The learning that ‘lives’ outdoors: Practitioners’ perspectives on the pedagogical affordances of Outdoor Learning

Aims

This presentation revisits a Participatory Action Research (PAR) study we conducted with our two partners, an early years setting and a primary school. The aims were two-fold: firstly, to support our partners to systematically investigate and develop their outdoor learning pedagogies; secondly to co-produce knowledge about the ways adults and children engaged with their outdoor spaces, the educational affordances practitioners perceived and made use of, the pedagogies they employed, the opportunities and challenges they experienced.

Conceptual framework

Outdoor Learning (OL) is learning outside the classroom (Waite et al, 2016). Its location, its ‘where’, is fundamental in shaping its characteristics and outcomes. Outdoor learning environments can vary significantly, from school grounds to museums, adventure parks and city parks, and have been used in several ways to meet different educational purposes.

Taking learning outside the classroom, is more than just a change of place; it requires a different praxis. OL involves a dynamic, interactive, place responsive pedagogy. The outdoor space becomes a pedagogical place (Gessiou, 2022). A space becomes a place when its inhabitants experience and assign meaning to it. Learning does not happen in a vacuum; it emerges from and is in a close, meaningful relationship with its environment.

Nature based pedagogies involve active, explorative, first-hand experiences. They afford opportunities for serendipitous learning; a deliberate, learner-centred approach and the co-construction of knowledge (Waite et al, 2016). They are experiential, emergent and ‘invisible’ (Bernstein, 1996).

Drawing on Gibson’s theory of affordances (Gibson, 2015) we saw the outdoors as a pedagogical place that affords opportunities for emergent, learner-centred approaches. This ecological perspective enabled us to explore the ways children and adults inhabited the outdoors; perceived its pedagogic, cognitive and social affordances; appropriated and adapted it for their needs and purposes.
The type of OL we studied is Udeskole, defined as curriculum based teaching and learning that takes place outdoors and an ad hoc alternative to indoor teaching and learning (Waite et al, 2016). It originated in Denmark as a bottom-up, grassroots movement and involves making use of outdoor learning environments to contextualise learning in one or more areas of the curriculum (Remmen and Iversen, 2022). It is an educational ‘tool’, a resource, or methodology that teachers have at their disposal to complement school learning. It is part of school learning and, as such, is aligned with curricular targets.

At first glance, it appears that Udeskole is sympathetic to the pedagogic intentions of educational settings as it can be used to meet curricular demands. However, as ours and numerous other studies have found, the holistic and child centred, agentic ethos of OL pedagogies is at odds with the broader political and educational context in England (Waite et al, 2016; Remmen and Iversen, 2022).

This misalignment of principles and aims between OL pedagogies and the National Curriculum, at least in the UK, may create a vacuum of guidance and support; or, even worse, tensions, conflicts and dilemmas to practitioners who are willing to adopt OL in their settings.

Methodology

The overarching intention of this study has been to give ‘voice’ to practitioners; invite them to reflect on their practice, co-construct knowledge and use this to further improve practice. Action Research can generate knowledge about a particular area of practice that emerges from practice and can then be applied in practice to achieve change (McNiff, 2017).

PAR is a form of collective and self-reflective activity that enables participants to understand and continuously improve their everyday practice; but also to reflect on and negotiate the conditions that shape this practice in the first place (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988).

We employed a mixed methods approach to capture our participants’ insights. These included the use of recording devices that practitioners used to capture their outdoor pedagogies; individuals’ reflections on their recorded interactions; and group reflections, where participants shared their insights with their colleagues in focus groups. This sequence of reflection-in-action, reflection-on-action and collaborative reflection was repeated in three series.

Findings

Our participants identified a tapestry of outdoor pedagogies they made use of depending on the pedagogical aims of each activity and of the broader curricular demands of each setting. All practitioners recognised that taking their learning outdoors is more than just a change of environment. It requires a complete change of mindset; a shift of practices from one that is carefully planned and controlled to one that is more open ended, unfolding, spontaneous and place emergent. The latter appears to be at odds with their perceived pressures to prioritise adult input, cover content and meet curricular targets. Despite these challenges, all participants saw Udeskole as a valuable pedagogy and proposed ways it can be combined with their indoor provision.
 

References
•Bernstein, B. (1996) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique.
•London: Taylor and Francis.
•Gessiou, G. A (2022) A follow-up review on the impact of a Participatory Action Research regarding outdoor play and learning. Educ. Sci., 12, 679.
•Gibson, J. J. (2015) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. London: Psychology Press.
•Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 559–603). London: Sage.
•Khan, M., McGeown, S. P., & Islam, M. Z. (2018). ‘There is no better way to study science than to collect and analyse data in your own yard’: Outdoor classrooms and primary school children in Bangladesh. Children’s Geographies, 1–14.
•McNiff, (2017) Action Research. All you need to know. London: Sage.
•Remmen, K. B. and Iversen, E. (2022): A scoping review of research on school-based outdoor education in the Nordic countries, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning
•Waite, S., Bølling, M. and Bentsen, P. (2016) Comparing apples and pears?: a conceptual framework for understanding forms of outdoor learning through comparison of English Forest Schools and Danish udeskole. Environmental Education Research, 22:6, 868-892.