Ervaringsleren
Zoeken
Home
Over ons
Links
Contact
Home » Nieuws

From Adventure To Therapy - Luk Peeters

2 reacties | reageer hier

1. Abstract

Some necessary conditions to enhance the therapeutic outcomes of Adventure programming

 

This article examines the way and the conditions under which adventure activities can become therapeutic. It determines change as a central concept in the therapeutic process. Out from a Gestalt and Client Centered framework the notion of ‘change’ is then further explored through the notion of ‘emotional schemes’. Emotional schemes are complex  synthesizing structures which provide the framework for our responses to the world. Therapy can then be understood as the process of activating and facilitating the reorganization of existing dysfunctional schemes and the creation of new and functional ones.

The article then continues by exploring some attention points for the facilitator in order to enhance the therapeutic process within the course of the activities.

 

1. Introduction

This article will examine the way and the conditions under which adventure activities can become 'therapeutic'. All too often activities are taken out of an educational or even recreational framework and presented and counseled in an almost identical and standardized way within a therapeutic aimed program. By doing this it is my belief that a lot of the therapeutic richness and power that the experiencing of these activities can generate may easily  be lost. Even worse, poorly led activities include the risk that a participant repeats  earlier trauma and thus strengthens old-patterned, unhealthy coping mechanisms.

As we talk about therapy, we talk about recovery or re-adaptation or more generally about change. Thus, one of the key-concepts in the area of therapy is ‘change’. This article searches for an in-depth understanding of the nature of change and leads to a model that emphasizes 'facilitating emotional change' (Greenberg et al., 1993).  From this theoretical background a variety of issues are described relating to issues in the presentation and conducting of adventure activities. The focus will not as much lie on the therapy process after the activity, as this is the more familiar side of the professional field of the psychotherapist, but on conducting the activity  in the narrower sense of the word. Therein  crucial points and pitfalls for adventure therapists will be identified.

The theoretical background and models used come out of the experiential Gestalt therapy, a direction in psychotherapy that fits quit naturally the experiential educational theories (see Gilsdorf 1998, Peeters 1990 and 1997 and Penner 1998).   Gestalttherapy can provide a more in-depth understanding of the processes of change within individuals and how they are being influenced by new experiences.

 

2. In Search of ‘Change’ in Adventure Therapy

I have always been interested, even intrigued by what exactly the concept of ‘change’ in an adventure context means. How does change occur, what triggers it to happen? What is the subject of change? How do activities in an adventure context facilitate behavior changes in other life-settings? Initial answers that were provided by literature available didn’t satisfy me. I believed that adventure situations could be a metaphor for other life events and that a behavioral change in those actions would influence so-called ‘real life’ behavior. However, I could not find anything, but superficial answers to the question of how these metaphors developed and what change really meant in terms of the relationship between subject and surrounding world. I  made some progress in my ‘quest’ for appropriate answers when Bill Proudman (Chapman, Mc Phee and Proudman, 1992) talked about experiential education as ‘emotionally-engaged learning’. This phrase struck a chord with my own personal experience. Whenever I saw major changes in the behavior, thinking and feeling of my participants there was emotion involved. Being ‘deeply touched’ seemed to go along with discovering the ‘new’. Thus it looked like change was always an emotional change.

The next step in my ‘search’ for answers consisted of the writings of Leslie Greenberg, especially his text: ‘Facilitating Emotional change’ (Greenberg et al, 1993). Interestingly, Greenbergs’ background is both Gestalt and Client-Centered Therapy.; In this combination we can already find some links with adventure therapy as Gestalt principles are often used within adventure therapy. Penner (1997) argues ‘how Gestalt Therapy and experiential Education strongly share the value of enacting actual experiment in order to create contact and “ownership” with our learning processes.’ Gilsdorf (1998) draws parallels between Gestalt Therapy as one of the branches of humanistic psychology an experiential education. Schoel, Prouty and Radcliffe use Gestalt techniques to frame and debrief experiences (1988) and Peeters (1990 and 1997) puts Outdoor Adventure activities in a Gestalt perspective.

The basic attitudes of the client-centered approach are often those which guide us as facilitators and are prominent in European Outdoor Education Train-the-Trainers programs. Congruence, acceptance and empathy are being explored and trained (Exponent, 1998) as central guidelines in the Ropes Course trainers’ relationship with participants.

Furthermore, Greenberg is strongly advocating that the experiential Client Centered and Gestalt therapy approaches merge in a new therapeutic strand, which he and his colleagues call “experiential psychotherapy”.

 



2. Facilitating Emotional Change: The theory of Greenberg

The central concept in the therapeutic theory of Greenberg (1993 and 1994) is that of emotion and ‘emotional schemes’. Emotional schemes are complex synthesizing structures which provide the framework for our responses to the world. They organize our experience and our responses to situations we encounter.

They are built up during our life and as a result of the experiences we have lived. Emotional schemes operate automatically by recognition of some key elements at a  tacit level. These key elements can consist of almost everything; A specific smell, a movement, being in a certain postural position, a bodily feeling, a memory etc. If occurring in a certain combination these key elements can trigger the appearance of a certain emotional schemes. In a healthy situation these schemes change by accommodation to new experiences. Fear for extravagantly dressed persons can for example change in trust and interest.

In this respect Laevers (1989) refers to Piaget where he states that new experiences that can not be assimilated due to the big discrepancy between available schemes and reality will lead to accommodation, this is the restructuring or expanding of existing schemes. So the experience of a strangely dressed, pierced and tattooed co-participant helping me out of a narrow and difficult caving passage has to change my existing schemes in order to get incorporated in my being who I am.

Greenberg considers emotional schemes as synthesizing. He situates them on a higher-ranking order than, for example, cognition which is only one of the four structuring components. In this respect he differs from Piaget (1969), who first uses the notion of ‘scheme’. His more cognitive concept refers to an intermediary structure between perception and comprehension through which the individual contacts the external reality. We for example see a chair at first glance through the concept of ‘instrument to sit upon’ and not as it appears ‘as such’.

Greenberg states that emotional schemes are made up of four components of which cognition is one of them. The others include motivation, affect and action (see figure 1).



An example of how these schemes organize our responses to our environment can clarify Greenbergs’ theory. For example, if we see a snake during a hike (I consider this example from the standpoint of a Western-European person) our reaction can be to withdraw from the animal as soon as possible. This emotional scheme is fed with information from the four components. These components include the following:

 

Cognition: our (limited) knowledge of snakes tells us that they ought to be considered dangerous.

 

Motivation: our goals, concerns and needs will co-construct our emotional scheme. If we want to show our ‘no-fear tendency’, or if we are a biologist and very much interested in everything that moves around, this will influence our response-mode.

 

Affect: The sensory and bodily feeling that we experience within ourselves will also help to shape our meaning of a situation. So we will define an emotion as ‘fear’ if we notice some bodily changes and sensory feelings that normally come together with that feeling.

 

Action: The above will be combined with the action tendencies that we experience within ourselves ( i.e. running away) and the mix of these four components will provide our response to the situation. Thus, cognition in this theoretical framework is just one of the components and does not operate on a higher level as  commonly  believed/accepted.

 

Emotional schemes are activated by the recognition of one or more key-elements who then act as a ‘trigger’.

 

Consider the following story:

‘Frank did a fantastic job today. Everybody silently agreed on that. He was very helpful during the initiative activities and came with some really smart ideas to solve the group tasks. During the rock-climbing session that followed people just enjoyed watching him. It was beautiful to see his concentration and dedication to the task he was accomplishing. Yet this 17 year old boy is quiet shy and has a rather negative self-concept. He is obviously not aware of his own qualities and capacities. The facilitator wants to bring this into awareness. So, when everybody is circled up at the end of the day and reviewing the days events the facilitator says: “OK Frank, get up. Tell us, how did you do today?” Frank stumbles up and looks down to his shoe tips. Other group members try to cheer him: “Yea Frank, come on, tell us!”. Frank looks up and around, his face now suddenly showing anger and tears, and shouts: “Get lost, all of you.” He then turns away and takes off.’

 So, what happened? Some elements of this situation triggered a formal emotional scheme to become active. Just like a snakelike silhouette on a dry and hot day in a stony and bushy environment that activates the ‘snake-avoidance scheme’. In Frank’s story it was the standing up and alone in the presence of others (affect/bodily feeling), their cheering (sensory feeling), the request from an authority figure and his belief that he had to evaluate himself  (cognition and motivation) that triggered the emotional scheme. This emotional scheme was built up when Frank, years ago, coming home from school on Friday afternoons, was put on the counter in his father’s pub and had to declare the results he obtained in school that week. Meanwhile, all the drinking customers where shouting and cheering at him. His father, proud and drunk, never saw the shame, pain and anger that Frank experienced during these incidents.

 

As Greenberg (1993) identifies when a once healthy scheme (e.g. running away from the threat) arises in a new situation that is fundamentally different, it can lead to dysfunctional behavior. “Dysfunction then occurs when the meaning construction system fails to attend to the fullness of information from the emotional scheme or when the schemes themselves are dysfunctional, which will result in dysfunctional emotional meanings and inappropriate reactions.”

 

Consequently, therapy can be understood as the process of activating and facilitating the reorganization of existing dysfunctional schemes and the creation of new and functional ones.

 

Thus, Frank can begin to learn to distinguish between potentially threatening and prizing situations,  and to restructure his meaning construction system to the arousal of more appropriate emotional schemes. It is crucial to point out here that in Greenbergs’ theory a scheme can only develop while it is active, only then  is it accessible for  new input and change. This  has tremendous implications for the role and the functions of the therapist and for the content of the therapeutic process. It is not enough that Frank recognizes his reaction afterwards and understands and trusts the positive intentions of participants and facilitator. Nor is it enough that he is now able to see how he deprives himself from positive feed-back in order for change to occur. It is not the awareness of an inappropriate reaction alone that will lead to a more suitable behavior, it is only during the time that the scheme is active that modifications can take place.

 

This places a lot of importance on the more action-oriented phase within experiential programs and to the interventions of the facilitator during these moments


3. From Adventure to Therapy: What the facilitator or therapist can do

 Based on the therapeutic assumptions presented above we can now focus on some tasks or ‘attention points’ for the facilitator during the course of the activity. (see Table 1). Some of these points are pointed out by Greenberg (1994), others come from personal experience and theoretical influences from Zinker (1974) and Ringer (2000)

 

However this list is not exhaustive

 

1.      heighten the interpersonal safety of the relationship

2.      facilitate the here-and-now experiencing of the participants

3.      direct the attentional focus to actual features of the experience

4.      stimulate and evoke schematic emotional memory

5.      create and maintain a ‘reflective space’

6.      try to avoid descriptions or names that narrow or devaluate the proper experience of the participant

7.      encourage participants to contact directly what is anxiety provoking and was previously avoided

8.      set up and personalize activities to generate new experiments

 

Table 1: attention points for the facilitator during the activity 

3.1.  Heighten the interpersonal safety of the relationship (Greenberg, 1993)

The heightening of interpersonal safety will reduce the intrapersonal anxiety. A person will find more trust and safety within him/herself when trusted and trusting and feeling safe within his/her environment. This will then result in the increase of the processing capacity of that person. When feeling safe, we can more easily open ourselves to new information and to new input that can be threatening in its potential capacity to urge us to change.

 

3.2.  Facilitate the ‘here and now’ experiencing of the participants

Often we see that participants are involved in the activity in a ‘result-oriented’ way: they only look at the top of the climb, the end of the passage, the other side of the bridge and then move as fast as possible, with ‘their eyes on infinity and their mind on zero’. Another way in which participants tend to keep away from the actual experience is by deflecting their attention to other features. For example by starting to talk to the belayers while climbing the pole at a ropes course activity or by whistling or singing (like the seven dwarfs!) when entering the cave in an caving activity. This focus needs to be shifted to the experiencing of the actual situation. This stimulation of the here-and-now experiencing can be done in different ways. This includes pointing out those mechanisms when introducing the activity and inviting them not to do so; by bringing it to their awareness if  we see it happen during the action; by slowing them down if they hurry through the action and/or looking for ways to force them to slow down and heighten their experience. A good example of this is participation in the pamper pole, where after climbing the pole participants first have to turn around on top before jumping off. This reduces the possibility of stumbling on and jumping of in almost the same moment, in an attempt just to ‘conquer’ that pole, without being fully present. Similar to this, Hovelynck (1999) argues that facilitators should support heir participants to make a shift from task success orientation to a frame orientation.

Thus it is not necessarily the task success that provides the learning, it can sometimes even be the opposite. A major failure as a vehicle to change.  

An example out of a high Ropes Course activity that is called the ‘Team Beam’. Two persons, each standing on a unstable log, suspended by cables, depend on each other to make it to the other side. Two participants choose to do this activity together. Their motivation is different. Anna wants to try to clearly verbalize and respect her own boundaries in relation with someone else. Laura wants to experience to trust a partner in the  commitment they have made together. As the moment of action comes closer, Anna gets scared and wants to withdraw. She asks Laura to not do the activity. At first, Laura reacts furious. She feels, once again, betrayed by the commitment of someone else. She tries to persuade Anna to keep her engagement. Anna is crying. She says she can not do it without going out of touch with herself. Which is what she does not want for herself anymore. So she decides not to go. After a 15 minutes of personal reflection time  they come back together. As Laura verbalizes that she is not angry anymore and respect Anna’s decision, the latter is profoundly relieved. ‘This is almost impossible for me to accept’ she says. ‘ I break my promise in choosing for  myself and I do not loose your love for me. This activity could not have been a greater success in any other way. A task success could never have given the same quality of learning outcome.

 

3.3.  Direct the attentional focus to actual features of the experience (Greenberg, 1993).

In directing the participant to the actual and appropriate dimensions of the experience it is necessary to confront the participant with what is happening at that moment. By, for instance, sharing your observations: ‘I can hear you breathing slowly and fully’, ‘hey, I don’t see you looking around and yet you say  you are in search of a handhold. Or even by imitating movements (making a fist while saying I am not angry) or sounds (sighing).

The way in which your participant will respond to these interactions will of course be determined by the relationship you already have established. Part of this relationship is the permission which as a therapist you have obtained to intervene on a therapeutic level. Which is of course not a simple answer to a request but the unspoken result of the respectful development of the therapeutic relationship.

 

3.4.  Stimulate and evoke schematic emotional memory.

In order to evoke schematic emotional memory we should not try to avoid the behaviors which are subject to change, we do not want to enforce an artificial positive attitude towards the activity, oneself and each other, where participants do not encounter their problematic behavior. Indeed, we want to welcome the dysfunctionality, because when visible and alive it can become subject to change as Greenbergs (1994) suggests. In order to change dysfunctional behavior the according scheme must be “up and running” , that is the behavioral pattern fully present and acted by the participant. 

When the course experience is nothing but a series of success stories and a chain of positive feelings towards one another it may be hard to link it with other life events. It will be more like a dreamlike holiday on another planet.

In my opinion this is a strong plea against some types of full value contracts where all of the negative labeled conducts are on beforehand forbidden. The participants on beforehand agree not to put someone down, try with the best of their capacities, not use discouraging language etc.

Whereas the aim of such a contract should be to create and maintain a safe working atmosphere it sometimes seems to become a set of imposed behavior rules to serve the facilitator’s well being and not getting out of control of the situation. Furthermore, it must be difficult for a participant to judge the sincerity of his other group-members in such a situation. So if I for example succeed in getting through a hole in the Spiders Web and my fellow group members applaud I will never be sure if they applaud because it is part of the contract, or because I behaved in a way that spontaneously urges them to applaud’.

On the contrary, away from a safe bottomline of necessary ‘ground rules’, participants should be able to encounter those aspects of themselves and others that are dysfunctional and perhaps even harmful and, in a dialogue amongst each other, formulate and develop their proper values and judgments.

3.5.  Create and maintain a ‘reflective space’ (Ringer 2000)

Ringer (2000) uses this term to describe how a positive environment for reflections can be organized. In the same way I see something similar during the actions  in  adventure therapy programs. We can similarly create and maintain an atmosphere where participants will be facilitated to explore their experiences. This is not achieved by imposing a number of rules or a so-called contract (see 3.4) so that group members are for example silent not because they are respectful for what a participant does but because they were told not to talk when an individual is trying an activity. The reflective space will be build up by role modeling of the facilitator and by sharing the effect of the behaviors of others on ourselves.  Like for example telling your group fellows that their ‘shouts of encouragement’ made you loose your concentration and had the opposite effect of what they meant.

 

3.6.  Do not use descriptions or names that narrow or devaluate the proper experience of the participant

Calling a trust-fall a trust-fall is useful amongst colleagues as we then have a common language, but in interaction with participants it suggests that that activity is a matter of  trust. That hinders other possible perceptions and experiences or the evocation of emotional schemes. Hovelynck (1999) supports this when he argues that, “a first principle of facilitation then becomes providing participants with space to enact their metaphors”.  In his example, of a high horizontal beam on a ropes-course, he calls it “… being careful not to introduce the beam as a ‘balance’ beam too lightly”. By which he means that we might narrow the participants’ space too much when using the word ‘balance’.

The same devaluation of a clients experience may happen when facilitators point out the most difficult part within an activity or action.

This can be illustrated by a specific event on the pamper-pole (note that the name seems to imply that the activity is so fear-provoking that one needs diapers!). When a participant manages to stand up the facilitator says (from his or her own experience): ‘Very good, standing up was the most difficult part’. This statement was incongruent with the participants experience as it turns out afterwards in the reviewing session. Looking back on her experience the same participant describes that standing up was easy. ‘I trust myself and the moves I make, I felt very confident in doing so. It was being dependent of others that felt scary and even horrible. Jumping off that pole, belayed by the other group-members and being totally dependent of their actions was a nightmare for me’.

 

3.7.  Encourage participants to contact directly  what is anxiety provoking and was previously avoided

In order to allow participants to engage in the meaning of the anxiety experience invite them to interact with that which provokes the fear and see what happens next. For example do not tell participants who are afraid of  heights not to look down during the abseil or rappel but rather the opposite. Invite the participant who is afraid to fall in a hole  along the route in a cave to explore that hole, to actually try to move in the hole.

 

3.8.  Set up  and personalize activities to generate new experiments

In personalizing the activities, ‘grade’ the challenge in order to meet the participants ‘level of readiness’ to engage him-or herself more fully in the activity. The term ‘grading’ is used by Zinker (1977, 1994) within the use of Gestalt experiments. This helps the client to execute an experiment at the level at which he is ready to do so in a given therapy hour (p.132, 1977). Note that the use of ‘experiment’ in a Gestalt context does not have the same meaning as in the classical scientific setting. Within this context it is the acceptance of a challenge, the willingness to try something and being curious about the outcome. Thus, grading should be done, not only at the level of readiness of the participant, but also taking into account surrounding circumstances,  such as the length of the program or group dynamic mechanisms. In this way standard activities can be engaged in at a personalized level for each participant. Figure two illustrates some different grades that could be applied to the ‘backward fall’  of a ‘trust fall’.

Fall down from a platform

Group mempbers will stand in two rows and catch you

Fall down backwards

A group member will catch you

Fall down backwards

A groupmember, alresady holding you, will support you

Stand straight and imagine falling backward while a group member will catch you

Up- and Downgrading of a 'trust fall' activity to meet the individual level of challenge

 

In this figure some classical trust fall activities are put in an order that up- or downgrades the level of challenge that it provides.

Top of the ranking is the backward fall of a platform of 1.7m high. Downgrading means that we try to lower the physical and psychological difficulty of that activity so that it becomes obtainable for that individual participant. This could physically be done by lowering the height of the platform or by a fall backwards standing on the ground with a fellow participant standing behind your back to catch you. If that participant holds you gently from the start this might also further downgrade the experiment. On the other hand an experiment might as well be too easy for someone and as such not present a challenge or a learning opportunity. In that case we must try to upgrade the experiment to a desirable level of suspense.

It is important to remember, even in  this attempt to grade the activity this has to be verified with the participants’ individual perception of the scaling of the level of difficulty depending on the emotional schemes that are activated  by this set-up of the activity. Perhaps being supported by one designated person is more fear evoking than a ‘anonymous’ circle of fellow group members.


4. Conclusions

Within this article the aim was to point out some of the major attention points for facilitators, counselors or therapists during the more action-oriented phase of an adventure therapy program. All to often the role of the facilitator during this phase (apart from some technical and safety issues) is restricted  to the gathering of interesting ‘processing material’, that can then be reflected upon in the reviewing session that follows the activity. In such a set-up the most important task for the facilitator during the activity would be to maintain a ‘sphinx-like’ attitude, not showing any form of encouragement or disagreement whilst collecting as many relevant data as possible. These observations would then be used afterwards to facilitate the reflection following the action.

 

On the contrary it is necessary to promote an active and intervening attitude from the facilitator, not only in the reviewing part, but equally  important during the more action-oriented phase.

To value the strength of our working tool, we must actively intervene during the activity; facilitate the here-and-now experiencing of the participants; direct the focus of the participants to actual features of the experience and stimulate the evocation of dysfunctional behavior. At the same time, the facilitator must be careful not to narrow or devaluate the proper experience of the participants or help hem to avoid the contact with that what is fear-provoking

 

This article thus stresses the importance of the processing-in-action, in order to obtain long lasting changes within the dysfunctional behaviors of clients. Alongside this, the processing-in-action model advocates the importance of tailor-made programs, activities and interventions for individual therapeutic needs. Therapy in adventure can not be assumed to be a naturally occurring process.


References:

Gilsdorf R. (1998). Gestalt and experiential education, in Itin C. (Ed), Exploring the boundaries of adventure therapy. Boulder: AEE, 131-143

Greenberg L, Rice L & Elliot R. (1993). Facilitating emotio­nal change: the moment-by-moment process. New York: The Guilford Press

Greenberg L. (1994). Seminar on emotion in psychotherapy, Leuven, May 2nd

Greenberg L., Paivio, S. (1997) Working with emotions in psychotherapy. New York: The Guilford Press

Hovelynck J. (1999). Facilitating the development of generative metaphors: re-emphasizing participants’ guiding images. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 4(1), 12-24

Laevers F. (1989). De helpende relatie in het kader van een experientiele vormingstheorie, in Vertommen et al. (Eds), De relatie in therapie <The relation in therapy>.Leuven: Universitaire pers, 305-330

Peeters L. (1990). Avontuurlijke aktiviteiten in de natuur als vormgeving binnen een Gestaltbenadering <adventure activities in nature as a working tool within a gestalt approach>. Turnhout: FMS

Peeters L. (1997). ‘De paalals werkinstrument binnen een experiêntiele Gestaltpsychotherapiebenadering <‘the pole’ as a working tool within a Gestalt approach> Gestalt, tijdschrift voor Gestalttherapie. Turnhout: FMS, 41-44.

Penner C. (1997). A Gestalt approach to experience, in Luckner J. & Nadler R. (Eds), Processing the experience. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt, 61-67

Chapman S., Mc Phee, P. Proudman B. (1992) What is experiential education?. Journal of experiential education, volume 15, No 2. Boulder:AEE, 16-23

Piaget J. (1969). Zes psychologische studies <Six psycholical studies>. Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus

Ringer M. (2000). Groups in adventure therapy. Insight. Boulder: AEE.

Schoel, J. Prouty D. and Radcliffe P.  (1988) Islands of Healing. A guide to Adventure Based Counseling. Hamilton: PA.

Zinker J. (1977). Creative process in gestalttherapy. New York: Vintage Books

Zinker J. (1994). In search of good form. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass


2 reacties
восстановление зренияу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r у500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r у500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r у500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r у500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r у500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r у500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500rу500r
MAX

lebron 13

nike air max

cheap oakley sunglasses

adidas iniki runner

ray ban sunglasses online

nike air max shoes

air jordan 12

goyard handbags

yeezy

converse outlet

dior sunglasses

golden goose

yeezy boost 350

nfl jerseys

yeezy

adidas nmd r1

jordan 1 off white

yeezy boost 350

kobe byrant shoes

burberry outlet online

ZZYYTT
Reageer op dit artikel:
security code Veiligheidscode:

Verstuur
From Adventure To Therapy - Luk Peeters
Wat doet de begeleider?
Via Experientia: process and outcomes as they are experienced by the participants
Op zoek naar de passende relatie
The art of reviewing
The active reviewing cycle
Reviewing adventure activities
Reviewing by doing
Doing reviewing
Reviewing
Experiential Learning: What and how?
Reflectiemethodieken
Put on your glasses
Moving active learning forward
At the boundaries of our images
Een model van groepsdynamica
What the research really says!
Driehoek: angst - verlangen - patroon
Kernkwadranten: korte uitleg
Leerstijlen Kolb
Evaluatieschaal begeleidershouding
Procesbegeleiding vanuit 3P model - Karen Vermeylen, 2008
Procesbegeleiding in outdoor-programma’s
Grondhouding
Theoretisch Kader
Ervaringsleren in een notedop
Gebruikersnaam:    Wachtwoord:
Inspired by Echo Design