Abstract
In this article, we explore inconsistencies in the implementation of outdoor learning across Australian early years’ education. The benefits of outdoor learning justify regular employment of this pedagogical approach in both early childhood education and primary school settings. Early childhood education services provide daily outdoor learning opportunities as required by Australian national policy documents. However, Australian primary schools are not subject to such requirements and teachers often face challenges regarding outdoor learning, thus regular implementation in primary classes can be a low priority. As children in the year before school and the first year of school have similar learning and developmental needs, we argue that the benefits of outdoor learning should be available to all children across the early years. We also recommend regular outdoor learning in the first year of schooling to promote continuity as children transition from early childhood education to primary schools.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The benefits for young children of engaging with natural environments and learning in outdoor settings are well documented (Mann et al., 2022a; Miller et al., 2022; Oberle et al., 2021). However, in many societies, including Australia, fears for child safety, limited access to green spaces, expansion of technology and demanding work commitments (Parsons & Traunter, 2020; Planet Ark, 2017) are resulting in children’s diminished time outdoors. These tensions between what is beneficial, what is feasible and what is being experienced by children are significant for families, educational settings, and educational policy makers.
In educational settings, we define outdoor learning (OL) as based on experiential theories of teaching and learning (Dewey, 1938), involving practical, educational, and often play-based experiences outdoors. Regular OL can be viewed as consistent over time with daily to weekly implementation. The term early years refers to children from birth to eight, and within the context of this article will refer to children in education settings before formal schooling (birth to four or five), and during the beginning years (four or five to age eight) of mandatory education in primary school settings.
Across the early years in Australia and many other countries, care and education are provided by early childhood education (ECE) services and primary schools. The importance of OL, including outdoor play, and the benefits of nature connection have inspired the growing momentum of a nature play movement in ECE in many countries, including Australia (Elliott & Pugh, 2020; Ernst & Burcak, 2019; Kids in Nature Network [KINN], 2018). Contrastingly, in Australian mainstream primary schools there is minimal evidence of regular outdoor experiences and learning occurring beyond the bounds of recess breaks and lunchtime (Green & Rayner, 2022; Jay & Knaus, 2018; Lloyd et al., 2018).
We argue that this inconsistency in OL across the early years is a significant problem in Australian education. The known benefits of OL and the comparable ages and developmental needs of children in ECE settings and the first year of school make OL an approach relevant for both educational settings. We contend that OL in schools can offer learning experiences aligned with mandated curriculum and policies, subsequently increasing children’s access to the many benefits of learning and playing outdoors. Teachers and educators can be considered ‘gatekeepers’ to the outdoors for children (Parsons & Traunter, 2020), hence it is important that educational settings explore ways children can experience greater access to the outdoors and its associated opportunities and benefits.
In this article, we outline the benefits of OL across the early years and its specific relevance for primary schools, then examine the disjunct between OL provision across ECE settings and mainstream primary schools within Australia and internationally, most notably between the years preceding formal schooling and the first year of primary school. We then examine the reasons for these inconsistencies and provide examples of the successful implementation of OL in primary schools, which indicate that challenges are surmountable, and OL is a highly beneficial and relevant pedagogical approach for Australian primary schools.
Benefits of outdoor learning across the early years
Emerging research relating to ECE, and primary school children indicates that OL has convincing cognitive, academic, physical, affective, and social benefits (Harris & Bilton, 2019; Miller et al., 2022; Oberle et al., 2021). Although less researched, there are also convincing benefits for teachers implementing OL (Kuo et al., 2018; Marchant et al., 2019). These benefits emphasise the importance of an OL pedagogical approach across the whole of the early years, including for primary school children and their teachers.
Cognitive and academic benefits
The early years are the most important brain development period within the human lifespan (Alexandra & Victoria, 2015). Research increasingly suggests there are numerous cognitive benefits for young children engaging in OL experiences during lower primary school, including concentration, divergent thinking, imagination (Bento & Dias, 2017; Mason et al., 2021), language acquisition (Mann et al., 2022b), creativity, memory (Dadvand et al., 2015; Mason et al., 2021), problem solving and executive functioning (Carr et al., 2017). The cognitive development promoted through OL supports the implementation of this pedagogical approach in primary school, particularly for children in lower primary at such a pivotal time for brain development (Dadvand et al., 2015).
Research increasingly suggests that OL for primary school children is academically beneficial, improving engagement and academic results in varied subjects (Kuo et al., 2019; Otte et al., 2019; Waite, 2019). Outdoor learning has potential to increase opportunities for children’s agency (Baker et al., 2021) and curiosity (Harwood et al., 2022), which also promote academic achievement (Anderson et al., 2020). In many Nordic countries, such as Finland and Sweden, children engage in high levels of OL in ECE settings until aged seven, when they begin formal education (Gustafsson & Blömeke, 2018). Once beginning primary school, they still spend up to half their school day outdoors (Passy et al., 2019; Planet Ark, 2017). Notably, these countries lead the world with academic results in international benchmarking tests, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment [PISA] (Gray, 2018; Schleicher, 2019). While we are mindful of the limitations of such benchmarking tests, this result is an indicator for a more consistent provision of OL across the early years in Australia.
Physical benefits
An increasingly sedentary lifestyle has contributed to a decline in the overall health of children, both in Australia and internationally (Bølling et al., 2021). Chronic health concerns such as asthma, childhood obesity, vitamin D deficiency and myopia are on the rise (Oberle et al., 2021). Time spent outdoors can improve physical activity, decrease immobility (Bølling et al., 2021), and minimise excessive weight gain in childhood (Sharma-Brymer & Bland, 2016). Researchers advocate that primary schools can become effective environments to promote increased physical activity among children and combat health issues (Wu et al., 2017).
Regular interactions with natural environments through OL can result in improved motor skills, including balance, coordination, and endurance (McClain & Vandermaas-Peeler, 2015). Young children can benefit from exposure to sunlight, natural elements, open air and contact with harmless microbes, all of which contribute variously to bone development, stronger immune systems, and protection against disease (Bento & Dias, 2017). Children who spend higher proportions of time outside are less likely to be diagnosed with myopia (Zhou et al., 2017).
Learning outdoors can be a powerful means to combat the health challenges of our time (Oberle et al., 2021). Considering the health threats posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, OL has become a globally recommended approach for education settings, as it reduces the risk of viral transmission and promotes social distancing (Barfod et al., 2021; Oberle et al., 2021). In a 12-month OL pilot project within urban United Kingdom (UK) schools, participating teachers viewed OL as a partial solution to the pandemic health problems (Harris, 2021). In Australia, educational health advice states, ‘fresh air is the most effective form of ventilation to minimise risk of transmission…[therefore] outdoor teaching is recommended’ (New South Wales [NSW] Education Standards Authority [NESA], 2023a).
Affective and social benefits
The social and interpersonal benefits of learning outdoors include fostering a sense of belonging, connection to community and place within an environment, and these can be conducive to learning and better academic results (Masters & Grogan, 2018). Studies have also shown that children’s OL participation can promote empathy and involve less peer conflict than when indoors (Bento & Dias, 2017; Bilton & Waters, 2017). Further to this, researchers report that contact with nature through OL can provide opportunities for children to engage in play, improve communication skills and enhance social relationships (Waite, 2020).
The prevalence of mental illnesses, such as depression and anxiety, among children is increasing worldwide, and this is now a significant health concern (Oswald et al., 2020). Learning outdoors can afford children affective benefits, as part of the remedy (Tillmann et al., 2018). Some documented affective indicators that can improve with OL experiences are self-confidence, resilience, self-esteem, and cooperation (Maller, 2009). Studies have also noted an improved attitude towards school (Sjöblom & Svens, 2019; Waite et al., 2017), increased enjoyment of learning, alongside reduced stress (Marchant et al., 2019; Tillmann et al., 2018).
The potential benefits of OL for primary school aged children are well documented, and although not specific to the first year of primary school, provide compelling evidence for the inclusion of OL across all primary school levels.
Benefits for education staff
The limited research available on the effects of outdoor teaching and learning for education staff indicates that teachers also benefit from being outdoors, and teach in more engaging ways (Kuo et al., 2018). Teachers have described experiencing job satisfaction and a sense of improved personal well-being with the implementation of OL (Marchant et al., 2019). Teacher comments included OL feeling like, ‘a breath of fresh air’, ‘like someone’s taken the shackles off us’ and ‘stress relieving for teachers as well as children’ (Marchant et al., 2019, p. 16). Literature highlighting the many affective benefits of being outdoors for adults (Twohig-Bennett & Jones, 2018) can be also applied to teachers within a primary school setting, suggesting that both child and teacher well-being can be increased through OL opportunities.
Given such an extensive range of benefits for both teachers and children, the stark difference between implementation of OL across the early years within an Australian context is problematic, indicating that primary children and teachers may be missing out on many important and far-reaching benefits. The following section outlines differences between OL in ECE and primary school settings in Australia.
Inconsistencies in outdoor learning provision across the early years
When comparing OL provision in ECE and primary school settings, there are inconsistent opportunities for OL in the two educational spaces. This problem is significant, as the disjunct in OL provision means that children in primary school settings cannot partake in the expansive benefits of OL which are often afforded to their ECE counterparts. It is also problematic that Australian literature is largely silent on the provision of OL opportunities for the first year of primary school in comparison to preschool aged children, and how children feel about such inconsistent provision.
Outdoor learning provision in early childhood education in Australia
Early childhood education focuses on educating and caring for children up to five years of age, and whether children attend ECE settings is a matter of parental choice within Australia. The Department of Education, Skills, and Employment (2022) reported that in 2018, 96% of Australian children were enrolled in a preschool service for at least 600 h per year in the year before they began formal schooling, showing that although optional, the uptake of ECE is significant.
In Australia, OL is considered integral to the daily ECE service curriculum and strongly advocated by national policy (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2018; Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE], 2022). In ECE settings, governing policy documents mandate that children have access to both indoor and outdoor spaces for learning opportunities (ACECQA, 2018; AGDE, 2022). For example, Learning Outcome 2 recommends that children ‘use play to investigate and explore nature and the natural environment’ (AGDE, 2022, p. 43) and Quality Area 3 requires that all children ‘engage in quality experiences in both built and natural environments’ (ACECQA, 2018). These requirements are upheld with assessment and rating processes monitored by regulating authorities, ensuring that children within ECE settings are provided with regular OL and play opportunities (ACECQA, 2018). The recent national quality standard analysis conducted by ACECQA (2023) revealed that 97% of Australian ECE services are meeting the Quality Area 3 requirements (p. 17). Such access is seen as integral to the daily learning, play and developmental experiences for children (Dankiw et al., 2023; Hughes et al., 2022; Little, 2017).
In addition to these regulatory requirements, in ECE in Australia OL is evident in off-site immersive nature play programs (INPPs) that are gathering momentum (Hughes et al., 2023; KINN, 2018; Speldewinde et al., 2021) and providing children with invaluable play-based learning experiences in local natural environments (Elliott et al., 2018; Hughes et al., 2022). These programs are often inspired by international examples of OL, sometimes reflecting a translation of European Forest School practices into contexts unique to the Australian environment and climate (Campbell & Speldewinde, 2019; Christiansen et al., 2018; Elliott & Chancellor, 2017). Anecdotally, mainstream Australian schools are yet to embrace such programs, with only a small number regularly exploring local natural environments with children.
In Australia, play-based learning is a foundational ECE pedagogy (ACECQA, 2018; AGDE, 2022). It is commonly claimed that there is considerably more opportunity for choice and play-based learning in ECE, before formal schooling begins (Lillejord et al., 2017). Such opportunities also facilitate greater periods of time learning outdoors (Sahlberg & Doyle, 2019).
Outdoor learning provision in primary schools in Australia
The Australian education system requires that compulsory schooling is attended by all children by their sixth birthday, and some states allow children aged four to begin if they are turning five that school year (NESA, 2021). Dependent on state requirements and parental decisions, children aged four and five may be in ECE settings or transitioning into their first year of schooling. The learning and developmental needs for this age group are comparable, however in contrast to ECE, the Australian primary school policy documents do not require children to have access to both indoor and outdoor spaces for daily learning opportunities. This difference in policy requirements is evident in the minimal implementation of OL seen in mainstream Australian primary school settings, particularly in the first year of school when preschool aged counterparts are still receiving the benefits of regular OL in ECE settings.
The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2020), guides teaching and learning practices in the national Australian Curriculum, yet each state and territory retains autonomy in its implementation and some use additional intermediary syllabus documents (e.g., NESA, 2023b; School Curriculum and Standards Authority, 2023; Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, 2023). The value of learning outdoors in schools was acknowledged by ACARA with the inclusion of OL as a curriculum connection in the 2017 Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2018; Gray, 2018). The syllabus documents for primary children do not dictate the way curriculum must be taught, meaning that it is possible for teachers to implement OL across every subject. However, OL is not promoted within the mandated syllabus documents for each key learning area and there are variations in OL implementation within educational settings state-to-state (Passy et al., 2019). It has been observed that this state-based, somewhat ad-hoc approach has resulted in OL being promoted and instigated to varying degrees across Australia, often with teachers unaware of the OL recommendations within curriculum documents (Lloyd et al., 2018). This could be addressed through further educational policy changes to advocate for increased OL implementation across all primary school settings.
Presently, there are minimal studies conducted in Australia which provide evidence of current regular OL implementation in primary school settings. In an email survey focusing on the use of primary school playgrounds in the Australian state of Victoria, Chancellor (2013) reported that in 99.4% of the participating schools, teachers conducted lessons in the school playground. The regularity of these lessons is unclear, and such results may indicate one off occurrences within the scope of a school year, as opposed to regular OL implementation. A more recent quantitative study of Victorian children engaging in OL through INPPs revealed that only 8.6% of primary school aged children were accessing these programs (KINN, 2018). This number may not necessarily reflect the implementation of OL within primary schools, as the programs accessed included settings beyond schools, such as off-site excursions or out of school care programs. In a survey of 200 Australian teachers conducted by Planet Ark (2017), less than 34% taught outdoors for 15 min or more within scope of a 10-week term. Collectively, these studies indicate that OL implementation in Australian primary schools may occur in isolated instances throughout the school year, however regular OL opportunities are minimal or even non-existent. Some peer reviewed literature feature instances of OL occurring within Australian primary schools (Beasley et al., 2022; Cumming & Nash, 2015; Green & Rayner, 2022; Lloyd et al., 2018; Miller et al., 2023) and these studies recognise that in Australia, day-to-day curriculum-based OL is a beneficial yet underutilised pedagogical approach to learning.
In increasingly urbanised societies, on-site school grounds have been identified as important places for children to increase their interactions with nature (Aminpour, 2021). Many Australian schools have implemented school ground ‘greening’ to re-establish natural habitats and increase natural elements in the outdoor school environment (Green, 2014). Green and Rayner (2022) have labelled this movement within Australia as a ‘national school garden renaissance’ (p. 239). Some Australian school landscape plans are now including carefully designed nature play spaces, providing diverse OL and nature play opportunities (Centennial Parklands, 2021; Miller et al., 2023; Wynne & Gorman, 2015). Research conducted in South Australia (SA) revealed that of the 52 primary schools represented, 88% of these schools had purpose-built nature play spaces currently, planned or under construction (Miller et al., 2023). Recent studies recognise that despite an increased focus on naturalised playground spaces, Australian teachers’ use of the school grounds for curriculum delivery was minimal, irregular, or non-existent. It is also apparent that school breaktimes are often the only opportunity for children to engage with the outdoor environment during the school day (Green & Rayner, 2022; Miller et al., 2023). The allowances of school outdoor recess and lunch play time do not compare to the long periods of unstructured outdoor play and regular OL experiences facilitated within ECE settings (Jay & Knaus, 2018).
The minimal peer-reviewed literature focusing on OL implementation in Australia collectively emphasises that this is an under-utilised pedagogical approach in mainstream Australian primary schools. This is an interesting comparison to the provision of OL as prioritised within the ECE sector, where outdoor spaces are integral to daily learning experiences (Hughes et al., 2022; Little, 2017).
An international phenomenon
The disjunct in OL between ECEs and primary schools is not unique to Australia, with some international literature available on the inconsistencies of OL provision between preschool and the first year of school. Research conducted in the UK indicates that teachers in both ECE and school often express value and support of OL pedagogies, however there is a decrease in OL provision for primary school aged children relative to their younger counterparts (Orlandi, 2011; Waite, 2010, 2011). This decline in OL may be in part motivated by an increased focus on performance driven outcomes and national testing as children progress through their schooling (Dickson & Gray, 2022; Patchen et al., 2022; Waite, 2010, 2011).
Orlandi (2011) conducted an in-depth case study examination on the transition from preschool to the first year of formal education in the UK, finding that teachers who claimed to value OL experiences at the beginning of the academic year reflected at the end of the year that the outdoors had only been used for break times (Orlandi, 2011). This highlights that teachers’ valuing OL does not subsequently result in the regular implementation of this pedagogical approach. Orlandi (2011) established that in all the case study schools, as children moved from preschool settings into primary school settings, ‘the use of the outdoors as a place for learning did not just diminish, it stopped. The outdoors became a place to have a break from learning’ (p. 44).
Children’s voices in international literature convey that children in the first year of primary school are aware of the inconsistency in provision of time outdoors as they transition into formal education systems, and they are unhappy with the decreased opportunities to play and learn outdoors (Fisher, 2009; Guardino et al., 2019; Hooson, 2020; Orlandi, 2011; White & Sharp, 2007). For example, a key point raised by Orlandi (2011) included children’s voices recognising that there was a distinct discrepancy in the play time provided in school in comparison to preschool, and a heartfelt cry of ‘I really miss going outside; we never go out!’ (p. 41). Reasons for the disjunct in OL provision as children transition from preschool settings into formal schooling are highlighted in the following section.
Challenges promoting outdoor learning inconsistencies across the early years
There are tensions between the reality of the copious benefits of OL and the challenges hindering this pedagogical approach in primary schools. Alongside the plethora of literature reinforcing OL benefits, a strong body of international research has arisen to investigate reasons for the void between OL knowledge and practice.
Some physical hindrances to the implementation of OL in a primary school setting include weather considerations, availability of equipment and resources, suitability of the accessible OL spaces and obstacles to improving these areas (Edward-Jones et al., 2018; Harris, 2021; Oberle et al., 2021). There can be safety, staff ratio and class management concerns associated with leaving the bounds of a classroom (Oberle et al., 2021; Van Dijk-Wesselius et al., 2020). Aversion to perceived risk-taking and litigation concerns associated with experiences beyond classroom boundaries can also deter OL implementation (Hyndman, 2021; Jerebine et al., 2022; Shume & Blatt, 2019). A critical consideration for teachers is time constraints within an overcrowded curriculum, combined with heavy content demands and an emphasis on measurable academic results (Harris & Bilton, 2019; Patchen et al., 2022; Waite 2019).
With an understanding that not all OL experiences are necessarily educational (Humberstone & Stan, 2011), some studies have reported teachers’ lack of confidence in meeting mandated outcomes through OL and how to communicate or measure what outcomes might be addressed (MacQuarrie, 2018; Oberle et al., 2021). In various studies, teachers have expressed apprehension about their own capabilities, confessing that teaching habits, dispositions towards being outdoors and lack of confidence and experience affected their ability to provide educational experiences beyond the classroom (Harris, 2021; MacQuarrie, 2018). In addition, Hoath (2015) points out that ‘good classroom practice is not synonymous with good out-of-classroom practice’ (p. 20). This suggests that not all excellent teachers may transfer their teaching skills effectively to an outdoor environment. These points emphasise that a significant pedagogical change is required for teachers to implement quality OL (Van Dijk-Wesselius et al., 2020).
A finding across various studies is that school leadership and/or administration can have a significant impact on OL implementation (Dring et al., 2020; Harris, 2021; Oberle et al., 2021). Research suggests that if a school’s leadership is supportive of OL, this enables a higher degree of OL implementation, and correspondingly, even if teacher motivation is high, unsupportive school leadership can be a significant barrier (Dring et al., 2020).
A recent study in the United States of America (USA) (Patchen et al., 2022) recognised nuanced differences across a range of studies identifying prominent OL challenges, and these differences were due to the unique and varied contexts. The authors postulated that these dissimilarities suggest there is not yet an extensive grasp on the challenges and enablers for OL in primary schools, with further research warranted. We concur, noting that there is a paucity of Australian research regarding OL and limited knowledge of the unique barriers and enablers specific to Australian educators and their contexts.
Interestingly, the documented challenges to OL implementation in primary school settings are not replicated in research surrounding ECE settings. This may signal that the varied pedagogical approaches and policies for the two different educational settings impact on OL implementation. What enables OL in ECE may reveal, in part, what hinders OL in primary schools. Some of the tensions between the two settings are attributed to the differences between ECE play-based, child-led pedagogy and primary schoolings’ teacher-led instruction (Lillejord et al., 2017). Formal training around play-based pedagogy is rare for pre-service primary school teachers in Australia (Chancellor & Hyndman, 2017; Hyndman, 2021). Coupled with a lack of training related to teaching outdoors or education about the OL spaces available to primary school teachers, may result in teachers not perceiving play and learning outdoors as valuable to curriculum delivery (Hyndman, 2021).
The challenges identified above shed some light on why OL is an under-utilised approach within many primary school settings, despite the overwhelming benefits of learning outdoors. Correspondingly, studies are emerging to disseminate strategies to overcome these challenges (Edwards-Jones et al., 2018; Green & Rayner, 2022; Oberle et al., 2021). Enablers for OL in primary school settings can be context specific and may include staff development, supportive leadership, provision of relevant resources, planning for OL, establishing supportive routines, and networking (Edwards-Jones et al., 2018; Oberle et al., 2021).
The disjunct between ECE and primary school settings, and the challenges to OL in primary settings outlined above, are of concern not only because of the documented OL benefits, but also because OL can play a role in easing the transition to school.
The contribution of outdoor learning to potentially enhance transition to school
Transitioning into compulsory schooling is internationally recognised as a significant process. Positive transition experiences are linked to school engagement, leading to beneficial educational and social results (Lillejord et al., 2017; Wallis & Dockett, 2015). The different pedagogical approaches between ECE and primary settings are seen to contribute to sometimes disconcerting transition experiences (Boyle et al., 2018). The consideration of consistent OL provision to potentially enhance the school transition process is an approach warranting further research.
Some early Australian research consulted with children to better understand how this transition could be improved, and a desire suggested by some children was, ‘being outside when we can’ (Perry & Dockett, 2011, p. 378). Australian parents and educators are also questioning why activities that are encouraged in ECE settings (particularly INPPs), such as tree climbing, fire making and playing with sticks, are not permitted in most mainstream primary school settings (Hughes et al., 2022; Rayner, 2020). Participants in an Australian webinar entitled Provocations from nature play in early childhood to inspire transformation in school settings commented that children and families who are actively engaged in INPPs prior to formal schooling can find the transition into kindergarten ‘quite jarring’ due to the significant inconsistencies in OL provision (Rayner, 2020). Most pertinently, Hughes et al. (2022) comment, ‘there is still much to be achieved in the school sector regarding the value of outdoor nature play’ (p. 90). To amend this, recommendations from a state-wide study of OL and nature play in one Australian state, Victoria, called for a ‘coordinated approach to OL across early years, primary school and community’ (KINN, 2018, p. 19).
Although the continuation of OL experiences into the first year of primary school is not widely recognised or documented as a tool to improve the transition period, we suggest this approach has the potential to promote children’s well-being and further extend the outdoor benefits experienced in ECE settings into the primary school years. We now turn to studies documenting what is possible when OL challenges are surmounted by school communities and consider the positive outcomes for primary-aged children.
Surmounting outdoor learning challenges
Innovative programs around the world have shown what is possible when OL is prioritised in primary school settings. These programs include, but are not limited to, Udeskole (outdoor school) in Denmark (Mygind et al., 2018), UK in-school Forest School programs (Waite & Goodenough, 2018), Finnish Nature Schools (Sjöblom & Svens, 2019) and the Curriculum for Excellence through Outdoor Learning in Scotland (Education Scotland, 2022; Scottish Government, 2018). International literature pertaining to OL reveals a strong body of research for ECE programs and a slowly building momentum for primary school implementation. According to researchers, primary schools worldwide are now more readily placing value on school ground landscaping and re-designing with increased green spaces offering potential OL areas (International School Grounds Alliance [ISGA], 2023; Van Dijk-Wesselius et al., 2020). Specifically designed school ground zones have been identified as potential pedagogical tools for enabling OL (Dring et al., 2020).
Countries such as Denmark and Scotland have proven to be frontrunners in valuing the place of OL within primary school curriculum and policies (Education Gray, 2018; Scotland, 2022). For example, the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence (Scottish Government, 2018) requires OL to be a regular experience for all learners. However, some authors note that increasing policy support does not necessarily equate to quality OL implemented in schools, and for effective policy changes to occur, cultural change at practitioner level is required (Passy et al., 2019). This is also true within the Australian context (Passy et al., 2019).
Stand-alone examples of successful OL implementation in Australian primary schools exist and are exemplified in the following schools. The Upper Sturt Primary School in SA, was the first mainstream school in Australia to holistically implement a nature-based OL approach to the Australian Curriculum (USPS, 2023). Additionally, The Nature School (TNS) in NSW, focuses on nature-based OL using place-based and inquiry-led pedagogies (TNS, 2023). Schools such as these prove what is possible within the bounds of the Australian schooling system, providing inspiration for further OL implementation within mainstream Australian primary schools.
Conclusion and recommendations
Despite the vast and well documented benefits of OL for primary school aged children, this is an under-utilised teaching and learning approach in Australian primary school settings. Numerous challenges contribute to the minimal implementation of OL in Australian primary schools. These are counteracted by enablers and examples of effective, regular OL implementation that reveal what is possible.
The disparity between ECE and school-based OL provisions is concerning given the similarly aged children across ECE and the first year of formal schooling. Evidence suggests that children are aware of the disjunct and unhappy with the limited OL provision in formal school settings compared to their previous ECE settings. We suggest that OL may potentially enhance the transition into schooling, as well as promote a range of learning and developmental benefits. A more cohesive approach to OL across ECE and primary school settings would also be conducive to uptake in the first years of schooling.
Outdoor learning should not be viewed as an additional requirement of already overworked teachers, but as a change of pedagogical approach, beneficial for both teachers and their students. We therefore recommend that Australian primary school teachers are supported through increased teacher training and professional development opportunities to learn how to implement OL and make effective use of school grounds. Further, teachers would benefit from leadership endorsement, networking, provision of relevant resources and planning time to increase and enhance their implementation of regular OL. Collaboration with existing OL specialists from Australian organisations (e.g. outdoor and environmental education centres, nature play organisations and residential outdoor school associations) could equip teachers with OL skills and build professional learning communities. Collaboration with local early childhood educators could enhance transition processes and upskill primary school teachers, particularly in relation to play-based OL.
One way of enabling increased OL implementation and supporting these cultural changes, is challenging educational policy. The current state-based approach to OL in primary schools may be enhanced with the explicit inclusion of OL suggestions within the national curriculum and syllabus documents, alongside the introduction of a national OL policy encouraging increased OL implementation across all primary school stages in every Australian state and territory.
The paucity of peer-reviewed literature focusing on OL implementation in Australian primary schools reveals a gap necessitating further research. To promote increased OL opportunities across the early years, we propose that research examining OL in the first year of school would significantly add to the fields of both ECE and primary school literature within Australia, drawing attention to the importance of OL opportunities for children in both settings. Such research would also contribute to the knowledge base specific to this phenomenon at an international level. Further, the potential of consistent OL provision to enhance the school transition process is an approach warranting further research, both within Australia and internationally.
The pedagogical approach of OL has largely untapped potential for both primary school educators and children, and this paper calls attention to the disjunct between the OL implementation in Australian ECE and primary school settings, which can be significantly jarring as children transition into the first year of primary school. This phenomenon warrants increasing support for Australian primary school teachers to regularly implement an OL pedagogical approach, challenging educational policy, and further research in this field.
References
Alexandra, D., & Victoria, W. (2015). Studying early brain development: Educators’ reports about their learning and its applications to early childhood policies and practices. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(3), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693911504000303
Aminpour, F. (2021). The physical characteristics of children’s preferred natural settings in Australian primary school grounds. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 62, 127163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127163
Anderson, C. L., Dixson, D. D., Monroy, M., & Keltner, D. (2020). Are awe-prone people more curious? The relationship between dispositional awe, curiosity, and academic outcomes. Journal of Personality, 88(4), 762–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12524
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2018). Foundation to Year 10 Curriculum: Curriculum Connections, Outdoor Learning (ACELA1428). https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/resources/curriculum-connections/portfolios/outdoor-learning/
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA] (2018). Guide to the National Quality Standard. ACECQA. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2020). Australian Curriculum. ACARA. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE] (2022). Belonging, being and becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (V2.0). Australian Government Department of Education for the Ministerial Council.
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA] (2023). NQF Snapshot Q2 2023. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-08/NQF%20Snapshot%20Q2%202023%20FINAL.PDF
Baker, S. T., Le Courtois, S., & Eberhart, J. (2021). Making space for children’s agency with playful learning. International Journal of Early Years Education, 31(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2021.1997726
Barfod, K., Bølling, M., Mygind, L., Elsborg, P., Ejbye-Ernst, N., & Bentsen, P. (2021). Reaping fruits of labour: Revisiting education outside the classroom provision in Denmark upon policy and research interventions. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 60, 127044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127044
Beasley, K., Hesterman, S., & Lee-Hammond, L. (2022). Reviving botany in the curriculum: The botanical journey of two Western Australian early childhood teachers. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2022.42
Bento, G., & Dias, G. (2017). The importance of outdoor play for young children’s healthy development. Porto Biomedical Journal, 2(5), 157–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbj.2017.03.003
Bilton, H., & Waters, J. (2017). Why take young children outside? A critical consideration of the professed aims for outdoor learning in the early years by teachers from England and Wales. Social Sciences, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci6010001
Bølling, M., Mygind, E., Mygind, L., Bentsen, P., & Elsborg, P. (2021). The association between education outside the classroom and physical activity: Differences attributable to the type of space? Children (basel), 8(6), 486. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8060486
Boyle, T., Petriwskyj, A., & Grieshaber, S. (2018). Reframing transitions to school as continuity practices: The role of practice architectures. The Australian Educational Researcher, 45(4), 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0272-0
Campbell, C., & Speldewinde, C. (2019). Bush kinder in Australia: A new learning ‘place’ and its effect on local policy. Policy Futures in Education, 17(4), 541–559. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210317753028
Carr, V., Brown, R. D., Schlembach, S., & Kochanowski, L. (2017). Nature by design: Playscape affordances support the use of executive function in preschoolers. Children, Youth and Environments, 27(2), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.27.2.0025
Centennial Parklands (Sept, 2021). Nature Play for NSW: Insights and recommendations. Nature Play Strategy Outline. https://www.centennialparklands.com.au/getattachment/Learn/Nature-Play/211404-Nature-play-strategy-outline_WEB.pdf.aspx?lang=en-AU
Chancellor, B. (2013). Primary school playgrounds: Features and management in Victoria. Australia. International Journal of Play, 2(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2013.807568
Chancellor, B., & Hyndman, B. (2017). The rush to judgement: Mapping moral geographies of the primary school playground. Global Studies of Childhood, 7(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043610617694731
Christiansen, A., Hannan, S., Anderson, K., Coxon, L., & Fargher, D. (2018). Place-based nature kindergarten in Victoria, Australia: No tools, no toys, no art supplies. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-017-0001-6
Cumming, F., & Nash, M. (2015). An Australian perspective of a forest school: Shaping a sense of place to support learning. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 15(4), 296–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2015.1010071
Dadvand, P., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Esnaola, M., Forns Guzman, J., Basagaña, X., Alvarez-Pedrerol, M., Rivas, I., López-Vicente, M., Castro Pascual, M., Su, J., Jerrett, M., Querol, X., & Sunyer, J. (2015). Green spaces and cognitive development in primary school children. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503402112
Dankiw, K. A., Kumar, S., Baldock, K. L., & Tsiros, M. D. (2023). Parent and early childhood educator perspectives of unstructured nature play for young children: A qualitative descriptive study. PloS one, 18(6), e0286468–e0286468. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286468
Department of Education, Skills, and Employment (2022). Australian Early Development Census National Report 2021: Early Childhood Development in Australia. The Department of Education, Skills, and Employment. https://www.aedc.gov.au/
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Touchstone Books.
Dickson, T. J., & Gray, T. L. (2022). Nature-based solutions: Democratising the outdoors to be a vaccine and a salve for a neoliberal and COVID-19 impacted society. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 22(4), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2022.2064887
Dring, C., Lee, S., & Rideout, C. (2020). Public school teachers’ perceptions of what promotes or hinders their use of outdoor learning spaces. Learning Environments Research, 23(3), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09310-5
Edwards-Jones, A., Waite, S., & Passy, R. (2018). Falling into LINE: School strategies for overcoming challenges associated with learning in natural environments (LINE). Education 3–13, 46(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2016.1176066
Elliott, S., & Chancellor, B. (2017). Beyond the fence: Exploring forest preschool/school approaches in Australia. In H. Little, S. Elliott, & S. R. Wyler (Eds.), Outdoor learning environments: spaces for exploration, discovery and risk-taking in the early years (pp. 243–261). Allen and Unwin.
Elliott, S., & Pugh, R. (2020). Children’s voices about fish and tadpoles in an Australian pond ecosystem: It’s all about balancing and belonging. In S. Elliott, E. Ärlemalm-Hagsér, & J. Davis (Eds.), Researching Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (pp. 205–219). Routledge.
Elliott, S., Rizk, N., Taylor, S., Kennelly, J., & McKenzie, M. (2018). ‘When are we going again?’ Investigating children’s responses to a new nature playspace at an environmental education centre. Curriculum Perspectives, 38(2), 157–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-018-0049-7
Ernst, J., & Burcak, F. (2019). Young children’s contributions to sustainability: The influence of nature play on curiosity, executive function skills, creative thinking, and resilience. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154212
Fisher, J. A. (2009). ‘We used to play in Foundation, it was more funner’: Investigating feelings about transition from Foundation Stage to Year 1. Early Years, 29(2), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575140802672576
Gray, T. (2018). Outdoor learning: Not new, just newly important. Curriculum Perspectives, 38(2), 145–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-018-0054-x
Green, M. (2014). Transformational design literacies: Children as active place-makers. Children’s Geographies, 12(2), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2013.812305
Green, M., & Rayner, M. (2022). School ground pedagogies for enriching children’s outdoor learning. Education 3–13, 50(2), 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2020.1846578
Guardino, C., Hall, K. W., Largo-Wight, E., & Hubbuch, C. (2019). Teacher and student perceptions of an outdoor classroom. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 22(2), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-019-00033-7
Gustafsson, J. E., & Blömeke, S. (2018). Development of school achievement in the Nordic countries during half a century. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(3), 386–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1434829
Harris, M. A. (2021). Growing among trees: A 12-month process evaluation of school based outdoor learning interventions. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 23(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2021.2001758
Harris, R., & Bilton, H. (2019). Learning about the past: Exploring the opportunities and challenges of using an outdoor learning approach. Cambridge Journal of Education, 49(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2018.1442416
Harwood, D., Huang, M., & Somma, M. (2022). “We’re trying to find cool things in the forest”– Exploring children’s curiosity and creativity in the outdoors. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 15(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.26822/iejee.2022.276
Hoath, L. J. (2015). A framework for understanding the distinctive characteristics of an outdoor setting pedagogy: A comparative primary education case study approach [PhD thesis, Sheffield Hallam University]. Available from ProQuest One Academic. (1961993421). https://shura.shu.ac.uk/18459/
Hooson, E. (2020). An investigation to determine how the introduction of outdoor education supports learning in Key Stage One: An evaluation of a primary school’s individual approach to outdoor education. Fields: Journal of Huddersfield Student Research. https://doi.org/10.5920/fields.677
Hughes, F., Bird, J., & Elliott, S. (2023, August 30-September 2). Investigating the where, why and how of nature play programs in Australia. [Symposium]. In: F. Hughes (Chair), Early years outdoors in Australia: Both within and beyond the gate. European Early Childhood Education Research Association 31st Annual Conference, Estoril, Portugal.
Hughes, F., Elliott, S., Anderson, K., & Chancellor, B. (2022). Early years learning in australian natural environments. Oxford University Press.
Humberstone, B., & Stan, I. (2011). Outdoor learning: Primary pupils’ experiences and teachers’ interaction in outdoor learning. Education 3–13, 39(5), 529–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2010.487837
Hyndman, B. (2021). Play across Australian schooling. In P. King & S. Newstead (Eds.), Play across: Childhood international perspectives on diverse contexts of play (pp. 119–142). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72461-0_7
International School Grounds Alliance [ISGA] (2023). International School Grounds Alliance: Every child outdoors every day. https://www.internationalschoolgrounds.org/
Jay, J. A., & Knaus, M. (2018). Embedding play-based learning into Junior Primary (Year 1 and 2) Curriculum in WA. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n1.7
Jerebine, A., Fitton-Davies, K., Lander, N., Eyre, E., Duncan, M., & Barnett, L. (2022). “Children are precious cargo; We don’t let them take any risks!” Hearing from adults on safety and risk in children’s active play in schools: A systematic review. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 19(1), 1–111. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-022-01344-7
Kids in Nature Network [KINN] (2018). State of nature play, outdoor learning and bush kinder in Victoria: Key findings and recommendations, November 2018. https://www.kidsinnaturenetwork.org.au/state-of-nature-play-report
Kuo, M., Barnes, M., & Jordan, C. (2019). Do experiences with nature promote learning? Converging evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship. Frontiers in Psychology, Environmental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00305
Kuo, M., Browning, M., & Penner, M. (2018). Do lessons in nature boost subsequent classroom engagement? Refueling students in flight. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02253
Lillejord, S., Borte, K., Halvorsrud, K., Ruud, E., & Freyr, T. (2017). Transition from kindergarten to school: A systematic review. Knowledge Centre for Education, www.kunnskapssenter.no
Little, H. (2017). Promoting risk-taking and physically challenging play in Australian early childhood settings in a changing regulatory environment. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X15579743
Lloyd, A., Truong, S., & Gray, T. (2018). Take the class outside! A call for place-based outdoor learning in the Australian primary school curriculum. Curriculum Perspectives, 38(2), 163–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-018-0050-1
MacQuarrie, S. (2018). Everyday teaching and outdoor learning: Developing an integrated approach to support school-based provision. Education 3–13, 46(3), 345–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2016.1263968
Maller, C. J. (2009). Promoting children’s mental, emotional, and social health through contact with nature: A model. Health Education, 109(6), 522–543. https://doi.org/10.1108/09654280911001185
Mann, J., Gray, T., & Truong, S. (2022). Rediscovering the potential of outdoor learning for developing 21st century competencies. In R. Jucker & J. von Au (Eds.), High-quality outdoor learning: Evidence-based education outside the classroom for children, teachers and society (pp. 211–229). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04108-2_12
Mann, J., Gray, T., Truong, S., Brymer, E., Passy, R., Ho, S., Sahlberg, P., Ward, K., Bensten, P., Curry, C., & Cowper, R. (2022). Getting out of the classroom and into nature: A systematic review of nature-specific outdoor learning on school children’s learning and development. Frontiers in Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.877058
Marchant, E., Todd, C., Cooksey, R., Dredge, S., Jones, H., Reynolds, D., Stratton, G., Dwyer, R., Lyons, R., & Brophy, S. (2019). Curriculum-based outdoor learning for children aged 9–11: A qualitative analysis of pupils’ and teachers’ views. PloS one, 14(5), e0212242–e0212242. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212242
Mason, L., Ronconi, A., Scrimin, S., & Pazzaglia, F. (2021). Short-term exposure to nature and benefits for students’ cognitive performance: A review. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 607–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09631-8
Masters, J., & Grogan, L. (2018). A comparative analysis of nature kindergarten programmes in Australia and New Zealand. International Journal of Early Years Education, 26(3), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2018.1459507
McClain, C., & Vandermaas-Peeler, M. (2015). Social contexts of development in natural outdoor environments: Children’s motor activities, personal challenges and peer interactions at the river and the creek. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 16, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2015.1050682
Miller, N., Kumar, S., Pearce, K. L., & Baldock, K. L. (2022). The perceived benefits of and barriers to nature-based play and learning in South Australian public primary schools: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 22(4), 342–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2022.2100431
Miller, N., Kumar, S., Pearce, K., & Baldock, K. (2023). Characterizing the available outdoor spaces and their use in South Australian public primary schools. Children, Youth and Environments, 33(1), 122–143. https://doi.org/10.1353/cye.2023.0003
Mygind, E., Bølling, M., & Seierøe Barfod, K. (2018). Primary teachers’ experiences with weekly education outside the classroom during a year. Education 3–13, 47(5), 599–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2018.1513544
NSW Education Standards Authority [NESA] (2021). Starting school: When to start. https://education.nsw.gov.au/public-schools/going-to-a-public-school/primary-schools/starting-school
NSW Education Standards Authority [NESA] (April, 2023a). COVID-19; Advice for families; Ventilation. https://education.nsw.gov.au/covid-19/advice-for-families/ventilation
NSW Education Standards Authority [NESA] (2023b). Primary (K–6) Syllabuses. https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/stages/primary
Oberle, E., Zeni, M., Munday, F., & Brussoni, M. (2021). Support factors and barriers for outdoor learning in elementary schools: A systemic perspective. American Journal of Health Education, 52(5), 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2021.1955232
Orlandi, K. (2011). Onwards and upwards: Supporting the transition to Key Stage One. Taylor & Francis Group. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/une/detail.action?docID=958471
Oswald, T., Rumbold, A., Kedzior, S., & Moore, V. (2020). Psychological impacts of “screen time” and “green time” for children and adolescents: A systematic scoping review. PLoS ONE, 15(9), e0237725. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237725
Otte, C., Bølling, M., Stevenson, M., Ejbye-Ernst, N., Nielsen, G., & Bentsen, P. (2019). Education outside the classroom increases children’s reading performance: Results from a one-year quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Educational Research, 94, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.01.009
Parsons, K. J., & Traunter, J. (2020). Muddy knees and muddy needs: Parents perceptions of outdoor learning. Children’s Geographies, 18(6), 699–711. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2019.1694637
Passy, R., Bentsen, P., Gray, T., & Ho, S. (2019). Integrating outdoor learning into the curriculum: An exploration in four nations. Curriculum Perspectives, 39(1), 73–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-019-00070-8
Patchen, A., Rakow, D., Wells, N., Hillson, S., & Meredith, G. (2022). Barriers to children’s outdoor time: teachers’ and principals’ experiences in elementary schools. Environmental Education Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2099530
Perry, B., & Dockett, S. (2011). ‘How ’bout we have a celebration!’ Advice from children on starting school. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2011.597969
Planet Ark (2017). Learning from trees: Life lessons for future generations. Planet Ark.
Rayner, S. (2020, May 8). The outdoors environment and garden in schools [webinar address]. Planning outdoor environments in schools: Well-being, play and outdoor learning. https://jeavons.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/2020-Jeavons-Schools-Seminar-Program.pdf
Sahlberg, P., & Doyle, W. (2019). Let the children play: How more play will save our schools and help children thrive. Oxford University Press.
Schleicher, A. (2019). PISA 2018 insights and interpretations. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf
School Curriculum and Standards Authority (2023). Western Australian Curriculum. https://k10outline.scsa.wa.edu.au/home/teaching/curriculum-browser
Education Scotland (2022). Successful approaches to learning outdoors. https://education.gov.scot/media/rvdfwele/learning-outdoors.pdf
Scottish Government. (2018). Curriculum for excellence. https://education.gov.scot/documents/All-experiencesoutcomes18.pdf.
Sharma-Brymer, V., & Bland, D. (2016). Bringing nature to schools to promote children’s physical activity. Sports Medicine, 46(7), 955–962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-016-0487-z
Shume, T. J., & Blatt, E. (2019). A sociocultural investigation of pre-service teachers’ outdoor experiences and perceived obstacles to outdoor learning. Environmental Education Research, 25(9), 1347–1367. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1610862
Sjöblom, P., & Svens, M. (2019). Learning in the Finnish outdoor classroom: Pupils’ views. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 19(4), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2018.1531042
Speldewinde, C., Kilderry, A., & Campbell, C. (2021). ‘All the things children can see’: Understanding children’s noticing in bush kinders. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 24(2), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-021-00080-z
The Nature School (2023). The Nature School; Welcome. https://www.thenatureschool.org.au/
Tillmann, S., Tobin, D., Avison, W., & Gilliland, J. (2018). Mental health benefits of interactions with nature in children and teenagers: A systematic review. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 72(10), 958–966. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2018-210436
Twohig-Bennett, C., & Jones, A. (2018). The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. Environmental Research, 166, 628–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.030
Upper Sturt Primary School [USPS] (2023). Upper Sturt Primary School. https://www.uppersturtps.sa.edu.au/
Van Dijk-Wesselius, J., van den Berg, A., Maas, J., & Hovinga, D. (2020). Green schoolyards as outdoor learning environments: Barriers and solutions as experienced by primary school teachers. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02919
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (2023). The Victorian Curriculum F–10 https://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/
Waite, S. (2010). Losing our way? The downward path for outdoor learning for children aged 2–11 years. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 10(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2010.531087
Waite, S. (2011). Teaching and learning outside the classroom: Personal values, alternative pedagogies, and standards. Education, 39(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270903206141
Waite, S. (2019). Educating outside: Curriculum linked outdoor learning ideas for primary teachers. Education 3–13, 47(3), 378–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2018.1467475
Waite, S. (2020). Where are we going? International views on purposes, practices, and barriers in school- based outdoor learning. Education Sciences, 10(11), 311. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10110311
Waite, S., & Goodenough, A. (2018). What is different about Forest School? Creating a space for an alternative pedagogy in England. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-017-0005-2
Waite, S., Rutter, O., Fowle, A., & Edwards-Jones, A. (2017). Diverse aims, challenges and opportunities for assessing outdoor learning: a critical examination of three cases from practice. Education 3–13, 45(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2015.1042987
Wallis, J., & Dockett, S. (2015). Stakeholders, networks and links in early childhood policy: Network analysis and the transition to school: Position Statement. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 16(4), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949115616323
White, G., & Sharp, C. (2007). ‘It is different… because you are getting older and growing up’ How children make sense of the transition to Year 1. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 15(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502930601161882
Wu, X. Y., Han, L. H., Zhang, J. H., Luo, S., Hu, J. W., & Sun, K. (2017). The influence of physical activity, sedentary behavior on health-related quality of life among the general population of children and adolescents: A systematic review. PloS one, 12(11), e0187668–e0187668. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187668
Wynne, S., & Gorman, R. (2015). Nature Pedagogy. The Association of Independent Schools of Western Australia.
Zhou, Z., Chen, T., Wang, M., Jin, L., Zhao, Y., Chen, S., Wang, C., Deng, Q., Liu, Y., Morgan, I., He, M., Yizhi, L., Congdon, N., & Pan, C. (2017). Pilot study of a novel classroom designed to prevent myopia by increasing children’s exposure to outdoor light. PloS one, 12(7), e0181772–e0181772. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181772
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
This theoretical paper did not require human research ethics approval.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Frances, L., Quinn, F., Elliott, S. et al. Outdoor learning across the early years in Australia: Inconsistencies, challenges, and recommendations. Aust. Educ. Res. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-023-00685-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-023-00685-x