Experiential learning

A child learning the countries of Asia by experience rather than by rote learning.

Experiential education (or "learning by doing") is the process of actively engaging students in an authentic experience that will have benefits and consequences. Students make discoveries and experiment with knowledge themselves instead of hearing or reading about the experiences of others. Students also reflect on their experiences, thus developing new skills, new attitudes, and new theories or ways of thinking (Kraft & Sakofs, 1988). Experiential education is related to the constructivist learning theory.

Historical development

Experiential education is a philosophy of education that focuses on the transactive process between teacher and student involved in direct experience with the learning environment and content. The term is mistakenly used interchangeably with experiential learning. The Association for Experiential Education regards experiential education "as a philosophy and methodology in which educators purposefully engage with learners in direct experience and focused reflection in order to increase knowledge, develop skills and clarify values."

John Dewey was the most famous proponent of experiential education, perhaps paving the course for all future activities in his seminal Experience and Education, first published in 1938. Dewey's fame during that period rested on relentlessly critiquing public education and pointing out that the authoritarian, strict, pre-ordained knowledge approach of modern traditional education was too concerned with delivering knowledge, and not enough with understanding students' actual experiences. Dewey's work went on to influence dozens of other influential experiential education models and advocates, including Foxfire, service learning, Kurt Hahn and Outward Bound, among others.

John Dewey, an American educational philosopher, was an early twentieth century promoter of the idea of learning through direct experience (action and reflection). Experiential education differs from much traditional education in that teachers first immerse students in action and then ask them to reflect on the experience.

In traditional education, teachers set the knowledge to be learned (including analysis and synthesis) before students. They hope students will subsequently find ways to apply the knowledge.

Paulo Freire was a Brazilian educator and the father of modern critical pedagogy. He is often cited in relationship to experiential education. Freire was largely focused on the active involvement in students in real experience, radical democracy and the creation of praxis among learners.

Despite the efforts of many efforts at progressive educational reform, reports by researchers such as Goodlad (1984) and Sizer (1984) suggest that most teaching, particularly at the high school level, still involves the teacher as purveyor of knowledge and the student as passive recipient.

Examples

Examples of experiential education abound in all disciplines. In her 1991 book Living Between the Lines, Lucy Calkins states, "If we asked our students for the highlight of their school careers, most would choose a time when they dedicated themselves to an endeavor of great importance...I am thinking of youngsters from P.S. 321, who have launched a save-the-tree campaign to prevent the oaks outside their school from being cut down. I am thinking of children who write the school newspaper, act in the school play, organize the playground building committee.... On projects such as these, youngsters will work before school, after school, during lunch. Our youngsters want to work hard on endeavors they deem significant."

At the professional school level, experiential education is often integrated into curricula in "clinical" courses following the medical school model of "See one, Do one, Teach one" in which students learn by practicing medicine. This approach is now being introduced in other professions in which skills are directly worked into courses to teach every concept (starting with interviewing, listening skills, negotiation, contract writing and advocacy, for example) to larger scale projects in which students run legal aid clinics or community loan programs, write legislation or community development plans.

Active Learning

Active learning is an umbrella term that refers to several models of instruction that focus the responsibility of learning on learners. Bonwell and Eison (1991) popularized this approach to instruction. This "buzz word" of the 1980s became their 1990s report to the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE). In this report they discuss a variety of methodologies for promoting "active learning." However according to Mayer (2004) strategies like “active learning" developed out of the work of an earlier group of theorists—those promoting discovery learning.

It has been suggested that students who actively engage with the material, are more likely to recall information later (Bruner, 1961) but this claim is not well supported by the literature (Mayer, 2004; Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark, 2006). Rather than being behaviorally active during learning, Mayer (2004) suggests learners should be cognitively active.

When should "active learning" based instruction be used?

The efficacy of active instructional techniques has been questioned recently (Mayer, 2004; Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark, 2006). Certainly practicing procedural skills is a necessity for learning to be automated. But while these activities may be motivating for learners, these unguided situations can in fact leave learners less competent than when they began the activity (Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark, 2006).

Should practice happen before, or even during initial learning? Unfortunately, some instructors develop unguided course activities and expect novice learners to learn from these experiences. Those promoting ‘Active learning’ strategies assume learners need little guidance. Guidance is a necessary part of instruction, and provides a more efficient learning experience for novice learners.

Self guided instruction is possible, but usually arduous and clumsy... and usually less than efficient (Sweller and Cooper, 1985). Sweller (1988) suggests learners should study worked-examples because this is a more efficient method of initial instruction. Sweller and Cooper found that learners who studied worked examples performed significantly better than learners who actively solved problems (Sweller & Cooper, 1985; Cooper & Sweller, 1987). This was later called the "worked example effect" (Clark, Nguyen and Sweller, 2006). It relies upon strong guidance from the instructor, as opposed to the minimally guided situations, often found in "active learning" based instruction (Kirschner et al, 2006).

Active learning exercises

Bonwell and Eison (1991) suggested learners work in pairs, discuss materials while role-playing, debate, engage in case study, take part in cooperative learning, or produce short written exercises, etc. While it makes sense to use these techniques as a "follow up" exercise, it does not make sense to use them to introduce material. However it is suggested that instructors guide their students during the early stages of learning, and then later, let them practice their new learned skills or apply new information.

Active learning exercises are only suggested as a review of previously covered subject matter, and should only be used with students that already have a good understanding of the material. They should not be used as an introduction to new material. Examples of "active learning" activities include:

• A class discussion may be held in person or in an online environment. Certainly all would agree that these discussions be held between prepared, knowledgeable participants.

• A think-pair-share activity is when learners take a minute to ponder the previous lesson, later to discuss it with one or more of their peers, finally to share it with the class as part of a formal discussion. It is during this formal discussion that the instructor should clarify misconceptions.

• A short written exercise that is often used is the "one minute paper." This is a good way to review materials.

While practice is useful to reinforce learning, problem solving is not always suggested. John Sweller (1988) suggests solving problems can even have negative influence on learning, instead he suggests that learners should study worked-examples, because this is a more efficient method of schema acquisition. So instructors are cautioned to give learners some basic or initial instruction first, perhaps to be followed up with an activity based upon the above methods.

Active learning method: Learning by teaching

A efficient way to mix guidance and active learning is Learning by teaching (Martin 1985, Martin/Oebel 2007). The students teach the new contents each other. Of course they have to be supported by the teachers very accurately. This method was developed in the early 1980s especially in Germany and is now established for all subjects and all levels in the German educational system . Learning by teaching is integrating behaviorism and cognitivism and offers a coherent frame of theory and practice.

Outdoor education happens through organized learning activities occurring in the outdoors, utilizing environmental experiences as a learning tool. Service learning is the combination of community service with stated learning goals, relying on experience as the foundation to provide meaning in service. Cooperative learning alters heterogeneous grouping in order to support diverse learning styles and needs within a group. Active learning, a term popular in US education circles in the 1980s, places the responsibility of learning on learners themselves, requiring their experience in education to inform their process of learning. Environmental education are efforts to educate learners about relationships within the natural environment and how those relationships are interdependent. The experience of being outdoors and learning through doing makes this learning relevant to students.

Active learning and Policy

Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) suggest that fifty years of empirical data does not support those using active learning methods early in the learning process. Kirschner et al (2006) calls for those using these techniques to explain their actions in terms of empirical data. In the past few years Outcome-based education policy has begun to limit instructors to only using those techniques that have been shown to be effective. In the United States for instance, the No Child Left Behind Act requires those developing instruction to show evidence of its "effectiveness."

Policy may be satisfied by demonstrating the instructional effectiveness of active instruction. Rubrics (education) are a good way to evaluate "active learning" based instruction. These instructional tools can be used to describe the various different qualities of any activity. In addition, if given to the student, they can provide additional guidance (here is an example rubric).

Cooperative Education

Cooperative education is a structured method of combining academic education with practical work experience.

Research indicates that one of the attributes employers value most in newly hired employees is work experience. A cooperative education experience, commonly know as a "co-op," provides academic credit for career work.

Cooperative education is taking on new importance in school-to-work transition, service learning, and experiential learning initiatives.

Other approaches at the university level include laboratory courses in social sciences and humanities that seek to parallel laboratory courses in the natural sciences. In social science laboratory courses, students combine theory with tests of the theory in field settings and often develop their own social models in disciplines as far ranging as history and philosophy to economics, political science and anthropology (Lempert, 1996).

At the professional school level, experiential education is often integrated into curricula in "clinical" courses following the medical school model of "See one, Do one, Teach one" in which students learn by practicing medicine. This approach is now being introduced in other professions in which skills are directly worked into courses to teach every concept (starting with interviewing, listening skills, negotiation, contract writing and advocacy, for example) to larger scale projects in which students run legal aid clinics or community loan programs, write legislation or community development plans.

Herman Schneider and Cincinnati

While at Lehigh University at the beginning of the 20th Century, Herman Schneider (1872-1939), engineer, architect, and educator, concluded that the traditional classroom was insufficient for technical students. (Smollins 1999) Schneider observed that several of the more successful Lehigh graduates had worked to earn money prior to graduation. Gathering data through interviews of employers and graduates, he devised the framework for cooperative education (1901). About that time, Carnegie Technical School, now Carnegie Mellon University, opened and thereby minimized the need for Schneider's co-op plan in the region around Lehigh University. However, in 1903 the University of Cincinnati appointed Schneider to their faculty, and later, 1906, allowed him an experimental year to implement his plan. Following that year, the University of Cincinnati gave him full permission for the co-op program.

Schneider, beginning from the rank of Assistant Professor, would rise through the rank of Dean of Engineering (1906-1928) to become President (1929-32) of the University of Cincinnati, based largely upon the strength of the co-op program. Throughout his career, he was an advocate for the co-op framework. His thirty years of service to the University of Cincinnati are partly credited for that institution's worldwide fame.

Post-Cincinnati evolutions

In 1909, seeing the possibility of co-op education, Northeastern University began using co-op in their engineering program, becoming only the second institution to do so in this country. By 1919, Antioch College had adapted the co-op practices to their liberal arts curricula, for which reason many called co-op the "Antioch Plan."

In 1922, Northeastern University emphasized its commitment to co-op by extending it to the College of Business Administration. As new colleges opened at Northeastern, such as the College of Liberal Arts (1935) and College of Education (1953), they became co-op schools as well. By the 1980s, Northeastern was the acknowledged leader in co-op education across the world, a distinction that remained throughout the 1990s. (Smollins 1999)

In 1926, Dean Schneider invited those interested in forming an Association of Co-operative Colleges (ACC) to the University of Cincinnati for the first convention. The idea took hold, and was followed by three more annual conventions. In 1929, the Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education, now called American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), formed the Division of Cooperative Engineering Education, incorporating the membership of the ACC. (Auld 1972)

In 1961, the Ford and Edison Foundations commissioned a study of co-operative education, published as Work-study college programs; appraisal and report of the study of cooperative education, (James Warner Wilson and Edward H Lyons, New York: Harper). The result of that study resulted in the formation of the National Commission for Cooperative Education (NCCE). NCCE remains today to promote and lobby for co-operative education in the United States. Its membership is comprised of sponsoring corporations and organizations (not individuals) from academia and business.

By 1962, about 150 academic institutions used co-op education, in one form or another, many were outside of engineering. The need for professional support of non-engineering programs became obvious, and the membership of ASEE, in 1963, began the Cooperative Education Association. To reflect its membership more accurately, it was eventually (sometime in the 1990s or early 2000s) named the Cooperative Education and Internship Association, it remains today as the professional association for co-operative education outside of ASEE.

Much of that early efforts of NCCE focused on lobbying and promotion of co-operative education. In 1965, the federal Higher Education Act provided support specifically for co-operative education. Funding continued from the federal government through 1992, when Congress ended its support of co-operative education. In all, a total of over $220 million was appropriated by the federal government toward co-operative education. (Carlson 1999)

In 1979, educators from Australia, Britain, Canada, and the United States (Northeastern's President, Kenneth Ryder), met to discuss work-related programs in their respective countries. In 1981 and 1982, this group, headed by President Ryder, convened an international conference on cooperative education. In 1983, several college and university presidents, educational specialists, and employers from around the world (including Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, the Philippines, the United States and the United Kingdom) formed the World Council and Assembly on Cooperative Education to foster co-operative education around the world. In 1991, it renamed itself the World Association for Cooperative Education (WACE). By 2005, that Association boasted a membership of over 1,000 individuals from 43 different countries.

Co-op models

From its beginnings in Cincinnati in 1906, cooperative education has evolved into a program offered at the secondary and postsecondary levels in two predominant models (Grubb and Villeneuve 1995). In one model, students alternate a semester of academic coursework with an equal amount of time in paid employment, repeating this cycle several times until graduation. The parallel method splits the day between school (usually in the morning) and work (afternoon). Thus, like school-to-work (STW), the co-op model includes school-based and work-based learning and, in the best programs, "connecting activities" such as seminars and teacher-coordinator worksite visits. These activities help students explicitly connect work and learning.

Co-op's proponents identify benefits for students (including motivation, career clarity, enhanced employability, vocational maturity) and employers (labor force flexibility, recruitment/retention of trained workers, input into curricula) as well as educational institutions and society (ibid.). Beyond informal and anecdotal evidence, however, a familiar refrain in the literature is the lack of well-done research that empirically demonstrates these benefits (Barton 1996; Wilson, Stull, and Vinsonhaler 1996). Barton (1996) identifies some of the research problems for secondary co-op as follows: federal data collection on high school co-op enrollments and completions ceased in the 1980s; some studies use data in which co-op was not isolated from other work experience programs. Ricks et al. (1993) describe other problems: due to lack of a clear or consistent definition of cooperative education, researchers cannot accurately identify variables and findings cannot be compared; theory is not well developed; theory, research, and practice are not integrated; and co-op research does not adhere to established standards.

Another set of problems involves perceptions of the field and its marginalization. Because of its "vocational" association, co-op is not regarded as academically legitimate; rather, it is viewed as taking time away from the classroom (Crow 1997). Experiential activities are not necessarily rewarded in postsecondary promotion and tenure systems, and co-op faculty may be isolated from other faculty (Crow 1997; Schaafsma 1996). Despite the current emphasis on contextual learning, work is not recognized as a vehicle for learning (Ricks et al. 1993). Schaasfma (1996) and Van Gyn (1996) agree that the field places too much emphasis on placements rather than learning. Wilson, Stull, and Vinsonhaler (1996) also decry the focus on administration, logistics, placements, and procedures.

Some institutions are fully dedicated to the co-op ideal (such as RIT, Kettering University, and LaGuardia Community College). In others, the co-op program may be viewed as an add-on and therefore is vulnerable to cost cutting (Wilson et al. 1996). Even where co-op programs are strong they can be threatened, as at Cincinnati Technical College when it became a comprehensive community college (Grubb and Villeneuve 1995) or LaGuardia during a budget crisis (Grubb and Badway 1998). For students, costs and time to degree completion may be deterrents to co-op participation (Grubb and Villeneuve 1995).

Redesigning a co-op for current realities

Despite these issues, there are reasons for optimism about the future of co-op. "Social, economic, and historic forces are making cooperative education more relevant than ever" (ibid., p. 17), including emphasis on university-industry-government cooperation, a fluid and demanding workplace, new technology, the need for continuous on-the-job learning, globalization, and demands for accountability (John, Doherty, and Nichols 1998). Federal investments in school-to-work and community service have resulted in a number of initiatives designed to provide "learning opportunities beyond the classroom walls" (Furco 1996, p. 9). Because this has always been a principle of co-op, the field is in a position to capitalize on its strengths and the ways it complements other experiential methods in the effort to provide meaningful learning opportunities for students. To do this, however, cooperative education must be redesigned.

For Wilson, Stull, and Vinsonhaler (1996), a new vision involves conceiving, defining, and presenting co-op "as a curriculum model that links work and academics-a model that is based on sound learning theory" (p. 158). Ricks (1996) suggests affirming the work-based learning principles upon which co-op is based. These principles assert that cooperative education fosters self-directed learning, reflective practice, and transformative learning; and integrates school and work learning experiences that are grounded in adult learning theories.

Schaafsma (1996) also focuses on learning, seeing a need for a paradigm shift from content learning to greater understanding of learning processes, including reflection and critical thinking. Co-op is an experiential method, but learning from experience is not automatic. Therefore, Van Gyn (1996) recommends strengthening the reflective component that is already a part of some co-op models. "If co-op is only a vehicle for experience to gain information about the workplace and to link technical knowledge with workplace application, then its effectiveness is not fully developed" (p. 125).

The Bergen County Academies, a public magnet high school, utilizes co-op education in a program called Senior Experience. This program allows all 12th grade students to participate in cooperative education or an internship opportunity for the full business day each Wednesday. Students explore a wide range of career possibilities. This new approach was recognized as an educational best practice and has been adopted as a state educational initiative for 12th grade students.

Integrating experiential methods

School-to-work and service learning have also been promoted as ways to link theory and practice through meaningful experiential learning experiences. Furco (1996) outlines the similarities between school-to-work and service learning. Although school-to-work, service learning, and co-op have different goals, each of his points also applies to cooperative education:

—Based on the philosophy that learners learn best through active engagement in meaningful activities

—View of students as active learners and producers of knowledge

—Use of such instructional strategies as contextual learning and application of knowledge to real situations

—Requirement for schools to establish formal partnerships with outside entities

—Concern for integrating school experiences and external experiences

The Community Service Scholarship Program at California State University-Fresno combines cooperative education with service learning. Students receive co-op/internship credit and scholarships for completing a placement at a community service site (Derousi and Sherwood 1997). As in traditional co-op work placements, students get real-world training, opportunities to explore career options, and enhanced employability skills such as communication, problem solving, and leadership as well as awareness of community and social problems. Combining co-op and service learning thus prepares students for roles as workers and citizens.

Research on highly successful co-op programs in Cincinnati (Grubb and Villeneuve 1995) and at LaGuardia Community College (Grubb and Badway 1998) shows that they share the basic philosophy and fundamental characteristics of the educational strategy of school-to-work. The reconceptualization of co-op should recognize and build upon this connection. At the same time, lessons from successful co-op programs can benefit the broader STW movement.

There is a need for broader definition of acceptable models for integrating work and learning. Barton (1996) and Wilson et al. (1996) identify a variety of work-based learning activities taking different names: co-op, internships, externships, apprenticeship, career academies, etc. Work-based learning programs should look for connections and develop collaborative relationships. The alternating and parallel co-op models may not meet the needs of returning adult students and dislocated workers needing retraining (Varty 1994). Alternatives such as extended-day programs emphasizing mentoring should be considered.

Connecting activities to integrate school- and work-based learning are an essential part of STW. At LaGuardia, the required co-op seminar helps students make connections by giving them a structure within which to reinforce employability skills, examine larger issues about work and society, and undertake the crucial activities of critical reflection (Grubb and Badway 1998).

Grubb and Badway (1998) and Grubb and Villeneuve (1995) found that the value of cooperative education is embedded in the culture of the institution (LaGuardia) and the region (Cincinnati). In this supportive culture, employer support does not have to be repeatedly obtained and there are clearly understood long-term expectations on all sides (schools, employers, students). This "informal culture of expectations around work-based learning may be more powerful in the long run than a complex set of regulations and bureaucratic requirements" (Grubb and Villeneuve 1995, p. 27).

However, even LaGuardia has found it difficult to sustain co-op culture over time (Grubb and Badway 1998). "The only way in which STW programs can find a permanent place in schools and colleges is for the work-based component to become so central to the educational purposes of the institutions that it becomes as unthinkable to give it up as it would be to abandon math, English, or science" (ibid., p. 28).

Finn (1997) believes that the answer lies in going beyond reconceiving co-op as an "educational strategy, pedagogy, model, methodology, or curriculum" (Finn 1997, p. 41). She asserts that it is time for cooperative education to develop and define its body of knowledge, investigate its unique phenomena-e.g., the concept of learning from experience, and clarify and strengthen the qualifications of co-op practitioners. For Ricks (1996), cooperative education is inherently committed to improving the economy, people's working lives, and lifelong learning abilities. It can thus position itself to serve the experiential learning needs of students into the 21st century.

Other Examples

• University of Waterloo in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada has the largest co-operative education program in North America, with more than 11,000 students enrolled in co-op programs and more than 3,000 active co-op employers.
• Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts has the largest co-operative education program in the United States of America, and is known as one of the only five-year universities in the United States. Northeastern's Co-Op program has been ranked #1 in the Co-Op and Internships category by U.S. News and World Report.
• Kettering University in Flint, Michigan enrolls students in co-operative education from their first year on campus, specializing in engineering, science, and management degree programs.

Service Learning

One widely adopted form of experiential education is learning through service to others (Kielsmeier & Willits, 1989). An example is Project OASES (Occupational and Academic Skills for the Employment of Students) in the Pittsburgh public schools. Eighth graders, identified as potential dropouts, spend three periods a day involved in renovating a homeless shelter as part of a service project carried out within their industrial arts class. Students in programs such as these learn enduring skills such as planning, communicating with a variety of age groups and types of people, and group decisionmaking. In carrying out their activities and in the reflection component afterward, they come to new insights and integrate diverse knowledge from fields such as English, political science, mathematics, and sociology.

Change in Roles and Structures

Whether teachers employ experiential education in cultural journalism, service learning, environmental education, or more traditional school subjects, its key idea involves engaging student voice in active roles for the purpose of learning. Students participate in a real activity with real consequences for the purpose of meeting learning objectives.

Some experts in the field make the distinction between "democratic experiential education" in which students help design curricula and run their own projects and even do their own grading (through objective contracted standards) and other forms of "experiential education" that put students in existing organizations in inferior roles (such as service learning and internships) or in which faculty design the field work (Lempert, 1996).

Experiential learning uses various tools like games, simulations, role plays, stories in classrooms. The experiential learning mindset changes the way the teachers and students view knowledge. Knowledge is no longer just some letters on a page. It becomes active, something that is transacted with in life or life-like situations. It starts to make teachers experience providers, and not just transmitters of the written word. Students become knowledge creators (for themselves) as well as knowledge gatherers.

Besides changing student roles, experiential education requires a change in the role of teachers. When students are active learners, their endeavors often take them outside the classroom walls. Because action precedes attempts to synthesize knowledge, teachers generally cannot plan a curriculum unit as a neat, predictable package. Teachers become active learners, too, experimenting together with their students, reflecting upon the learning activities they have designed, and responding to their students' reactions to the activities. In this way, teachers themselves become more active; they come to view themselves as more than just recipients of school district policy and curriculum decisions.

As students and teachers take on new roles, the traditional organizational structures of the school also may meet challenges (Zemelman, Daniels, & Hyde, 1998). For example, at the Challenger Middle School in Colorado Springs, Colorado, service activities are an integral part of the academic program. Such nontraditional activities require teachers and administrators to look at traditional practices in new ways. For instance, they may consider reorganizing time blocks. They may also teach research methods by involving students in investigations of the community, rather than restricting research activities to the library (Rolzinski, 1990). At the University Heights Alternative School in the Bronx, the Project Adventure experiential learning program has led the faculty to adopt an all-day time block as an alternative to the traditional 45-minute periods. The faculty now organizes the curriculum by project instead of by separate disciplines. Schools that promote meaningful student involvement actively engage students as partners in education improvement activities. These young people learn while planning, researching, teaching, and making decisions that affect the entire education system.

At the university level, including universities like Stanford and the University of California Berkeley, students are often the initiators of courses and demand more role in changing the curriculum and making it truly responsive to their needs. In some cases, universities have offered alternatives for student-designed faculty approved courses. In other cases, students have formed movements or even their own NGOs like Unseen America Projects, Inc., to promote democratic experiential learning and to design and accredit their own alternative curricula (Lempert, 1996).

Helping with the transition

At first, these new roles and structures may seem unfamiliar and uncomfortable to both students and adults in the school. Traditionally, students have most often been rewarded for competing rather than cooperating with one another. Teachers are not often called upon for collaborative work either. Teaching has traditionally been an activity carried out in isolation from one's peers, behind closed doors. Principals, used to the traditional hierarchical structure of schools, often do not know how to help their teachers constitute self-managed work teams or how to help teachers coach students to work in cooperative teams. The techniques of experiential education can help students and staff adjust to teamwork, an important part of the process of reforming schools.

Adventure education is one form of experiential education that is highly effective in developing team and group skills in both students and adults (Rohnke, 1989). Initially, groups work to solve problems that are unrelated to the problems in their actual school environment. For example, in a ropes course designed to build the skills required by teamwork, a faculty or student team might work together to get the entire group over a 12-foot wall or through an intricate web of rope. After each challenge in a series of this kind, the group looks at how it functioned as a team. Who took the leadership roles? Did the planning process help or hinder progress? Did people listen to one another in the group and use the strengths of all group members? Did everyone feel that the group was a supportive environment in which they felt comfortable making a contribution and taking risks?

The wall or web of rope can becomes a metaphor for the classroom or school environment. While the problems and challenges of the classroom or school are different from the physical challenges of the adventure activity, many skills needed to respond successfully as a team are the same in both settings.

These skills — listening, recognizing each other's strengths, and supporting each other through difficulties — can apply equally well to academic problem-solving or to schoolwide improvement efforts.

For example, the Kane School in Lawrence, Massachusetts has been using adventure as a tool for school restructuring. The entire faculty — particularly the Faculty Advisory Council, which shares the decisionmaking responsibilities with the principal — has honed group skills through experiential education activities developed by Project Adventure. These skills include open communication, methods of conflict resolution, and mechanisms for decision making (High Strides, 1990).

Summary

Experiential education can change schools because it requires new roles of students, teachers, and administrators. It can provide a different, more engaging way of treating academic content through the combination of action and reflection. Experiential education empowers students to take responsibility for their own learning. Experiential education can also provide a process for helping all those involved in schooling become more comfortable with the unfamiliar roles commonly proposed for restructured schools.

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Auld, R. B. "The Cooperative Education Movement: Association of Cooperative Colleges." Journal of Cooperative Education (ISSN: 0022-0132), vol. 8, pp. 24-27, 1972.
• Barton, P. E. Cooperative Education in High School: Promise and Neglect. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1996. (ED 400 413)
• Calkins, L. (1991). Living between the lines. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books, Inc.
• Carlson, A. Co-op Planet: Organizations at N.U. Plant Co-op's Seeds Far and Wide. Northeastern University Magazine. Boston, MA: Northeastern University (Office of University Relations). May 1992. Downloaded July 12, 2005, from http://www.numag.neu.edu/9905/wase.html.
• Crow, C. "Cooperative Education in the New Millennium." Cooperative Education Experience, pp. 1-5. Columbia, MD: Cooperative Education Association, 1997. (ED 414 433)
• Derousi, P., and Sherwood, C. S. "Community Service Scholarships: Combining Cooperative Education with Service Learning." Journal of Cooperative Education 33, no. 1 (Fall 1997): 46-54. (EJ 565 927)
• Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
• Educational Writers Association. (1990). Lawrence grows its own leaders. High Strides: Bimonthly Report on Urban Middle Grades, 2 (12). Washington, DC: Author.
• Finn, K. L. "The Spaces Between: Toward a New Paradigm for Cooperative Education." Journal of Cooperative Education 32, no. 2 (Winter 1997): 36-45. (EJ 542 265)
• Fletcher, A. (2005). Meaningful student involvement: Students as partners in school change. Olympia, WA: HumanLinks Foundation.
• Freeland, R. M.; Marini, R. C.; and Weighart, S. "Moving Partnerships between Co-op Institutions and Co-op Employers into the Next Century." Journal of Cooperative Education 33, no. 2 (Winter 1998): 17-27.
• Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. NY: Continuum.
• Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. NY: McGraw Hill.
• Grubb, W. N., and Badway, N. Linking School-Based and Work-Based Learning: The Implications of LaGuardia's Co-op Seminars for School-to-Work Programs. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1998. (ED 418 230)
• Grubb, W. N., and Villeneuve, J. C. Co-operative Education in Cincinnati. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1995.
• Furco, A. "Service Learning and School-to-Work." Journal of Cooperative Education 32, no. 1 (Fall 1996): 7-14.
• Hyman, Ronald T. 1980. Improving Discussion Leadership. New York: Columbia Univ., Teachers College Press.
• John, J. E. A.; Doherty, D. J.; and Nichols, R. M. "Challenges and Opportunities for Cooperative Education." Journal of Cooperative Education 33, no. 2 (Winter 1998): 10-16.
• Kielsmeier, J., & Willits, R. (1989). Growing hope: A sourcebook on integrating youth service into the curriculum. St. Paul, MN: National Youth Leadership Council, University of Minnesota.
• Kraft, D., & Sakofs, M. (Eds.). (1988). The theory of experiential education. Boulder, CO: Association for Experiential Education.
• Lempert, D. and others (1996). Escape from the ivory tower: Student adventures in democratic experiential education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Lorenzen, Michael. 2001. Active Learning and Library Instruction. Illinois Libraries, 83, no. 2: 19-24.
• Lowman, Joseph. 1984. Mastering the Techniques of Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
• McKeachie, Wilbert J., Paul R. Pintrich, Yi-Guang Lin, and David A.F. Smith. 1986. Teaching and Learning in the College Classroom: A Review of the Research Literature. Ann Arbor: Regents of The Univ. of Michigan. ED 314 999. 124 pp. MF-01; PC-05.
• Penner, Jon G. 1984. Why Many College Teachers Cannot Lecture. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas. .
• Ricks, F. "Principles for Structuring Cooperative Education Programs." Journal of Cooperative Education 31, nos. 2-3 (Winter-Spring 1996): 8-22. (EJ 524 105)
• Ricks, F.; Cutt, J.; Branton, G.; Loken, M.; and Van Gyn, G. "Reflections on the Cooperative Education Literature." Journal of Cooperative Education 29, no. 1 (Fall 1993): 6-23. (EJ 475 316)
• Rohnke, K. (1989). Cowstails and cobras II. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
• Rolzinski, C. (1990). The adventure of adolescence: Middle school students and community service. Washington, DC: Youth Service America.
• Ruhl, Kathy L., Charles A. Hughes, and Patrick J. Schloss. Winter 1987. "Using the Pause Procedure to Enhance Lecture Recall." Teacher Education and Special Education 10: 14-18.
• Schaafsma, H. "Reflections of a Visiting Co-op Practitioner." Journal of Cooperative Education 31, nos. 2-3 (Winter-Spring 1996): 83-100. (EJ 524 109)
• Sizer, T. (1984). Horace's compromise. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
• Smollins, J.P. "The Making of the History: Ninety Years of Northeastern Co-op." Northeastern University Magazine. Boston, MA: Northeastern University (Office of University Relations). May, 1999. Downloaded July 12, 2005, from http://www.numag.neu.edu/9905/history.html.
• Van Gyn, G. H. "Reflective Practice: The Needs of Professions and the Promise of Cooperative Education." Journal of Cooperative Education 31, nos. 2-3 (Winter-Spring 1996): 103-131. (EJ 524 110)
• Varty, J. W. "Cooperative Education for the '90s and Beyond." Co-op/Experience/Co-op 5, no. 1 (March 1994): 10-11. (EJ 478 859)
• Wilson, J. W.; Stull, W. A.; and Vinsonhaler, J. "Rethinking Cooperative Education." Journal of Cooperative Education 31, nos. 2-3 (Winter-Spring 1996): 154-165. (EJ 524 112)
• Wigginton, E. (1985). Sometimes a shining moment: The Foxfire experience. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
• Zemelman, S., Daniels, H. & Hyde, A. (1998). Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

• Bonwell, C. & Eison, J. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom AEHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.1. Washington, D.C.: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 1-87838-00-87. 
• Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review 31 (1): 21–32.
• Clark, R., Nguyen, F., and Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in Learning: Evidence-Based Guidelines to Manage Cognitive Load. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. ISBN 0-7879-7728-4. 
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 41 (2): 75-86.
• Mayer, R. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist 59 (1): 14-19.
• Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science 12 (1): 257-285.
• Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction 2 (1): 59-89.

External links

• Association for Experiential Education
• Experiential Learning & Experiential Education: Philosophy, Theory, Practice & Resources
• Changing Schools through Experiential Education. ERIC Digest. The original version of this Wikipedia article is based on the public domain text at this site.
• Experiential Learning - Discussion list.
• Experiential Learning in Higher Education: Linking Classroom and Community. ERIC Digest.
• Incorporating Student Voice into Teaching Practice. ERIC Digest.
• Improving Evaluation in Experiential Education. ERIC Digest.
• Outdoor, Experiential, and Environmental Education: Converging or Diverging Approaches? ERIC Digest.
• Broadening the Bounds of Involvement: Transforming Schools With Student Voice. New Horizons for Learning.
• Otter Valley Experiential High School: Experience Your Education...Experience Your Life.
• Experiential learning through games...Maximize learning through fun experiences

Active Learning

• Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ERIC Digest. The original version of this article is from this public domain site.
• New Directions for Cooperative Education. ERIC Digest.
• The Essential Elements of Cooperative Learning in the Classroom. ERIC Digest.
• Active learning section of Geoff Petty's practical guide on improving teaching and learning.
• Active Learning and Library Instruction

Cooperative Education

• Cooperative Education and Internship Association (CEIA).

• National Commission for Cooperative Education (NCCE)

• Cooperative Education Division (CED) of the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE)

• New Directions for Cooperative Education. ERIC Digest. The original version of this Wikipedia article is based on the public domain text at this site.
• Co-op Student Reviews

• Ninety Years of Northeastern Co-op.

• Theosophy, Vol. 43, No. 5, March, 1955 (Pages 218-225) Intuitive Educators: Herman Schneider 1872—1939.

• New Directions for Cooperative Education. ERIC Digest.
• The Essential Elements of Cooperative Learning in the Classroom. ERIC Digest.
• Active learning section of Geoff Petty's practical guide on improving teaching and learning.
• Active Learning and Library Instruction
• Platform for Active Learning (University of Hull). Includes bank of examples.
• Educational psychology in classroom settings. A developing open-source Wikibook related to learning as discussed in this article.
• Learning by teaching - by Jody Skinner

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Experiential_education  ^history
• Cooperative_education  ^history
• Active_learning  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Experiential learning"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.