Robbers Cave Experiment / Realistic Conflict Theory
- Social Identity Theory
- Realistic Conflict Theory
Robbers Cave Experiment
By Dr. Saul McLeod, published 2008, updated 2020
Muzafer Sherif argued that intergroup conflict (i.e., conflict between groups) occurs when two groups are in competition for limited resources. This theory is supported by evidence from a famous study investigating group conflict: The Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherif, 1954, 1958, 1961).
Key Takeaways: The Robbers Cave Study
- In the Robbers Cave field experiment, 22 white, 11-year-old boys were sent to a special remote summer camp in Oklahoma, Robbers Cave State Park.
- The boys developed an attachment to their groups throughout the first week of the camp by doing various activities together like hiking, swimming, etc.
- The boys chose names for their groups, The Eagles and The Rattlers.
- During a four-day series of competitions between the groups prejudice began to become apparent between the two groups (both physical and verbal).
- During the subsequent two-day cooling off period, the boys listed features of the two groups. The boys tended to characterize their own in-group in very favourable terms, and the other out-group in very unfavourable terms.
- Sherif then attempted to reduce the prejudice, or inter-group conflict, shown by each group. However, simply increasing the contact of the two groups only made the situation worse.
- Alternatively forcing the groups to work together to reach common goals, eased prejudice and tension among the groups.
- This experiment confirmed Sherif’s realistic conflict theory (also called realistic group conflict theory), the idea that group conflict can result from competition over resources.
In the mid-1950’s Muzafer Sherif and others carried out the Robbers Cave experiment on intergroup conflict and co-operation as a part of research programme at the University of Oklahoma.
The hypotheses tested were:
- When individuals who don’t know each other are brought together to interact in group activities in order to achieve common goals, they will produce a group structure with hierarchical statuses and roles within it.
- When two in-groups, once formed, are brought into functional relationship under conditions of competition and group frustration, attitudes and appropriate hostile actions in relation to the out-group and its members will arise; these will be standardised and shared in varying degrees by group members.
Overview of the Study
Overview of the Study
The field experiment involved two groups of twelve-year-old boys at Robber’s Cave State Park, Oklahoma, America.
The twenty-two boys in the study were unknown to each other and all from white middle-class backgrounds. They all shared a Protestant, two-parent background.
The boys were randomly divided by the researchers into two groups, with efforts being made to balance the physical, mental and social talents of the groups.
Neither group was aware of the other’s existence.
They were then, as individual groups, picked up by bus on successive days in the summer of 1954 and transported to a 200 acre Boy Scouts of America camp in the Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma (with researchers doubling as counsellors).
Phase 1: In-group Formation (5-6 Days)
The members of each group got to know one other, social norms developed, leadership and group structure emerged.
At the camp the groups were kept separate from each other and were encouraged to bond as two individual groups through the pursuit of common goals that required co-operative discussion, planning and execution.
During this first phase, the groups did not know of the other group’s existence.
The boys developed an attachment to their groups throughout the first week of the camp, quickly establishing their own cultures and group norms, by doing various activities together like hiking, swimming, etc.
The boys chose names for their groups, The Eagles and The Rattlers, and stenciled them onto shirts and flags.
Phase 2: Group Conflict (4-5 Days)
The now-formed groups came into contact with each other, competing in games and challenges, and competing for control of territory.
Sherif now arranged the ‘competition stage’ where friction between the groups was to occur over the next 4-6 days. In this phase it was intended to bring the two groups into competition with each other in conditions that would create frustration between them.
A series of competitive activities (e.g. baseball, tug-of-war etc.) were arranged with a trophy being awarded on the basis of accumulated team score.
There were also individual prizes for the winning group such as a medal and a multi-bladed pocket knife with no consolation prizes being given to the “losers.”
The Rattlers’ reaction to the informal announcement of a series of contests was absolute confidence in their victory! They spent the day talking about the contests and making improvements on the ball field, which they took over as their own to such an extent that they spoke of putting a “Keep Off” sign there! They ended up putting their Rattler flag on the pitch. At this time, several Rattlers made threatening remarks about what they would do if anybody from The Eagles bothered their flag.
Situations were also devised whereby one group gained at the expense of the other. For example, one group was delayed getting to a picnic and when they arrived the other group had eaten their food.
At first, this prejudice was only verbally expressed, such as taunting or name-calling. As the competition wore on, this expression took a more direct route. The Eagles burned the Rattler’s flag.
Then the next day, the Rattler’s ransacked The Eagle’s cabin, overturned beds, and stole private property. The groups became so aggressive with each other that the researchers had to physically separate them.
During the subsequent two-day cooling off period, the boys listed features of the two groups. The boys tended to characterize their own in-group in very favorable terms, and the other out-group in very unfavorable terms.
Keep in mind that the participants in this study were well-adjusted boys, not street gang members. This study clearly shows that conflict between groups can trigger prejudice attitudes and discriminatory behavior. This experiment confirmed Sherif’s realistic conflict theory.
Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (6-7 Days)
Sherif and colleagues tried various means of reducing the animosity and low-level violence between the groups.
The Robbers Cave experiments showed that superordinate goals (goals so large that it requires more than one group to achieve the goal) reduced conflict significantly more effectively than other strategies (e.g., communication, contact).
A number of improvised reconciliatory opportunities (such as a bean-collecting contest, or the showing of a film, or the shooting of Firecrackers to celebrate the fourth of July) did not lead to any appreciable lessening of tensions between the Eagles and the Rattlers.
Sherif et al. concluded that such contrived contact opportunities were not going to lessen tensions between the groups.
They now arranged for the introduction of a number of scenarios presenting superordinate goals which could not be easily ignored by members of the two antagonistic groups, but the attainment of which was beyond the resources and efforts of one group alone.
These scenarios were played out at a new location in the belief that this would tend to inhibit recall of grievances that had been experienced at Robbers Cave.
The Drinking Water Problem
The first superordinate goal to be introduced concerned a common resource used by both groups. Their water supply, which had suddenly stopped flowing.
All of the drinking water in the camp came from a reservoir on the mountain north of the camp. The water supply had failed and the Camp staff blamed this on “vandals.”
Upon investigations of the extensive water lines by the Eagles and the Rattlers as separate groups, they discovered that an outlet faucet had a sack stuffed into it.
Almost all the boys gathered around the faucet to try to clear it. Suggestions from members of both groups concerning effective ways to unblock the obstruction were thrown in from all sides simultaneously which led to cooperative efforts clearing the obstacle itself. The joint work on the faucet lasted over 45 minutes.
When the water finally came on there was common rejoicing. The Rattlers did not object to having the Eagles get ahead of them when they all got a drink, as the Eagles did not have canteens with them and were thirstier. No protests or “Ladies first” type of remarks were made!
The Problem of Securing a Movie
The next superordinate goal to be introduced was a favourite feature-length movie for boys of their age. Two films had been chosen in consultation with children’s movie experts and brought to the camp along with other stimulus materials.
In the afternoon, the boys were called together and the staff suggested the possibility of watching either “Treasure Island” or “Kidnapped”: Both groups yelled approval of these films.
After some discussion, one Rattler said, “Everyone that wants Treasure Island raise their hands.” The majority of members in both groups gave enthusiastic approval to “Treasure Island” even though a few dissensions were expressed to this choice.
Then the staff announced that securing the film would cost $15 and the camp could not pay the whole sum!
After much discussion it was suggested that both groups would pay $3.50 and the camp would pay the balance.
This was accepted even though, as a couple of homesick Eagles had gone home, the contribution per person per group was unequal.
At supper that night there were no objections to eating together. Some scuffling and sticking chewing gum on each other occurred between members of the two groups, but it involved fewer boys on both sides than were usually involved in such encounters.
Other problem-solving superordinate goals introduced in this phase included the joint use of a tug-of-war-rope, and both groups of boys ‘accidentally’ coming across a stuck-in-a-rut truck that was carrying food for both groups.
In the event the joint pursuit of such superordinate goals saw a lessening of intergroup conflict. At breakfast and lunch on the last day of camp, the seating arrangements were considerably mixed up insofar as group membership was concerned.
The events at Robbers Cave mimicked the kinds of conflict that plague people all over the world. The simplest explanation for this conflict is competition. Assign strangers to groups, throw the groups into competition, stir the pot, and soon there is conflict.
There is a lot of evidence that when people compete for scarce resources (e.g. jobs, land etc.) there is a rise in hostility between groups. For example, in times of high unemployment there may be high levels of racism among white people who believe that black people (or asylum seekers) have taken their jobs. The study was a field experiment which means it has high ecological validity.
However, the Robbers Cave study has been criticized on a number of issues. For example, the two groups of boys in the study were artificial, as was the competition, and did not necessarily reflect real life. For example, middle class boys randomly assigned into two separate groups is not rival inner city gangs, or rival football supporters.
Ethical issues must also be considered. The participants were deceived, as they did not know the true aim of the study. Also, participants were not protected from physical and psychological harm.
Nor should the results be generalized to real life because the research used only 12 year old white middle class boys and excluded, for example, girls and adults.
APA Style References
Sherif, M. (1954). Experimental study of positive and negative intergroup attitudes between experimentally produced groups: robbers cave study. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Sherif, M. (1956). Experiments in group conflict. Scientific American, 195(5), 54-59.
Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. American journal of Sociology, 349-356.
Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers Cave experiment (Vol. 10). Norman, OK: University Book Exchange.
How to reference this article:
How to reference this article:
McLeod, S. A. (2008). Robbers cave experiment. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/robbers-cave.html
report this ad
The Impact of Camp Experiences on Social Skills and Happiness
With depression, anxiety, and addiction rates high among adolescents (Keyes, 2006), and many youth engaged in relational aggression and other damaging social practices like bullying, there is clearly a need to find effective interventions to improve social skills, relationships, and overall well-being in our young people. Camp professionals know from experience that camp can serve as a positive, often life-changing, psychological intervention for youth, but for the “noncamp” world to understand the potential benefits of summer camp, rigorous research needs to be conducted and disseminated. Many in the fields of psychology and youth development have not considered summer camp as an intervention or preventative alternative to more traditional approaches such as individual or group therapy. Therefore, many parents do not understand the potential benefits a camp experience may have for their child.
Impact of Camp Experiences on Social Skills and Well-being
To become happy, successful adults, children need certain social skills to develop positive relationships with others (Crosnoe, 2000). Over the past 15 years, the field of positive psychology has looked into what makes people thrive rather than what causes psychological distress (e.g., depression, anxiety). Several studies (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Seligman, 2012) have concluded that positive relationships are a key predictor of overall well-being. Good social skills, in turn, predict positive relationships (Gottman, Gonso, & Rasmussen, 1975). Youth who lack social competencies, just as much as youth who lack academic competencies, require coaching from adult teachers and mentors. In addition, all youth — even those with good social skills — benefit from practicing and honing those skills. Many summer camp rograms specifically focus on teaching, modeling, and practicing the social skills that most schools — because of lack of time and resources — cannot teach.
A recent study, conducted during the summer of 2014, investigated parents’ and children’s perceptions of the impact of a two-week, overnight camp experience on children’s social skills and overall happiness. To assess these perceptions, information was gathered from a written survey campers completed at the end of their camp stay and from an online survey parents completed after their children returned home. One hundred sixty-seven children from six different two-week, residential summer camp programs in Arizona, California, and Colorado participated in the study. Campers were predominantly female (55.7 percent) and Caucasian (84.4 percent). The age range of campers was six to 15 years old, with the majority (82.2 percent) being between the ages of nine and 13. Just over half of the participants (58.7 percent) were first-year campers. While some evidence exists that growth occurs in social skills in camps (Thurber, Scanlin, Scheuler, & Henderson, 2007), changes in overall well-being have not been previously measured.
Social Skills Results
The camper survey contained 14 questions related to social skills. Campers rated whether each of the social skills (1) “got a lot worse,” (2) “got a little worse,” (3) “did not change at all,” (4) “got a little better,” or (5) “got a lot better.” The variable Social Skills was computed for each camper by averaging his or her answers to the 14 social skills questions. These averages were compared to the value of 3, or “did not change at all.” The children reported social skills changes significantly above the neutral value of 3 (M = 3. 97, SD = 0.59), t(146) = 19.84, p<.05. Of the 147 children who answered all of the social skills questions, two reported negative changes and five remaining 140 reported positive changes in social skills.
For the four “other skills” questions (which were unrelated to social skills and placed on the survey to assess whether campers were reading the questions as they answered), campers reported changes significantly above the neutral value of 3 (M = 3.30, SD = 0.52). Of the 153 campers who answered all four “other skills” questions, 73 reported no change in those skills and eight reported negative changes (“got a lot worse” or “got a little worse”).
On a post-camp, online survey, parents answered the same questions about their children that the children had answered about themselves. Parents reported significant positive changes in their children’s social skills above the neutral value of 3 (M = 3.67, SD = 0.51), t(118) = 14.50, p<.05 (see Table 2). Parents also reported significant positive changes above the neutral value of 3 in “other skills” (M = 3. 10, SD = 0.26). Further, children and parents reported significant positive growth in all social skills measured on the surveys (see Table 3).
On the survey, children were asked how their time at camp changed their overall happiness level. Possible answers were (1) “I’m a lot less happy because of camp,” (2) “I am a little less happy because of camp,” (3) “My happiness level has not changed because of camp,” (4) “I am a little happier because of camp,” and (5) “I am a lot happier because of camp.” The majority of campers reported being “a little” or “a lot” happier because of camp (see Table 4). Parents answered a similar question, rating how much, if any, their child’s camp experience changed their child’s happiness level (see Table 5).
Children reported positive changes in their happiness level because of camp (M = 4.13, SD = .90), t(154) = 15.58, p<.05 (see Table 1, above). Parents also reported an increased happiness level as a result of their child’s camp experience (M = 3. 90, SD = 0.74), t(131) = 14.00, p<.05 (see Table 2, above).
Summary and Discussion
The social skills children reported as having been most impacted by their camp stay relate to meeting and getting to know people, which are emphasized in camp programs. Camp counselors, unlike teachers, view their primary role as one of facilitating friendships and positive experiences. Counselors are trained in skills that help campers build social skills. At most camps, counselors participate in a week of training prior to the summer. Training includes communication and leadership skills and team building. Counselors often are trained to facilitate “get to know you” games at the start of the session to help campers connect and form friendships. Because making friends is talked about at camp as an important part of the experience, children learn friend-making skills and have the opportunity to practice them during their camp stay. Given that camp programs emphasize forming new friendships and rekindling old ones, the finding that children perceive improved social skills as a result of camp supports both the hypothesis of this study and anecdotal testimonials.
Summer camp programs provide structured, extracurricular activities where youth are engaged with friends and have adult emotional support. Psychologist Nansook Park (2004) has described these types of programs as being important to help youth flourish and have a higher life satisfaction rating. Summer camp counselors and staff are focused on creating fun experiences for campers and promoting positive relationships among them. Many camp practices and traditions — singing, dancing, telling stories and jokes, and playing outdoors — increase positive emotions, which lead campers to feel what they describe as “happiness.” As positive relationships predict happiness, the camp environment is an ideal setting to improve happiness because of the focus on building positive relationships. Children at summer camp have ample, daily opportunities to connect with other people and therefore, are — in fact — “happy campers.”
Families and staff at summer camps are acutely aware of how beneficial the experience can be; however, the general public may not have similar knowledge of the summer camp experience and its potential as a psychological intervention that may positively impact children’s social skills and happiness. As the children and parents in this study reported, they perceived that their camp experience had a positive impact on both their social skills and happiness. However, more research will need to be conducted to confirm that the perceived improvements represent actual social and psychological changes. Ideally, this study will lead to more people understanding the potential benefits of summer camp experiences on youth development, to more children participating in camp programs, and to more research being done to determine the benefits of camp experiences.
Photos on pages 46–47 courtesy of Birmingham Zoofari Summer Camp, Birmingham, Alabama; Camp ClapHans, Norman, Oklahoma; Camp DeWolfe, Wading River, New York; and Camp Jump Start, Imperial, Missouri.
Crosnoe, R. (2000). Friendships in childhood and adolescence: The life course and new directions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 377-391.
Diener, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R.E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.
Gottman, J., Gonso, J., & Rasmussen, B. (1975). Social interaction, social competence, and friendship in children. Child Development, 46(3), 709-718.
Henderson, K.A., Whitaker, L.S., Bialeschki, M.D., Scanlin, M.M., & Thurber, C. (2007). Summer camp experiences: Parental perceptions of youth development outcomes. Journal of Family Issues, 28(8), 987-1007.
Keyes, C.L.M. (2006). The subjective well-being of America’s youth: Toward a comprehensive assessment. Adolescent & Family Health, 4(1), 3-11.
Park, N. (2004). The role of subjective well-being in positive youth development. The ANNALs of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591(1), 25-39.
Seligman M.E. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Free Press.
Thurber, C., Scanlin, M., Scheuler, L., & Henderson, K. (2007). Youth development outcomes of the camp experience: Evidence for multidimensional growth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(3), 241-254.
Audrey “Sunshine” Monke, with her husband Steve, has owned and directed Gold Arrow Camp (Lakeshore, CA) for the past 27 years. She has been a member of ACA since 1989 and was president of WAIC (Western Association of Independent Camps) from 2007-2010. Audrey writes about camp and parenting at www.sunshine-parenting.com.
War and peace and summer camp
The Lost Boys: Inside Muzafer Sherif’s Robbers Cave Experiments Gina Perry Scribe (2018)
A few years after the Second World War, Muzafer Sherif conducted possibly the most complex field studies ever attempted in social psychology. Sited in summer camps around the United States, they focused on conflict and cooperation within and between two groups of about a dozen 11- and 12-year-old boys. The children were never informed that they were taking part in research. In each study, Sherif and his fellow researchers spent up to three weeks disguised as counsellors and caretakers, manipulating features of the camp set-up — in particular, the structure of team competitions and challenges — to examine their impact on group relations.
In The Lost Boys, Gina Perry puts these extraordinary experiments under the microscope. As in her 2013 book Behind the Shock Machine, which probed psychologist Stanley Milgram’s 1960s research on obedience, she is unsatisfied with the half-truths lazily handed down in textbooks. Her aim is to make a distinctive contribution to the current debate about replication and reproducibility in social psychology. She goes in search of the stories behind the research, in particular reassessing Sherif’s legacy through the recollections of study participants and research collaborators. The result is an enlightening read, and a ripping yarn.
All three studies featured a phase in which the two groups competed for scarce resources such as prized penknives. In other respects, their designs were quite different. In the 1949 and 1953 studies, the boys underwent a phase of making friends. They were then assigned to one of two distinct groups that cut across friendship lines. In the 1954 study, at Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma, there was no initial friendship phase. Moreover, competition was followed by a period in which the two groups could achieve a prized outcome (such as watching a movie) only if they cooperated (say, by pooling group funds). The studies were very much of their time: the scientists selected white, Protestant boys who were deemed psychologically ‘well adjusted’.
As Sherif and his colleagues reported in later texts — notably the 1966 book Group Conflict and Co-operation — their manipulations profoundly affected the boys’ behaviour. In particular, as predicted by ‘realistic conflict’ theory, competition generally led to ‘us–them’ group identities: well-mannered boys were turned into aggressive, prejudiced adversaries. Significantly, at Robbers Cave, this process was then reversed with the requirement to cooperate in the study’s final phase.
Sherif’s research is less well known than Milgram’s, or later classic studies by Solomon Asch on conformity and Philip Zimbardo on tyrannical power dynamics (B. Maher Nature 523, 408–409; 2015). But what has made Sherif’s legacy clearer and more enduring is the meticulous theoretical work that informed his studies’ design. Sherif was no blind experimentalist. Rather, his ambitious goal was to create an empirical landscape capable of capturing the richness of ‘big picture’ social relations.
In many ways, this concern was a reflection of his own tumultuous life. As Perry clearly documents, that had been marked by external conflicts and inner torture. Before and after the Second World War, Sherif had moved back and forth between his native Turkey and the United States in the face of threats posed by nationalism, Nazism and McCarthyism. At various points, these pressures placed his work — sometimes his life — under threat, and led him to win and lose many friends along the way.
The Lost Boys illuminates Sherif’s life and times, as well as Turkish history and how large field studies work. Sherif’s own accounts of the latter give a sense that support for his theoretical hypotheses followed reasonably seamlessly from the studies’ manipulations. In practice, it wasn’t quite like that, as Perry’s careful detective work reveals.
First, the boys responded in a range of ways to changing group relations and escalating conflict, and it is not always easy to weave these into a single account. Second, even when they were describing the same event, Sherif’s co-investigators often interpreted it differently. Third, it was impossible for the investigators not to shape the boys’ behaviour — not least because ‘doing nothing’ was itself laden with significance (as when researchers refused to censure intergroup aggression, and the tacit approval led to escalation). Fourth, sometimes things simply didn’t go to plan. This is seen most vividly in the 1953 study, which — to Sherif’s dismay — had to be abandoned because the boys, realizing the tensions were engineered, refused to buy into group conflict.
Perry does a magnificent job of documenting these nuances. She tracks down participants, many now retired, and shares their reactions on first discovering that they had taken part in a famous study. Most were intrigued and hungry for information; some were conflicted. Perry rightly worries about the ethics of her own psychological archaeology.
Nevertheless, her efforts to fill in the inevitable gaps in her sources are not always convincing. Sometimes she does rather too much ‘imagining’ to join the dots between experimenters’ actions and participants’ reactions. This is especially problematic in the context of her rather unforgiving commentary on similar shortcomings in accounts by Sherif and his team. Although she questions whether Sherif’s data collection was merely fleshing out a preconceived script, she herself is not immune to this charge.
A bigger problem is that Perry does not put the material she excavates to better use. Had she more thoroughly surveyed contemporary social psychological research on group conflict and collaboration, she would have found important clues that fit closely with the evidence she unearths, and pave the way for significant progress in the questions that Sherif posed.
For example, in his 1976 monograph Social Psychology and Intergroup Relations, Michael Billig observed that Sherif’s key theoretical failing was not factoring in the experimenters as the studies’ third group. Michael Platow and John Hunter have pointed out that Sherif himself recognized that the effects of group membership (such as in-group affinity) preceded competition, and so seem to be as dependent on internalized group identity as on the battle for scarce resources (in ways that Henri Tajfel and John Turner would later unpack in their social identity theory). More generally, Sherif failed to appreciate how the participants and researchers would follow his own lead (in particular, in his cultivation of shared identity). As research has since clarified, this is a blind spot in many classic social psychology studies — not least those of Milgram and Zimbardo.
In The Lost Boys, Perry opens the door to clearer theorizing about these crucial processes of identity and influence, but she fails to walk through it. In these terms, her book leaves the reader concerned not just for the boys’ lost voices, but for Sherif’s. He argued passionately and compellingly for theoretical progress in social psychology. Today, when a focus on empirical replicability often drowns out the equally important requirement for strong integrative theory, we need that voice as much as we did 70 years ago.
Lessons from Camp | Harvard Graduate School of Education
Summer camp: For so many kids, it signifies carefree days of swimming, playing sports, singing songs, and reveling in freedom from the demands of the school year. Camp means no homework, no studying, and no teachers.
But significant learning is still taking place at summer camp — even if the campers don’t necessarily realize it.
Summer Learning (Without the Books)
All those classic camp dynamics — being away from home and parents, making new friends, being part of a team, and trying new things — are building blocks to crucial social-emotional skills.
Social-emotional learning (SEL) can encompass a variety of practices, but most experts agree that a child with high SEL skills is successful in five core areas: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision making. These skills are increasingly understood to be central to success in school and in professional life beyond, but schools don’t always have the time or capacities to teach them explicitly. Obligations to complete curriculum and boost student achievement often make it difficult for teachers to prioritize community building, goal-setting, or problem solving in their classrooms.
Unconnected to the commitments of the school day, summer camps (particularly overnight camps) can dive head-first into social-emotional learning — and many do. These opportunities are especially importance for low-income students, many of whom already have fewer opportunities to gain these skills outside of school.
A 2005 study of 80 camps by the American Camp Association (ACA) found significant growth in children’s social-emotional skills after a session of summer camp. Camp staff, parents, and children reported increases in children’s self-esteem, independence, leadership, friendship skills, social comfort, and values and decision-making skills, from the beginning to the end of a session.
What a Good Camp Experience Looks Like
It’s not just the new environment and flexible schedule that builds kids’ social-emotional skills. Many camps have an intentional focus on social-emotional learning. YMCA camps, for instance, explicitly discuss their four values — honest, caring, respect, and responsibility — constantly, through songs, skits, and rallies. And most camps train staff to coach kids on becoming more independent, socially aware, and reflective.
In particular, camps foster relationship skills and social awareness by:
- Introducing children to an entirely new group of peers. Camp may be the first time children have spent substantial time with people whose background — home, race, or religion — is different from their own.
- Setting up opportunities for children to find their own friends. According to education researcher and longtime camp counselor and director Claire Gogolen, counselors often begin a session by leading icebreakers and regularly sorting a cabin group into different pairs. These activities give campers explicit opportunities to get to know each other, allowing them to figure out who they want to become better friends with.
- Creating a space where silliness is accepted, and bullying is not. Without the need to plunge into academic content, camps have time to use the beginning of a session to prioritize group norms, says learning specialist and former camp counselor and director Ari Fleisher. Counselors can make it very clear that bullying and teasing are not acceptable. At the same time, camps can encourage songs, jokes, and general silliness that allow campers to relax and be themselves.
- Taking a break from technology. Many overnight camps restrict or prohibit phones and computers. For many campers, this means it’s the first time they’ve made friends without the help of Instagram or Snapchat, and they learn how to navigate social cues to build and maintain friendships in “real life.”
- Modeling teamwork and sportsmanship. During staff training, many camps stress the importance of adults demonstrating cooperation and friendship to their campers. When campers are surrounded by positive role models — particularly role models closer to their own age than teachers are — they learn how to get along with peers who may be different from them.
Camps also nurture self-awareness, self-management, and responsible decision making by:
- Requiring children to solve day-to-day problems on their own. With limited contact with parents, campers have to learn how to manage their own conflicts, whether it’s a disagreement with a bunkmate or not getting their first-choice activity.
- Presenting activities that are new to everyone. Counselors often purposefully lead games and activities that none of their campers have tried before, says afterschool specialist and former camp counselor Nicky DeCesare. Without the fear that some peers will already have a leg-up on lava tag or basket making, children may be more likely to decide to try new things.
- Offering kids the chance to set and accomplish daily goals. The sheer amount of new activities makes it possible for kids to continually set and achieve goals, deepening their understanding of personal limits. One day a camper may be set on reaching the top of the climbing wall, and the next she may be determined to collaborate with her group to create a new song.
- Helping children uncover new skills. Kids who are usually immersed in academics may become aware of new skills that they didn’t know they had. For children who struggle in school, these opportunities can increase self-confidence.
- Providing time for reflection. Many camps begin or end the day with reflection activities, in which campers can think about the challenges they’ve faced, how they’ve grown, and what they’re excited for. These moments, rare in a typical school day, can develop self-awareness and mindfulness for all kids.
How Do Summer Programs Influence Outcomes for Children and Youth? – Shaping Summertime Experiences
Allen LR, Cox J, Cooper NL. The impact of a summer day camp on the resiliency of disadvantaged youths. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2006;77(1):17–23.
Allington RL, McGill-Franzen A, Camilli G, Williams L, Graff J, Zeig J, Zmach C, Nowak R. Addressing summer reading setback among economically disadvantaged elementary students. Reading Psychology. 2010;31(5):411–427.
American Camp Association. 2017 Sites, Facilities, & Programs Study Report: Overnight Camps. Martinsville, IN: 2017.
Augustine CH, McCombs JS, Pane JF, Schwartz HL, Schweig J, McEachin A, Siler-Evans K. Learning from Summer: Effects of Voluntary Summer Learning Programs on Low-Income Urban Youth. RAND Corporation; 2016.
Bakle B. Summer Learning Loss: The Influence of Summer School Programs on Student Achievement in Language Usage, Math, and Reading. Dissertation, Indiana State University. University Microfilms International (UMI) No 3404432; 2010.
Betts JR, Zau AC, King K. From Blueprint to Reality: San Diego’s Education Reforms. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California; 2005.
Borman GD, Benson J, Overman LT. Families, schools, and summer learning. The Elementary School Journal. 2005;106(2):131–150.
Borman GD, Goetz ME, Dowling NM. Halting the summer achievement slide: A randomized field trial of the KindergARTen summer camp. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk. 2009;14(2):133–147.
Borman GD, Dowling NM. Longitudinal achievement effects of multiyear summer school: Evidence from the Teach Baltimore randomized field trial. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2006;28(1):25–48.
Bowens BD, Warren SR. Toward social justice: The characteristics of an effective mathematics intervention program for urban middle school students. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research. 2016;12:35–46.
Burgin JS, Hughes GD. Measuring the effectiveness of a summer literacy program for elementary students using writing samples. Research in the Schools. 2008;15(2):55.
Chaplin D, Capizzano J. Online Submission. 2006. Impacts of a Summer Learning Program: A Random Assignment Study of Building Educated Leaders for Life (BELL).
Cleary TT. Providing Phonemic Awareness Instruction to Pre-First Graders: An Extended-Year Kindergarten Program. Dissertation, University of Rhode Island. University Microfilms International (UMI) No 3039075; 2002.
Collado S, Staats H, Corraliza JA. Experiencing nature in children’s summer camps: Affective, cognitive and behavioural consequences. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2013;33:37–44.
Coronado AA. The Effects of a Summer Performing Arts Program on At-Risk Adolescents. Dissertation, University of Southern California. University Microfilms International (UMI) No 9955025; 2000.
Davies S, Aurini J, Milne E. Summer learning: Classic, new and future research. Chapter for Section IV, Case Studies of Extended Education. In: Hoon Bae S, Mahoney JL, Maschke S, Stecher L, editors. International Developments in Research on Extended Education: Perspectives on Extracurricular Activities, After-School Programs, and All-Day Schools. Opladen, Berlin, and Toronto: Barbara Budrich; forthcoming.
Dynarski M, Moore M, Mullens J, Gleason P, James-Burdumy S, Rosenberg L, Masnfield W, Heaviside S, Levy D, Pistorino C, Silva T. When Schools Stay Open Late: The National Evaluation of the 21st-Century Community Learning Centers Program. First Year Findings. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; 2003.
Dynarski M, James-Burdumy S, Moore M, Rosenberg L, Deke J, Mansfield W. When Schools Stay Open Late: The National Evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program—New Findings. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; 2004.
Dynia JM, Piasta SB, Justice LM. Columbus Metropolitan Library. Impact of library-based summer reading clubs on primary-grade children’s literacy activities and achievement. The Library Quarterly. 2015;85(4):386–405.
Edmonds E, O’Donoghue C, Spano S, Algozzine RF. Learning when school is out. The Journal of Educational Research. 2009;102(3):213–222.
Foley-Nicpon M, Assouline SG, Kivlighan DM, Fosenburg S, Cederberg C, Nanji M. The effects of a social and talent development intervention for high ability youth with social skill difficulties. High Ability Studies. 2017;28(1):73–92.
Garst BA, Ozier LW. Enhancing youth outcomes and organizational practices through a camp-based reading program. Journal of Experiential Education. 2015;38(4):324–338.
Gillard A, Watts CE. Program features and developmental experiences at a camp for youth with cancer. Children and Youth Services Review. 2013;35(5):890–898.
Gottfredson D, Cross AB, Wilson D, Rorie M, Connell N. Effects of participation in after-school programs for middle school students: A randomized trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2010;3(3):282–313.
Grenwelge C, Zhang D. The effects of the Texas Youth Leadership Forum summer training on the self-advocacy abilities of high school students with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies. 2012;24(3):158–169.
Hektner JM, Brennan AL, August GJ. Incorporating well-adjusted peers in a conduct problems prevention program: Evaluation of acceptability, fidelity, and safety of implementation. School Mental Health. 2017;9(1):66–77.
Heller SB. Experimental Evidence on Improving the Human Capital of Disadvantaged Youth. Dissertation, The University of Chicago. University Microfilms International (UMI) No 3568385; 2013.
Heppen JB, Sorensen N, Allensworth E, Walters K, Rickles J, Taylor SS, Michelman V. The struggle to pass algebra: Online vs. face-to-face credit recovery for at-risk urban students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2017;10(2):272–296.
James-Burdumy S, Dynarski M, Moore M, Deke J, Mansfield W, Pistorino C, Warner E. When Schools Stay Open Late: The National Evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program. Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; 2005.
Johnson A. Causal Impact of Summer Credit Recovery on High School English Language Learner Outcomes. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Education Policy Analysis; 2017.
Kim JS. Effects of a voluntary summer reading intervention on reading achievement: Results from a randomized field trial. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2006;28(4):335–355.
Kim JS. The effects of a voluntary summer reading intervention on reading activities and reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2007;99(3):505.
Kim JS, White TG. Scaffolding voluntary summer reading for children in grades 3 to 5: An experimental study. Scientific Studies of Reading. 2008;12(1):1–23.
Kim JS, Guryan J, White TG, Quinn DM, Capotosto L, Kingston HC. Delayed effects of a low-cost and large-scale summer reading intervention on elementary school children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2016;9(supp. 1):1–22.
Leos-Urbel J, Schwartz AE, Weinstein M, Weitzman B. More Than a Paycheck? The Impact of Summer Youth Employment on Students’ Educational Engagement and Success. New York: New York University, Institute for Education and Social Policy; 2003. (Policy Brief no. 02-12).
Lipsey MW, Puzio K, Yun C, Hebert MA, Steinka-Fry K, Cole MW, Roberts M, Anthony KS, Busick MD. Translating the Statistical Representation of the Effects of Education Interventions into More Readily Interpretable Forms. Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education; 2012. (NCSER 2013-3000).
Luftig RL. When a little bit means a lot: The effects of a short-term reading program on economically disadvantaged elementary schoolers. Literacy Research and Instruction. 2003;42(4):1–13.
Mac Iver MA, Mac Iver DJ. The Baltimore City Schools Middle School STEM Summer Program with VEX Robotics. Baltimore Education Research Consortium; 2015.
Mariano LT, Martorell P. The academic effects of summer instruction and retention in New York City. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2013;35(1):96–117.
Matsudaira JD. Mandatory summer school and student achievement. Journal of Econometrics. 2008;142(2):829–850.
McCombs JS, Kirby SN, Mariano LT, editors. Ending Social Promotion Without Leaving Children Behind: The Case of New York City. RAND Corporation; 2009.
McCombs JS, Augustine C, Unlu F, Ziol-Guest K, Naftel S, Gomez,Marsh CT, Akinniranye G, Todd I. Investing in Successful Summer Programs: A Review of Evidence Under the Every Student Succeeds Act. RAND Corporation; 2019.
Melosh GM. Summer Books!—Stemming Reading Loss in High-Poverty Second Graders Through Access to Appropriate Books During the Summer Vacation Break. Dissertation, University of Florida; 2003.
Michalski JH, Mishna F, Worthington C, Cummings R. A multi-method impact evaluation of a therapeutic summer camp program. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal. 2003;20(1):53–76.
Nelson BW. A Summative Evaluation of a Middle School Summer Math Program. Dissertation, Walden University. University Microfilms International (UMI) No 3614119; 2014.
Povilaitis V, Tamminen KA. Delivering positive youth development at a residential summer sport camp. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2018;33(4):470–495.
Pulizzi S. Paper Commissioned by the Committee on Summertime Experiences, and Child and Adolescent Education, Health and Safety. Washington, DC: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; 2019.
Schacter J, Jo B. Learning when school is not in session: A reading summer day-camp intervention to improve the achievement of exiting First-Grade students who are economically disadvantaged. Journal of Research in Reading. 2005;28(2):158–169.
Schwartz AE, Leos-Urbel J, Silander M, Wiswall M. Making Summer Matter: The Impact of Youth Employment on Academic Performance. New York: New York University, Institute for Education and Social Policy; (Working Paper 03-14).
Simpkins SD, Riggs NR, Ngo B, Vest Ettekal A, Okamoto D. Designing culturally responsive organized after-school activities. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2017;32(1):11–36.
Stein ML. Supporting the summer reading of urban youth: An evaluation of the Baltimore SummerREADS Program. Education and Urban Society. 2017;49(1):29–52.
Stevens BE. Just Do It: The Impact of a Summer School Self-Advocacy Program on Depression, Self-Esteem, and Attributional Style in Learning Disabled Adolescents. The Claremont Graduate University; 2005.
Stewart KL. Closing the Summer Learning Gap in the Content Area of Mathematics. Dissertation, Grand Canyon University. ProQuest LLC, ProQuest No 10275169; 2017.
Story IN. Pre-Kindergarten Summer School: An Intervention for Kindergarten Readiness. Dissertation, University of Wyoming. University Microfilms International (UMI) No 3320743; 2008.
Zvoch K, Stevens JJ. Summer school and summer learning: An examination of the short- and longer-term changes in student literacy. Early Education & Development. 2011;22(4):649–675.
Zvoch K, Stevens JJ. Summer school effects in a randomized field trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2013;28(1):24–32.
Academic Camps Near Me – Winter, Spring, Summer
Academic Camps Happening at Sylvan
If you’re looking for ways to keep your child engaged in learning, you’ve got to check out Sylvan’s academic camps! They’re a great way to keep your child’s mental muscles strong and fit, but just as important, they’re really fun.
Our camps blend the latest teaching methods, engaging activities and games, and a fun rewards system to inspire your child in learning. From math camps to reading, from writing to test prep, your child will step into the classroom more confident and excited about the next school year.
We’ve got a variety of camp options for your family
- Academic camps to strengthen your child’s skills and confidence in kindergarten readiness, reading, writing, math or algebra
- Study skills camps to help your child develop the time management and organization skills needed to manage bigger workloads and expectations
- College readiness camps that help teens prep for the ACT® or SAT®, write college application essays and be prepared for the rigorous coursework to come
What to expect from Sylvan academic camps
With many camps and activities closing this summer, our academic camps are a great option. And don’t worry – kids LOVE Sylvan, including our virtual programs! Our teachers are expert at engaging kids and bringing out their best. Nothing can replace that teacher connection and your child will get it with face-to-face instruction with our certified teachers, whether in-person or online.
- Camps are offered winter, spring and summer breaks. (Perfect for keeping your child engaged in learning throughout the year.)
- Our camps not only engage the mind, but are designed to be fun and interactive. Kids just love them!
- Our online camps have small group sizes and offer fun, collaborative activities that allow for great camaraderie and socialization opportunities with like-minded kids. Convenient scheduling that works well with your family’s busy schedule.
Where we have academic camps
Sylvan academic camps are available in our centers nationwide! Contact your local center to find out what’s available in your area.
The Learning & Educational Benefits of Summer Camp
Camp director’s viewpoint
Summer camp is a place of active learning that occurs on many levels, explains academic and camp owner Stephen Fine. His 2005 PhD thesis examined residential summer camp as a unique learning environment.
“Camps are a special place to learn. Kids who find it difficult to learn in another setting will often succeed at camp,” Fine says. “Camp directors will tell you that kids with attention deficit disorders do very well in a camp setting. This is anecdotal, but the sentiments are quite common.”
From his research, Fine found that learning at camp occurs in three areas—personal, social and physical—with strong carryover into school studies.
“At camp, children learn they have the capability to do things on their own,” Fine says. Kids at residential camp are responsible for their own space and know that others depend on them to carry out certain duties. “This type of experience starts to change a child’s whole self-concept and their sense of who they are and what they can do.”
Whereas schools applaud good marks, camp acknowledges and rewards a broader range of accomplishments
Whereas schools applaud good marks, camp acknowledges and rewards a broader range of accomplishments, Fine says. “It creates an environment where every child can feel valued for their contribution. Camp is very fulfilling on a personal level.”
Personal growth also comes through being separated from parents and the security of home, Fine adds. “It’s important for kids to be away from their parents and family. It allows them to understand that they can stand on their own two feet.”
“Children meet people at camp they may not come into contact with in their everyday lives. It breaks down barriers that kids often put up between each other. The school cliques don’t operate at camp,” Fine says.
Campers come together from different parts of the city, the province, the country or even the world to be part of a supportive community. “At camp you work as a team. It builds social capital. It teaches you how to be a good citizen. Camp teaches you how to be successful in life.”
Social bonds between campers are often deep and lasting. “Lifelong friendships are made at camp. Supportive networks are created that continue throughout life for some,” Fine says. “Very strong and lasting lessons about how to be a contributing member of a community are made at camp. You can interview people 20 years after they have gone to camp and they will tell you about their experience at camp with great clarity.”
Kids quickly become aware of their physical prowess and their ability to challenge themselves in various ways, Fine says. “Children become strong very quickly. They are moving all day at camp. They are active from the moment they get out of bed.”
Whatever physical activity campers are participating in—swimming, horseback riding, rock climbing or hiking—developing strength and setting and accomplishing physical challenges builds a great deal of confidence, Fine says. “This self-confidence transfers to other areas of a child’s life.”
Fine, who is also chair of education and research for the Ontario Camping Association and owner of Hollows Camp in Ontario, strongly believes campers can transfer what they’ve learned at camp to many other settings now and later. As he sees it, camp offers boundless chances to learn. “Camps can create many curriculum-related learning opportunities, whether it’s earth science, music, theatre, physics, art or math,” Fine says. “The camp classroom is effective because it is situated learning. What they are learning becomes real for kids and they never forget it.”
“Camp has been one of the most significant experiences of my children’s lives,” says Linda Cameron, associate professor in the Curriculum, Teaching and Learning department at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Summer camp shaped the lives of her now-adult children and she sees its powerful potential to affect, in a positive way, the lives of many children.
“Camp provides opportunities for children to adapt and grow social and emotionally. They can learn in a safe and caring environment how to cope with separation and operate successfully without depending on their parents,” Cameron says.
Camp was an important microcosm that helped her children learn to be well grounded in the real world. One camp her kids attended included children with special needs. “They learned to live with children who had disabilities and to see everyone as contributing members of the community,” Cameron says. “They learned life skills. They learned to negotiate, compromise and co-exist within a group. Kids can be self-centred. At camp they are taught to be group-centred.”
As an educator, Cameron says she has become increasingly concerned about over-protected and ‘pushed kids.’
As an educator, Cameron says she has become increasingly concerned about over-protected and “pushed kids.” As she sees it, children are either overly coddled, with few chances to independently or spontaneously explore their world, or their lives are overly structured and they are rushed from one activity to the next. Children need the chance to interact spontaneously with their peers, so that they can develop socially and creatively and learn to problem-solve, she says.
Cameron is also concerned that urban kids are far too detached from the wonders of nature. “Children need nature for their health and the development of their senses. Kids today are not developing their senses and therefore their perception of sights and sounds and smells.” Residential camp is one way to alleviate this “nature deficit.”
At camp, children can discover for themselves the world around them. “Camp can open children’s eyes and give them different experiences beyond their day-to-day lives,” she says. “It can help them ask new questions and develop wonderful ideas.”
Summer camp is the perfect antidote to the “bubble-wrapped kid” says Troy Glover, associate professor in the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies at the University of Waterloo. Michael Ungar, author of Too Safe for Their Own Good, coined the phrase bubble-wrapped kid to describe urban children who are overprotected by their parents, to the detriment of them learning to become independent and responsible individuals.
“Summer camp removes the bubble wrap from children,” says Glover, who is involved in the first year of a national five-year Canadian study on the benefits of summer camp. Camp provides a safe and nurturing environment, but at the same time it is structured to allow children to challenge and test themselves. This fosters self-confidence and independence, he says.
Glover sees camp as an effective teaching environment because learning is enjoyable there.
Glover sees camp as an effective teaching environment because learning is enjoyable there. “When people look at camp, they see fun. But that is not what camp’s about. What’s really important, and the value of the experience, is what children learn. Sure camp is fun. But why do we dismiss the value of the experience because it’s fun?”
Campers learn not only about themselves, but also about relating and interacting successfully with their peers. They become self-reliant and, at the same time, learn to work as part of a team, whether it is sharing cabin clean-up or supporting one another on a high-ropes course. “Summer camp is a self-contained community where you have to work together with others to achieve anything,” Glover notes.
He argues that children learn some of life’s most important lessons at camp. “Parents spend a lot of time these days trying to enhance their children’s academic credentials. Yet, it is good social skills that allow children to grow up to be successful adults.”
“Many parents mistakenly don’t value the soft skills enough,” Glover says. “If you look at developmental psychology, these sorts of soft skills are what make the difference to children in the long term.” As part of the camp study, Glover will involve interview parents of current campers as well as past campers who are now adults. “We’ll be looking at the short- and the longer-term impact of camp. Adult camp alumni will be interviewed about how camp influenced where they are now.”
From a practical standpoint, Glover says camp should also be seen as a health benefit to a society concerned about childhood obesity. “The best way to encourage activity in children is to send them outdoors. At summer camp, children are almost always outside and in motion.”
Glover also favours summer camps for kids who have trouble fitting in with their peers elsewhere. “Kids who don’t necessarily excel in some areas have a chance to find something they can do well at camp. Many camps offer a lot of alternative physical and sporting activities. Camps are also a place where children are celebrated and find the freedom and confidence to be their true selves,” Glover says.
“Emotional Intelligence and Summer Camp” by Stephen Fine.
The Canadian Summer Camp Research Project. University of Waterloo.
“What is Nature Deficit Disorder?” Richard Louv.
90,000 Professional activities of a teacher and counselor in a summer health camp (72 hours)
Advanced training under the program “Professional activities of a counselor in a summer health camp” (72 hours) provides an opportunity to master additional competencies necessary for the implementation of professional pedagogical activities of a counselor in a summer health camp and obtain a certificate of the established form.
The program was developed in accordance with Federal Law No. 273 of 29.12.2012 “On education in the Russian Federation” in the current edition.
The content of the program provides for the study of the professional and competent organization of the counselor’s work, contains recommendations for optimizing the safe stay of children in summer health camps, familiarization with the methods of organizing cultural and developmental leisure and social work with children; the foundations of the activities of children’s and youth organizations and movements; consideration of socio-psychological problems of work in a socio-cultural environment, the program offers methods for studying the personality of the pupil, the basics of communication; the psychology of children’s creativity is widely represented in the program.
Category of listeners: teacher of additional education, counselor, teacher-organizer, teacher, educator.
Issued document: certificate of the established form.
Form of final certification: final testing.
Tags: teacher, counselor, educator, advanced training courses, health camp, professional activity, planning, methods, leisure, education.
- Section 1. Strategy for the development of education in the Russian Federation for the period until 2025. The concept of spiritual and moral development and education of the personality of a citizen of Russia
- Lesson 1. Modern approaches to the organization of extracurricular activities of schoolchildren in the context of the Strategy for the development of education in the Russian Federation until 2025.
- Lesson 2. Implementation of the main provisions of the Concept of spiritual and moral development and education of the personality of a citizen of Russia in an educational institution.
- Lesson 3. Strategy for the development of education in the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025. The concept of spiritual and moral development and education of the personality of a citizen of Russia.
- Lesson 4. Planning and organization of the educational process in accordance with the “Strategy for the development of education in the Russian Federation for the period until 2025”.
- Section 2. Regulatory documents regulating the activities of the counselor in the summer health camp
- Lesson 1.Legal documents regulating the activities of the counselor in the summer health camp: planning, work program and job descriptions.
- Lesson 2. Regulatory framework for the summer recreation camp: ensuring safety.
- Lesson 3. Normative legal documents governing the activities of a senior counselor in an educational organization.
- Lesson 4. Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of additional education for children.
- Lesson 5. Legal status and legal responsibility of teaching staff.
- Section 3. Activities of a counselor in a summer health camp
- Lesson 1. Weekdays and holidays in a children’s health camp: guidelines for organizers of summer vacations for children and adolescents.
- Lesson 2. What to do with children in a summer health camp, or One hundred detachment cases.
- Lesson 3. Interactive technologies for modeling the profile shift of a children’s camp.
- Lesson 4. Organization of the activities of a senior counselor in an educational organization.
- Section 4. Building a program of educational work for the review-competition of school and country camps in various nominations
- Lesson 1. Review-competition of school and country camps in various nominations: preparation and implementation of the educational program.
- Lesson 2. Building a program of educational work for the review-competition of school and country camps in various nominations.
- Lesson 3. Designing additional general developmental programs for implementation in the school’s health camp.
- Section 5. The practice of educational and health-improving work of an educational organization in the summer
- Lesson 1. Planning a summer health-improving period in the context of the implementation of the Federal State Educational Standard.
- Lesson 2. Summer vacation! The practice of educational and recreational work of an educational organization in the summer.
- Section 6. Independent work of students
- Lesson 1. Children’s self-government and children’s public organization in the NGO.
- Lesson 2. The role of children’s self-government and children’s public organization in the educational system of NGOs.
- Lesson 3. The mechanisms of activity of a senior counselor in an educational organization.
- Lesson 4. Criteria for the quality and effectiveness of the work of the senior counselor.
- Lesson 5.Characteristics of the activities of the senior counselor in the educational organization.
Why Attend UCA Summer Camp?
Why attend UCA Summer Camp?
This summer, the University of Central Asia (UCA) will reopen its doors to tenth graders from schools in Tajikistan, the Kyrgyz Republic and Kazakhstan. UCA’s Second Summer Camp will take place on the shores of Lake Issyk-Kul (Kyrgyzstan) from July 20 to August 9 at the Royal Beach Hotel.
UCA’s vibrant summer camp program, its emphasis on Applied Learning, and an active outreach program provide participants with a multi-faceted experience, curiosity and personal development. Last year, 76 schoolchildren were selected out of 850 applicants.
What has UCA Summer Camp to offer?
In the camp, participants will be able to develop those skills that will be in demand while continuing their studies.Schoolchildren will be able to improve their skills in English and mathematics, immerse themselves in an English-speaking environment and take an international exam at the end of the summer camp.
Due to the fact that there are only four students per camp employee, the camp provides an individual approach and a small format of study groups. Whether they are proficient in English or math, UCA professionals can help every child by assigning additional assignments to those who are stronger and giving extra time to those who are lagging behind.The English-speaking environment will be ensured by the fact that the camp staff will be native speakers and qualified specialists in teaching English as a foreign language.
The camp setting is truly participant-centered. In addition to the three weeks of preparation for entering universities within the framework of the summer camp, schoolchildren will receive advice on choosing a direction of study and profession. With the help of interactive exercises that help navigate the admission process and choose the most suitable university and direction of study, applicants will be able to start building their future careers.
And at the same time, the participants will have a lot of opportunities to have fun. Schoolchildren from different countries will be accommodated in the cottages – this will allow schoolchildren to unite and build friendships and connections both with each other and with the camp staff. Excursions to cultural sites, debate evenings, sporting events, science and practice and math competitions, art projects and much more will allow students to learn from each other and immerse themselves in the atmosphere of the university campus.
UCA Summer Camp helps students to become more competitive with other applicants. After 42 hours of English, 24 hours of mathematics and immersion in an English-speaking environment, campers will not only be familiar with the university entrance process, but will also be ready to establish contacts and communicate with their peers.
Selection for UCA Summer Camp is competitive. The actual cost of the summer camp is $ 1,300.USA per participant. Each selected participant is awarded an educational grant of US $ 1000, i.e. the member only needs to pay $ 300 and additional benefits are offered for members from families who can justify their financial needs.
UCA Summer Camp selection is based on a small test of English comprehension, math and logic skills. Hurry up to register before May 17 and receive an exclusive gift after testing is completed.Testing will take place in three republics on May 21-22, 2016 http://bit.ly/UCAcamp16. Schoolchildren should have a copy of the student’s passport / ID and birth certificate with them.
90,000 Dancing and English at Exsportise Summer Camp
StudyLab interviewed Exsportise summer camp participant, Christina
Christina, did you go to the dance program without experience?
No, I studied ballet as a child and just before going to Exportise – tectonics, so I have a very good level of dance.
What kind of dance was studied in England?
We studied a lot of different dances there – Michael Jackson, r & b, hip-hop and so on. It was very cool – the teachers were all cool: modern, cheerful and active, even those who had never been able to dance before began to dance with them.
That is, everyone studied mixed together?
Yes, we had a very different number of people in our group all the time – from two to twelve.Someone came, someone left, everyone has a different level of dance, but we were not divided into groups – we all danced together. As a result, those who could not, simply had to “catch up”.
What new things have you learned in Exsportise?
Michael Jackson’s dance, now I can dance like him.
Besides dancing, you studied English. How did you manage to combine what schedule did you study on?
In the morning we had dancing lessons (from ten to one), then from 13.00 to 14.00 lunch, and from two to six – English lessons. I really liked this schedule – if the person did not get enough sleep, he could sleep during lunch.
What can you say about your studies? How did your English lessons go?
We were taught grammar and spoken English approximately equally. There were no homework assignments, we did everything together in the classroom: for example, we discussed films, then we made role-plays based on them, wrote essays and essays, sometimes in the classroom we interviewed each other in English or with children from other groups.I really liked the team games in English and the fact that during the lessons we could discuss with the teacher anything we wanted, all kinds of topics we wanted.
Did you progress in English while studying at Exportise?
Yes, although I had good English initially: according to the results of the entrance test, I was immediately assigned to the top-level group. And then, when I arrived in Russia, I immediately moved to the senior English group at a local school.
What happened after the lessons? How did you spend your leisure time?
Without a teacher or supervisor, we could not go to the city on our own – the school grounds were closed, and we lived in a hostel there. But all the same, we had a lot of fun. After classes we had different “activities” – under the supervision of adults we were taken to casinos, cinemas, bowling, karaoke. Sometimes they organized various sporting events such as “fun starts”. It happened that on the school grounds, teachers threw a party and showed costume shows – they changed into famous critics, then men – women, women – men.On our only day off we were taken to shopping. In general, there was no time to get bored!
Enforex Marbella Las Chapas – summer camp in Spain for children 14-17 years old
For almost 20 years, Enforex has been offering summer programs for children and teenagers to study Spanish throughout the country. These programs enable young people from all over the world to find Spanish friends their age (60% of Spanish students), learn the Spanish way of life and experience the diversity of the world’s cultures.
Marbella is a fashionable resort on the southern coast of Spain, Costa del Sol.
At the same time, 220 students can study at the Enforex Marbella Las Chapas summer camp. Summer Camp “Enforex” Alboran covers an area of 38,000 sq. M. surrounded by pine forest and located 15 minutes walk from the beach.
Area: summer camp Enforex Marbella Las Chapas is held on the campus of the prestigious Marbella school – Colegio Alboran, on the territory of a beautiful estate. The school has a student residence and staff rooms, classrooms and auditoriums.The sports facilities at the Enforex Las Chapas summer camp in Marbella are multi-purpose sports grounds, two football fields (natural and artificial), playgrounds for handball, basketball and volleyball, a large swimming pool, and stables. It also has its own farm.
Teachers : have experience working with international students and qualify as Spanish as a Foreign Language.
Included in the program
Summer camp training Enforex Marbella Las Chapas: 20 lessons of Spanish or English per week.
Students per class: maximum 14
Language proficiency level: beginner to proficiency
Note: Day camp Monday through Friday from 9:15 am to 7:30 pm.
With the duration of the program not less than 2 weeks, at the Enforex school additional sports or creativity are available for a separate fee :
- tennis – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- table tennis – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- horse riding – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- football – 16 lessons in 2 weeks;
- golf – 18 lessons in 2 weeks;
- swimming – 8 lessons in 2 weeks;
- yoga – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- creative program Creativity – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- program for lovers of technology Robotics – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- theater skills – 12 lessons in 2 weeks;
- dancing – 12 lessons in 2 weeks.
Accommodation at the Summer School “Enforex” – Alboran Marbella: in the residence – students live in rooms for 20 people, with a toilet and shower for common use.
Meals: Enforex Summer School – Alboran Marbella offers full board meals – breakfast, lunch and dinner. Additional meals are offered on excursions.
Excursions: 2 excursions per week – one full day and one half day. Students go on excursions to the caves of Nerja, Seville, on sightseeing tours of Marbella and Granada.
Sports and entertainment at the Enforex Summer School – Alboran Marbella : tennis, squash, swimming, horse riding. After classes – going to the cinema, parties, discos, “pioneer” bonfires on the territory of the “Enforex” – Alboran camp, local excursions.
Certificate of completion of the Spanish course at the “Enforex” Summer Camp – Alboran Marbella. 90 017 90 000 Feedback from parents about summer camp
We express our gratitude to TSPT Start-PRO for a superbly organized summer camp.The child really enjoyed working in a carpentry workshop, interesting classes in electronics, metalworking, in a multicultural studio, in entertaining astronomy and drawing. Thanks to your talented teachers!
Parents of the 4th group.
Mother of Fyodor Kuptsov (9 years old), group 3
We would like to express our deep gratitude for the Start-PRO summer camp! To say that a child is delighted is to say nothing. And we ourselves did not expect that it would be SO great there.Children run there and if they are forced to miss a day, then this is a tragedy. When we pick them up, then all the way they excitedly describe the past day to us. And often they cannot formulate what exactly they liked the most – because they liked everything! He has not acquired such a wide variety of knowledge, skills and abilities in his entire life. Now it will be easier for both them and us as parents to determine the line and direction in which to move on. And help to realize the child’s potential to the maximum. For example, it was after the camp lessons in robotics that Fedor wanted to seriously continue to study this area and even begged for a designer like in class.And at home he completely assembled the robot himself and programs it for various tasks.
I really like carpentry, electronics and physics classes. And cartoons that they themselves make on a computer and post on YouTube! And then they proudly show us and their non-camp friends.
Even now, my son is not crying that there is no second shift – so he does not want to part with Start-PRO. In the fall, he will definitely continue his studies there in the course of chemistry, robotics, programming and maybe something else!
And yet – children now ask to come here instead of school)
They say that after these lessons at school they will be bored and not interested (What to do …
Alina (mother of children from groups 5 and 6)
Summer children’s camp “Start-PRO” – is it endless smiles and … tears? There are tears too, but only when you take them from there 😉
I really wanted to post a post with words of gratitude to “Start-PRO”.My boys are delighted that they were honored to get into the educational session, they really discovered a lot of new things for themselves, found friends and … now they are looking forward to new projects! Thank you “Start-PRO” many, many times!
90,000 Children’s language camps in Ireland, teaching English
Ireland, or as it is also called “the emerald island”, is a mysterious country with its own flavor and charm. Ireland has long gained success and popularity among Europeans, but for Russian-speaking travelers and students, this destination has not yet gained popularity and mass character in comparison with Ireland’s neighbor – Great Britain.Although it is worth noting that language camps and children’s summer and winter vacations have been held here in the same way as in England, for over 30 years.
In addition to pure English, which is the state language of the country, Ireland has something to surprise – starting from the picturesque shores of the Atlantic with green cliffs, the majesty and stateliness of Glendalough, medieval castles, an abundance of ancient cities with incomparable architecture, but the main thing that attracts and does not go away from memory – this is the nature of Ireland.And of course, one cannot fail to mention the warmth and hospitality of the Irish, making this country an ideal destination for a homestay learning experience.
The most popular cities where you can learn English are Dublin, Bray, Kilkenny, Waterford. But Dublin, as the capital, breaks all records for the number of educational institutions. Most of the children’s summer programs are held precisely at the prestigious Irish universities in Dublin.
Almost all children’s language camps are round-the-clock and operate on an “all-inclusive” basis, that is, they offer the maximum package of services for an effective pastime. The standard program always includes an English course of at least 20 lessons per week, accommodation in a residence or a host family, full and varied meals, study materials, a rich excursion and cultural and educational program.
In addition to studying English, it is possible to choose an additional load from such disciplines as:
90 020 90 021 professional football;
The above programs can be offered by the Emerald Cultural Institute network of language camps. Similar sports programs are offered by the Mackdonald Language Academy.
Ireland opens its doors to summer programs for children and adolescents from 11 to 17 years old from the end of June to the end of August. Check-in dates vary for each training center. In addition to the summer period, it is possible to organize a study trip for the autumn, winter and spring holidays.Usually, the stay program is 2 weeks or more. Due to the huge number of excursion sites and attractions, even a long stay in Ireland will not make your child bored.
Features of studying in Ireland
It is important to note that far fewer Russian-speaking students come to Ireland than to the UK, so if you are looking for a destination with a minimum percentage of Russian children and maximum practice of the language in an international environment, Ireland is an ideal choice.
Another distinctive feature of this area is the low flow of migrants and a high percentage of the indigenous population, which allows us to speak of a high standard of living, pure English and undoubted safety while staying on a vacation program. When choosing accommodation with a host family, it is almost certain that the child will end up in a family with children and will be able to communicate with peers, because the Irish highly respect family values, love children and do not stop at one child.Also, an important fact is that in Dublin they try to settle children at a minimum distance from the school, and in smaller cities like Kilkenny, children are guaranteed to live next to the educational center.
Studying in Ireland is a unique opportunity to get the level and quality of English education at attractive prices. For example, a comprehensive program with homestay, intensive course, activities, meals and transfers at MLM Kilkenny will cost 1359 euros for 2 weeks, or 1910 euros when accommodated in a comfortable residence with single rooms and a private bathroom on the Emerald – Marino Institute program.
90,000 Young firefighters undergo training at a summer camp in the Suntarsky ulus of Yakutia
“School Bazaar” opened on Komsomolskaya Square
Little princesses “Beauty of the North-2015” were chosen in Yakutsk
Fire fighters of the Detachment of the State Fire Service No. 31 and inspectors for small boats of the Suntarsky section of the GIMS Center teach pupils of grades 8-10 of educational institutions, as well as members of young firefighters squads in the children’s sports and recreation camp “Rescuer” from July 24 to August 13 in the village of Kyukiai Suntarsky district.
According to the press service of the Main Directorate of EMERCOM of Russia for the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), the camp is held as part of the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the EMERCOM of Russia, the organizer of the event is the State Fire Service of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia).
Classes on fire safety rules, fire-tactical classes, lessons on safety at water bodies are held daily with the children. The children received a lot of positive emotions and, at the same time, practical skills in fire-fighting and rescue work during the “Young Firefighter” and “Funny Starts” relay races, the children could show their creativity during the competition of wall newspapers on fire-fighting topics.
In addition, inmates of the Rescuer camp have the opportunity to study real fire engines, train in putting on firefighter’s uniform, in extinguishing fires with the help of fire hoses and fire extinguishers.
According to the head of the Suntarsk fire and rescue garrison Artem Yakovlev , over the past two weeks the camp participants have really matured, made friends, felt the responsibility that rescuers and firefighters bear.
“The guys really like it here, our employees hear so many positive responses about their work. Almost all the pupils of the Rescuer camp want to choose the profession of a firefighter or a rescuer of the Ministry of Emergencies in the near future ”, – noted Artem Yakovlev.