The state of work-related wellbeing of early childhood educators is alarming both internationally and in European context, a concern that has been extensively examined within early childhood education research (Li et al., 2024). One promising approach to address the issue is to strengthen work engagement (Schaufeli et al., 2002) by providing educators with working conditions that align with their needs (Yang et al., 2025). This study explores the work engagement experienced by educators who spend a substantial portion of their working hours outdoors in nature. In the other Nordic countries, comparable practices are often described as nature kindergartens (Alme & Reime, 2021). In Finland, however, usually only one or a few child groups within a daycare centre spend most of their daily activities outdoors, while the remaining groups operate in traditional settings indoors. Also, nature groups and indoor groups apply the same curriculum that is required in all Finnish ECE. For these reasons, the Finnish model is more accurately referred to in this text as nature groups rather than nature kindergartens. As educators in nature groups have often actively chosen these working conditions, this context provides a compelling example of a well-fitting work environment that may foster work engagement. Previous research suggests that outdoor activities can increase work engagement (Salonen et al., 2018), yet the underlying factors that explain the connection between working outdoors and work engagement remain unclear. This study aims to analyze educators' perceptions of their work engagement and to examine the phenomenon of outdoor teaching in relation to the experiences it provides. The research questions (RQ) guiding this study are:  

RQ1. What is the level of work engagement among early childhood educators in nature groups? (quantitative)  

RQ2. What characterizes high work engagement among early childhood educators in nature groups? (qualitative)  

In this research, early childhood educators’ wellbeing is conceptualized as a changing state influenced by individual and relational factors, the work environment, and socio-cultural-political contexts (Cumming & Wong, 2019). Work-related wellbeing is understood as part of the overall context in which it is experienced, and a holistic model is used to illustrate this, describing different environments and their connection to individual wellbeing. Factors related to work engagement are examined through the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, which seeks to explain the job resources and demands that influence wellbeing (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017). Work engagement refers to a persistent, positive emotional state related to work (Maslach et al., 2001), characterized by a generally positive attitude toward all aspects of work rather than specific tasks (Schaufeli et al., 2002). The study examines which factors associated with outdoor teaching contribute to work engagement, operationalized through three dimensions: vigor, dedication and absorption (Maslach et al., 2001). Vigor reflects high energy, resilience and willingness to invest effort in work, even under challenging conditions. Dedication involves perceiving work as meaningful and inspiring, feeling pride, and embracing challenges. Absorption refers to deep concentration and immersion in work, often accompanied by a sense of time passing quickly. Work engagement manifests as sustained work motivation and a positive attitude toward all aspects of work (Schaufeli et al., 2002). 

This study investigates whether time spent in nature is associated with higher levels of work engagement among early childhood educators. In addition, we will investigate what exactly it is about the outdoor work environment that increases work engagement. By exploring this connection, the study aims to contribute to the scientific discussion by proposing that providing educators with work environments aligned with their preferences may enhance work engagement, thereby improving the attractiveness and retention within the field. 

The study targeted Finnish early childhood educators who spend significant working hours outdoors and integrate pedagogical activities into nature. The exact population size is unknown, as no comprehensive statistical data on this type of teaching in Finland exist. Identification began with data from the Finnish early childhood education database (Varda) and continued via snowball sampling. In 2023, 183 active nature groups practicing outdoor teaching were identified and a total of 151 educators participated in the study. This study employs a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design (Creswell, 2015). First, a survey (N=151) incorporating well-established scales and open-ended questions was conducted, followed by semi-structured interviews (n=25). The survey addressed RQ1, while the interviews focused on RQ2. The research was conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines and received the necessary approvals. Work engagement was measured using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale – 9, UWES-9 (n=121) (Schaufeli et al., 2006), validated within Finnish educational context (Hakanen, 2005). The UWES-9 consists of nine items grouped under three dimensions of work engagement: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002). Each dimension includes three statements rated on a seven-point Likert scale, where 0 indicates Never and 6 indicates Daily (Hakanen, 2009). The psychometric properties of the survey data were examined using SPSS. Based on survey results indicating above-average work engagement among nature group educators, those with the highest engagement levels (Hakanen, 2009) were invited for interviews. A semi-structured interview framework was developed based on survey findings and literature review and piloted in two interviews. Interviews were conducted remotely via Microsoft Teams between March and April 2025. Participants could choose camera use, while the interviewer kept video on to foster interaction. Recordings ranged from 23 to 61 minutes, with an average length of 45 minutes. Automated transcriptions were verified and corrected through repeated listening. Interview data were analyzed using inductive content analysis (Elo et al., 2022), following reduction, grouping, and abstraction stages (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The unit of analysis was a set of ideas, possibly several sentences (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). Irrelevant text was removed before importing into MAXQDA 24 software. Sets of ideas were coded and similar expressions were grouped into subcategories, then categories and main categories (Elo et al., 2022). To enhance reliability, selected units of analysis and classifications were collaboratively reviewed by the research team.

At the time of submission, the analysis is still ongoing. To determine the level of work engagement, mean scores were calculated for each dimension, as well as for the overall scale. These scores were categorized according to Hakanen’s (2009) UWES Finnish manual Low (M=1,44–3,43), Moderate (M=3,44–4,53), Above Average (M=4,55–5,30), and High (M=5,31–6,00). None of the responses fell into the Very Low category (M=0–1,43). Based on these preliminary findings, educators teaching outdoors appear to experience high work engagement. This may reflect self-selection, those who enjoy teaching outdoors may already enjoy their work, or more favorable conditions outdoors. Interviews were targeted for individuals with High work engagement also across all subdimensions: vigor (M=5,34–6,00), dedication (M=5,51–6,00), and absorption (M=5,30–6,00). Initial results suggest that work engagement outdoors primarily stems from the freedom to implement early childhood education in ways that suit both educators and children, without rigid schedules typical of daycare centers. Participants reported that work engagement was enhanced by opportunities to develop their skills through functional outdoor activities. A collaborative and enthusiastic team, guided by shared values and goals, was also a key factor. Most interviewees felt supported by managers who appreciated and enabled outdoor practices. Additional factors contributing to work engagement included the wellbeing benefits of nature, physical activity, and a reduced workload, particularly due to lower noise levels and fewer behavioral rules required outdoors. Educators noted that children had ample space, resulting in fewer conflicts and less need for constant reprimands. These conditions were perceived to positively influence adult-child relationships and the overall atmosphere. This study contributes to the literature by deepening understanding of the benefits of ECE work conducted in nature, and of the elements associated with enhanced educator work-related wellbeing. Limitations are discussed to enlighten the needs for future studies.

Alme, H., & Reime, M. A. (2021). Nature kindergartens: a space for children’s participation. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 24(2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-021-00081-y Bakker, A.B. & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job Demand-Resources theory: taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285.  Creswell, J. W. (2015). A consise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE.   Cumming, T. & Wong, S. (2019). Towards a holistic conceptualization of early childhood educators’ work-related well-being. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 20(3), 265–281.    Elo, S., Kajula, O., Tohmola, A., & Kääriäinen, M. (2022). Steps and phases of qualitative content analysis process. Hoitotiede, 34(4), 215–225. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Arvanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 2648.2007.04569.x.   Hakanen, J. (2005). Työuupumuksesta työn imuun: työhyvinvointitutkimuksen ytimessä ja reuna-alueilla. Työterveyslaitos Hakanen, J. (2009). Työn imun arviointimenetelmä - Työn imu -menetelmän (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale) käyttäminen, validointi ja viitetiedot Suomessa. Työterveyslaitos. Li, X., Zhang, L., Lee, J. C.-K., & Chen, J. (2024). A Systematic Review of Research Patterns and Trends in Early Childhood Education Teacher Well-Being from 1993 to 2023: A Trajectory Landscape. Behavioral Sciences, 14(12), 1179. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14121179 Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W., & Leiter, M. (2001). JOB BURNOUT. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397   Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook (2. ed.). Sage. Salonen, K., Hyvönen, K., Määttä, K., Feldt, T., Mauno, S., & Muotka, J. (2018). Luontoympäristön yhteydet työhyvinvointiin ja työssä suoriutumiseen: kysely-, interventio- ja haastattelututkimuksen tuloksia. Jyväskylän yliopisto. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-7539-5  Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-9 (UWES-9). APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t05561-000   Schaufeli, W., Salanova, M., González-romá, V., & Bakker, A. (2002). The Measurement of Engagement and Burnout: A Two Sample Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326 Yang, J., Wang, X., & Hong, H. (2025). Do Early Childhood Educators Benefit from a Playful Working Environment? A Study on Workplace Fun and Work Engagement. Behavioral Sciences, 15(2), 149. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15020149