August 2005
Residential Outdoor Environmental Education Programs:
How Inclusive Are We?
Kendra Liddicoat Jim Rogers
Department of Natural Resources Bradford Woods,
Fernow Hall
KRL8@cornell.edu jarogers@indiana.edu
During July and August 2004, 96 residential
outdoor environmental education (ROEE) centers completed a survey about their
current practices for including students with disabilities. These programs were located throughout the
The survey was developed to reflect
the aspects of administering an ROEE program that taken together would enable a
center to follow established best practices in inclusive education and
inclusive recreation. These practices were based on the work of
Because most programs for school groups do not recruit individual students directly but rather communicate with children and parents through their teacher, questions about the school-EE center interaction may be more instructive. It is up to the schools to decide whether they will bring their students with disabilities to the outdoor experience. However, EE center directors can discuss this decision with teachers, make it clear whether they can accommodate certain students, and educate others about program accessibility. Interestingly, 29% of center directors could not estimate how many schools bring all of their students, and 36% stated that they do not specifically encourage schools to do so. These results suggest that school-EE center communication regarding inclusion may be an area needing improvement. Fortunately, fostering discussions about inclusion are an inexpensive and relatively simple step to take. On a more positive note, all of the centers who responded indicated that they are passing on special needs information to the instructors at least one day before the students arrive.
Once the schools arrive for their ROEE program, how included students feel is influenced by both staff skill and program/facility accessibility. In terms of hiring qualified staff, we found that 28% of centers always employ someone skilled in making accommodations, and 36% of centers routinely ask about experience with persons with disabilities in their interviews. Recognizing that many ROEE centers provide extensive training to their new staff, we also asked about educational sessions related to inclusion. The most commonly covered topics—those reported by at least 50% of the respondents—were how to adapt activities for students with physical or learning disabilities, how to encourage communication between all students, and information on the accessibility of various sites on the property.
Because program and facility accessibility are key prerequisites to effective inclusion, we asked a series of questions in this area. For simplicity, we chose not to define “accessibility,” which can refer to access for people with a variety of disabilities (physical, sensory, cognitive, etc). Consequently, respondents may have used a narrower definition, thinking only of wheelchair accessibility. With this caveat in mind, the series of accessibility questions still provides interesting and useful information. First, they demonstrated that simply asking “Do you consider your program/facility to be accessibility” may not provide very reliable information. We found that estimates of accessibility are lower when the questions are more specific. This may be because only 45% of respondents had conducted an accessibility survey of their site. Also, while 97% of directors considered their program to be at least somewhat accessible, only 77% indicated that their curriculum has activities for students varying abilities. Similarly 42% stated that they do not have any adapted or universally designed program equipment available. Overall, we found that center directors tended to rate program accessibility higher than facility accessibility when asked generally and specifically. This may be because there are clearer guidelines for facility accessibility or because increasing program accessibility is the less expensive, faster process of the two.
Combining questions about individual facilities and programs enabled us to calculate a numeric accessibility score which could then be compared to the responses to other questions. Looking at which center characteristics were related to high program accessibility, we found that demographics such as center size, age, and location were not significant, while hiring practices, facility accessibility, centrality to the mission, and priority placed on inclusion were. These results are encouraging because the influential factors are the same ones that are within the sphere of influence of current center directors.
To conclude our survey, we enquired about overall perceptions of inclusion and additional resources desired. Respondents answered two value-based questions: “How central is including students with disabilities to your center's mission?” and “What level of priority do you place on increasing inclusion at your center?” Levels of centrality and priority were rated from low to high on a scale of 1-5. To both questions, respondents gave positive answers with an average of 3.6 for each. In order to increase inclusion at their center, they listed the most useful resources as guidelines for increasing program accessibility, written materials/suggestions for staff training, and curriculum materials designed for students of all abilities.
The data
gathered through this survey study were intentionally descriptive rather than
evaluative. We had three main
goals. First, we wanted to provide ROEE
professionals with information about how practices at their center compare with
those at other centers across the
If there is any additional information that would make the results of this study more useful to you, please do not hesitate to contact us. You can find more specifics, including graphs and data tables, on the Bradford Woods website, www.bradwoods.org, under Research.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by a grant from the Indiana University
HPER (Health, Physical Education, and Recreation) Department. Research assistance
was provided by Dr. Lynn Anderson at SUNY Cortland, Dr. Craig Ross at IU, and
Theresa Ford and Carrie Hayden at Bradford Woods. Alexey Kudryavtsev, Florian
Eichiner, and Govind Acharya of
Sources
Anderson, L. & Kress, C.B. (2003). Including people with
disabilities in parks and recreation opportunities.
Bullock, C.C. & Mahon, M.J. (1997). Introduction to
recreation services for people with disabilities: A person-centered
approach.
Jorgensen, C.M. (1998). Restructuring high schools for all
students: Taking inclusion to the next level.
McAvoy, L.H. & Schleien, S.J. (2001). Inclusive outdoor education and environmental interpretation. Taproot 13(1): 11-16.