I do not want to become attached to a particular word - only to say that it
was a meeting involving a South African, an Australian, and Americans which
came up with the model and the words.

It is difficult to discuss this particular initiative further without
bringing in its originators, and I am not sure if any of them are on this
list.  I will contact those I know and inform them of this debate and invite
them to join the list.

My understanding of the meaning of the role of Champions is simply this:
these would be existing organisations who would take the lead in reaching
out to their members and others in their field, and to other organisations
and networks, to promote the initiative and to take action to make it
happen.

If the name is a problem, please suggest a different one.  If the concept is
flawed, please propose alternatives.  If alternatives already exist, please
tell us about them.

Steve briefly refers to Ian Lewis in the context of Champions.  Ian, with
the support of the Association for Outdoor Learning (now part of the
Institute for Outdoor Learning) initiated a project in the UK called Outdoor
Champions.  The idea was to support someone (such as a teacher) in every
school and educational institution in the country to promote outdoor
education.  The scheme is still going - and the beneficiaries are young
people.  Steve is right about business sponsorship and PR.  A manufacturer
of waterproof camera cases and the like sponsors the scheme.  The
achievements of young people are given publicity in the media in order to
promote outdoor education and to encourage others to offer more young people
opportunities.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Bowles <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 20 December 2001 16:23
Subject: Re: International development of outdoor education


>Hello Steve - I want only to remind the list ( especially after the comment
from
>Peter Bunyen) that my own concern was quite clearly centred upon the
"CHAMPIONS"
>idea and I made my comments from that context.
>
>As we all know(?) this "Champions" idea is unknown in most places and is a
quant
>British thing ( I think began by Ian Lewis in 1995 if I remember well
enough)
>and is hardly a term of international use. This "Champions" theme is highly
>political and as i said highly involved with business sponsorships and PR
>marketing. This has been made by a few people working to increase their
"vision"
>of an "Outdoor Industry".
>
>I used my words carefully. If there is to remain any meaning to a word (
>Champions?) then I wrote fairly.
>
>Perhaps this might be explained a little better.
>Maybe my main point and the context of my critique could be replied to.
>
>My question concerns CHAMPIONS ?
>
>Again, as you know, I have never made "cliche" or whatever against your
work. I
>do however remain firm. I made a point. That point is being avoided. But
that
>point will not go away. Why does any international group need these
"Champions"
>and what is the reality of this term "Champions"? Let us make this term
"naked".
>
>best wishes
>steve bowles
>
>Steve Lenartowicz wrote:
>
>> This proposal came from a discussion between AEE and ICEL (at an AEE
>> conference I believe).  Tony Saddington of ICEL and Chris Batten of the
AEE
>> board met again at the Brathay Youth Conference in September and invited
me
>> along as a representative of IOL.  As a result, the IOL board has agreed
to
>> act as a potential partner and to publicise the initiative - it was
>> mentioned in the last IOL newsletter.  I am now using opportunities such
as
>> outres to spread the word.
>>
>> I do not know why the idea was not first discussed on the lists you
>> mention - perhaps because the people involved were not aware of them? Any
>> one forum is not a representative sample of the field.  Outres is
>> specifically research-oriented, and intercom seems very limited.  Any
>> attempt at working together has to start somewhere and it may be
inevitable
>> that initiatives start in more than one place without knowing about what
is
>> already happening elsewhere, and eventually start to connect up.  What
>> finally emerges may look different - but I see nothing wrong with
proposals.
>> What is now important is that people do not just criticise proposals
which
>> do not start with them, but offer alternatives and build on what is
already
>> there.  What is already in place
>> may be working for those in the know, but it cannot be working for some
>> people or they would not look for other solutions.  If we know of
something
>> that works, let's make it inclusive.
>>
>> Perhaps the next step would be to create a global experiential learning /
>> outdoor learning email group and to advertise it widely?  If intercom or
any
>> other existing group is an attempt to be that, then let's encourage it to
do
>> its job, and to build connections.  This would mean other lists
(including
>> this one), refusing to compete with it, and directing appropriate traffic
to
>> it.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> >
>> >> ----------
>> >> From: Chris Loynes[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>> >> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:43:44 AM
>> >> To: [log in to unmask]
>> >> Subject: Re: International development of outdoor education
>>
>> >>
>> >Hi Steve
>> >
>> >This seems to duplicate what we already have without champions or
sponsors,
>> >etc. It feels like a powerful taking away of something already working.
Why
>> >is this discussed by IOL. AEE, etc without, until now, conversation with
>> >outres, intercom, etc. This brings to light in me all the fears that
Steve
>> >expressed.
>> >
>> >Chris Loynes
>> >
>> >
>