Anything worth doing, is worth doing well.

What is good enough?
In our western culture we have a notion that perfection is necessary to achieve excellence. We may achieve near perfect, yet find our selves or others telling us to refine in hopes of attaining perfection. In education, whether experiential or not, what happens when we become more concerned with engagement rather than attainment?

I believe it is exciting to redefine what is good enough. As an experiential educator, I can free my self from concern of a level of effort, and refocus on the experience itself. In other words, aiding students in developing the skills to identify for themselves what is and is not important in achieving excellence. Even in our day to day lives, what is good enough becomes a relative question. What tasks truly deserve our attention?

I purposely leave this post here. Instead of trying to define what is good enough, I leave with a finishing quote, so that you can choose weather or not it is a task that deserves your attention.

"Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly"
-Chesterton

Overconfidence + a bad snowpack = a really bad time

Experience is a critical element at play in how we all perceive numerous types of risks in the backcountry. As of late, I have begun to wonder why so many have tempted fate in the Wasatch. Maybe it is our past experiences of what is and is not safe in another season. Yet, this season has been drastically different. Our snow pack has been more reminiscent of conditions found in our neighboring state Colorado.
The video above, is the story of several friends touring in Montana. I believe it serves the purpose to remind us all of the ever present dangers when heading into the backcountry.

A contrived dialectic

As an experiential educator there are lofty, unattainable goals set forth. One that I have been toying with for sometime now is that of contrived experiences. More specifically, how to facilitate towards an intended outcome, yet not manipulate the experience to achieve said outcomes. Confused? Perhaps put into terms of a dialectic, will presents a more understandable notion.

On one end of the dialectic, an educator takes their students into the wilderness and waits to see what will happen. As the experience unfolds they patiently intervene only when needed. Perhaps as the experience begins to reach an end there is an outcome that is identified, but, the experience my turn out to simply be a walk in the woods.

On the other end, and educator has designed an experience to meet specific outcomes. As the experience begins goals and objectives are laid forth. Each part of the experience is used towards obtaining the ultimate outcome.

In either case, there is a need for a middle ground. Wherein the educator sits back and allows the experience to truly take place. And at times the educator does not intervene only till it is absolutely necessary. There is no right or wrong, rather there is a time and place for each approach taken along such a dialectic - and it is by experience that an experiential educator can effectively facilitate in such a way that is appropriate.