- 2,99 €
Description de l’éditeur
Abstract This article outlines serious concerns about the quality of a paper by Brand (2001) that was published in the Australian Journal of Outdoor Education (AJOE) under the editorship of Gray (2001). Brand reported results from a 2 year follow-up study that investigated alleged changes in delinquent behaviour following a 10 day Wilderness Enhanced Program among 73 apparently 'at-risk' 11, 12 and 13 year olds. Brand's paper evidences substantial flaws in the reporting and interpretation of research data that contravene scientific convention. Further, editorial bias and the failure of the AJOE to provide adequate scholarly scrutiny, is illustrated in how Brand's paper was, and appeared to be, treated by the journal. This critique is presented with the broader aim of highlighting critical issues in the practice of scientific research and it's use in developing the field. It is hoped that this article might spawn a more vigorous and critical-analytical culture in outdoor education that is argued to be necessary for the legitimacy and advancement of the field.