Expeditionary Learning, Constructivism, and the Emotional Risks of Open-Ended Inquiry

  • Amy L. Heath
  • Peter Smagorinsky


This chapter explores the complex processes involved in a project undertaken by a middle-school student in an Expeditionary Learning school. This case study critiques the overwhelming responsibility of coordinating people to plan and pull off a school event, along with parental interference, limited faculty supervision, and lack of participation by other students. Simply providing constructivist opportunities is insufficient. The chapter concludes with suggestions on how to mitigate the problems so that constructivist school activities might better serve a diverse range of participants.


  1. American Institutes for Research. (2006). CSRQ center report on middle and high school comprehensive reform models. Retrieved January 18, 2013, from
  2. Bennett, T. (2013). Teacher proof: Why research in education doesn’t always mean what it claims, and what you can do about it. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1998). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. EL Education. (2017). EL education. Retrieved April 8, 2017, from
  6. Expeditionary Learning. (2011). Core practices. Expeditionary learning outward bound [PDF]. Retrieved April 19, 2011, from
  7. Expeditionary Learning Middle School. (2010a). Advancing student achievement: Now enrolling grades 6, 7, and 8 [Brochure]. Columbus, OH: ELMS.Google Scholar
  8. Expeditionary Learning Middle School. (2010b). ELMS: Enrollment update [Brochure]. Columbus, OH: ELMS.Google Scholar
  9. Expeditionary Learning Middle School. (2010c). Expeditionary learning design principals [Brochure]. Columbus, OH: ELMS.Google Scholar
  10. Expeditionary Learning Middle School. (2010d). ELMS: Expeditionary Learning Middle School. Retrieved November 1, 2010, from school website.Google Scholar
  11. Farrell, G., & Liebowitz, M. (1998). Expeditionary learning outward bound in year five: What the research shows. Cambridge, MA: ELOB.Google Scholar
  12. Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. (2007). Students’ interpretations of learning tasks: Implications for educational design. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite, Singapore 2007. Retrieved April 12, 2017, from
  13. Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  14. Heath, A. L. (2013). We are crew, not passengers: Middle level students’ experiences of the Expeditionary Learning school reform model and its relationship to literacy, agency, and diversity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
  15. Hills, T. (2007). Is constructivism risky? Social anxiety, classroom participation, competitive game play and constructivist preferences in teacher development. Teacher Development, 11(3), 335–352. Retrieved April 11, 2017, from
  16. Kastenbaum, S. (2012, May 17). The high stakes of standardized tests. CNN Schools of Thought. Retrieved February 16, 2017, from
  17. Lewis, C. (1997). The social drama of literature discussions in a fifth/sixth-grade classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 163–204.Google Scholar
  18. Manara Academy. (2017). We are an Expeditionary School. Retrieved April 8, 2017, from
  19. McQuillan, P., Kraft, R., O’Conor, A., Timmons, M., Marion, S., & Michalec, P. (1994). An assessment of outward bound USA’s urban/education initiative. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado School of Education.Google Scholar
  20. Murphy, J., & Datnow, A. (Eds.). (2003). Leadership lessons from comprehensive school reforms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  21. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved February 13, 2017, from
  22. Neill, J. (2008). Dr. Kurt Hahn. Retrieved April 10, 2017, from
  23. Outward Bound International. (2013). History. Retrieved April 10, 2017, from
  24. Pearson, S. S. (2002). Finding common ground: Service-learning and education reform. A survey of 28 leading school reform models. Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum.Google Scholar
  25. Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  26. Smagorinsky, P. (2011). Vygotsky and literacy research: A methodological framework. Boston: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky’s conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238–248. Retrieved April 10, 2017, from
  28. U.S. Department of Education. (2004). About CSR. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved April 10, 2017, from
  29. UMass Donahue Institute Research and Evaluation Group. (2011). Impact of the expeditionary learning model on student academic performance in Rochester, New York. Amherst, MA: Author. Retrieved February 14, 2017, from
  30. Vossoughi, S., & Gutiérrez, K. D. (2017). Critical pedagogy and sociocultural theory. In I. Esmonde & A. N. Booker (Eds.), Power and privilege in the learning sciences (pp. 139–161). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amy L. Heath
    • 1
  • Peter Smagorinsky
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Language and Literacy EducationThe University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations