Explore the vast range of titles available.

This is an unusual article in that it brings together the perspectives of many on this journal's editorial board, around the issue of contending with COVID-19. Twenty statements showcase a range of thoughts and experiences, highlighting the differences and similarities in the way the pandemic is impacting on the educational practice of outdoor and environmental education. The future is not yet written, of course, so it is worth thinking about how the current moment may impact on the months and years to come. The aim of this article is to influence and support such thinking. [Author abstract]

Increasing physical activity and reducing sedentary behavior is an economic and health priority. This Green Exercise (GEx) study reports on a 40-day physical activity intervention to increase physical activity that primarily used outdoor recreation activities. Adherence, compliance, blood pressure (BP), total cholesterol, anthropometry, strength, dynamic stability, and cardiovascular fitness were assessed 1 week prior and immediately following the 40-day intervention. The results then were compared with a larger study that used the same methodologies but for the exception of primarily indoor physical activities. Results from this study showed similar improvements in health measures to the comparative indoor-based physical activity program with increased adherence and compliance. Improvements in wellbeing were also noted. This GEx study suggests that exercise programs that seek to increase physical activity levels of insufficiently active adults may benefit from including outdoor recreation activities within the program and may also increase participant mental health and general well-being.

In Australia, when a person wants to work in the outdoor education or recreation field, they can follow a number of different pathways to gain the required knowledge, skills and experience. Typically, this involves the completion of a formal program with either a training organisation or a university, depending on the qualification sought. Programs delivered by training organisations typically use a national training package to define the specific competencies (knowledge and skills) and the curriculum and outcomes of these programs are clearly defined, and qualifications are usually transferable around the country. Outdoor education programs delivered by universities in Australia, however, have no such clarity. This paper describes a research study that used the Delphi research method to consult with academics working in university outdoor education programs across Australia. The research set out to establish a set of threshold concepts that articulate what a student who completes at least a major in outdoor education knows and is able to do. Over two rounds of consultation the six authors of this paper formed the Delphi facilitation team, which solicited input and feedback from an expert panel. Nineteen different university academics participated in the research and produced seven threshold concepts, which are shared in this paper to encourage discussion and invite feedback from a wider range of stakeholders. More research is required to ascertain the efficacy of these threshold concepts in describing what graduates of university outdoor education programs know and can do. [Author abstract]

Research has indicated that some stakeholders in the Australian outdoor education profession are uncertain about the capabilities of students graduating from university outdoor education programmes. Unfortunately, there is currently no formal or informal agreement amongst university programmes regarding the knowledge, skills, and experience that an outdoor education graduate should be expected to acquire. The situation becomes more complicated when these graduates are required by some employers, land managers, or insurers to undertake additional vocational education and training (VET)-based training to obtain activity leadership qualifications. This paper outlines a process to identify and document the forms of knowledge, skills, and experience that graduates of university outdoor education programmes need to work in the profession. In the last decade, several fields and discipline areas have used a threshold concepts framework to optimise curriculum design and pedagogical development based on the work of Meyer and Land (2003). Threshold concepts articulate critical knowledge areas that graduates entering the profession must master, and these concepts have been characterised as being transformative, irreversible, troublesome, integrative, and bounded. Using a threshold concept framework to design curriculum allows professionals to identify essential concepts and alerts academics to areas where their students are likely to experience difficulties. Suggestions for developing threshold concepts outlined in the literature are summarised, and a collaborative, consultative process is recommended to establish threshold learning outcomes in university outdoor education programmes in Australia. Some suggestions for new nomenclature that can be used to describe outdoor leaders, including graduates of university outdoor education programmes, are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] [Author abstract]

Communicating tertiary graduate skills and knowledge to employers is a contemporary issue in Australian outdoor education. Threshold concepts have been proposed as a positive way forward to a shared understanding between Higher Education (HE) professionals, students, graduates, employers, and other outdoor education stakeholders. While threshold concepts can offer a curriculum development framework that highlights the graduate capabilities of an HE outdoor educator, they do not specify how these concepts are assessed. In this paper, we explore the assessment of threshold concepts in HE degrees and then examine current assessment practices in HE outdoor education degrees. We highlight selected literature on assessing outdoor education in HE and then explore how other professions assess threshold concepts. Specific professions included have (a) identified threshold concepts and (b) considered the ability to practice upon graduation, as this has the most significant alignment with the professional role of an outdoor educator. We then describe current outdoor education HE assessment practices at selected Australian universities, highlighting the breadth and range of assessment methods incorporated in existing degrees. We conclude with a discussion of the role of authentic assessment and provide five recommendations for how academics might assess the seven HE outdoor education threshold concepts described by Thomas et al. (2019) to support communication of graduate capabilities to employers, students, graduates, and other outdoor education stakeholders.

The Australian outdoor education sector has diverse qualification pathways. Each pathway must prepare graduates to meet workplace expectations and the capacity to engage in appropriate levels of professional practice. The focus of this paper is to resolve an area of continued confusion—the differences in learning and responsibilities across graduate pathways (vocational and university). Through an analysis of the current Australian Adventure Activity Standards, The Australian Qualifications Framework and the National Outdoor Education Threshold Concepts, we argue that a better understanding of the capabilities of university graduates is possible. Via specific narrative examples from multiple tertiary institutions of the expected professional understanding and capabilities of university-trained outdoor educators in the context of bushwalking, we articulate the clear difference in skills and knowledge of university graduates to those who have been trained through other qualification pathways. This Australian exemplar is intended to continue international discussion about the role of university education to outdoor education.

The initial online publication contained several typesetting errors. The original article has been corrected.

This paper reports on a survey of South Australian secondary Schools conducted in 2000 regarding the nature and scope of outdoor education in South Australian secondary schools. The survey was.adapted from Lugg and Martin (2000,) study of outdoor education implementation in Victorian secondary schools, ajid was sent to all outdoor and physical education coordinators, as well as school principals of every secondary school in South Australia. The survey results suggest that most secondary schools in South Australia offer outdoor education in the curriculum in one form or another. Perceived outcomes by teachers were largely in the personal and social development domain. Environmental outcomes, although perceived to be of reasonable importance, were largely not achieved through outdoor education in South Australia. The outdoor education curriculum area has strong links to physical education in this state with most teachers having a background in physical education, and outdoor education was often taught as part of a physical education program. Despite this, the outcomes of outdoor education did not appear to be closely related to physical education. Outdoor education was generally valued within the curriculum, but structural (logistics, cost, staffing, etc.) issues appeared to restrict the implementation of outdoor education. The survey generally indicates that outdoor education is a well-established component of the curriculum of South Australian secondary schools.

This paper examines the implementation of Outdoor Education in South Australian schools and investigates the influences on this curriculum area. The data obtained describe influences on the nature of programmes as including Outward Bound and other training organisations. The major influence on the scope of Outdoor Education appears to have been commonwealth and state funding, as suggested by the increase in participation by state schools in the late 1970's and early 1980's. This investigation forms the basis for further study of the nature and scope of Outdoor Education in South Australian Schools. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]