Introduction & Policy Context

Many practitioners and educators in Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) provide opportunities for learning in outdoor environments. The links are being made between the theoretical and practice traditions of ‘outdoor education’ (OE), ‘outdoor learning, (OL), ‘out-of-school learning’ (OSL), and LoTC (Learning outside the Classroom LoTC) (see Dyment and Potter 2015, Hill et al 2021). Some particular forms of science education, geography fieldwork and play in early years are in some countries seen as more directly relevant to ESE. However, outdoor provision can also include subjects such as mathematics, art, literacy and history with potential links to ESE as a cross-curricular form. As the terms ‘outdoor learning’ and ‘outdoor play’ gain in use internationally, we need surveys of provision to understand links between OL and ESE, and if there is change over time.

In Scotland, we have had over a decade since the publication of Curriculum for Excellence through Outdoor Learning (2010). Focusing on ESE, the policy Learning for Sustainability (LfS) positions outdoor learning, sustainable development education, and citizenship education as a three-way ‘entitlement’ for all pupils. Our current study sets out to inform our understanding of the degree of progress towards this outdoor entitlement.  

In the Scottish context, the Educational outcomes of Learning for Sustainability: literature review (Christie & Higgins 2020) provide us with valuable summaries of the possible outcomes of LfS provision and a basis for supporting increased provision of OL as part of LfS. Beames and Polack (2019) partly pre-empt findings here. They looked at inspection reports in Scotland (2011 – 2018) wherein OL ‘grounds, local green space or local community during school hours’ appeared in ¾ of primary schools’ inspections. 

Literature

Some studies (for example: in Canada, see Asfeldt et al. 2020; in Hungary, Fuz 2018; in England, Prince, 2019; in New Zealand, Hill et al 2020) have sought to conduct empirical research at national and international levels of outdoor learning provision but the links between OL and ESE provision remain somewhat obscured.  In Scottish educational settings, access to outdoor learning experiences is defined as an entitlement for all pupils and some studies explore pupil and teacher experience in ESE (see also Mannion et al 2013, Lynch and Mannion 2021, Ruck 2022). Through the implementation of Curriculum for Excellence and other policy drivers such as Learning for Sustainability, there is the requirement that all teachers are able to demonstrate a commitment to taking learning outdoors (Christie et al 2019).

Young people’s own research about outdoor provision and LfS are increasing in scope and criticality. Teach The Future – an amalgam of young people’s environmental groups – have called for the existing commitments to outdoor learning to be fulfilled; they emphasise the need for ‘connection to nature’ and learning about the ‘climate emergency and ecological crisis (Teach the Future 2020). In addition, a Children’s Parliament inquiry (Children’s Parliament, 2022) remind civic bodies that young people have a right to an education that helps them develop respect for the natural environment. They called for all children to have the chance to learn outdoors throughout the school year, learning regularly about climate change and sustainability outside in nature. 

Building on previous surveys (2006 and 2014), our current 2022 survey is set to find out to what extent, in what ways OL/OE and ESE provisions are now changing in schools and pre-schools during the global Coronavirus pandemic. Quay et al (2020) question the future of outdoor and environmental education in Covid times and suggests that there is need to embrace the possibilities that increased outdoor learning may bring.

Methodology This research demonstrates a unique cross-sectional analysis of evidence collected in May and June periods in three years, 2006, 2014 and 2022, enabling us to create an unprecedented comprehensive account of a changing picture over a 16-year period. We report here on circa 200 outdoor learning events provided by staff working in 19 early years centres and 25 primary schools randomly sampled across in diverse catchment areas. Raw data were collected by teachers themselves for each individual outdoor learning visit, event, or trip made over a two-month period (schools), and for a two-week period (nurseries) in each of three surveys. The dataset comprises hundreds of reports on individual outdoor sessions or lessons with evidence for each event on duration, location, cost, focus and other aspects. This rich dataset proves a rich and reliable account of what comprises ‘outdoor learning’ in terms of duration, location, focus including when and how ESE was addressed. The recent survey also asked additional questions about the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic for outdoor learning provision, and the confidence levels and professional learning experiences of teachers.

Findings & Conclusion Survey results indicate sustained uplift in outdoor provision in early years but considerable decline in the primary school sector when comparisons are made with previous surveys.  • Early Years’ provision outdoors has increased compared to 2014. The survey showed that on average 39% of the time at nursery was spent outdoors. This figure has risen from 23% in the 2006 survey, and from 36% in 2014. • Primary School outdoor provision has decreased compared to 2014. In 2014, the duration ‘per pupil per week’ was 30 minutes. In 2022, this was 7 minutes. Covid restrictions meant residentials were very uncommon, but this did not account for all of the decline.   • Use of grounds, off-site visits to locations beyond the grounds and beyond the local area by schools were all down in 2022. Less than 30% of outdoor events addressed Learning for Sustainability in schools.  • Considerable numbers of staff across primary and early years reported a lack confidence in facilitating outdoor learning (OL) and Learning for Sustainability (LfS). Staff in receipt of lower levels of training also report lower confidence in OL and LfS. • A little over half of all practitioners surveyed felt that provision had increased compared to pre-Covid. Just less than a third of respondents felt that provision has decreased.    • Schools providing more OL time tended also to be smaller in roll size. Post-Covid, what comprises ‘Outdoor ESE’ becomes less elusive through empirical study of this blind spot. Taken together, the survey provides a critical starting point for understanding what might be needed for further development in provision of ESE outdoors. Professional learning is clearly one area for development but we must consider the situated nature of practice to eke out specific recommendations for a given schools or early years centre.

References Asfeldt, M., Purc-Stephenson, R., Rawleigh, M. & Thackeray, S. (2020) Outdoor education in Canada: a qualitative investigation. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, DOI: 10.1080/14729679.2020.1784767 Christie, B., Higgins, P., King, B., Collacott, M., Kirk, K. and Smith, H., (2019). From rhetoric to reality: Examining the policy vision and the professional process of enacting Learning for Sustainability in Scottish schools. Scottish Educational Review, 51(1), pp.44-56. Dyment, J. E., & Potter, T. G. (2015). Is outdoor education a discipline? Provocations and possibilities. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 15(3), 193–208. Faskunger J, Szczepanski A, Åkerblom P. (2018). Teaching with the sky as a ceiling: a review of research about the significance of outdoor teaching for children’s learning in compulsory school [Internet]. Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press. Füz, N. (2018). Out-of-school learning in Hungarian primary education: Practice and barriers. Journal of Experiential Education. doi:10.1177/1053825918758342 Hill, A., North, C., Cosgriff, M., Irwin, D., Boyes, M., & Watson, S. (2020). Education outside the classroom in Aotearoa New Zealand - A comprehensive national study: Final Report (Report). Christchurch, New Zealand: Ara Institute of Canterbury Ltd. Power, S. C., Taylor, C., Rees, G., & Jones, K. (2009). Out of school learning: Variations in provision and participation in secondary schools. Research Papers in Education, 24(4), 439–460 Prince, H. E. (2019). Changes in outdoor learning in primary schools in England, 1995 and 2017: lessons for good practice, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 19:4, 329-342 Lynch, J. & Mannion, G. (2021). Place-responsive Pedagogies in the Anthropocene: Attuning with the more-than-human, Environmental Education Research, 27(6), 864-878. DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2020.1867710 [Available via online from 4th Jan 2021: https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2020.1867710]. Mannion, G., Fenwick, A., Lynch, J. (2013). Place-responsive pedagogy: learning from teachers’ experiences of excursions in nature. Environmental Education Research, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp 792-809. Quay, J., Gray, T., Thomas, G. et al. (2020). What future/s for outdoor and environmental education in a world that has contended with COVID-19? Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education 23, 93–117. Ruck, A. & Mannion, G. (2021) Stewardship and beyond? Young people’s lived experience of conservation activities in school grounds, Environmental Education Research, 27:10, 1502-1516, DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2021.1964439 Zink, R., & Boyes, M. (2006). The nature and scope of outdoor education in New Zealand schools. The Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 10(1), 11–21.