A Review of Some of the Literature
Supporting the Use of Outdoor Learning
with Children between the Ages of 3 and 7 years

It is generally agreed amongst early years practitioners that outdoor learning is essential for children under the age of eight, so much so that the DfES did consider inserting a clause in the Children Act 2004 that 50% of the Foundation Stage curriculum should be delivered outside. Unfortunately it got lost at the green paper stage. Forest School is a relatively new manifestation of outdoor learning for this age group, and is based on Scandinavian early years practice (Taylor, S., 2005, pg 68, Williams-Siegfred, J., 2005, pg 26 Farstad, A., 2005, pg 14, Joyce, R., 2004, pg 4). It focuses on developing children’s self-help skills and their confidence, usually in a wood separate from their usual setting, and over time – 10 ½ days is usually considered to be a minimum. This is a movement I am involved in, but I have found that not every setting is ready to embrace Forest School completely. With encouragement and guidance, however, early years practitioners can make any outdoor space into an adventure for young children.

In this review I intend to focus on what I believe to be four key issues to consider when debating the use of outdoor learning in schools and with early years groups. The first is “safety and the management of risk”. I am dealing with this first because it is impossible to plan outdoor learning until those around you are convinced that you are going to keep children safe. Secondly I wish to consider “health and well-being”. I have placed this next because it is a current hot topic, with government initiatives on promoting healthy life-styles, and this has implications for those of us working outdoors. Thirdly I will consider “emotional and social development”. I do not believe that children can learn until they are emotionally secure – Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Bunting, 2006, pg 23) is good way to demonstrate the importance of emotional well-being. I do believe that learning outside is more likely to create that positive state than being stuck in a classroom. “The indoor environment, particularly where there is a confined space, often means that there is concern to button up children’s emotional expression in the interests of the rest of the group” (Dowling, 2005, pg 152). Lastly I will consider “the nature of the learning taking place outdoors”, as I believe that some of the learning that can take place outdoors is of a much deeper and more lasting nature than that which takes place in many conventional classrooms, “it provides a more complete learning experience” (Gilbertson et al, 2006, pg 5).

There are other issues that I could look at, but I have selected those that I feel to be the most pertinent to deal within a limited word constraint.

Safety and the Management of Risk.

“A frequently-cited challenge for outdoor learning provision is fear and concern about young people’s health and safety” (Rickinson et al, 2004, pg 43). These fears seem to be divisible by two – one half relate to the well-being of children, the other to the litigation that may derive from any accident and thereby threaten the well-being of those organising outdoor learning provision. Jenny Lindon (2003, pg 5) points out that “Children need to learn about safety and handling risks” so that they can grow up knowing how to keep themselves safe. Nick Halls (in Barnes and Sharp, 2004, pg 116) begins with “In common law every person has a duty of care for themselves and others who may be affected by their actions”. In order to balance the need for children to learn to manage risks and the need to respond to that duty of care, good practice and legislation have determined ways of assessing and monitoring risks.

Nick Hall’s article (in Barnes and Sharp, 2004, pg 120) quoted above goes on to cite the legislative framework, starting with The Health and Safety and Work Act (1974). These acts and regulations are important, and professionals can access guidance from the Health and Safety Executive on their website www.hse.gov.uk/pubns - their leaflet “preventing accidents to children on farms” covers matters of relevance to those working with children off-site. Another source of support is the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers (BCTV) who offer handbooks (for instance http://shop.btcv.org.uk/shop/level2/60/level has two books on risk assessment) and courses (http://shop.btcv.org.uk/shop/leve3/532/level has courses on first aid and health and safety).

With young children it is equally important to be aware of their developmental abilities, which in turn are affected by their previous experiences. Macintyre and McVitty (2004, pg25) cite a 2001 study claiming that there has been an 80% increase in children presenting with movement difficulties, and postulate a connection to the decrease in unstructured physical activity of the kind that naturally occurs outdoors. Clearly, every child is different, and will be at risk in different ways, so practitioners need to be aware of the children they are working with, and evaluate the interplay between the individual child and the outdoor activity.

Early years workers are trained to undertake safety checks – Dowling (2005, pg 155) describes how that usually takes place “through careful observation and shared information about incidents or perceived potential to harm children”. This basic awareness of safety issues has two consequences. One is positive – it is a good base upon which to develop further awareness. The other is negative – workers can over-react to potentially risky environments. Jenny Lindon (2003, pg 9) describes the “precautionary principle” prevalent in some settings, “that we should always avoid risk where the outcome is uncertain”. Giving early years workers the tools to move beyond this stance involves training them to recognise and manage risks until the situation becomes reasonable for those children in that setting on that day.

Generally, the tools to help workers centre around the process of risk assessment. This process will be different for different ages and stages – Gilbertson et al explore these different needs, highlighting the developmental imperative for high ratios with young children (2006, pg 47). In order to manage all of the variables concerned I favour the risk assessment scheme shown in Appendix 4, rather than that used in Appendix 3. This enables the leader to assess the site, the prevailing conditions on that day, the risk value of the activities planned, and the risk rating for any children with particular needs. With all of those assessments in place, a leader can feel that they have considered the session from most angles, and have taken reasonable precautions to ensure reasonable safety. This conforms to the five steps suggested by the Health & Safety Executive (Barnes & Sharp, 2004, pg 94). It also assumes that the leader undertaking the assessment has the necessary skills to undertake the assessments and evaluate the risks. As with all areas of outdoor education, Forest School has its “Gold Standard”, currently the level three “Forest School Leadership Award”. This is validated by both EdExel (www.bridgewater.ac.uk/forestschool) and OCN ( Murray, 2004, pg 6), and includes a considerable amount of safety training. Even training at levels 1 & 2 includes safety awareness, but assumes practitioners will not be in the position of leading groups off-site.

Having created a safe-enough environment, it is important that the children should still have a sense of adventure, as described by Mortlock (2000, pg19). Fortunately, with young children every fresh encounter is an adventure, provided the adults with them are prepared to facilitate not obstruct. The visions and values stated by the charity “Learning Through Landscapes” encapsulates this very well – see Appendix 6.

Health and Well-being

In February of this year the National Audit Office (2006, www.nao.org.uk) published a report “Tackling Child Obesity – First Steps” which identified the need for children to take more exercise, recommending a school sports programme (pg 10), and a play programme (pg 10) and the further development of their extended schools programme (pg 11). It then went on to explain why each one of these would be under-funded. But even were they to be supported adequately, they could not contribute to the well-being of children in the way that Outdoor Education can, for three main reasons.

In the first place, they are too structured. Children need to be able to freely explore, to follow their own goals, in order to stretch, grow, and gain in confidence and self-esteem. There is a lack of hard data to support this view, which is strange, given its historical roots. The McMillan sisters in the latter part of the 19 th and early part of the 20 th century recognised its importance to young children (Bilton, 2002, pg 28). With regard to older children and adults, Barnes and Sharp link the formation of the Outward Bound movement in a similar period to the idea of physical challenge and “the restoration of spiritual health” (2004, pg 8). Latterly, Dowling identifies a current issue as the “lack of hard physical exercise to develop young bodies” (2005, pg149). In my work I have seen very young children grow in confidence and ability by challenging themselves (supported by caring adults) to climb trees, toast marshmallows, go into a darker part of a wood, or whatever experience it was that concerned them. Organised games can’t do that level of individual challenge.

In the second place, these are not inclusive programmes. I spent my childhood coming last in every race at school, so I have a natural dislike of athletics. Other children might find team games not to their tastes. In my experiences of extended school programmes and after school clubs the choices are always limited by the skills of the adults available, so some children will feel excluded in every setting, and miss the opportunity for exercise and recreation. Being outdoors enables children to invent their own games and challenges, to their own abilities – Garrick explores ways in which outdoor resources can be accessed by children with a range of difficulties (2004, pg52).

Lastly, all three initiatives are asking children to remain within settings that they may have failed in. Whilst this particularly applies to school settings and the extended schools programme, many play and sports programmes are also centred on school sites. The Training and Development Agency in fact cite the benefits of community access to sports on school sites as a by-product of the extended schools programme (www.tda.gov.uk/home/remodelling/extendedschools). Health is not just about physical exercise, it is also about mental health, centrally about feeling good about yourself. Bennathan and Boxall (2000, pg20) describe how the school setting can acerbate the sense of fragmentation and hostility that can build in unsuccessful children, Bond (2004) signals the behavioural and mental health benefits of Forest School.

The Forestry Commission have commissioned research on the impact of outdoor spaces (O’Brien & Tabbush, 2002, pg11-17), and emphasise the wide variety of health benefits from outdoor spaces – “Multi-functional and accessible woodland and forest can provide the infrastructure/setting for health education and the opportunity for putting it into practice” (O’Brien & Tabbush, 2002, pg 22). As Simon Barnes put it, “a childhood without trees is incomplete: unlived” (Barnes, 2006).

Emotional and Social Development

The statements above lead naturally into this section. Bunting (2006, pg 22) offers “the need to relate well to others” as one of 8 needs that can be met by outdoor activities. Durant (2003, pg2) clarifies that this happens through “taking turns, sharing, cooperating, negotiating and talking to each other”. This happens more easily outdoors as the majority of the adventures are less structured and more child-led. The example below shows a complex activity involving constructing a canal system in a wood; child initiated and child led it required 8 or 9 five to six year old boys to communicate and cooperate.

Jarvis & Chandler (2001, pg 60) describe these kinds of experiences as “a training ground for future relationships”, without which children will become less successful adults. This kind of positive experience is particularly important for boys – Dowling (2005 pg 139-140) describes how young boys in particular respond to kinaesthetic or active learning experiences, and ascribes the falling attainment levels of boys in schools to the lack of such experiences fostering a negative attitude to learning.

Hopkins and Putnam (1993, chapt 6) state the importance to school-aged children of experiencing success – “they need to feel a sense of achievement and to enjoy the consequent heightened self-esteem and the esteem of others”. Martin et al (2004, pg 14) illuminates how this comes about through the active learning cycle of outdoor activities. This success in turn encourages independence, an “I can” attitude, as described by Bilton et al (2005, pg 76). These positive emotional effects are not confined to being outdoors – children who have developed such attitudes transfer them back into their formal studies. For example, Tom Lilley (in Higgins and Humberstone, 1999, pg 57) describes how an outdoor programme can facilitate positive changes in classroom attitudes of young people at risk.

Just being outdoors can often be an affirming experience. Gair (1997, pg 38-39) describes the sensuality of outdoor experiences, and links this to developing children’s instincts “to question and discover what is around them”. McWilliam (in Barnes & Sharp, 2004, pg 21) explores the development of aesthetics through outdoor activities, and how this creates a love of the environment. Mortlock (2000, pg 105), invests this aspect of outdoor education as a vital part of our development as world citizens, ending with a quote from Thoreau: “in wilderness is the preservation of the world”. With very young children the wilderness may be nearer than for older children, but the sense of awe and wonder can be just as great (Bilton et al, 2005, pg 77). In the Foundation Stage Curriculum (2001, pg 38) it states the importance of showing care and concern for living things and the environment. I have a cherished memory of sitting and watching a nest of baby spiders with a group of four year olds, and enjoying their deep engagement with that mini-miracle of nature, being “curious and fascinated” (Ryder Richardson, 2006, pg 17). Unless children have the opportunity to engage with the environment in that deep and unhurried way, we lose our opportunity to engage them in the future of the planet.

The Nature of the Learning Taking Place Outdoors

Mortlock (2000, pg 22) describes play as something involving “minimal involvement……in terms of emotion, skills, mental control and concentration”. Bruce (2004, pgs 133 & 135) describes play in this way: “play takes huge energy and concentration. It is anything but relaxation” and “play freeflows along, bringing clarification and illumination of ideas, feelings, relationships and understandings of the human body in an entirely different way”. These two opposing views illustrate the difference between early years practitioners and those working with much older children and young people. My training and experience place me in the former camp, and it is from that play-based learning perspective that I consider outdoor learning.

The outdoors is a wonderful place for young children, “there is a freedom associated with the space that cannot be replicated inside” (Bilton, 2004, pg 4). Space and a sense of freedom and autonomy create opportunities to be “active absorbed, motivated and purposeful” (Bilton, 2004, pg 7). However, for the learning potential of an outdoor learning experience to be maximised, considerable planning has to take place (cf Bilton, 2002, pg 8). I have described in section 1 how Forest School leaders plan their risk assessments, but first they need to locate a useable space, and subsequently identify suitable activities and resources to stimulate the children’s learning. Appendix 7 shows a 6-week Forest School plan for working with Foundation Stage children, mapped to the curriculum. Providing this framework in a natural environment enables children to learn in a deep and meaningful way, “they are absorbed in very practical activities and learning directly” (Lindon, 2001, pg129). So learning outdoors in general is likely to be more congenial and more successful for most young children.

Children engaged in outdoor learning are more likely to take control of their own learning (Bilton et al, 2005, pg76). This leads them to be more successful in the conventional classroom, developing those “survival skills” (Rodger, 2003, 106) needed. They are also more likely to have the positive attitude and disposition towards learning identified by QCA (2000, pg 8) as central to the learning process.

Learning outdoors enables children to engage with the environment. Not only does this develop their citizenship skills, as mentioned above, but it also introduces them to ideas about life cycles and habitats, and the respect due to all living things (Bilton et al, 2005, pg 47), linking in to major areas of the curriculum( QCA, 1999) such as science (pg 86) , geography (pg 110) and maths (pg 64). Outdoor learning is holistic learning, addressing all areas of the formal and informal curriculum.

Outdoor learning should also be inclusive. Boys’ brains are more developed in spatial awareness but less so in language skills when they start school (Bilton, 2002, pg 72), and they therefore need the space that the outdoors offers to learn in the kinaesthetic ways best suited to them. Girls may be inhibited by societal pressures to behave more decorously (Lindon, 2003, pg 47). Outdoor play can give them the opportunity to develop their confidence and physical skills. Young children develop at different rates, and need plenty of practice in gross motor activities to embed the neural pathways, before ever fine motor skills can develop (Maude, 2001, pg 19) – and the same for those fine motor skills! Outdoor play offers physical learning, and for all children to practice and repeat at their own stage and rate. Individual children may be able to bring skills to outdoor learning that are not valued in the classroom. For example, I had a child with Down’s Syndrome in one Forest School group who was able to act as a leader to a group of younger children because of the skills he had acquired from living on a farm. His self perception about his formal learning was boosted by his role in the outdoor setting.

In summary, outdoor learning offers flexibility, richness of experience, inclusivity, time and space. The learning is cross-curricular and holistic. The nature of the learning is completely in tune with the way young children learn, and helps them to make links with different areas of learning (Bruce, 2004, pg116).

Conclusion

I hope that I have managed to show the importance of outdoor learning to our youngest children. It is “a complete learning environment which can cater for all children’s needs – cognitive, emotional, social and physical” (Bilton, 2003, pg ix). This view is one that is being expressed by more and more respected early years experts and practitioners, such as those I have quoted.

Ideally, children in the Foundation Stage would all have access to Forest School for at least a ½ day a week for at least a year. This is the goal Forest School practitioners like myself have set ourselves. As yet the training and the theoretical base for this experience is limited, but as more areas adopt the idea, so it will spread. A recent Ofsted report at Nayland School (Goodchild, 2005, pg 5) said that Forest School made a “magical contribution” to the Foundation Stage curriculum. I have to agree.

But even a thought-out garden-based experience, or a planned walk in a local park has potential for young children to be a challenging adventure. And hopefully I have managed to show how practitioners can find out how to make any of these outdoor adventures safe enough, and why it is important to do so.