Abstract
In the first of a two part series of articles I argued that “character building” in outdoor adventure education (OAE) is a flawed concept. This, the second article, examines the persistence of the idea of character building in OAE in the face of strong evidence that outdoor experiences cannot change personal traits. I examine how the “fundamental attribution error” can explain the paradox of (a) a shortage of evidence that adventure education “works” and (b) a widespread belief that it does “work”. I review the place of character building in research, and develop a critical reading of a representative adventure education text. I show how unchallenged dispositionist assumptions emerge in neo-Hahnian discourse. I explain how discarding the intuitively appealing but fallacious foundations of neo-Hahnism can clear the way for situationist approaches to outdoor education that bring much needed sensitivity to cultural, regional, historical, and social contexts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
