For over 20 years, the Wilderness Program has practised its bush counselling activities in Tasmania beyond the sphere of mainstream counselling professionals. Whilst some professionals understand little about our approach, articles regarding the Wilderness Program practices and participant outcomes have appeared in many Australian publications as far back as 1991. Typical of all programs of such longevity, the philosophical underpinnings of this organisation are constantly undergoing refinement. Included here is a brief synopsis on the ethos and methodology which guides the the Wilderness Program's bush counselling practices of our operational facilitators.
The Australian bush is a stimulating medium cloaked in uncertainty, fear and a sense of danger. Coincidentally these same ingredients are significant features in the process of change. For positive change to occur for the participant on a bush counselling program he or she must navigate a number of obstacles before this can come about. Abraham Maslow (1968) puts it succinctly:
Each step forward is a step into the unfamiliar and is possibly dangerous. It also means giving up something familiar, good and satisfying. Growth forward is in spite of these losses and therefore requires courage, will, choice and strength in the individual as well as protection, permission and encouragement from the environment.
The bush environment mirrors this uncertainty and danger through its uncanny resemblance to the process of change and in so doing provides the Wilderness Program participant with a powerful metaphor in terms of courage and strength to take back to their community.
The use of risk-recreation activities such as bushwalking abseiling and kayaking, provide an intervention that allows the individual the freedom to make choices. For the participant who has experienced repeated failure, taking part in a successful activity contradicts their old beliefs and reinforces the new behaviour that enabled them to participate despite the uncertainty. Failure on the other hand is a valuable method of learning for the participant as it provides opportunities to change behaviours that are no longer effective. As a learning tool, future behaviours are influenced, through the continued reinforcement of personal decisions which reap success and the extinguishing of behaviours that potentially cause distress or simply do not measure.
People learn from their mistakes and this is one of the fundamental premises of bush counselling. For this reason, facilitators can never afford to be put in a position where they give reward or punishment for participant success or failure. The consequences of participants’ decisions must be real and natural (eg a sense of accomplishment from reaching the summit or the embarrassment of getting lost and walking extra distance into nightfall).
The proper place to search for truth according to Plato is in half-civil places, where humans are not totally in charge. The ‘sacred space’ phenomena recognises that subjective transcendental experiences occur for each participant within this context. The bush setting is the critical ingredient for this medium, where the opportunity to search for personal meaning is not encumbered by modern day technological tools that fill every waking hour. This search for meaning is achieved through:
* Development of positive self-efficacy.
* Nonverbal exercising through body movement.
* Exploration of one’s emotional responses to the world.
* Living in the here and now.
An increased sense of meaning and purpose is the logical development in an environment where participants have the freedom of choice to engage in challenging risk-recreation activites.
What is the meaning of life? This is a question asked by individuals in all ages of life from adolescence onward. According to Frankl (1967) defining ourselves through our endeavours and achievements is the key to shaping a meaningful existence. As Frankl quotes, "in the how of existence lies the answer to the question for its why." A meaningful existence is therefore linked to what people do and achieve. Assagioli (1995) views a meaningful life as more of a journey. He states "spiritual development in a person is a long and arduous adventure, a journey through strange lands full of wonder."
It may not be clear how participating in a bush counselling program contributes to spiritual well-being, yet future research may assist in highlighting the connections between the processes and the development of spiritual resilience. Questions revolve around the methodology employed by the researcher and how that it might be presented to avoid compromising the 'magic' of the process.
The social norms agreed to by the group prior to the start of the program, greatly assist the facilitator and the group establish ground rules for acceptable behaviour. An agreement is made between all group members and collectively this is known as the full value agreement. There are a number of points:
- Giving and accepting constructive feedback
- No put-downs
- Respecting physical and emotional safety
- Goal Setting
- Confidentiality
- Abstinence
Giving and accepting constructive feedback: The giving and receiving of feedback is a useful tool in allowing people to think about changing their behaviour. If the feedback is offered constructively the person receiving it is more likely to hear it without becoming defensive.
No put-downs: By not putting yourself or others down, helps participants attending the program accept differences within the group and become aware of negative self-talk that may obstruct their ability to get the most from the activities.
Respecting physical and emotional safety: Group members are asked to respect the physical and emotional safety of self and others. Only without fear of criticism or rejection can a participant begin to explore new territory and open up.
Goal Setting: The risk-recreation activities used on the Wilderness Program are the medium and the catalyst for change. Setting a goal of relevance to achieve during the program formalises the change agenda and challenges participants to focus on an issue of personal significance. The participant is encouraged to constantly review his or her goal on the basis that sometimes the goal is over ambitious or not challenging enough. Setting goals that are specific, measureable, achieveable, relevant and within a timeframe are encouraged.
Confidentiality: Bush Counselling facilitators affirm the client/practitioner relationship akin to other professions. The group members agree that what is said within the group is kept confidential after the program. In the Tasmanian community this is particular significance due to the small size and nature of the community.
Abstinence: No sexual relationships, drugs or alcohol use are permitted on the program. This is not a moral-based requirement but a boundary put in place to ensure the physical and emotional safety of all group members.
All group members including the facilitators agree to abide by these norms and are encouraged to own, monitor and police it. It is advisable to have a process in place for how the group governs the agreement, before it is gets violated. By keeping everyone focused on their personal goals and handing over the maintenance of social norms to group members allows the facilitators to step back from the policing role once the participants feel accepted within the group.
Knowledge of the following areas of bush counselling are considered essential prerequisites for all facilitators employed on the Wilderness Program.
Carl Rogers' Person-Centred Therapy (Corey, 1996), is a central tool for our relationship with the participants. The creation of a caring and empathic tie is not only forged between the facilitator and the group but the tie also influences interaction between participants. It allows facilitators to approach participants with sincerity and in a trusting environment in which they can talk openly. The use of active listening skills forms the basis of all programs as few participants have had past opportunities to be heard without judgement. Participants, as a consequence are usually keen to talk honestly about themselves. The Person-Centred approach relieves the facilitator of the responsibility of searching for solutions to the participant's difficulties, thus freeing he or she to explore the emotional world of the participant in greater depth. Only through careful listening can the facilitator begin to understand the participant's issues and thus construct opportunities to assist the participant toward realising their goals.
The concept of task mastery and the development of positive self-efficacy is discussed by Albert Bandura (1969). Bush counselling programs utilise activities such as abseiling that promote task mastery. Whilst peer modelling can play a major part in this process, task mastery can also be achieved with the aid of a supportive group environment. Individuals are encouraged to more readily attempt the task because the consequences of failing in front of their peers are significantly diminished. The use incremental steps in the completion of various challenges is widely used. An example of this is when leaders rig three abseil descents of increasing difficulty to encourage a progressive approach to task mastery. This highlights the need for staff to assess the level of skills within the group and to fix the degree of difficulty to a challenging yet achievable level. Participants also learn to approach difficult tasks in a calmer and more deliberate manner. Through the development of positive self-efficacy, or the "I can approach", other situations where performance was weakened by a preoccupation with personal inadequacies can be improved.
A non-interventionist approach by the facilitators allows participants the freedom to respond to challenges in any way they feel is appropriate and responsible during a Wilderness Program activity. It is clear that maintenance of positive future behaviour is more likely to occur through heuristic learning than if advice subtle or otherwise is offered by the leader.
Heuristic learning in bush counselling programs is where the experience is left to speak for itself without intervention from the facilitators. An example of this is in the case of Lucy, a 16 year old student with a learning difficulty who has set herself a goal of making decisions independently that effect her well-being.
Lucy is walking through an overgrown scrubby section of bush track that is scratching her legs in a progressively harsher manner. As a result, keeping up with the group is becoming more difficult and she calls out to the group to "wait up". She considers the option of getting her overpants out of her pack and putting them on. She decides to asks one of the facilitators if she should put them on. In light of Lucy's goal, the facilitator's response might be to deflect the question and ask her, "What do you think you ought to do?" The facilitator notes that this is the first time Lucy has been assertive enough to ask the group to wait and sensing that there is some urgency within the group to get going, decides to adopt a totally non-directive approach and observe what transpires. The facilitator meanwhile pretends to look busy adjusting something on his or her backpack and presently notices that Lucy is coming to some sort of resolution. She has made a decision to put on the overpants and consequently is able to keep pace with the group without scratching her legs any further.
Later on that evening the facilitator asks Lucy, how she resolved the issue and what difference had it made? She replies that "I had no choice, I had to make a decision. The difference it has made is that I know that I am capable of making decisions when I have to".
To help generalise this new behaviour into other areas of Lucy's life invites further prompting from the facilitator. When asked as to what happens in similar situations back at home when she does have choices in decision making, Lucy answers, "I get flustered and someone usually my mum makes the decision for me. I just have to figure out how I am going to stop her".
Bandura (1969) notes in his writing that individuals’ achievement is largely a result of the effort they exert, rather than their inherent ability. Peer dynamics on the program play an important part in the extent of each participant’s achievement, because the level of positivity and encouragement received by the individual, will potentially negate or promote the amount of effort exerted. Therefore the selection of group members is a critical factor in creating a conducive environment in which effort can be rewarded.
Multiple models are particularly effective in the bush counselling context for they provide the participant with a view of various successful behaviours. Bush counselling programs that utilise a heterogeneous basis for group selection employ a variety of methods. Single individuals from a variety of backgrounds are chosen for each Wilderness Program heterogeneous course and pre-existing peer groups are discouraged. Each participant therefore commences the course on an even standing with other members. Thus, without fear of judgement from peers, the opportunity is available to the individual to experiment with a range of new ideas and behaviours. The Wilderness Program staff in their selection process endeavour to create this positive group setting, whereby participants with elevated peer status become models for the rest of the group. An example of this on a bush counselling program might come about when a less confident individual observes another group member completing a difficult task (e.g. a tight squeeze in a cave) and concludes that because that person managed to get through, then so can they.
The following areas of bush counselling are considered essential competencies for our most experienced operational facilitators.
The Piagetian concept of disequilibration describes the conflict within an individual when pressed into accommodating new concepts, beliefs and experiences that cannot be assimilated into pre-established patterns within the psyche. Activities that involve a high level of perceived risk, allow the participant to experience increased awareness of the disequilibrating process, prior to successful completion of the activity. The bush counselling terminology for this process is called 'edgework' (Nadler & Luckner, 1992) and by relating the experience to events in their daily living, the activity is used by participants as a personal metaphor. The feelings of stuckness and uncertainty that a participant encounters on the edge of an abseil are rich in comparisons to every day situations. Teetering on the edge of an abseil descent, self-defeating internal dialogue builds up and becomes louder, increased physical discomfort occurs and emotionally the individual is often intensely fearful. Questions asked at this point can assist self-awareness in the individual and help make the connection between what is going on and other experiences in the participant's world. Examples might include "What are you experiencing right now?" and "Can you remember a time recently when you felt, thought or acted this way?" Such disequilibrating moments in a participants life are invariably connected to periods where they have experienced rapid change in the beliefs they hold about themselves and the world they live in.
The developmental progress of every group is important to consider and carefully monitor. For facilitators of bush counselling programs, optimising the opportunities presented to participants require close attention to group needs. Each stage of the group development cycle requires a different emphasis to assist with these needs. This requires flexibility of program structure so that adjustments can be made to cater for different groups. Trotzer (1977) proposes five distinct stages of group development.
Security Stage:
The prime focus is to establish a common ground for communication to occur. This can come about by modelling feelings of discomfort to gain the group's confidence. Active listening and providing for their needs goes a long way toward maintaining a friendly atmosphere. An example of a question that the facilitator might ask at this stage is, "What do you need in order to trust and feel safe in this group?
Acceptance Stage:
The need to belong, the need for relatedness is a key requisite for members of the group experiencing Trotzer's second stage. The desire to be a part of the group is a motivating factor for acceptance of each person regardless of their behaviour exhibited outside the group. Each participant's behaviour therefore needs to reflect this through modelling the acceptance of behaviours and attitudes of others. Rogers (Corey, 1996) terms this acceptance as unconditional positive regard. An example of a question that may be asked at this stage is, "What is it that makes you feel you belong here?"
Responsibility Stage:
This stage involves the recognition that, "yes this is my problem and I have to do something about it." Facilitators encourage individuals to maintain focus on their solution to problems by modelling self-responsibility. This is achieved by staff demonstrating that they own their weaknesses and can talk about them non-defensively to members of the group. An example of a question that may be asked at this stage is, "What do you need to do in order to solve your personal issue?"
Work Stage:
This stage of group development comes later in the program, involving open discussion of personal problems and creating an atmosphere where alternatives can be tried and examined free of threat. This is the moment when individuals can try out new behaviours or attitudes in a safe setting prior to risking changes outside the group. The facilitator's role here is to model vulnerability by actively seeking solutions to his or her's issues by asking group members for assistance. An example of a question that may be asked at this stage is, "What can the group assist you with that will help you in trying out this new behaviour?"
Closure:
The realisation that something of great significance is coming to an end elicits a sense of sadness in the group. Participants take credit for their own changes, yet the difficult task for each person is modifying behaviour and attitudes outside of the group. People outside the group may not give the same encouragement or reinforcement to the member for acting in new or different ways. Without a source of support, the chance of regression is greater. Examples of questions that might be asked at closure are, "Describe one thing you learned about yourself during the program?" "Can you tell the person next to you how they went with their personal goal during the course?" "As a result of these things you have learned about yourself, what areas of your life in the outside world would you like to change?"
Social constructivist theory informs the Wilderness Program facilitator that the causal factors underlying a participant's problem may bear little relationship to its eventual solution. In fact there may be a myriad of solutions for any given problem, yet by focusing solely on problem causality it can be overwhelming for the participant. Solution-Focused and Narrative counselling approaches are both underpinned by constructivist theory and they advocate that by separating the person from the problem, respite is achieved and some control is gained over its influence. For example when a participant persistently holds a negative view of themselves and their problems, a process of externalising the problem can help lessen the impact.
The miracle question is used extensively as a tool to focus individuals away from the problem and into some level of future resolution. The miracle question typically asks "If a miracle happened tonight and your problem was solved, how would you know it was solved and what would be different?" This style of questioning slices through the confusion surrounding the problem by providing the participant with a clear idea of where they want to head. Another useful tool used to monitor feelings, physical effects and general well-being in the group is through the asking of scaling questions. For example when the facilitator is monitoring progress within the group towards goal realisation, he or she might ask participants to, "give me a number on a scale of 1 - 10 that indicates how you are progressing with your personal goal?".
Since adventures are defined as experiences with uncertain outcomes, facilitators employ learning methods that frequently avoid 'rescuing' participants, giving away answers to difficult tasks, solving problems they encounter along the way, or making decisions for them. As an experienced staff member it is tempting to be the 'expert' and to be swayed into helping a group, but this behaviour encourages the group to rely on the facilitator and not themselves. By giving away the ending, the spirit of true adventure is compromised and the learning potential is severely jeopardised. The only exception in this case is when real dangers are present. If the group appears to be headed for accident or injury, then timely intervention to reduce or eliminate that risk is the recognised response from Wilderness Program staff.
Perceived freedom of choice is a necessary component of adventure. Take away the participants’ power of decision and success or failure will more likely be attributed to the person who made them do it. Facilitators avoid coercing participants and prefer to operate under Karl Rohnke’s (1984) axiom of “challenge by choice”. For Wilderness Program staff, this may mean encouraging participants to attempt tasks despite their saying “I can’t do it!” However, the instant they affirm “I won’t do it!” the leader will support and honour the decision. For some participants (e.g. survivors of incest or abuse), being able to say NO is far more important than completing the task (and in this example, ignoring their affirmation can prevent a major change occurring).
Staff employing bush counselling methods employ flexible teaching approaches to match the learning styles of participants. Non-experiential teachers often teach to a fictitious person called Norma Normal (or Norm for short, the middle or average person in the group). By doing so, these teachers are neglecting the people who need more challenge (and so are bored) and those who need less challenge (and so are anxious). Rarely does Norm ever exist, so good educators recognise that adventures are a state of mind which fluctuate according to the participants’ perceptions of situational risks and personal competence. Wilderness Program facilitators are able to offer a range of challenges to participants in the same activity (different craft for paddling) or at the same site (various climbs on a cliff). Furthermore, if a facilitator is working on improving group communication and finds that lack of trust is a barrier, they must be flexible enough to change the program activities to evolve with the participants’ needs.
Facilitators deal in perceived risk (where participants show initial concern or react with fear to the experience) while keeping the real dangers at the lowest possible levels for the chosen activities or sites (through the use of PFD’s, helmets, ropes, etc.). Dealing with real dangers (where a backup system is not possible due to the nature of the activity or site) should be reserved for participants who have overcome their misconceptions about risk and are astute at perceiving their own level of competence, and have been appropriately trained and assessed in preparation for the adventure.
Other prerequisites to adventure are the use of personal competence and the opportunity to exercise control over one’s environment, thus attempting to influence the way an adventure turns out. Consider rafting in a motorised craft: certainly exciting but clearly more chance than challenge, because success and failure are in the hands of person operating the outboard motor. However, put paddles in the participants hands, and they are likely to be empowered by the challenge and thus to learn more from their own successes and failures. The amusement park approach to adventure programming (where participants are removed from the safety responsibility and experts care for them) is a good example of the potential for disempowerment, because such exclusion can lead a participant to further dependence on staff expertise. It can also interfere with team development, caring for weaker group members, and may even be injurious, as safety is an attitude to be shared by all.
Bush counselling affirms the facilitator/participant relationship, akin to that of doctor and patient. Confidentiality ought not to be breached. The Wilderness Program staff have adopted the ethics of the Professional Counselling Association of Tasmania and work under the auspices of the Privacy Act. Consent is required from the participant for the release of personal details to other agencies.
Suffice it to say that the bush counselling facilitator should protect the local environment and pass on an ethic of minimal impact to participants.
Assagioli, R. (1995) Transpersonal Development. London: Thorsens. P.116.
Bandura, A. (1969). Social learning theory of identification processes. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.). Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Corey, G. (1996). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy (5th ed.) Ca: Brooks/Coles Publishing.
Frankl, V. (1967) Psychotherapy and Existentialism. London: Souvenir Press. p.30.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a Psychology of Being. (2nd Ed.). Princeton NJ: Van Nostrand. pp. 199-200
Nadler, R. S. & Luckner, J. L. (1992). Processing the adventure experience. Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
Rohnke, K. (1984) Silver Bullets. Kendall Hunt.
Trotzer, J. P. (1977). The counsellor and the group: Integrating theory training and practice. Monterey: Brooks Cole Publishing.
Click here to access Wilderness Program publications
