Accreditation is marketing. In fact, it may be why you are being sued.

Marketing is not a way to manage risks or stop lawsuits. Marketing Makes Promises that Risk Management Must Pay For.

In an effort to sell services and promote their organization, many trade associations accredit, certify or anoint its members, with various titles, quasi degrees and paper to put on their wall and website. There is always a charge for the program and in many cases; the trade association’s budget is based on selling this program. Many times, these new programs are sold as a cure-all or at least help in risk management or litigation defense.

They are neither. At best, these are training programs; generally, they have little value other than for marketing. Worse, an accreditation can help you lose a lawsuit.

Several trade associations offer this marketing program as a way to show your future clients that you uphold the standards, or whatever of the trade association. (Ignoring the issue that people want to know if you meet their standards, not those of a trade association.) If you pay for the program you will be inspected/reviewed by “trained” members of the association who, then say you have a qualifying program or not. A trade organization will offer the idea that accreditation can provide risk management or better defenses to litigation. Because the program is up to speed on the latest and greatest or at least the tried and true for its industry.

These generally fail for several reasons.

  • Because no trade association represents a large segment of the industry and in most cases, they represent less than half of the trade. Granted, the better programs are usually members of the trade association, but that still does give them the clout or numbers needed to dictate how a member should run its business.
  • There are dozens of instances where a different way is being used, successfully by other members or non-members of the association. Consequently, the association’s way is proved ineffective or just not the only way.
  • State laws and prior litigation have changed the standards, and the trade association has not caught up making their standards look dated.

On top of that, trade associates move by their members. A new idea developed and used by one member needs to float t the surface and be discovered by the group writing the standards. By the time that happens, the standard is written, vetted, reviewed and published several years have passed. You need to react immediately to changes in your industry, not wait for someone to write it down.

Worse no new ideas are created because of fear that the idea will not qualify under the accreditation program creating liability for the member. If you develop a new way to run a program, that is safer but requires less people, you will be liable if you run the program without the required number of people because the association standard requires it. Even if your new idea has that extra person just standing around.

Marketing is not a defense against a lawsuit.

As much as we may wish, showing that an organization may hold itself to a higher standard to prevent litigation or help win a lawsuit, does not work. Standards of care or levels of doing something are not created by trade associations. The issue at trial is whether or not the defendant in litigation is determined by the jury to have met the standard of care proposed by the Expert Witnesses in the trial. Trying does not change that; trying to be good, trying to stay on top of things, trying to be educated does not cause a change.

In reality, it is a minimum two-step process that keeps one from losing in court. The first step is staying current. The second step is staying above the minimum required level of care a jury will accept. However, even these two steps may not be enough with the volume of information that flows today, and the speed which things change. Again the definition of the problem with trade associations and accreditation. The process to create the process is always behind the time curve. As such, the program that received the blessings of the trade association is probably out of date in a courtroom.

Marketing is simply an attempt to influence the decision making of someone. If that person believes that you are a better organization or offer a better program than your competitor, then your marketing was successful. Factors too numerous to discuss and of little relevance to this article go into marketing and how it influences a person’s decision. If you believe the seal on the door or the diploma on the wall going to influence someone to try your program, then take that route, just make sure you understand what you are buying and why.

On a side note, when I had an office, I had art on the walls, Not a single degree or diploma. In twenty years, only one person asked me where my diplomas were. I did not care to look at diplomas; I wanted to look at wildlife and nature scenes. I was spending more time in the office than anyone. Twenty years and only one person cared what diploma I had.

Someone who arrives at your business is going to have higher expectations. The person who sees the promises your marketing makes is going to expect that level or greater service. That expectation will apply, even if the accreditation has nothing to do with the program or the issues of your guests. You are accredited; therefore, I should not have been hurt.

That does not mean you should not tell the world how great you are. It means you must meet the marketing you are promoting.

Marketing also affects and to some extent, shows the world how you think of yourself. A current example is zip lines. For fifty years zip lines were used by the military to train recruits and by movies about the military to thrill viewers. The next twenty years zip lines were used in team building programs as part of a ropes or challenge course. Now zip lines have been used purely as an amusement device. People go out for a day of zip lining like they used to rent go karts or play a round of golf. Your marketing efforts to steer your possible clients back to the idea of team building are going to interfere and have to overcome the general expectations that zip lines are just fun.

Accreditation meets that same issue in the minds of the people coming to your program. Is the certificate on the wall to show me how good you are or on the wall to convince me not to sue? Alternatively, is the certificate proof that you did not take the proper care of me causing my injury. Marketing to cross purposes or marketing to reverse community beliefs is difficult.

Marketing makes Promises that Risk Management has to Pay For.

As stated earlier, the expectations of someone who has researched your diplomas, seals and other marketing accomplishments are going to have a higher expectation that you are not going to injure them. Your commitment to staying current, your efforts to obtain the seal of approval and the paper on the wall are proof, in your guest’s minds, that you are better than your competitors. Better may mean to provide a better program or service. It better definitely means your participants will not be injured.

The American Camp Association (ACA) has an accreditation program that the ACA recognizes for what it is, a marketing program. “ACA Accreditation: Valuable Marketing Tools.” The web page even makes that known. ( Numerous other instances can be found where accreditation is synonymous with marketing.

  • Private Duty Service Expansion through Accreditation and Marketing Excellence
  • Importance of Accreditation as a Marketing Strategy
  • Use CLE Accreditation as a Marketing Tool

Marketing is not risk management and not good at providing a defense to litigation. The two are opposite in purpose. Marketing is trying to bring people to the program by telling people the program is great and to some extent, safe. If someone is injured, then the program was not safe and the marketing was not true. Having your marketing turn on you while you are a defendant is one of the worst situations to find yourself when involved in litigation. Having your marketing prove that you were a bad operator is the worst.

That does not mean you should not get the best training you can receive in running your business, no matter what the name of the certificate you receive at the end.

Accreditation does have a legal definition and support.

Accreditation from a legal standpoint is defined by Federal Statutes. The Department of Education oversees accreditation of colleges and universities in the United States. A list of accredited college and universities and the agencies that can accredit a college or university can be found at the Department’s website. (There is also a list of those colleges that are no longer recognized.) The department of education also has a statutory scheme for determining how an educational organization will be accredited, which can be found at USC § 1099b. Recognition of accrediting agency or association.

From a legal standpoint, an accredited educational intuition is on that list. It is eligible for federal and state assistance and students of those colleges are eligible for federal financial aid.

Accreditation from any other organization for any other purpose is done to enhance or market the organization seeking the approval and the agency granting the approval. Let’s first look at what this means.

If you are not seeking to offer federal financial aid to your students or receive federal aid, then accreditation can be anything you want. If you want to be accredited, send me $10.00, and I will accredit you. (You have been accredited by James H. Moss) My accreditation has the same legal value and possibly the same marketing value as any other accreditation you can receive. The issues are not. What was done, but what can you hang on your wall and advertise to prospective clients who make you look good? (The $10 will get you a cheap diploma you have to print yourself.)

A good attorney will always look behind the diploma to see what is being covered up. Throw rugs hide spots on carpets, and pictures hide holes on the wall. Attorneys know that paperwork on the wall may be covering up something that the program felt they lacked. In some cases, he or she may only find a hole in the wall. In many cases, he will see that the accreditation is just marketing. Even without an injury that can be associated with a violation of the accreditation requirements, the attorney will use the accreditation against the organization. As the owner proudly runs through his accomplishments on the witness stand, mentioning that his organization is accredited by XYZ trade association the plaintiffs’ attorney will be prepared.

The plaintiff’s attorney will have gone through each of the accreditation requirements that the organization no longer meets or violated and have the owner admit to the problems. If the accreditation is not really based on any real requirements, (like mine), then that will also be pointed out. Either the organization manager or owner will come away looking like they bought the paper to impress guests, or they earned it and then ignored it. A marketing program gone awry.

In many cases, this “accreditation mills” type of accreditation may be probably safer from a legal perspective. There is no list of items or requirements that can be used to show you violated that as an accredited organization, you should not have broken.

You are, in fact, buying marketing when you seek accreditation. This purchase works both ways providing the accrediting agency with value because they can list the organizations that have received accreditation, thus promoting themselves. The organizations that receive accreditation have come to the trade association for its seal of approval boosting the association’s standings the eyes of the industry.

However, accreditation can have a negative side also. Accreditation usually is accompanied by a list of the requirements that must be met. The more the accrediting organization wants to promote itself the longer the list. For an agency that has been accredited, this list then becomes a set of rules which they have agreed to meet. Any failure to meet these rules or regulations cannot be violated. Example:

If the accreditation says you will have one guide per five guests any variation from this at the time of an injury, and the plaintiffs (injured person) attorney has proof that you violated your own rules or standards of operation. In effect, you have provided the plaintiffs with a list of rules which you have agreed not to violate at risk of losing your accreditation.

If accreditation was a true accreditation, it would be removed when an accredited organization fails to continue to meet accreditation. Remember the Department of Education has that list of colleges that no longer are accredited. I’ve never seen a trade association do this (doesn’t mean they don’t).

By providing the plaintiff’s attorney with a list of requirements for accreditation you have also provided the plaintiff’s attorney with the standards that you have breached. The standard is what a reasonable man or organization would do in your situation. Instead of having to dig and hire expects to achieve that information, the plaintiff only has to look up the requirements for accreditation. If the injured guest, the plaintiff’s attorney’s client, was injured when something on that list was not met, then the attorney has proof of a breach of a standard.

It is irritating to see an expert witness report from the plaintiff that goes through each of the points the defendant missed for the diploma hanging on the wall. Most times the plaintiff’s expert witness was trained by the trade association that created the accreditation.

How do you think the Defendant feels watching someone trained by an association he paid money to join and more money to receive their marketing program testify against them?

In the above case, if the accreditation required one guide per five guests and there were twenty guests than the program needs four guides. If one guide stops to look at a flower or slows to tie his shoe, the program now has one guide per 6 or seven guests. If a guest is injured at that moment, the plaintiff’s attorney will argue that the injury could have been prevented with more guides, the standard required a specific number of guides, the defendant organization knew it needed more guides, (it was accredited) and if failed to provide the necessary number of guides.

Accreditation, like any outside review can cost you.

Whenever you have someone come into a program and provide you with a review of your program, that review may come back to haunt you. It is subject to discovery in litigation. Discovery means any document or witness that may have information that may lead to information about the case must be provided to the opposing side. Any document, such as an accreditation review, whether you passed it or not, must be given to the opposing side. Consequently, you want to make sure that any outside review is done in a professional manner and that negative comments and issues are either handled correctly, fixed immediately, or are not part of the written review.

Accreditation has greater value, greater weight for the plaintiff when you have failed to meet the requirements you paid to have reviewed. If the accreditation was so valuable to you, it cost you time and money to receive, how could you, then ignore it without violating the rules?

An example of this that went wrong is the case of Adam Dzialo. (See Marketing is marketing and Risk Management is not marketing,; Money is important in some lawsuits, but the emotions that start a lawsuit.,; Serious Disconnect: Why people sue.,, Wow, someone apologized, Adam was enrolled in a summer camp run by Greenfield Community College. The college had just undergone a review to achieve accreditation. The accreditation report stated the number of instructors for the whitewater class was insufficient. Adam suffered a leg entrapment during a whitewater class suffering permanent brain injuries. The number of instructors for the class was below the number required to achieve accreditation, and this became a major issue during the litigation. The review provided in the accreditation process was used by the plaintiff to argue the defendant was negligent.

The defendant was told their program was insufficient, and they ignored that notice. Is the defendant liable?!

Accreditation from the perspective of an advanced degree

If you do not want your program to be marketed as an amusement but something that provides greater benefits, you might align yourself with educational organizations. As such, an “accreditation” may add that aura of validity as an educational organization rather than a summer camp. No matter that most kids would rather go to a fun summer camp than an educational one. (Not that those concepts are totally separate.)

In a courtroom, however, the marketing will be stripped bare and what you are will be laid out in the courtroom. No matter how much money you spend on marketing, if the jury sees you as an amusement park, you are an amusement park, and your marketing program will be exposed as a ruse.

It is easy to strip away an accreditation program. A plaintiff’s lawyer simply goes to the list of developed by the US Department of Education of accreditation agencies and looks for the association that accredited you. As the defendant, you are then in a position of trying to prove the value of your accreditation or diploma on the wall. What did you pay for it and why? What value does it really have? If it is not recognized, isn’t it no more than a marketing program or worse a scam.

The department of education has a statutory scheme for determining how an educational organization will be accredited. USC § 1099b. Recognition of accrediting agency or association. The department of education itself does not accredit educational institutions.

Many times an accrediting association believes that by creating a list of objectives, rules and items to meet the accrediting goals, they have done a good job. In essence, the more rules and paper the better the accreditation. However, as the Department of Education and as most people already know, more does not mean better. The accreditation is based on the “the institution’s mission, goals and objectives, resources and resource allocation, student admission requirements, student support services and the quality of the faculty and educational offerings.” The accreditation is based on the college’s goals as well as the accrediting organizations’ goals.

More may mean very bad.

One of the basic tenets of education is teaching. Helping the student understand, comprehend and be able to use the knowledge gained. One of the tenets of accreditation is the educational organization employs instructors who know the subject matter of what they are teaching but also employs people who have been trained to teach. Very few association accreditation checklists look at whether the instructors have degrees in teaching.

Accreditation at best is just one of many ways an organization can show they strive to be as good as they can and to maintain good practices. It is among a list of things that an organization can do. That other equally important, if not more important items include constant training of employees, maintain professional relationships with trade associations and attending conferences, staying current in the industry. However, the paper on the wall or the seal of approval on the front door, do not prove that this was either effective or provides any protection. The issue is and always has been doing the defendant organization breach a duty of care to the injured plaintiff.

So, what does it mean when you do not meet the standards or accreditation of the trade association when someone was injured?

A legal duty is the duty owed to the plaintiff or what would a reasonable person do in the defendant’s situation. Duty is the first of four steps that the plaintiff must prove to prove negligence. Those steps are:

  • Duty
  • Breach of a duty
  • Injury proximately caused by the breach of duty.
  • Damages from the injury

For the plaintiff to win his or her lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove all four elements of negligence. As you can see, nothing in the definition of negligence is based on the diplomas on the wall or the certificates in a file.

The hardest part of any negligence suit to prove for the plaintiff is, was there a duty and a breach of the duty. Duty is defined as the standard of care of a reasonable person or organization in the same position as the defendant. Normally, the plaintiff and his or her attorney would hire expert witnesses to determine if the duty was breached. However, if there is a written document which the defendant has agreed to abide by in running his or her organization, the written document will be substituted by the plaintiff as the standard of care. Those requirements that you met to be accredited are then transposed by the plaintiff as the standards of care that you agreed to meet. Your agreement to meet those requirements is evidence by you proclaiming them to the guests.

By agreeing to them or by calling them standards, it is a foregone conclusion, almost, that, that is the standard of care you breached.

In effect, once accreditation is obtained, it becomes the level of operation that the organization can never fall below. It becomes a list of requirements the organization must always meet every day.

Accreditation or lack thereof, can also come back to haunt you in another way. Like any misrepresentation, if you claim you have a level of training or skill, and you don’t. That is misrepresentation or fraud. Even if the accreditation has no value as a defense and is only a marketing ploy, failure to have what you claim is fraud, and you are liable for any injury your misrepresentation caused.

A good example of that is you are accredited by XYZ Association on January 1, 2012 for a three-year term. Your accreditation says you have your staff trained in current CPR. In January of 2014, the American Red Cross changes how CPR is taught, and none of your staff are current. In fact, 99% of the people trained in CPR are no longer current. If on January 2, 2014, you have someone have a heart attack on your property who dies, are you liable because you stated and held yourself out as being accredited and yet you were not?

Professional relationships, membership in trade associations, employee training and staying current rarely have the possible kick back that the certificate on the wall may have. Those ways of maintaining professionalism do not come with a list of ways that you have failed to be professional.

Another way that any type of training can come back to haunt an industry is in raising the expectation of the guests of the industry above the normal level of care.

Any value of accreditation that once existed has been diluted by its adoption by numerous other industries. Once the sole domain of higher education, as stated earlier anyone and everyone are now offering accreditation for anything and everything. As such, the term has lost any significance in its value to the public. And that value has always been as a marketing tool rather than a legal defense.

Accreditation to be valuable must occur regularly and be current.

Another major issue is once a program receives accreditation. The program ceases to stay current. The program rests on its laurels on in this case the accreditation. The accreditation provides a false sense of accomplishment and finality, when just the opposite is true.

Staying current in an industry is the only way to stay in the winning column in litigation.

Major Organizations do not offer Accreditation.

Very few trade associations offer accreditation. They know that the cost of keeping the accreditation up to the level it should be along with the risk it subjects its membership too, do not justify the time and expense. Some of the organizations that do not offer accreditation in the outdoor recreation industry are the National Ski Area Association, Boy Scouts of America, Girl Scouts of America and America Outdoors. All of these organizations represent large groups of people. Commercial or business ventures that are serious about their business and represent a large segment of their industry.

Is Accreditation bad?

No accreditation is not a bad thing, unless you are sold on the idea and achieve the accreditation on a mistaken theory that it will assist in either staying out of court or winning in court.

However, like all programs you must know what you are buying. No longer are the days of caveat emptor the rule of the day. That legal pronouncement was created when determining the age of your transportation consisted of looking at the horse’s teeth and walking around the animal. Now days you can look at a car engine for hours and never know if it will run for a day or a lifetime.

The plaintiff is opening your program’s hood and looking forward to seeing if your program runs. You are saying it will because of the paper on the wall or the seal on your website. The trade association went through a checklist of items and issues to hand you a piece of paper. None of those items can guaranty the safety of the guest. All of those items can be used by the guest to prove the program liable and hold you and the trade association accountable.

As it applies to you when you are looking at marketing your program as well as when your clients are looking at your program. If you believe that a marketing program will protect you, you are not studying the program hard enough. Neither will accreditation guaranty the safety of your guests.

  1. Make sure you know what you are accomplishing before you start.
  2. Justify why you are going down that route.
  3. Make sure if your path can be interpreted two ways, that you cover both options to make them good ideas.
  4. If you find problems fix them immediately.
  5. You understand the difference between risk management and marketing.


The Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn.

Copyright 2018 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law


Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law


Mobile Site:

© 2018 Recreation Law    James H. Moss

Rules support lawsuits. Education supports the program.

The longer I work in this industry, the more I believe a couple of things.

1.     We can’t keep people safe or accident free. Any program anyone advocating this position is ignoring the realities of life.

        You can have the safest ropes’ course or zip line in the world, and someone can fall down on the stairs leading to the first element. You can bubble wrap a kid and stick him in a padded room, and he can get hurt. Stick two kids in the room and both will get hurt.

        This does not mean you should not attempt to run a safe program within industry standards. What it means is the industry standards and the “people” promoting them should accept the realities of life.

        If you are working with someone promising to make your program safe, they are lying to you. Remember you have a first-aid kit at home and most people die in the bathroom. People are going to get hurt in your program at some point if you are running long enough.

2.     Since people get hurt no matter what we do, we might as well be prepared for it. Prepared means you and them. Prepared means knowing the most likely reasons why and how people get hurt at your program. Prepared means have the appropriate first-aid kit and training. However, your preparation is not enough.

        Your guests need to be prepared also.

3.     The best way to keep people from getting hurt is to educate them. Padding, protecting and eliminating only goes so far. People fall getting into and out of their cars in your parking lot. You can pad our parking lot, or you can know it is going to happen and be prepared.

        People, hopefully, know their cars and parking lots. However, you program is a big blank in their knowledge inventory. If they get hurt getting out of their car, they can get hurt getting into your boat, into your harness, into any part of your program. People get hurt before the program begins and yet 99% of the work to keep people safe, we all (including me) do is just about the program.

        (At the same time writing an article about the dangers of sidewalks or parking lot risks is just not fun.)

4.     Rules (laws), regulations and industry standards don’t work. The number-one reason they don’t work is your customers don’t know or understand them. On top of that they don’t know or understand what the rules are supposed to do or why. The more rules you make for your program the more ways you set yourself up for a lawsuit. The more an industry works to make standards/regulations the more ways your participant can break one with no idea what why or how.

        Your risk management manual, emergency plan or other such as documents are probably more helpful to the plaintiff in a lawsuit than to your defense.

Rules support lawsuits. Education supports the program.

Concentrate on educating your customers then. This does not mean to ignore changes in the industry that might make the program safer. This means that you can do more to keep someone’s safe if they understand how they are going to get hurt.

The legal principle of assumption of the risk was based on this. If you knew what you were getting into and got hurt you could not sue. This still holds true in most states for sports or recreational activities.

More importantly you are doing your customers a better service of educating them rather than threatening them. (Most releases contain several threats if you read them.)

Even better and ignoring the legal issues, participants who understand what they are getting into will have a better time. Their chances of getting hurt will be reduced and consequently, the entire trip will be better with no injuries. Your guests can reach for their goals of entertainment, enjoyment or growth and still present a great program to them.

·         Education is better than a threat. It worked for you.

·         Education is better than a release; one lasts forever, and the other one is hopefully never used.

·         Education shows you care, not that you don’t care.

Make your program safe but make your guests or participants knowledgeable. Help them understand their safety, their risk and their responsibility to keep themselves safe.

You and your program will be better off, and your guests will have been more fun.

clip_image002What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Author: Outdoor Recreation Insurance, Risk Management and Law

To Purchase Go Here:

Copyright 2016 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law


Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law


Mobile Site:

By Recreation Law         James H. Moss



#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom,, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, Rules, Lawsuits, Education, Safety, Guest Education, Participant Education, Safety Talk,


16th issue of the JOREL Published – Volume 6(2)

16th issue of the JOREL Published – Volume 6(2)

Bowling Green, Ky. The Western Kentucky University Research Foundation, the Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education; and the Wilderness Education Association are pleased to announce publication of Volume 6(2) of the Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership.

The Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership publishes quality manuscripts to disseminate the latest knowledge related to outdoor recreation, education, and leadership to help develop theory and practice. The journal seeks quantitative and/or qualitative research findings; conceptual or theoretical discussions; or program practices. Relevant topic areas (centered on outdoor recreation, outdoor education, or outdoor leadership) for the journal include, but are not limited to: outdoor recreation, adventure recreation, outdoor education, outdoor leadership, pedagogy, administration, programming, risk management, wilderness medicine, certification, participant behavior, trends, diversity, training, and outcomes. Authors may consider submitting a manuscript in any one of the following three categories: (a) Regular Papers; (b) Essays, Practices, and Commentaries;and (c) Research Notes. Descriptions of the manuscript categories can be found on the JOREL website.

All previously published JOREL articles (excluding those in our 6 month embargo) are now indexed and have full text coverage. For specific details please visit the following url:

Abstracts (free) and full articles (available by subscription) are available at Volume 6(2) includes the following:

Editors’ Notes

  1. Celebrating the Past and Looking Ahead: Editors’ Notes (Andrew J. Bobilya and Raymond Poff)

Regular Papers

  1. The illusion of competence: Increasing self-efficacy in outdoor leaders (Scott A. Schumann, Jim Sibthorp, and Douglas Hacker)
  1. Identifying with the Gunks: Investigating the effect of serious leisure participation and place attachment on environmental concern among traditional climbers (William Richard Wilson, Andrew M. Szolosi, Bruce Martin, and Stephen Scanlan)
  1. Comparing day users’ and overnight visitors’ attitudes concerning Leave No Trace (B. Derrick Taff, Peter Newman, Wade M. Vagias, and Ben Lawhon)

Essays, Practices, and Commentaries

  1. Obesity-stigma and the “Why Try” model: Implications for outdoor recreation constraint negotiation (Stephen T. Lewis and Gretchen C. Newhouse)
  1. Outdoor investigations to connect water to you (Kathi A. McDowell, Martha Y. Parrott, and Pamela D. Christol)

Research Symposium Abstracts (2013 AORE Research Symposium)

  1. Connecting with nature: A matter of significance [introduction](Andrew W. Szolosi and Raymond A. Poff)
  2. Mapping the connections between wildlife, learning, and emotion(Jonathan R. Hicks)
  3. Investigating climbing as a spiritual experience(Michael Pond, Bruce Martin, Elizabeth Collins, and Andrew Szolosi)
  4. Environmental attitudes of students enrolled in adventure programming classes(Geneviève Marchand)
  5. Exploring the relationship between the facilitator and fidelity(Ryan J. Gagnon)

Other Journals’ Table of Contents

  1. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education (AJOE) Table of Contents, Volume 17(2)
  1. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning (JAEOL) Table of Contents, Volume 14(3)
  1. Journal of Experiential Education (JEE) Table of Contents, Volume 37(3)

The journal advisory group (representing AORE, WEA, and WKURF) includes: Raymond Poff, Ph.D., Western Kentucky University; Eric Frauman, Ph.D., Appalachian State University; Connie Foster, MLS, Western Kentucky University; Rose Verbos, University of Utah; Nate Furman, Ph.D., University of Utah; and Jerel Cowan, Ph.D., University of Central Oklahoma.

Support for The Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership

The journal, hosted at WKU, uses resources available through TopSCHOLAR® a University-wide, centralized digital repository dedicated to scholarly research, creative activity and other full-text learning resources that merit enduring and archival value and permanent access. TopSCHOLAR® uses the Digital Commons platform from Berkeley Electronic Press

The Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education (AORE) provides opportunities for professionals and students in the field of outdoor recreation and education to exchange information, promote the preservation and conservation of the natural environment, and address issues common to college, university, community, military, and other not-for-profit outdoor recreation and education programs.

The Wilderness Education Association (WEA) promotes the professionalism of outdoor leadership through establishment of national standards, curriculum design, implementation, advocacy, and research driven initiatives.

The Western Kentucky University Research Foundation (WKURF) is organized to support Western Kentucky University efforts to promote the development, implementation, and coordination of extramurally sponsored programs involving research, instruction, public service, and to legally protect, manage and commercialize intellectual property resulting from research, scholarship and creative activities on behalf of Western Kentucky University.

JOREL v6 i2 News Release.pdf

Be a Changemaker in the Environmental Ed Movement- CAEE Friend Fundraiser-Wynkoop Brewery



Join the Colorado Alliance for Environmental Education

for the annual

EE Changemaker Friend and Fundraiser

Wednesday, November 5, 2014


VIP Reception 4:00-5:00p.m.

Wynkoop Brewery, Denver

~Help build the movement toward 100% environmentally literacy in Colorado~

Come for a bE.E.r and brew a movement for sustainability. Participate in a live auction to win weekend getaways, recreation equipment, and super food.


$25/person Spark: Come for Happy Hour and brew a movement for Sustainability.
$50/person Catalyst: Includes Happy Hour, Specialized “EE” Beer, and Green Brewery Tour
$75/person Changemaker: Includes Happy Hour, Specialized “EE” Beer, and VIP Reception with Special Guest
Start the movement. Register to attend today.
152.pngCan’t Attend?Build the movement with a donation today.
Event Preview

4:00-5:00Private VIP Receptionwith Special Guest 5:00Changemaker Friend and Fundraiser 6:45 Wynkoop GreenBrewery Tour
movie-tickets-red.jpgDetails coming soon! FullLineOfCans-300x300.jpg CopperTanksSquareEdit.jpg

We welcome you to invite friends and colleagues who share our passion for environmental education to this inspiring event!

CAEE: Catalyzing the Collective Power of Environmental Educators576996752_731eddfdbb.jpgMahatma Gandhi once said, “We must be the change we wish to see in the world.” Every day, environmental educators embody this philosophy. Classroom teachers, natural resource professionals, business role models, government agencies and others are ensuring that Coloradans have the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions about the environment. CAEE is catalyzing the collective power of environmental educators. Will you join us to build an environmental literacy movement that supports healthy environments and thriving communities throughout Colorado?
Other CAEE AnnouncementDue Monday, October 27, 2014-Submit a Session Proposal*2015 Advancing Environmental Education ConferenceExplore Research, Elevate Practice, Spark Collaborations

Friday, March 27-Saturday, March 28, 2015- Auraria Campus-Denver

Help explore, elevate and spark environmental education by presenting at CAEE’s 15th annual Colorado’s Advancing Environmental Education Conference

(also known as Teaching Outside the Box).

CAEE is seeking session proposals that highlight environmental education (EE) approaches and capacity building from a variety of backgrounds, sectors and focus areas, and in particular the connections between EE research, practices and collaborations that offer tangible takeaways for participants.

Click here for more information about submitting a session proposal

*We prefer sessions to be submitted by October 27, however, if you need a little more time, please email info for an extension.

CAEE Logo Simple BWCOLORADO ALLIANCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION152060 South Golden RoadGolden, Colorado 80401



Keep a kid safe for a minute or help them learn to be safe for a lifetime!

Research shows that just saying don’t do that doesn’t work. You have to give kids the knowledge to learn how to evaluate the risks of life.

A study published in the Journal of Pediatric Psychology shows that taking the time to explain the risks to a child is better than saying don’t do that. This allows the child to understand why and even better it provides the child with the tools to learn to evaluate all of the risks he or she will face in life.

Kids take risks not to take risks, but because they don’t know what the dangers are. More importantly children have no ability to evaluate the risks. You don’t know something is going to hurt unless you learn. There are two ways to learn.

1.   Get hurt

2.   Have someone explain the reasons and risks to you.

However the study did say there are still children who are prone to get hurt. When they grow up they are called guides!  J

See Explain the Present Danger to Children So They Stay Safe

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Copyright 2014 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law


Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Mobile Site:

By Recreation Law      James H. Moss         #Authorrank

<rel=”author” link=”” />



#RecreationLaw,, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #Rec-Law, #RiskManagement, #CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw,, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, #RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law, #SkiLaw, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law,, #OutdoorLaw, #RecreationLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #Law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #AttorneyatLaw, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #RecLaw, #RecLawBlog, #RecreationLawBlog, #RiskManagement, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation,# CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw,, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, sport and recreation laws, ski law, cycling law, Colorado law, law for recreation and sport managers, bicycling and the law, cycling and the law, ski helmet law, skiers code, skiing accidents, Recreation Lawyer, Ski Lawyer, Paddlesports Lawyer, Cycling Lawyer, Recreational Lawyer, Fitness Lawyer, Rec Lawyer, Challenge Course Lawyer, Ropes Course Lawyer, Zip Line Lawyer, Rock Climbing Lawyer, Adventure Travel Lawyer, Outside Lawyer, Recreation Lawyer, Ski Lawyer, Paddlesports Lawyer, Cycling Lawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #FitnessLawyer, #RecLawyer, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #RopesCourseLawyer, #ZipLineLawyer, #RockClimbingLawyer, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #OutsideLawyer, Good Samaritan, Samaritan, First Aid, Children, Kids, Risks, Mothers, Education,



WordPress Tags: Keep,lifetime,Research,knowledge,life,Journal,Pediatric,Psychology,tools,Kids,dangers,Explain,Present,Danger,Children,Stay,Safe,Leave,Twitter,LinkedIn,Recreation,Edit,Email,Google,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Outdoor,Adventure,Travel,Blog,Mobile,Site,James,Moss,Authorrank,author,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,AdventureTravelLaw,TravelLaw,JimMoss,JamesHMoss,Tourism,AdventureTourism,RiskManagement,CyclingLaw,BicyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,RopesCourse,ChallengeCourse,SummerCamp,Camps,YouthCamps,Areas,Negligence,SkiLaw,Outside,AttorneyatLaw,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,RecreationLawBlog,HumanPoweredRecreation,Colorado,managers,helmet,accidents,Lawyer,Paddlesports,Recreational,Challenge,Course,Ropes,Line,Rock,RecreationalLawyer,FitnessLawyer,RecLawyer,ChallengeCourseLawyer,RopesCourseLawyer,ZipLineLawyer,RockClimbingLawyer,AdventureTravelLawyer,OutsideLawyer,Samaritan,Risks,Mothers,Education


Environmental Education Giving Week April 16-22


Website About Us Our Programs Environmental Education Get Involved Contact
Like us on Facebook Like us on FacebookFollow us on Twitter Follow us on TwitterVisit our blog Visit our Blog
55.jpgBecome a Member
CAEE Events and Initiatives______
Online Course: Principles and Foundations of EE 6/2-8/10EE Certification Portfolios Due: 5/2/14Post EE Jobs and Internships at Get Outdoors Colorado Job Center
The work of CAEE is made possible by:81.jpgxcel8.jpg119.jpg

The EE News YOU need

CAEE Weekly Happenings- April 4, 2014

Save the Date:

Environmental Education Giving Week130.png

Give Today. Support Tomorrow.

Celebrate Earth Day this year by supporting the dedicated educators in Colorado who work every day to create a better world through environmental education.

EE Giving Week 2014

CAEE is teaming up with the North American Association for Environmental Education and its Affiliate Network to create more visibility and support for EE across the globe. The funds raised on our giving page will come back to CAEE to advance EE locally and 5% will go to benefit NAAEE, as our voice at the national level.

By giving to CAEE, you will support local educators as well as state, national, and global efforts to improve education and care for the environment in which we live.

GivEE Colorado!

We need your help to advance environmental education! Please save the date and support EE April 16-22!

Call 303-273-9527303-273-9527 or email us if you have questions! Thank you for your support of EE!


Phone: 303-273-9527303-273-9527

Fax: 303-273-5780

E-mail: info

Academy of Leisure Sciences (ALS) Future Scholars Program

The purpose of the Future Scholars Program is to provide master’s degree students who are interested (in the next few years) in pursuing a doctorate in an area related to recreation and leisure studies the opportunity to meet some of the outstanding researchers and scholars in the field. Selected applicants will be invited to attend the NRPA Annual Congress as guests of the ALS and the NRPA Education Network. The Future Scholars will receive $1,000 to cover transportation, lodging, and meal expenses. Future Scholars are expected to register for the NRPA conference at the student rate.

Future Scholars Program

Thank you for your interest in the Academy of Leisure Sciences (ALS) Future Scholars Program sponsored by the ALS with support from the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Education Network. This packet includes information that you will need to complete your application.

This year’s conference will be held from October 14 to 16, 2014 in Charlotte, North Carolina. At the conference, Future Scholars will be paired with a mentor and have an opportunity to interact with scholars in the field. In addition, Future Scholars will attend meetings hosted by the Academy of Leisure Sciences, the Leisure Research Symposium, and the NRPA Education Network; go to NRPA educational sessions; and participate in social functions. This will be an excellent opportunity for Future Scholars to ask questions about the field and inquire about doctoral program opportunities.

Applications should be submitted to Dr. Deb Kerstetter ( as an email attachment (.docx or .pdf formatted) by midnight April 18, 2014.

Best wishes and thank you for your interest in the Future Scholars program!

The 2014 ALS Future Scholars Program Committee Members


The purpose of the ALS Future Scholars Program is to provide graduate students who are interested in pursuing a doctorate in an area related to recreation and leisure studies the opportunity to meet some of the outstanding scholars in the field by attending the NRPA National Congress.


Individuals who meet all of the following criteria are eligible to apply:

             currently enrolled in, or have completed a master’s degree in the leisure field;

             have a grade point average of at least 3.0 (on a 4.0 scale) during both undergraduate and graduate studies;

             Is not committed to, nor enrolled in, doctoral study at a particular university at the time of application and conference attendance;

             has plans to initiate doctoral studies within the next three years;

             is interested in pursuing a doctoral degree in recreation and parks, leisure studies, tourism, or related discipline;

             has the written support of a faculty sponsor; and

             can attend the 2014 NRPA National Congress.


Members of the 2014 ALS Future Scholars Program Committee will review all applicants using the following criteria:

             academic ability (based on GPA and Faculty Sponsor letter);

             indications of scholarly potential in the field (based on publications, presentations, research experience, applicant’s cover letter, and/or Faculty Sponsor letter);

             strength of intention to pursue doctoral studies in a leisure-related subject (based on applicant’s cover letter and Faculty Sponsor letter); and

             general level of professionalism (based on format and depth of application materials, presentation of written materials, and professional involvement).

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Copyright 2014 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law


Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Mobile Site:

By Recreation Law      James H. Moss         #Authorrank

<rel=”author” link=”” />



#RecreationLaw,, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #Rec-Law, #RiskManagement, #CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw,, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, #RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law, #SkiLaw, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law,, #OutdoorLaw, #RecreationLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #Law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #AttorneyatLaw, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #RecLaw, #RecLawBlog, #RecreationLawBlog, #RiskManagement, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation,# CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw,, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, sport and recreation laws, ski law, cycling law, Colorado law, law for recreation and sport managers, bicycling and the law, cycling and the law, ski helmet law, skiers code, skiing accidents, Recreation Lawyer, Ski Lawyer, Paddlesports Lawyer, Cycling Lawyer, Recreational Lawyer, Fitness Lawyer, Rec Lawyer, Challenge Course Lawyer, Ropes Course Lawyer, Zip Line Lawyer, Rock Climbing Lawyer, Adventure Travel Lawyer, Outside Lawyer, Recreation Lawyer, Ski Lawyer, Paddlesports Lawyer, Cycling Lawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #FitnessLawyer, #RecLawyer, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #RopesCourseLawyer, #ZipLineLawyer, #RockClimbingLawyer, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #OutsideLawyer, Good Samaritan, Samaritan, First Aid, Academy of Leisure Sciences, (ALS), Future Scholars Program, NRPA, National Recreation and Park Association,  

WordPress Tags: Academy,Leisure,Sciences,Future,Scholars,Program,purpose,degree,students,doctorate,area,recreation,researchers,applicants,NRPA,Annual,guests,Education,Network,transportation,conference,student,Thank,National,Park,Association,packet,information,October,Charlotte,North,Carolina,mentor,addition,meetings,Research,Symposium,sessions,opportunities,Applications,Kerstetter,attachment,April,Best,Committee,Members,Individuals,criteria,undergraduate,attendance,parks,tourism,SELECTION,Sponsor,letter,indications,publications,presentations,applicant,strength,intention,professionalism,depth,presentation,involvement,Leave,Twitter,LinkedIn,Edit,Email,Google,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Outdoor,Adventure,Travel,Blog,Mobile,Site,James,Moss,Authorrank,author,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,AdventureTravelLaw,TravelLaw,JimMoss,JamesHMoss,AdventureTourism,RiskManagement,CyclingLaw,BicyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,RopesCourse,ChallengeCourse,SummerCamp,Camps,YouthCamps,Areas,Negligence,SkiLaw,Outside,AttorneyatLaw,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,RecreationLawBlog,HumanPoweredRecreation,Colorado,managers,helmet,accidents,Lawyer,Paddlesports,Recreational,Challenge,Course,Ropes,Line,Rock,RecreationalLawyer,FitnessLawyer,RecLawyer,ChallengeCourseLawyer,RopesCourseLawyer,ZipLineLawyer,RockClimbingLawyer,AdventureTravelLawyer,OutsideLawyer,Samaritan,doctoral,docx