Download Experiential Education and Adolescents’ Personal and Spiritual Development: A Mixed-Method Study in the Secondary School Context of Hong Kong PDF

TitleExperiential Education and Adolescents’ Personal and Spiritual Development: A Mixed-Method Study in the Secondary School Context of Hong Kong
Author
LanguageEnglish
File Size50.0 MB
Total Pages204
Table of Contents
                            To Hon Fai Solomon
Table of contents
Foreword by Prof. Dr. Alan Ewert
Foreword by Prof. Dr. Annette Scheunpflug
Preface
List of Tables and Figures
List of abbreviations
1 Introduction
	1.1 Import of experiential education
		1.1.1 Experiential education in Hong Kong
		1.1.2 Promotion of the use of experiential education/adventure-based practice
	1.2 Personal development as human function of coping and living
	1.3 Experiential education and personal development
	1.4 Purpose and design of the study
		1.4.1 Key concerns of investigation: Self-concept, self-efficacy, learning climate and spiritual dimension
		1.4.2 Research question and purpose of the study
		1.4.3 Design of the study
	Summary
2 Literature review and clarification of research question
	2.1 Experiential education: Explication of the concept
	2.2 Experiential education and adventure-based practice: Conceptual framework
		2.2.1 Learner-centered orientation
		2.2.2 Construction of learning environment/condition
	2.3 Review on the effects of adventure-based practice
		2.3.1 Benefits of adventure-based practice
		2.3.2 Empirical results from related literatures
		2.3.3 Research focus of adventure-based programs in this study
	2.4 Clarification of research question
		2.4.1 Peripheral layer
		2.4.2 Central layer
		2.4.3 Contextual layer
		2.4.4 Restating the purpose of this study in brief
	Summary
3 Methodology and methods of data collection
	3.1 Case study design
		3.1.1 Methodological decision
		3.1.2 Limitation of using case study
		3.1.3 Researcher’s role
	3.2 Data collection methods
		3.2.1 Internet website analysis
		3.2.2 Institute profile
		3.2.3 Interview to teachers and practitioners
		3.2.4 Episodic interview to adolescent participants
		3.2.5 Observation
		3.2.6 Quantitative survey
	Summary
4 Findings: Case record in layers
	4.1 Peripheral layer: Circumstantial information of the adventure-based programs
		4.1.1 Expectation of adventure-based programs
	4.2 Central layer: Learning process and product of adventure-based programs
		4.2.1 Learning product in questionnaire
		4.2.2 Learning process in episodic interview
		4.2.3 Learning process in observation
	4.3 Contextual layer: Hong Kong school context
		4.3.1 The historical development of experiential education in Hong Kong
		4.3.2 Understanding of the terms “experiential education” and “spirituality”
		4.3.3 The reception of experiential/adventure-based elements in Hong Kong secondary schools
	Summary
5 Discussion and conclusion
	5.1 Interpretation on findings of central layer: Learning in adventure-based programs
		5.1.1 Perceived self-concept and perceived self-eflicacy
		5.1.2 Participants’ perceived learning climate
		5.1.3 Participants’ perceived spiritual dimension
		5.1.4 (In)Complete adventure-based program learning process as a whole
	5.2 Interpretation of findings of contextual layer: Adventure-based practicein in the secondary school context of Hong Kong
		5.2.1 Adventure-based practice as experiential education in Hong Kong context
		5.2.2 Popularized adventure-based practice from elite/middle-class students to students of the general public
		5.2.3 Adventure-based practice in adapted program format with differentiated goals in school context of Hong Kong
	5.3 Intrapersonal and interpersonal development against a global context as functions of adventure-based practice/programs
		5.3.1 Adventure-based practice as enhancement of personal development: Spiritual being, individual being and holistic being
		5.3.2 Prescriptive use of experiential education embedded in the school context
	5.4 Conclusion
		5.4.1 The study in summary
		5.4.2 Limitations of the current study
		5.4.3 Conclusion in brief
	5.5 Implication
		5.5.1 Recommendation for adventure-based/school practice
		5.5.2 Recommendation for theory reflection
		5.5.3 Recommendation for further research
	Closing words
References
Appendices
	Appendix A: Website, institute profile, expert interview, semi-structured interview, episodic interview and observation guiding questions
	Appendix B: Table of construct information of quantitative survey
                        
Document Text Contents
Page 2

Experiential Education
and Adolescents� Personal
and Spiritual Development

Page 102

2. The moral self-concept had values, pre- (M=2.52, SD=O.5I) and post-
(M=2.55, SD=0.56), 1(303) = -1.l0,p>.05. The mean values of the moral
self-concept were not significantly different.

3. The perceptual change in self-concept yielded a small effect. The study
had power of 84% to yield an effect size = 0.17 for intelligent self-
concept. There was 84% chance of detecting a significant small effect
for intelligent self-concept. The power of this study to yield an effect
size = 0.12 for general self-concept was 0.60 and an effect size = 0.13
for social self-concept was 0.66. There was ca. 60% and 66% chance of
detecting a significant small effect for general self-concept and social
self concept.

b. Perceived self-efficacy

The Table 4.7 provides an overview on the mean and standard deviation pre/post
values of the area perceived self-efficacy.

Tab. 4.7: Mean pre/post values, effect size and power of perceived self-efficacy

Pre-test Post-test
Mean Sig.(2-
diff. tailed)

M, SD, M, SD, M,-M, P d g

General
2.22 0.64 2.29 0.59 0.07 <.05 0.13 0.65 self-efficacy

104

I. The variable general self-efficacy, which had pre- (M=2.22, SD=0.64)
and post- (M=2.29, SD=0.59), 1(303) = -2.37, p<.05 camp rellected that
the students originally perceived themselves of less capable of making
a change in times of difficulty. After the camp, they reported an increase
of trust that they believe that they have the ability to manage hard times.

2. The study had power of65% to yield an effect size = 0.17 for perceived
general self-efficacy. There was 65% chance of detecting a significant
small effect for perceived general self-efficacy.

Page 103

c. Participants' response to learning climate

Participants' response to learning climate includes two variables: Participants'
response to cooperative/ competitive learning environment and participants'
response to teacher/tutor-stodents/participants relation. The Table 4.8 provides
an overview on the mean and standard deviation pre/post values of the area
participants' response to learning climate.

Tab. 4.8: Mean pre/post values, effect size and power of participants' view to
learning climate

Pre-test Post-test
Mean Sig.(2-
cliff. tailed)

M
J

SD
J M, SD, M 2 -M1 P d g

Participants'view
to cooperative!

2.57 0.58 2.62 0.59 0.05 >.05 cornpetitiveleanring
environment
Participants'view
to teacher/tutor-

2.31 0.53 2.96 0.52 0.65 <.05 0.98 studcntslparticipants
relation

I. The mean values prior (M=2.57, SD=0.58) and after the participation
(M=2.62, SD=0.59), 1(303) =-1.88 for Participants' view to cooperative!
competitive learning environment associated with p>.05. The mean
values prior (M=2.31, SD=0.53) and after the participation (M=2.96,
SD=O.52), 1(301) =-15.00 for participants'view to teacher/tutor-students!
participants relation associated with p<.05. Only the mean values of
participants' view to teacher/tutor-stodents/participants relations were
sigoificantly different in pre- and post-tests. Respondents perceived
that they had a better learning atmosphere in the camp than their school
and classroom atmosphere, a more intensive relationship with group
members and a more understanding relationship with group tutors than
with their school classmates and teachers.

2. The power of tltis study to yield an effect size = 0.98 for participants'
view to teacher/tutor-students!participants relation was I. This study had
100% chance of detecting a sigoificant large effect for participants' view
to teacher/tutor-stodents/participants relation.

lOS

Page 203

Appendices

AppendiI A: Website, in.titate profile, expert iDterview, .emi-structured interview, episodie
iDterview and oblenation guiding question.

Facet qUeitiODl:
• How has experiential educationladventuro-bascd practice been developed in Hong Kong?
• How has experiential education boen understood among non-practitioners and practitioners

of advonllw-based practice?
• How is the extent of reception of adventure-based program in the secondary school context

of Hong Kong?
• From what has adventure-based program come from?
• Whether there was perceptual change from the student participants' perspoctive in self-

concept, self-efficacy,leaming climate and spiritual dimension?
• What have participants perceived in their learning with regard to self-concept, self-

efficacy, learning climate and spiritual dimension during the program?

Internet website amy.i. guiding questlou

• What type of school is this & the (religious) background of this school?
• Is there any signs (pictureslmessages, etc.) that shows that adventure-based practice is

taking place in this school? How many staff members & students are there?
• What are the types of adventure-based elements: general, developmen~ therapeutic,

military,leadership, Adventure-Ship, Outward Boood, AYP ... ? ... ek:.

Institute profile (.chooVthurch) guiding questions (ollly cOReened about expectadon)

• Expectation of adventure-based programs

Expert iDternew guiding quesdons (only concemed about the understanding of eIperien.daI
educadoD and IpiritaaHty)

• Would you tell me what you know about how did experiential education! adventure-based
practice bave brought to Hong Kong?

• How has it developed from there to the toclay's situation? ... etc.

Semi-.tructured interview guiding question.

• What do you think about experiential education & spirituality?
• How do you connect "experiential education" to "spiritual dimension"? ... etc.

Episodic iDternew guiding quesdonl

• What do you feel now?
• It looks like you have just ...• and what are you thinking now?
• Why did you do this and that? .•. <k:.

Observation guiding question. (ollly COD.teraed about Jeaming zone & group dyaamlcI)

205

C. K. A. Cheung, Experiential Education and Adolescents’ Personal and Spiritual Development,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-531-19120-1, © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013

Page 204

Appendix B: Table of construct information of quantitative survey

No.
Comtruct Facet variables/code Source of scale of ., 0,

i_

Personal information - 6 - -
Demograpbica1

Sense of religious belonging 13. Jugendstudie 2000 (in Ger-Infonnation 31 0.72 -
(SRB) man); StaDdfest ct al, 2005

Gem:ral seIf-<:ODCept/ (CaGS) 8 0.80 0.79

Social self-concept! (CaSS) Cheng and Watkins, 2000: 10 0.81 0.80
Pfreeivedse1f~ Chinese Adolescent Self-

Intellectual self-concept! (CaIS) Esteem Scales (CASES) 10 0.79 0.74

Mmal self-concept! (CaMS) 8 0.80 0.78

Perceived self-
Gem:ral self-cfficacyl (CGSE)

SchW8IZel" and Zhang. 1995:
10 0.87 0.85

,ffio""l' Chinese General Self-Efficacy

Self-report about social
competence: Preference for

PISA2000 (German version) • 0.79 0.84 Perceived view to cooperative/competitive learning
learning climate environment! (COL)

Sobool omd CWmoom a;",m, UDd
PISA2000 (English version) 17 0.86 0.89

_~relationl(TSR)

Religious Conviction! (RC) 8 0.91 0.88

Perceived view to Religious and Spiritual Practice/ 13../ugen<btudie 2000 (in 0.,- 23 0.85 0.83
spiritual tlimen- (RSP) man); Stmdfest ct al, 2005

sion (in close Spiritual_omonJl (SE)
connection with

14 0.91 0.87

religiosity) Importance of Spiritual Dimen-
Spirit of generation Y (The So-

orion! QSD)
cial_Centte,A_ 14 0.92 0.86
Catbolio Ucivemi!y, 2005)

Life Orientation Test-Revised! Scbob; ean..; & Bridgos, 1994:
10 0.64 0.62

(WTR) I.i:fu 0:rimiBtimJ. Test-Revised

Existential Well-Being Scale! Paloutzian & Ellison,. 1982:
10 0.75 0.75

(EWBS) Existential Well-Being Scale

WQddHeallhOrganizatim
Perceived view Meaning & Purpose in Life! Qoilio/olliJC: .........", .. -

4 0.70 0.68 to spiritual (MPL) ........ omd...,.,..Ibdmf..Je
dimension (in loose (WHOQOLSRPB """" 2002)
connection with
religiosity) ~"--&_(FAW) 4 0.74 0.70

Wholeness & Integration/ (WI) 4 0.68 0.66

Hop' & ()ptimmnI (HO) WHOQOL-SRPB Group 2002 4 0.78 0.79

Faith! (F) 4 0.91 0.92

Kindness to others' (KTO) 4 0.6' 0.76

Total number of items: 212

206

Similer Documents