quite critical of this claim and highlighted a lack of evidence to support it. One of the reasons for my opposition to this general claim is that outdoor educators are not necessarily subject experts when it comes to the environment. Although the outdoor education industry recognises that outdoor educators need some level of environmental knowledge to be able to answer questions about the areas where they are leading groups but this knowledge is the not the same as the subject specialism and expertise required to teach environmental education.

This would be my fear if bushcraft was suddenly added to the national curriculum that a teacher with a bit of enthusiasm for bushcraft and a good collection of Ray Mears and Bear Grylls DVD's would suddenly become the schools 'bushcraft' teacher without the skills and expertise to back up their enthusiasm.

Based on the standard wages for forest school practitioners and teaching assistants I doubt very much that a school would be willing to pay a full teachers wage for a specialist bushcraft practitioner unless a serving teacher was willing to teach bushcraft in addition to their other duties and that's where the problem begins. Suddenly you have an inexperienced person teaching buschraft, which devalues bushcrafts contribution to learning and potentially creates health and safety issues if techniques arent taught properly.

You only have to watch a few youtube videos and do a quick search of the internet to see that poor technique and inexperience abounds amongst so called 'expert' bushcrafters; people who would teach someone to carve a feather stick like the one bellow and pass it off as good technique; 

By Jim Thomas (Jomegat) - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

So that would be my fear for bushcraft if it was taught in schools that it would be done poorly by people who were inexperienced partly because of the education sectors historical reliance on people with an enthusiasm for the outdoors to deliver outdoor elements of their provision and partly because I know, having worked in education long enough, that there would be no proper funding for a bushcraft teachers role if one was suddenly required by the curriculum.

These two obstacles would mean that buschraft was taught poorly, possibly dangerously and without the subject knowledge to back up the learning or contextualise it in terms of it's application to other subjects.

Ultimately bushcraft won't ever be included in the curriculum anyway because it's outcomes aren't measurable enough or closely linked to priority subjects or progression to higher learning. I think it SHOULD be but it WONT, would be done BADLY if it WAS and CAN'T be because sadly it's benefits aren't recognised by education policy makers.

Why We Will Still Need Bushcraft Skills In Space

Last month I did something I almost never do and wrote about a movie here on the Bushcraft Education blog, hopefully it was more than just a rant about how rubbish The Revenant, a film claiming to depict the ordeal of Hugh Glass after his mauling by a bear in1823, was and how much more about survival we can learn from Riddley Scott and Matt Damon film The Martian. For the original post follow this LINK. I said in that post that even though The Martian is fictional it demonstrates a need for bushcraft and survival skills even in space, I thought I would follow it up with my thoughts on just why bushcraft skills will always be relevant. 

Geoff

_________________________________________________________________________________

People who practice Bushcraft tend to spend a lot of time looking back to times when the manual skills we value so highly were an essential part of every day life, to the mountain men of North America who lived by their trapping and navigating skills, to the Mesolithic hunter gatherers who gleaned every necessity from the land, and the craftsmen of yesteryear who relied on their manual skills and basic tools rather than the convenience of modern power tools.

However bushcrafters and survival skills enthusiasts have plenty of reasons to look forward as well, and before all the sensible people reading this give up expecting the next sentence to mention the zombie apocalypse, just give me a minute more to make my case.

Zombies aren't real and those 'prepping' for a zombie apocalypse need to keep their stockpiles of  green tipped ammunition and toxic green knife handles as far away from me as possible.

A knowledge of bushcraft is timeless, even if many of the skills are now made largely redundant on a day to day basis by modern technology;

The flint and steel or bow drill has been replaced by the piezo electric lighter, the electric oven and gas central heating.

Tracking and trapping animals and birds for food and clothing has been replaced by cellophane wrapped, battery farmed livestock and internet shopping.

Collecting, eating and preserving seasonal vegetables and fruits has been replaced by ordering a side salad or buying expensive 'porcini' mushrooms at a delicatessen even though they grow plentifully just yards from your home.

A bumper harvest of 'porcini' also known as cep or penny bun, fairy ring chantarelle and a giant puff ball. Sold dry in tiny packets in supermarkets for an absolute fortune. 

What worries me is the only people that seem to value these skills are the few first nations peoples who preserve their traditional knowledge for cultural as much as practical reasons and the relatively few people who practice bushcraft as recreation. In the UK our schools are demanding more and more inclusion of technology in the curriculum with very little emphasis placed on manual skill development. We have young school children learning computer programming, ipads in every classroom, students at secondary schools requiring laptops and home computers for every piece of homework, homework being conducted on virtual learning environments rather than in exercise books while all the time there are fascinating opportunities out of reach of our children just on the other side of the classroom window.

In the school grounds of my childrens school I could gather quince, lime bast for making rope, cat tail pollen for baking in the spring and seed down for firelighting in the autumn, a huge range of wild greens; shepherds purse, garlic mustard, lime leaves, pineapple weed and bitter cress, I could tap birch trees and use the bark to make birch tar and I that could all be embedded in the science curriculum but it isn't. There is a bit of a catch 22 here in my mind and I'll address it fully in another post next month . Briefly though the problem of trying to teach bushcraft at schools is that there simply isn't anyone to teach it and the risk is that if it was taught it would be taught badly and would turn children of to it, just as children can be turned off to other fascinating subject by bad teachers or by a poor curriculum, geography, science, literature and history for example should all be fascinating and engaging subjects, I don't know how you would ever make maths interesting but someone's got to try I suppose, but often schools manage to make even the most interesting topics tedious and disengaging and the same could happen to bushcraft if it was done in a school setting.

The point of this post though is whatever the difficulties of taking advantage of the natural school surroundings or of teaching a bit about the natural world those difficulties should be conquered and the learning should go ahead, children should be taught about nature and the environment, traditional rural skills and knowledge and bushcraft is the perfect way to do that teaching, in fact it's why I started this blog in the first place. 

Quinces collected with the permission of my daughters school, we turned them into jelly and mixed some of them with some black nightshade berries to make a delicious chutney too. But the school didn't take advantage of them at all, in fact the teachers didn't even know what they were and were at a complete loss when Lillie took a jar of the finished jelly in for them to try. 

If we aren't careful one day when we really need the skills of a bushcrafter, the practical skills which relate to ecology, survival, navigation, resource identification and collection, identification and gathering of food which only come from consistent exposure to and work in nature and the outdoors, we will find that no one has those skills. When in a few years we are all driving electric cars, commuting on mag-lift trains operating all our household appliances with our phones or in a million years when the human race is boldly exploring the galaxy with our computer whizz kid great-great-great-great etc.. grandchildren living in human colonies on the other side of galaxy, travelling faster than we can ever dream who is going to grow our food, plan the rotation of timber production, manage pests, carry out habitat management and restoration, discover and classify new species etc.. When computer code can do all that then we can start relying on technology but until then we will need to maintain and develop our connection with nature. Even if one day our technology has advanced so far that we can explore space and new planets what value will there be in that if all we can do when we get there is write computer code and do maths. We will always need ecologists, environmental scientists, experts in agriculture, bushcrafters and others with practical nature based skills. And with little engagement in those areas in school maybe it will be the people who practice it for fun that will save the day.

Environmental Archaeology and Bushcraft Course at Reaseheath College

Experimental Archaeology is a field of study which generates and tests archaeological hypothesis. This is achieved by replicating archaeological equipment, or performing tasks that ancient cultures may have undertaken.

With this new course we aim to bridge the gap between academic theories and the practical lives of those we study and whose methods we replicate. By studying A level Archaeology, Environmental Studies, Bushcraft and Primitive Skills, you will gain greater understanding of the lives of our ancestors, the environments in which they lived and the ancient skills that they possessed.

Throughout the two years, not only will you gain the qualification that you desire, should you wish to progress to University, your primitive survival skills together with naturalist skills will be strengthened and enhanced as part of the natural progression of the course. 

The college orchard where a lot of practical work will take place, current students have built the structures here from timber harvested entirely from the college estate. 

A birds-eye view showing the riving brakes for green woodwork behind the main building, the fire-pit where students have recently been making birch bark tar and the remnants of the larch logs which have been milled for planking.  

For further information and to apply contact;

Dr. Peter Groom

01270 613261

peter.groom@reaseheath.ac.uk

or

Geoffrey Guy

01270 613261

geoffreyg@reasheath.ac.uk

Trading Places

In this recent article published in the Institute for Outdoor Learning's Horizons magazine I report on some 'skills swaps' carried out at FE colleges between outdoor education/adventure sports students and countryside and game management students.   

Does Bushcraft Have a Place in Formal Education

Bushcraft Research Opportunities

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Bushcraft Show 2014; Enriching Experiences and Educating with Bushcraft

I was fortunate enough to be invited to speak at this years Bushcraft Show at Catton Hall in Derbyshire where I spoke on the topic of how bushcraft can provide enriching experiences and be used to promote the development of personal skills and in formal education to meet the needs of specific curricula.

This talk was based on research I have been carrying out over the last few years.

The links refered to in talk are all available here;

for the kindle version of my book "Bow Drill Trouble Shooting" please follow; http://goo.gl/xQSQ0w

and for the paperback; http://goo.gl/u590ye

Contact me via;

twitter; @GdaGuy

Facebook; Bushcraft Education

Linkedin; https://www.linkedin.com/pub/geoffrey-guy/75/b95/845

and read my further research at;

Academia; https://reaseheath.academia.edu/GeoffreyGuy

Blog; www.bushcrafteducation.blogspot.co.uk

Will we still need to know about nature in space?

With the announcement that approval has been given for outdoor learning budgets to be cut by Birmingham council and Michael Gove's intention to make computer coding a compulsory part of the curriculum for all over fives I wonder what is going to happen in the future when we find that everyone graduating from schools, colleges and universities can program a computer, make fabulous computer animations, are really good at simultaneous equations but can't hammer a nail or saw a piece of wood?

Will there ever be a time when the practical skills as simple as tightening a screw, cutting a piece of wood, tying knots  or digging a hole are not required? I think not, and although I would argue that it as much, if not more, the domain of parents to teach these skills to their children what could be the value in separating children coming through the schools system from nature and practical physical involvement in manual tasks?

Those who may have wanted to go on to study ecology, countryside management, conservation, agriculture and a whole host of other subjects find themselves ill prepared and poorly qualified by any of the statutory examinations and awards currently being issued let alone in a few years time when it seems that education will become even more technology based. Even now I see students arrive at college with a vague interest in countryside management having joined a course but unable to do even the simplest of practical tasks, this means that a significant time needs to be spent bringing the students up to speed on things as simple as knocking in fence staples and cutting a strait line with a saw, the result of that is that they soon complain to be bored, and who wouldn't be, at sixteen or eighteen years of age you need more to stimulate you than knocking in some staples but because their practical ability is so poor I can't move onto more involved tasks until they have grasped the basics. (I must say at this point that not all my students have been like this, there have been many with a good grasp of practical skills and an honest interest and passion for learning and working outside in the countryside, they have been a pleasure to teach) It's not only the students who suffer from this overwhelming dependence on technology but it's being imposed on teachers too. In my last job at a college in Northamptonshire it was made clear to me that my ability as a teacher, bear in mind that I was employed to teach a vocational countryside management course, was going to be judged more on my ability to use an interactive whiteboard and a virtual learning environment than my ability to teach practical skills. I was once graded 'two' in an observed lesson instead of 'one' based on a single piece of negative feedback "the internet was too slow".

I wonder if any of those encouraging this futurist approach to education have given any thought to the fact that we will never do away with the need for people who understand ecology, the environment and nature. Who is going to grow our food, plan the rotation of timber production, manage pests, carry out habitat management and restoration, discover and classify new species etc.. When computer code can do all that then we can start relying on technology but until then we will need to maintain and develop our connection with nature.

Even if one day our technology has advanced so far that we can explore space and new planets what value will there be in that if all we can do when we get there is write computer code and do maths. We will always need ecologists, environmental scientists, experts in agriculture, bushcrafters and others with practical nature based skills.

             

Examining the Differences between Forest Schools and Skogsmulle

Skogsmulle

By In Donaldismo Veritas (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Mulle is a troll who lives in the woods (skog) of Sweden and teaches children about nature with the help of his friends laxe, fjällfina and nova. Skogsmulle is for children aged 5 to 7 and is preceded by courses for children as young as 2 and is a precursor for educational programmes aimed at older children, teenagers and adults. The programme was introduced by Gösta Fröhm in 1957 to supplement the skiing and ice skating which made up the normal programme of children's activities and education provided by the friluftfrämjandet (fresh air foundation) at that time (friluftsfämjandet 2012).  

Forest Schools

One of the tree faces made by a nursery group I thought
a six week forest schools course to in 2011 

Forest Schools are a relatively new idea in the UK, based on similar well established programmes in Scandinavia such as Skogsmulle in Sweden or naturebørnehaven in Denmark. Primarily aimed at younger children (primary school age or younger) it is easy to link forest schools courses to the national curriculum even up to level 3. Due to the relatively recent establishment of Forest schools in the UK there is little data to indicate whether learning simple ecological principles such as food chains and plant identification in a forest school setting prepares learners for more advanced theory in the classroom or in FE, this begs the question; are students more environmentaly aware in countries where these programmes are well established and heavily subscribed to?  In a vocational education setting Forest Schools is relevant within the subjects of countryside management an outdoor education as these students may require training to deliver Forest Schools programmes in the future. 

Comparing the Two

Here I will compare the goals and also the approach to delivering and embedding the programmes.  

	Skogsmulle	Forest Schools
Goals	The need to Improve children’s relationship with nature and make them aware of the environment to the point that they can influence society for the better (friluftsfrämjandet 2006).	Primary goals include development of creative skills, physical development, personal and social skills and general knowledge (Knight 2009) with the development of environmental understanding a secondary goal.
Curriculum model	Environmental principles revisited in ever increasing detail throughout skogsknop (2 to 3 yrs), skogsknytte (3 to 4 yrs), skogsmulle (5 to 7 yrs), stövare (7 to 9 yrs) and on to educational programmes for teenagers and adults.	Forest Schools is often used as an ’extra’ activity (with links to published curriculum being very unclear) for young learners, it may have valuable learning outcomes which will help children in the future but these are not always obvious and may even form part of a hidden curriculum.

The two although superficially different are fundamentally similar, perhaps more entrenched in the culture and formal education in Scandinavia, but there is time for that to develop in the UK.  

One question springs to my mind though, why the emphasis in the UK on personal and social development rather than the 'nature' element of the programme. I hope it's not because our 'system' here values nature so little that there had be some other, more measurable, justification for Forest Schools. 

Bushcraft Session Evaluation

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].

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].

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].

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.

An Activity to Keep Your Hands Warm

It was a rough day to be outside today, the trailer I normally pull behind the tractor to transport students around had the tarpaulin cover ripped off it by the wind this morning. So what do you do with students when the weather is that bad?

I'm currently working with outdoor education and countryside management students at Moulton college as they get involved in skills swaps, the outdoor education students teach my countryside students how to climb and kayak while my students teach them to shoot, coppice and do bushcraft.  To stay warm on such a windy day what could be better than get them all around the camp fire to have a go at making some coal hollowed spoons and bowls.

For first attempts there are some really good results here;

A selection of partially completed spoons and one bowl, all the burning and scraping kept the hands and faces warm on such a cold day.

"Rich in Potential, Strong, Powerful and Competent"

A pine resin candle made by eight year old visitors to a residential environmental education project.

I was doing some reading as part of my studies towards a Masters degree in outdoor education recently and came across this quote in a paper; the author describes the children he is working with as being trusted to be "Rich in Potential, Strong, Powerful and Competent" (Edwards et al 1998), this was describing children in an indoor mainstream nursery setting but it stuck me that this quote can sum up the aims of forest schools, and early years outdoor education in the UK.
The social development and empowering of children is a key aim of these programs; is there a better way to empower children than give them opportunities to be outside, use tools, light fires, cook food and have their own adventures. I don't really think there is, however much responsibility you give to a child in a classroom they are still ultimately controlled by their surroundings, the layout of the classroom, the walls, the rules of being indoors; don't be too messy, don't be too loud etc.... By taking them outside and letting them explore and discover they are empowered to develop their own understanding and skills, with some element of guidance and facilitation from a supervising adult of course, but that freedom of being outdoors and being told to "go and explore" or "here's a firesteel, make a fire" must be far more empowering than being inside, mustn't it??    

A 'Fairy boat' made by seven year old's 

References

Edwards, Gandini L, Forman G (1998) The Hundred Languages of Children - Advanced Reflections. Greenwich Connecticut. Ablex Publishing; cited in Harker E (n.d) How can I carry out Masters level educational research without abandoning my own educational values? available from http://www.actionresearch.net/writings/tuesdayma/ehee06.htm [accessed on 04/11/2010]

Bushcraft Isn't Fun

I love bushcraft and am passionate about it and of course it is fun but do I feel that it's fun when I'm absorbed in practicing or teaching it?
For me probably not, and I can say that of a number of other subjects which I am equally passionate about, for example when I am engrossed in coaching someone on how to shoot a rifle or light a fire by friction I am not conscious of having fun, this has been described as a 'flow state' (Csikszentmihalyi 2002) perhaps more commonly referred to as being focused or 'in the zone'.
I've seen this in my students as well, recently they have been working on friction firelighting as part of a bushcraft element of the BTEC skills for landbased outdoor and adventurous activities module which I teach them. Although I think they enjoy learning the bushcraft skills I am teaching them there have been times, especially while working on their friction fire projects, where some students who would normally be very prone to loosing concentration, chatting with friends instead of working or surreptitiously using their mobile phones while they think my back is turned have concentrated on their projects to the exclusion of all else. They have found their 'flow state' they will work and work and work. Those that have reached this stage have always been the ones who make fire first. The same goes for other subjects, some students get engrossed in deer management or firearms but for those who find the 'flow state' the subject becomes more than that, they become passionate about it and able to dedicate their time and attention to it beyond what they normally would.

Is reaching your potential and finding a subject to be passionate about more important than fun?


References

Csikszentmihalyi M (2002) Flow London. Rider Press

Bushcraft as an Educational Activity

I recently blogged about my research into the value of bushcraft when it is applied to formal education, this research has now been published by the Institute for Outdoor Learning (IOL) and can be found in the Autumn 2013 edition of their Horizons journal.

A few years before embarking on this more recent bushcraft related research I completed a project partly towards my undergraduate studies and partly as a fact finding/developmental exercise on the effectiveness of using bushcraft in an environmental education setting. This project was a vital part of the formation of teaching resources and courses for my company SurvivalHobbies which I was running at the time.

For the full report of how I used bushcraft to meet learning outcomes such as 'working as part of a group', 'environmental awareness' and 'making the most of leisure time' follow this link.

Practical Bushcraft Projects for Countryside Management Students

My students have recently been able to carry out some bushcraft tasks related to their studies of practical estate skills, game bird production and green woodwork.

Over the last couple of weeks they have made several functioning pheasant traps of the sort that would have been used by game keepers to catch pheasants for breeding purposes, nowadays keepers normally use large catchers made of steel mesh or adapted partridge pens with which they can catch dozens of birds at a time. The traps the students produced are much more rustic (despite the blue baler twine) but would still be functional.

The students had coppiced the willow used in the construction of these traps themselves and after some experimentation with trigger mechanisms (they didn't think my suggestion was good enough apparently) they settled on using a split stick trigger and a trip wire with bait being spread underneath the trap.
They will get a chance to test the effectiveness of these traps as well as more modern alternatives in January when they begin to catch up the estates pheasants ready for egg production in the Spring. 

Another recent project was this small basket made from willow and nettles and seen here full of shaggy ink cap fungi;

Creating Bushcraft Teaching Resources and Proving it's Value in Environmental Education

A key part of my personal development as a bushcraft instructor and probably the catalyst to my interest in Bushcraft as a tool in formal education was a project I carried out a few years ago as part of my studies at University;

RESEARCH INTO THE RELEVANCE OF ‘BUSHCRAFT’ WITHIN REAL WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

Indigenous peoples have within the context of their own lifestyles been practicing ‘environmental education’ for thousands of years (Sterling 2001), but although the skills practiced by indigenous peoples survive in remote areas of the globe those skills have in our modern society been tagged as ‘bushcraft’ and become little more than an adventurous free time activity or a topic of interesting TV documentaries. Several case studies have made the observation that the effectiveness of environmental education could be increased by the inclusion of ‘free time’ and adventurous activities within environmental education programs (Cooper 1998). The purpose of this research was to establish the value of bushcraft within environmental education not only as an additional adventurous element to a program but as a relevant part of a course with appropriate links with the curriculum. As a result of this research it was hoped that a curriculum could be prepared for a number of bushcraft sessions which could be used within formal education to meet some objectives of a course rather than just being an enrichment activity.


The full write up of this project and my conclusions can be found here;
http://www.academia.edu/4748355/RESEARCH_INTO_THE_RELEVANCE_OF_BUSHCRAFT_WITHIN_REAL_WORLD_ENVIRONMENTAL_EDUCATION

An Introduction to Forest Schools

Discussion and Review of Current Forest School Philosophy and Aims in light of its recent Historical Development. 

The roots of what we in England now know as Forest Schools can be traced back to Scandinavia, ‘Friluftsliv’ literally ‘fresh air life’ was originally a Norwegian expression and is a concept deeply ingrained in their culture (Knight 2009). ‘Friluftsliv’ is also an integral part of the Swedish national curriculum; this approach is extended to all age groups in Scandinavia including the pre-school age group with ‘skogsmulle’ in Sweden and ‘Naturbørnehaven’ in Denmark.

Skogsmulle

The Swedish approach to Forest School style programs for pre-school children began in 1957 with Gösta Frohm (Joyce 2004)who at the time was head of the Swedish Society for Outdoor Life (Friluftsfrämjandet). He believed that from a very early age children should have opportunities to learn about sustainability and the environment (Joyce 2004).

Bringing Forest School to the UK

" The children set their own agenda, cook [on open fires], listen to storytelling, sing songs, and explore at their own level. They are able to climb very high into the trees on rope ladders and swings, and sit and whittle sticks with knives, alone " (Trout 2004).

This was an observation made during the trip to Denmark in 1994 by the early years department of Bridgewater College which began the formal development of Forest Schools in this country.  Within the UK forest schools expanded slowly, with the nursery at Bridgewater running forest school sessions, and later with Edexcel as their examinations board developing a suite of courses to transmit the forest school ethos (Knight 2009) and train new practitioners. However it was not until 2002 that a large organisation endorsed Forest Schools, it was then that The Forestry Commission stated “access to green space is not just about ‘the environment’. For young children there is perceived to be great benefit in teaching most subjects in a natural environment” (O’Brien, Tabbush, 2002).   Since then Forest Schools had continued to find favour in this country and throughout the world, Skogsmulle schools are found in Japan, Latvia, Russia, Germany, Norway, and Finland (Joyce 2004) and within the UK there are now dozens of providers of Forest Schools programs and training for practitioners.

Although there are now many well established providers of Forest Schools throughout the country the aims and ethos of Forest Schools is not always compatible with modern attitudes towards the outdoors and education.  Many parents and other well-meaning individuals have developed an attitude of ‘risk avoidance’   rather than one of trying to help children self-manage and approach activities that may be viewed as ‘risky’ themselves and learn to deal with those situations. Instead we as a society are now incapable of dealing with risks and have implemented unnecessary safety measures to avoid them, often at the expense of freedom and enjoyment (Gill 2007). Some of the activities involved in Forest Schools can be perceived as risky even something as harmless as ‘playing in the woods’ is not something that every child can do anymore. Forest Schools are a good way of redressing this balance and hopefully parents will feel more comfortable about their children taking part in activities in the woods and countryside as part of a Forest School course where there is less perceived risk if not on their own. This will be discussed more in the following essay on the Forest School leader’s role.

With regard to the curriculum and summative assessment led nature of modern education Forest Schools with its very open learner centred approach does not quite fit in, or at least has a niche all of it’s own. The fact that a learner will not finish a Forest School course with a recognised qualification and that there is no funding to be had for an institution for learners who take part in Forest Schools courses  makes Forest Schools an investment on the part of many institutions which they will see no financial gain from. This may be an issue for many institutions and although there are organisations which support Forest Schools such as the Forestry Commission, Woodland Trusts and some local authority’s this lack of funding may be a hindrance for many who would otherwise be involved in Forest Schools.

Philosophy and Aims

The best way to illustrate the philosophy and aims of forest schools is with this diagram:

Figure 1; Friluftremjanded 2006

This diagram focuses on the environmental education aspect of Forest Schools but other areas (and indeed in this country at least the environmental education aspect of Forest Schools would probably be considered secondary to the social development of participants)  of development among Forest Schools Participants may include;

·         Creative development

·         Physical development

·         Maths development

·         Communication, language and listening

·         Personal, social and emotional development

·         Knowledge and understanding of world.

·         (Forest Research 2005)

A Forest Research report on Forest Schools in England included the following which I think summarises very effectively the key features of a Forest School.

·         The use of a woodland (and therefore ‘wild’) setting that is framed by

strict safety routines and established boundaries that allows the flexibility and

freedom for child-initiated (not only issue-led) learning and other innovative

approaches to learning to take place in a low-risk environment. This woodland

setting is important particularly for children from areas of the country where

there is little opportunity for contact with the natural environment.

ƒ

·         Learning can be linked to the national curriculum and foundation stage

objectives whilst setting those objectives in a different context, and it is not

focused just on the natural environment. By incorporating innovative

approaches to learning (such as undertaking small and easily achievable

tasks) children are encouraged to develop their innate curiosity and

motivation to learn. This is particularly important for those who find it difficult

to assimilate knowledge in a strictly ‘classroom’ environment.

ƒ

·         The freedom to explore using multiple senses is fundamental for

encouraging creative, diverse and imaginative play. The focus is on the

‘whole child’ (not just their academic ability) and how they can develop their

own learning styles at their own pace whilst maximising the benefits from

each experience they discover for themselves.

ƒ

·         Regular contact for the children over a significant period of time (e.g. all

year round, in all weathers). Regular can mean anything from fortnightly

during a school term to one morning, afternoon or day every week for twelve

months or more. This is coupled with a clear set of safety routines and

boundaries that allow children to develop a responsible attitude to risk whilst

becoming familiar and confident enough to explore and interact with an everchanging natural environment.

ƒ

·         A high adult to pupil ratio (e.g. Groups are small with approximately twelve

children per session) allows for children to undertake tasks and play activities

that challenge them but do not put them at undue risk of harm. It also allows

practitioners quickly to get to know the individual learning styles, abilities and

characteristics of the children in their charge.

 References 

For a full reference list see my full essay at; http://www.academia.edu/4813212/Forest_School_Essays