Learning Outside The Classroom

Learning Outside The
Classroom
2015
Barriers To Participation Within Primary
School Education
A Critical Review on Learning Outside The Classroom Within Primary School Education
By TJ (John) Vile
University of Derby

Learning Outside The Classroom, Barriers To Participation Within Primary School Education
1
Table of Contents
Abstract:................................................................................................................. 2
Introduction: .......................................................................................................... 3
Hypothesis:............................................................................................................. 5
Rationale:............................................................................................................... 6
Literature Review:.................................................................................................. 7
Methodology: ....................................................................................................... 21
Method:................................................................................................................ 22
Results:................................................................................................................. 25
Discussion: ........................................................................................................... 34
Conclusion: .......................................................................................................... 40
References: ........................................................................................................... 42
Appendices: .......................................................................................................... 45
Acknowledgments: ............................................................................................... 56
Epilogue: .............................................................................................................. 57

2
Abstract:
This research paper presents critical analyses of current LOTC (Learning Outside the
Classroom) practices within primary school education in the UK. The initial hypothesis
identified barriers to LOTC within primary schools. Olgilvie (2005), Martin et al (2006),
Council for Learning outside the Classroom (2015), Louv (2006) and Gill (2007) identified a
number of key barriers such as lack of time, fear of risk, and lack of understanding of the
benefits of LOTC. Through the review of literature, it was identified that there was a lack of
previous research with educators in this area. A study was conducted and data was
collected from primary school education professionals via an online survey. The results
showed that only 40% of those sampled currently take part in LOTC within their curriculum.
However, this study lacked vigor due to a low level or responses, making statistical
correlation analysis untenable. Be that as it may, this study found that time limitations
appeared to be the most common barrier for teachers wanting to take children out of the
classroom. Recommendations for future research include a longer timescale in addition to
visiting schools in person instead of using an online survey site. Sampling from a larger pool
of participants was also deemed appropriate for a future study (Descombe, 2010).

3
Introduction:
This research paper evaluates and discusses theoretical approaches regarding the benefits
of learning outside the classroom (LOTC) and facilitation of these experiences. LOTC is
frequently focused on experiential education, where theoretical knowledge and experience
are combined allowing for knowledge to be further expanded and adapted within a practical
learning environment. In the outdoors, experiential learning is a focal and critical part of the
facilitation and learning process (Berry, 2011). The research undertaken in this project looks
to find out about current practices in primary schools in the UK, and to identify if
educational professionals are participating in LOTC, and what barriers might be standing in
their way.
Current education practices in primary school education in the UK are mixed and varied;
currently teacher training standards as set out by OFSTED, the department of education
(DOE) and training institutions work in conjunction to set the standards required for training
and certifying primary school education professionals (DOE, 2012). The overall aim of the
study is to identify current practices in primary education and to investigate the learning
process both for education professionals but also for the students that are taught and to
also identify current practices relating to LOTC and educational practice guidelines.
Set out in the outdoor manifesto of 2006 the UK Government, The Institute of Outdoor
Learning and The English Outdoor Council put together a set of recommendations to bring
outdoor education into mainstream education across all levels (0-18 years old) (DfES, 2006).
For this current study, LOTC meant stripping away the classroom environment and using
some sort of natural space.

4
In the UK the NHS (National Health Service) is fighting a battle with obesity (Rasheed et al.,
2010), people do not need to leave their home to experience the outdoors as it can be
brought to them in a virtual format, thus removing the need for physical activity, in addition
to the easily accessible technology that removes nature from day to day life. Currently
people walk down the street with headphones in their ears and in addition to looking down
at their mobile phone thus removing them more from nature, as Richard Louv described in
“Last Child in the Woods” there is a “nature deficit disorder” taking place. With increasing
barriers between people and nature in the modern world, it is not hard to Louv’s hypothesis
concerning “Nature Deficit Disorder” and the effects this might be having on people (Louv,
2006). With technology now being a big part of the younger generation’s day to day life it
appears that this technology is removing them from their own natural surroundings.
Marghanita Hughes (an outspoken proponent of outdoor learning) claims that “nature is our
children’s future, time and nature improves children’s physical, mental and emotional
wellbeing” and ”when children and nature mix something magical happens, and all children
deserve to experience that magic part of childhood” (Hughes, 2015). This research project
looks to support or dispute these sorts of claims.

5
Hypothesis:
Teachers are likely to use other facilities that are readily available to them if they need
another space for a particular teaching session (Bilton, 2005). With health and safety
guidelines and time limitations during the day, it would seem that some teachers may
believe it is too difficult to take their children outside during the day. Other teachers may
feel like they cannot spend enough time teaching outdoors due to a variety of barriers.
These barriers might include fear of litigation, parental refusal, curriculum guidelines, and
not enough resources (time and money). Several researchers have already identified a
variety of barriers that come up for teachers looking to take their students outdoors (See
table 1). This current study will look to see which of these barriers are still operating, if any,
and to what extent and how the teachers feel about taking their students out and whether
they are willing to work to overcome barriers.
Potential Barriers To LOTC For Primary Schools In The UK:
Element Of Risk
Fear Of Litigation If Anything Goes Wrong
Money/Cost Of Setting Things Up
Inexperienced Staff
Lack Of Understanding Of The Benefits To Outdoor Learning
Lack Of Time In Curriculum
Line Managers/Head Teachers/Board Of Governors Say No To LOTC
Lack Of Facilities/green space
Lack Of Uptake (Not Enough People Want To Do It)
School Thinks That LOTC Not Applicable To Their Learning Environment
No History Of LOTC
Need More Safety Things In Place (More Staff, Equipment, Specialist Staff)
Unnerving To Have Students Outside Of 'Normal' Environment
Higher Costs
Table 1: Potential Barriers to LOTC (Olgilvie, 2005; Martin et al, 2006, Council for Learning
outside the Classroom, 2015; Louv, 2006)

6
Rationale:
The goal of this study is to identify current practices and to determine if outdoor learning is
currently being practiced within primary education and to investigate and identify what
some students might be missing out on by not getting enough time learning outside. A
secondary goal is to determine barriers to learning outdoors that might exist for education
professionals and students in an attempt to find solutions to some of these barriers.
Different schools throughout the country have different ways of delivering the concepts
required in primary school. Schools with more access to outdoor space may have an easier
time taking students out of the classroom into natural spaces to learn. Through this research
project, it is hoped that recommendations can be made to the national curriculum
developers to help make LOTC easier for teachers. Because individuals learn differently, and
because it is important for teachers to have a way of tailoring learning to different students,
it is important for teachers to realize the potential benefits of LOTC as a tool for benefitting
student development (Kolb, 2014). It is hoped that this current research will shed light on
some of the issues that stand in the way of making LOTC a reality for more students and
teachers. It is also hoped that this research will have a positive impact on the LOTC
Manifesto (DfES, 2006) when it is re-written to reflect more current practice.
Identifying why there are barriers to going outside the classroom can aid the learning
process and aid policy makers in figuring out ways to overcome barriers; this may be
important information for policy makers. Giving the results of this study to influential
organizations like the Institute of Outdoor Learning, OFSTED and the HSE could influence
industry change to overcome some of the existing barriers.

7
Literature Review:
A growing body of academic literature provides a clear rationale for
classroom teachers taking their students outside during class time.
There are three particularly convincing reasons for doing so: the
outdoors provides a means for bringing curricula alive, it helps students
understand our environment and related issues of sustainable
development, and it encourages physical activity.… Going outdoors
brings health and well-being benefits, and provides opportunities for
children to learn how to evaluate and manage risks.
(Beames, Higgins, and Nicol. 2012, p.1).
In the United Kingdom (UK), the government has shown an interest in developing aspects of
outdoor learning and has produced the Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto (DfES
2006). The outdoor manifesto clearly defines and highlights that “the use of places other
than the classroom for teaching and learning” (Outdoor Manifesto, 2006, p. 3) is beneficial
for learning overall. There are clear benefits to using the outdoors within an experiential
education setting in order to enhance learning with the goals of improved academic
achievement, development of skills and independence, the nurturing of creativity,
developing the skills of dealing with uncertainty and the improvement of peoples’ attitudes
towards their own and others’ learning (Beard and Wilson, 2012). Currently LOTC initiatives
are not compulsory within education, they are merely recommendations (DfES, 2006; IOL,
2015; EOC, 2015).
Experiential education is now at the forefront of the national curriculum and also within the
outdoors, this is where learning involves experience (Beard and Wilson, 2012). It is
understood that learning is a continuous and never ending cycle where the most effective
learning combines experience (Kolb, 2014). The focus of “Learning Outside The Classroom”

8
(IOL, 2005) and bringing learning into the “real world” is not a mainstream approach to
learning at present. The LOTC learning approach is different to most mainstream methods
because it has at the forefront of its aims experiential learning and development (Beames et
al, 2012).
The 2006 outdoor manifesto also highlights that “Learning outside the classroom is about
raising achievement through an organized, powerful approach to learning in which direct
experience is of prime importance” (DFES, 2006, p.5). This is about where and how we learn,
as well as what we learn; by using a practical application this reinforces what is being learnt.
Research has shown that for students "working outside can be harder than [working] inside,
one may be physically more active, regularly battling against the elements and often more
alert. Overall education out of doors is physically and mentally taxing” (Gill, 2007, p. 15).
Some researchers may think this is the case, but it may not always be. Because of the
current climate towards health and safety in our culture, health and safety issues have
gotten a bit overwhelming. Lyme bay in the 1980s had an effect on people’s view of outdoor
education, and currently, the media has sensationalised stranger danger and the need for
parents to worry about their kids experiencing danger outdoors. As a result, many teachers
and parents have concluded that the best place for kids to be is indoors. But other
researchers have disputed these claims (Broome, 2009; Hammond, 2007).

9
“We have to be convinced all the effort [to take children outdoors] is for a good reason”
(Bilton, 2010, p. 11). The reality is that the benefits are not always immediately apparent
when altering the situation and circumstances where kids are leaning. The results need to
be measured over a longer period of time. The amount of time to wait to take a
measurement is not agreed upon by teachers, but most agree that taking time and seeing
how the experiences are influencing kids’ learning after a longer period of time is essential
(Bilton, 2005; David et al, 1996; Gill, 2013). It is difficult to test one group of kids versus
another when doing learning outdoors versus learning indoors, so the amount of data
available is limited (Skates, 2014). Furthermore, “…many teachers are unsure how to begin
[taking their children out of the classroom]” (Beames, et al., 2012 p.2).
Some researchers argue that children should have free access to the outdoors all the time.
“It is important that children have continuous access to outdoor play and it is not confined
to set times and good weather” (O’Hagen and Smith, 1993, p. 60). They describe the
benefits of vigorous physical play as improving spatial awareness, learning to take risks, and
developing “practical concepts of area, energy, weight, forces, mass inertia” (O’Hagen and
Smith, 1993, p. 47). These researchers indicate that learning outdoors can help not only
physical development but also benefit childrens’ cognitive development.
There are, however, a variety of reasons offered by researchers as well as to why children
are not being allowed to learn outside as much as they could. Kivner (2012) identifies
several when he states that,
The underlying causes of this change [from learning outdoors] are
complex and linked to wider changes in society, including increasing car
ownership and use, loss of green spaces, longer parental working hours,
a rising fear of crime… and the growth of indoor, screen-based leisure
activities (Kivner, 2012).

10
Tim Gill (2007) would blame it on the cotton wool culture that has development in our
culture, the overwhelming desire to protect our children beyond what is necessary. Knight
(2013) argues that a greater proportion of people in society are living in predominantly
urban areas, away from natural spaces. Like Louv (2006), Knight is arguing that because of
urbanization and the continuing building of concrete ‘jungles’, people are losing green
spaces to cement. People are therefore slowly being pulled away from nature as cities grow,
and they are losing touch with nature, and Louv would argue that they are beginning to
suffer from nature deficit disorder. Hammond (2007) agrees with this analysis and states
“many of the fields and hills that were the natural playgrounds of previous generation have
disappeared and the lack of space has been compounded by parental concerns about safety,
so children have little opportunity to play freely outdoors” (p. 14).
Hammond continues that humans appear to have a determination to experience risk. Taking
children to the woods and allowing them to explore naturally allows kids to have beneficial
learning experiences, but with boundaries. As they develop, the boundaries can be
expanded, and the risks expanded as well (Hammond, 2007). The natural landscape makes a
good playground. “Expensive equipment does not guarantee children’s safety, nor the
direction of their learning” (Hammond, 2007, p. 21).

11
“You empower kids by teaching them how to do something dangerous, but how to do it
safely” (Selby, 2014). “Children have to be outside because there are things they need - for
example fresh air, sun and daylight" (Bilton, 2010, p. 11). This may by or may not be the
case. Some researchers argue that this is the case and is the basis for needing to go
outdoors. Others argue that the importance of going outdoors has more to do with learning
styles and the impact of learning in different environments and under different conditions
(Kolb, 2014). Other authors argue for a number of specific benefits gained by children
playing outdoors (Loscalzo, 2013) (see Appendix 1). Loscalzo (2013) argues that children
need the freedom and time to play, and that play is not a luxury, that instead it is a necessity
for bettering their life skills and physical development. Furthermore, it has been argued that
the outside allows people a place to unwind and relax. People who visited natural
environments several times a day, every day, or several times a week rated themselves as
having greater life satisfaction, more self-worth, more happiness and less anxiety than less
regular visitors (Gov.uk, 2015).
Children coming from cities versus the country will likely have a different reaction to
learning outdoors as well. Some of the factors are difficult to account for, but research
seems clear that learning in different ways is important to meet the needs of each child
(Foundation Years, 2012). "Fundamentally, we believe that kids should be outside playing
for a good proportion of the day because it is how you can stay happy, less stressed but it is
also good in a whole range of ways," said Play England director Cath Prisk (in Kivner, 2012).
However, she added: "Research we carried out last year showed that parents think taking
their kids to the park is something you do as a treat instead of something you do every day”
and, "There is a growing body of research that says getting outside regularly is good for kids,
but that is fighting a massive zeitgeist, which says that if you let your kid out of your sight,
then they will come to harm" (Kivner, 2012).

12
"Children will do many things that we bid - stick tissue paper on card, complete worksheets,
run around outside like headless chickens - but just because children do them does not
mean they are appropriate” (Bilton, 2010, p.11). Children nowadays in school are
sometimes treated like factory items. They come in at one end of the school, are treated in
various ways, and then at the other end of school, they come out. They are treated much
too much as if they are all the same; differentiation is not happening enough, say some
researchers (Stradling and Saunders, 1993). As Beard and Wilson (2012, p.16) note “no two
people experience the same event exactly the same way”. Teacher training teaches teachers
that learning inside is the way forward, but they are not doing enough training for teachers
to help them learn how to teach in differentiated ways, including teaching outdoors (Beard
and Wilson, 2012).
Learning is complex and has many different approaches and the outdoors is part of the
complex process. Each and every person learns differently in different situations; what
might be the norm for one person may not be for the other. "The children that are not so
confident in the classroom are different outdoors. They have more freedom to take risks but
they are taking risks in a safe environment…She just blossomed, she led that group and it
was amazing to see. Children that are not so confident in a classroom environment do
blossom outside” (Broome, 2009).
We learn from others as well as ourselves, we learn also from what we see, hear and feel
too. Government curriculum guidelines do not allow the teachers to make the changes
needed to help adequately meet the needs of a diverse group of learners. “Many school
improvement efforts have to swim against the current of government regulation” (Hopkins
and Levin, 2000 p. 15).

13
“Children love junk food and TV, but this does not make them right for children. …We need
to protect children and make sure they do what is age and stage appropriate” (Bilton, 2010
p. 11). Schools and the government may actually be partially to blame for the problem of
parents being overprotective of children. With the creation of the internet, and the speed
with which news stories can be broadcast, small news items can be spun out much more
quickly and land in someone’s lap. Therefore, people believe that there is more threats to
their children nowadays then there used to be, but the reality is actually the opposite (Gill,
2007). The media also plays a role in this. For example the use of the media to highlight
accidents from hill walking can give people an impression that it is dangerous and not safe,
however it can also report on the benefits of the activity such as health and fitness, use of
the countryside and the effects that it has within a sustainable use of exercise. Health and
safety is a key and also a principle part of working in the outdoors. By having necessary
information on health and safety can help to minimize injuries. By having the right
information we help to keep ourselves and others from harm and this is also a key part of an
teacher’s toolbox (Olgilvie, 2005). But are teachers being given these skills in their training?
"This would give us more answers and I would not be at all surprised to see greater interest
from the clinical world in the benefits of taking kids into green spaces…we are not quite
there yet, but the evidence is building and I think it is time that the health sector took
proper notice"(Gill in Kivner, 2012).

14
Similarly, children these days are exposed to technology more and more, and children are
often given access to modern technology possibly before they are ready. These include
fancy phones, touch pads, and computers. Children love them, but are these items
appropriate for children? As stated previously, Louv (2006) argues that there is a deficit of
contact with nature for kids, and that kids are experiencing ‘nature deficit disorder’ partially
because of their contact with technology. These predictions can be seen as similar to the
dark predictions of George Orwell (1954) in his book 1984. It is hard to say whether Louv’s
predictions will be played out, but his implications for the future are fairly dire. "The way I
unpack the idea is that regular contact with nature is part of a balanced diet of childhood
experiences (Gill in Kivner, 2012).
"If children do not have those experiences then they are not going to thrive to the same
degree as if they did," he added "They are also likely to grow up not caring about the world
around them; while it is not a clinical condition, it should be something that worries us."
(Louv in Kivner, 2012).
“Being outside and being outside engaged in meaningful activities is appropriate for children
and particularly the young child” (Bilton, 2010 p. 12). Researchers argue that being outside
will give them the opportunities to develop the skills required to succeed as adults in this
society. Not going outside has been shown to decrease people’s quality of life; their life
expectancy goes down, and their likelihood of contracting various diseases goes up
(Rasheed et al, 2010). Getting kids outside when young helps to set up beneficial habits that
are likely to last a lifetime. Going outside is critical to building fundamental life skills.
Without being able to apply knowledge practically, learning these skills can be very difficult
(Beard and Wilson, 2012).

15
“It is not a case of needing to prove that outside is better than inside; both environments
have benefits, it is a case of being aware that outside is a part of our life and benefits us
physiologically, psychologically, physically, socially and so on. It is a mind and body benefit”
(Bilton, 2010, p. 11). The issue revolves around the balance between going outside and
spending inside time. Balancing the amount of time between the two spaces can be a
challenge. Research has shown that children enjoy learning in a first-hand way, and learning
outside can facilitate this (Waite and Pratt, 2011). In Malaysia, in 2010, a research paper was
written (Harun and Salamuddin, 2010) that has to do with developing personalities for
people spending time outdoors. The intellectual and physical experiences that the
participants had had demonstrated strong benefits for spending time outdoors for personal
development. “Based on the analysis that was conducted, outdoor education does have an
impact on behaviour changes of the participants” (Harun and Salamuddin, 2010, p. 233).
These personal traits that were benefitted include cooperation skills, leadership ability, self-
confidence and ability to cope with changes.
A potential barrier to learning outside is the current way it is frequently organised.
In our experience, outdoor education…has become increasingly focused
on adventurous activities conducted in highly controlled environments.
These often take place far from school [at an outdoor education center]
have few connections to the school curriculum, and are provided by
instructors trained to facilitate these activities using specialized
equipment. … Programmes of this nature are expensive, require
specialist skills, are rarely progressive, and consequently are
experienced infrequently by most children. This may represent one kind
of outdoor learning, but there are others! (Beames et al., 2012, p. 4).

16
The Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage (QCA 2000) emphasises that the
outdoors should be as much a part of a child's learning environment as the indoor
environment. This document states that every child should have access to an outdoor
curriculum. The principles state that;
To be effective, an early years’ curriculum should be carefully
structured. … A planned and carefully structured curriculum should
provide rich and stimulating experiences and make a good use of
outdoor space so that children are enabled to learn by working on a
larger, more active scale than is possible indoors. [And] Well planned
play, both indoors and outdoors, is a key way in which young children
learn with enjoyment and challenge (James et al 2005, P17).
As stated previously, LOTC is not a mandatory part of the national curriculum within primary
education. Add to this the fact that organizations like the English Outdoor Council and the
Institute of Outdoor Learning are not statutory bodies: they are merely there in an advisory
capacity. This is unlike the Adventurous Activity Licensing Service (AALS) and the Health and
Safety Executive (HSE) who have legislative powers and can enforce policies, law and
governance across the outdoor sector (IOL, 2015; EOC, 2015; HSE, 2015). This puts the
momentum with the organizations likely create rules barring participation in the outdoors,
and takes it away from the entities likely to promote it.

17
There is a problem between early years and primary education: there is no carry over
regarding the need to go outside in the curriculum. Because the early years’ education
system has lesser constraints on it, it has to deliver the early years’ guidelines. When
children go into reception the teachers are constrained as to what they have to deliver
according to the curriculum guidelines, and so the amount of play time, especially outside
time, becomes limited when compared to time spent at nursery before children go to
primary school. The primary school teachers have to meet certain requirements, and as a
result, the quality of the learning changes. But some would argue that these requirements
force the teachers to stop meeting the needs of some of the children when it comes to
learning (DOE, 2012). Ofsted has encouraged schools to focus on indoor learning skills over
outdoor learning skills in order to promote certain kinds of learning skills set up by the
government. But are these skills the right ones? It can be argued that this takes something
away from the individual learners and treats every student too much like the next one, with
some researchers claiming that there is a big difference between what is taught in school
and what is needed in the real world (Moore, 2000).
The use of the outdoors to further the learning experience is beneficial but also effective.
Outdoor adventure learning is now a major part of the national curriculum and is heavily
endorsed by the IOL (Institute of Outdoor Learning) alongside the LOTC (Learning Outside
The Classroom) initiative (IOL, 2015).
Risk is another factor affecting the way kids interact with the natural world. The HSE is
primarily focused on health and safety in the workplace, but it is clear that attitudes to risk
are formed long before young people enter the world of work. Play - and particularly play
outdoors - teaches young people how to deal with risk. Without this awareness and learning
they are ill equipped to deal with working life. Our health and safety system in Britain
requires workplace risks to be managed, not eliminated, and gives people responsibility for
their own wellbeing. We simply cannot afford to exclude outdoor play and learning from our
children's education (Gill, 2007).

18
"Children learn more when they are actively engaged, especially when there is a thrilling
sense of adventure involved. The activities at 50DT (50 Dangerous Things) camp will help
kids learn how to recognize and mitigate risk for themselves and they will be more confident
and competent as a result. Life skills for living heroic lives” (Tulley, nd).
Young people are curious, and they learn quickly. We should not deny
them the opportunity to learn by taking risks. Seeking to protect them
from every conceivable hazard, rather than sensibly managing the
genuine risks they face, ultimately leaves them in harm's way, not to
mention robbing them of memories that last a lifetime. [Lack of risk] is
clearly a factor in children’s physical activity levels, and hence their
levels of overweight and obesity. It is also relevant to children’s health,
well-being, and more fundamentally to what a good childhood looks and
feels like. It is revealing that research last year from the Children’s
Society found that freedom of choice was the single most significant
factor in influencing children’s overall levels of subjective well-being
(Hackitt in HSE, 2012).
Outside of the UK and in some parts of Europe outdoor education or as it is more commonly
known as “forest school” is more common than in the UK. The use of forest school
ideologies in Wales was brought to the attention of the BBC. One organizer was quoted as
saying "The children have grown in confidence over the weeks and are able to implement
conflict resolution strategies independently." Ms Prior said it was also helping their social
development and they were becoming "increasingly creative with the natural resources
available to them." Staff have transferred some of the techniques back to the nursery
allowing children to use their new understanding of negotiating and problem-solving in the
normal classroom setting (BBC, 2012). The concept of Forest Schools originally came from
Sweden in the 1950s and was adopted by other Scandinavian and European countries.

19
In addition to raising children's awareness of nature and the flora and fauna that surrounds
them, Forest School places an emphasis on team working and problem solving (Broome,
2009).
Steadily increasing governmental support for learning outside the
classroom can be found in many countries. … This situation, however, is
not universal. There are many teachers throughout the world who
would like to make the case for outdoor learning, yet are within an
educational or political context that is not supportive. (Beames et al,
2012, p2).
Moreover,
Rather than being regarded as an infrequent, recreational disruption to
learning, taking classes outdoors should be seen as an extension of, or
indeed integral part of classroom activities and used to meet the
curricular and other needs of students. Outdoor learning content can be
directly linked to the ‘formal’ or ‘official’ curriculum, as it is in Australia,
New Zealand, Canada, Norway, and Scotland (Beames et al, 2012, p 7).
A 2009 report by Natural England found that only 10% of children played in woodland,
compared with 40% of their parents' generation (Kivner, 2012). The study indicated that
there were a number of ways the curriculum could be improved to help develop LOTC.
These included promoting better use of accessible green space in order to increase the use
of under-utilized areas, promoting "forest schools" and similar approaches to learning in the
outdoors, and encouraging schools to give greater emphasis to offering children "engaging
nature experiences" (Kivner, 2012). The report championed the use of forest schools
because it quoted research by the Forestry Commission that showed “lessons and activities
within a woodland appeared to have a beneficial effect for children with emotional or
behavioral problems” (Kivner, 2012).

20
“Young children’s learning experiences are most efficient when they are relevant,
meaningful, and active, and are provided in a challenging but familiar context” (David et al,
1996, p.5). If a child is given a strong foundation in their early years of learning, they will
benefit throughout their later learning. The children that have direct experience in learning
early on, they will be able to refer to these experiences. LOTC can help to give students
these experiences in an active setting.
Beames et al (2002) argue that LOTC should be used just as indoor learning in the classroom
is used. It should be planned in line with curriculum guidelines, and should be used in such a
way as to maximize the learning of the students.
From the existing literature it can be seen that there is a mixed view on LOTC not only from
the outdoor sector but from the primary education sector. There is a mixed message around
LOTC, some support the idea whilst others only see barriers. From looking at the HSE,
reports on accidents that have occurred when students were outside the classroom are
readily available online, and it may be that this easy access to this sort of information has
impacted the actions of teachers and educators consciously or unconsciously. Outdoor
learning appears to be more common in other parts of Europe than in the UK, and this may
be because of less intrusive health and safety regulation. Ultimately, many of the
researchers have indicated that the benefits to LOTC outweigh the perceived risk, and so it
needs to be done.

21
Methodology:
This study was looking find out what barriers were affecting educational professionals in a
primary school setting, including teachers, teaching assistants, administrators, head
teachers and deputy heads. Primarily, this is a phenomenological study because this study
looks to find out about a subject through feedback from subjects’ actual judgements. “A
phenomenological research study is a study that attempts to understand people’s
perceptions, perspectives and understandings of a particular situation” (RPFHP, 1990). This
method is seen as an alternative method of research to positivism, which is a method that
looks to measure things in the real world, that exist outside of people’s beliefs or feelings
(Denscombe, 2010). However, this study also includes a small amount of positivism as well,
based on some of the questions asked of the participants. This mix of methods was used in
order to identify key numerical items pertaining to the participant’s experiences, as well as
getting some of their ideas and feelings about the subject. Doing both kinds of questions in
the study was hopefully to get a broad enough understanding of current practices in relation
to LOTC, and doing only one type of question was considered to be not broad enough to get
holistic understanding of the situation. The two types of questions were also meant to
ensure the participants really thought about the concepts when answering the
questionnaire. In this way, the study had a mixed methods approach, and should provide
data that is more accurate (Denscombe, 2010). This mixed method approach is meant to
provide a more complete picture of the subject
Furthermore, this study was a cross-sectional study, as this survey was only given out at one
time. This study was also a deductive study as it looked to confirm a hypothesis that was
developed by the researched. This process, then, followed a series of steps from a theory,
to a hypothesis, to collecting data, to either confirming or dis-counting the original idea
(Trochim, 2006; Saunders et al, 2007).

22
Method:
To gather data, an online survey was conducted. The survey included both open ended
(phenomenological/qualitative) questions and closed (positivistic/quantitative) questions.
The survey was sent out to selected primary schools. These primary schools were selected
using Google Maps, and the researcher decided to find schools within a 20 mile radius of the
university where the research was originated. Other primary schools were selected based
on a 5 mile radius of the researcher’s home in London. This selection method for the sample
was used primarily because the researcher wanted to ensure some schools were from a
more rural setting than others, while some would be definitely in an urban setting. This
would be considered a non-probability sample, as this was not a random sample.
Furthermore, this would not be considered a representative sample, as the number of
schools studied was very small. The reason for this type of sampling was to keep the study
simple out of necessity for the researcher (Denscombe, 2010). Working with schools in
order to get access to teachers and teaching staff is an example of cluster sampling, which
takes advantage of the fact that teachers are already clustered at a school in comparison to
the general population (Denscombe, 2010). One disadvantage of using an online survey is
that they are easy to ignore, especially because there is not personal contact. The main
advantage of an online survey was low cost and time savings.
In order to ensure that the schools would not have to deal with any issues of child
protection, all the contacts with schools were done remotely. In addition, the researcher
knew that it would be difficult to actually travel to schools, so the research was conducted
online. This was also done to hopefully make the surveys easier for the teaching staff at the
schools to fill in when they had time.

23
Originally, 65 primary schools were contacted via the internet. This initial contact was done
via email. The email addresses were found online on the school websites. The first email
contained general information about the study, who the researcher was, and invited them
to respond with a confirmation that they and their staff would be willing to participate in
the study. The email indicated that the study was about LOTC. Email contacts were given to
the head teachers for both the researcher and the supervisor of the research at the
University of Derby.
When a school responded positively, the researcher sent them a letter to further brief them
on the study and how their data would be used. The participant briefing sheet included the
dates as to when the survey would close and how to access the survey on the internet (via
Survey Monkey) (Surveymonkey, 2015). Each participant was given information on how they
could withdraw after completing the survey if they chose to as well. Following the data
collection, a de-briefing letter was sent to each school thanking them for participating and
letting them know again how to access the researcher if they needed to.
The survey itself consisted of nine questions, of which two of the required a text based
response (qualitative data). The other questions were multiple choice, and required one or
more answers. The questions were engineered using the online software such that all
questions required an answer before moving on.
Four pilot studies were conducted prior to sending out the survey to the schools. The first
pilot was used to identify whether the questions that were going to be sent out were
appropriate to the hypothesis. From this pilot study, some of the questions were revised
and the format was revised.
The second pilot study was used to determine if enough questions were being asked and the
quality of the questions. The researcher was able to look at the responses to see if the
answers were along the lines required. During this pilot, the time required to finish the
survey was measured to ensure the survey could be completed in under 10 minutes.

24
The third pilot study was conducted in order to ensure the order of the questions was well
suited. From the feedback, the order of the questions was changed and a de-briefing
section was added at the end.
The fourth and final pilot study was used to test run the questions that can be seen in
Appendix 3. This pilot determined if the survey was ready to be sent out. Following this, the
supervisor for the study gave the researcher the go-ahead to send the survey out.
The data was collected and processed with the use of Survey Monkey and Microsoft Excel.

25
Results:
The data from the surveys was analyzed and placed into bar and pie chart formats in order
to express clearly the numerical data that was collected. Qualitative data collected is
presented in table format below. Overall, only 5 responses were collected within the set
time limit. The survey was sent out to the 3 schools that responded and showed interest in
participating. Cleary, not many of the teachers from these schools were able to respond by
the deadline.
Question 1:
1: Are You Currently Working Or Based Within Primary School Education As Any Of The Following?
 Head Teacher
 Deputy Head
 Head Of Department
 Teacher
 Teaching Assistant
 Administrator
 Other (Please Specify)
Chart 2.1. Question 1 responses.
Chart 2.1 shows the various roles from the participants. As there were only 5 participants in
the project, the overall numbers are easy to see in each category.
0
1
2
3
Head Teacher Deputy Head Head Of
Department
Teacher Teaching
Assitant/HLTA
Adminsitrator
Question 1:

26
Question 2:
2: How Long Have You Been Working Within Education?
 Less Than 1 Year
 1 To 3 Years
 3 To 5 Years
 5 To 7 Years
 7 To 10 Years
 10 Years +
Chart 2.2. Question 2 Pie Chart.
Chart 2.2 shows the percentages of the respondents that fell into different categories for
time spent in education. 2 had been practicing for 10+ years (40%), 2 had been practicing for
3-5 years (40%), and 1 had been practicing for 5 to 7 years.
40%
20%
40%
Question 2:
Less than 1 year 1 to 3 Years 3 to 5 Years 5 to 7 Years 7 to 10 Years 10 Years +

27
Question 3:
3: Please Indicate Which Year Group Or Year Groups You Currently Work With? (Please Indicate One Or All
That You Have Or Currently Work With)
 Reception (Year 0)
 Year 1
 Year 2
 Year 3
 Year 4
 Year 5
 Year 6
Chart 2.3.
Chart 2.3 shows the year group(s) that participants have worked with or currently are
working with, 22% have either worked with or are currently working with year 6, for the
other options the other year groups, years 0 to 5 each category was 13%.
13%
13%
13%
13%
13%
13%
22%
Question 3:
Reception Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

28
Question 4:
4: From The List Below Please Indicate If Your School Is:
 Rural (Countryside)
 Suburban (Within A Neighbourhood)
 Urban (Within The Setting Of A Built Up City)
Chart 2.4 shows the percentage, of which the participants identified their school as either
being rural, urban or suburban, 60% identified their school as being ‘suburban’ and 40%
identified their school as ‘urban’.
60%
40%
Question 4:
Rural Surburban Urban

29
Question 5:
5: On A Scale Of 1 To 10 Please Indicate Your Schools Access To A Natural Space (1 Being Inaccessible And
10 Being Readily Accessible). For The Purposes Of This Research Playing Field/S And The Playground Are
Not Considered A Natural Space.
Chart 2.5 shows the participants perceptions based on access to a natural space, excluding
playing field(s) and the playground, 40% identified that a ‘natural space’ was ‘readily
accessible’ whereas 40% identified that a ‘natural space’ was difficult to access, a further
20% identified that their access to a ‘natural space’ was moderately accessible.
20%
20%
20%
40%
Question 5:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

30
Question 6:
6: On Average How Many Hours Per Month Have You Taken Children Outside To Learn, (Excluding Physical
Education)?
 None
 0 To 2 Hours
 2 To 4 Hours
 4 To 6 Hours
 6 To 8 Hours
 8 To 10 Hours
 10 Hours +
Chart 2.6 shows the amount of time that those surveyed take children outside the
classroom per month, 40% said that they did not take any form of learning (excluding
physical education) outside of the classroom, 20% said they spend on average 4 to 6 hours a
month outside the classroom, an additional 20% identified that they spend 6 to 8 hours
outside the classroom and 20% said they spent 10 or more hours outside of the classroom
environment.
40%
20%
20%
20%
Question 6:
none 0 to 2 hours 2 to 4 hours 4 to 6 hours 6 to 8 hours 8 to 10 hours 10 hours +

31
Question 7:
7: Please Describe In Detail How You Take Learning Outside The Classroom With Your Pupils, If Not Then
Please Describe What Stops You From Doing So
Participant No: Answer:
1 A health and safety mad head teacher.
2 I just follow the lesson plan which has never been to take the children outside. I do
not think it would be appreciated if I did this without being asked and also the time
and effort it would take to get the children outside, settled and back in again with all
of the resources/resources it would eat into the lesson time.
3 I run after school forest club which means we are outside whatever the weather.
We have made a variety of things, learnt new skills such as tying knows, using a
potato peeler to not only peel carrots to eat outside but also whittle wood to make
magic journey sticks.
Wherever possible I take my class outside to enhance their learning, going on walks
around the school grounds to find objects to then write stories about with Year 2 to
finding patterns and shapes with Reception class.
4 We encourage all teachers to take the children to local parks, open spaces. We also
have extensive grounds and are a forest school.
5 Every week, I take EYFS children outside for "Outdoor Learning". I take all the
other children outside whenever their science topic can be successfully taught
outdoors - assuming the weather is suitable. Only the EYFS children bring outdoor
clothing specifically for their lesson. If the weather is bad, not all children are suitably
equipment for outdoor learning, without sending letters home.
Table 2.7. Question 7.
Table 2.7 shows the responses to the open-ended questions, there was no limit to the
responses.

32
40%
20%
20%
20%
Question 8:
Yes No
Will Be Considering For The Future Currently Setting Up/Looking Into "Forest School"
Unsure Of What Forest School Is
Question 8:
8: Does Your Current School Use Initiatives Such As “Forest School”?
 Yes
 No
 Will Be Considering For The Future
 Currently Setting Up/Looking Into “Forest School” Schemes
 Unsure Of What “Forest School” Is
Chart 2.8. Question 8
Chart 2.8 identifies if a school is either; proactively taking part in ‘forest school’ based
learning curriculum, 40% said they are currently taking part in a forest school learning
environment, 20% said they were unsure of what forest school was, 20% said no and an
additional 20% said they were ‘currently setting up/looking into forest school schemes’.

33
Question 9:
9: As A Child Please Tell Us Of Any Learning Outside That You Did Whilst At Primary School, Excluding
Physical Education And Playtime (Please Briefly Describe), (Please Also Place The Last Three Digits Of
Your Telephone Number At The End In Brackets In Case You Wish To Withdraw).
Participant No: Answer:
1 Had science lessons in the woods. Art lessons on the school field.
2 None
3 I used to enjoy being outside but when I went to school we were only allowed
outside at breaks and lunchtimes :-(
4 I do not remember being taken outside that much at all
5 I don't remember any. We had a nature table, but brought things in from home for
that. I don't remember any school trips either, apart from in the final year.
Table 2.9. Question 9.
Table 2.9 shows the responses to the open-ended questions, there was no limit to the
responses.

34
Discussion:
From the literature review, it appears that the overall benefits of LOTC have been identified
and discussed (Louv, 2006; Kivner, 2012; Gill, 2007; Beames et al, 2012; Broome, 2009;
Berry, 2011; Bilton, 2010; Hammond, 2007; Harun and Salamuddin, 2010; Knight, 2013;
Tulley, nd) . However because LOTC is non-statutory (Gov.uk, 2010, DfES, 2006) there are
schools and LEAs have the choice whether to opt in or opt out of participating. Some schools
or LEAs do not have the budgets or the space to do outdoor learning in the same way as
other schools (Gill, 2007).
In this study, it has been identified that the results showed a mixed situation. Some schools
were taking part in outdoor learning or forest school ideas in their in house curriculum
choices, while others were considering taking part (see Results Question 7). The remaining
schools appeared to not be taking part in LOTC. This research appears to show that the
teachers did understand the general level of benefit that could be had for children
experiencing learning outside, but that barriers were often too big to overcome. One
teacher, participant 5, (see question 7 in results section) identified that they do EYFS (Early
Years Forest School) at their school during everyday teaching. This teacher clearly is aware
of the benefits of learning outside and is making strides to make it happen at her school.
She has identified the benefits, and despite the curriculum that does not mandate this sort
of teaching, she has taken it upon herself to take kids outside when possible.
The literature reviewed has shown that it has the particular benefit of helping improve
achievement levels for children across academic performance areas through a holistic style
of learning i.e. something that complements the style of learning or the subject area being
studied. It is also known as a complementary style of learning (Bilton 2010, Beames et al
2012). This may especially be true if a group is outside, the subject matter may be actually
present instead of being just imagined or described in theory through words.

35
Some students will benefit directly from having subject matter directly in front of them. This
could in creative writing, mathematics, science, environmental studies, geography, and
more (Bilton, 2010; Broome, 2009). In this study, participants 2 and 5 described how they
take their learning outside the classroom with their students in a holistic format (see
question 7 from the results).
This study appears to agree with the existing literature having to do with the difficulties that
teachers find when setting up their lessons. Generally, the teachers found that they were
being told what to teach from their heads of departments or head teachers; the
government targets are set, so they are hearing that they need to focus on the traditional
styles of teaching and not experiment with LOTC. Some of the feedback was that LOTC was
not part of their lesson plans. Participant 2 stated that “I just follow the lesson plan which
has never been to take the children outside”. Participant 5 indicated that “If the weather is
bad, not all children are suitably equipment for outdoor learning, without sending letters
home”. This shows some of the complexities that get in the way of teachers taking their
children outside. This seems to indicate that managers in the education system are making
it more difficult for teachers to do LOTC. Not all managers in teaching come from a teaching
background and therefore may be unaware of current learning theories, and this could
include outdoor learning.
The literature review identified a whole list of possible barriers to taking children outside
(see Table 1). The participants in this study did not respond in enough detail to know if the
same barriers existed for them in their daily teaching. The main barrier for the participants
in this study appears to be time limitations. They have to deliver a lesson in a certain
amount of time, and this time often does not allow for moving the group around the
grounds. Participant 2 stated that “I do not think it would be appreciated if I did this without
being asked and also the time and effort it would take to get the children outside, settled
and back in again with all of the resources/resources it would eat into the lesson time”.

36
It would appear to solve this situation that the teacher would have to take time out of other
lessons in order to allow enough time to facilitate LOTC. The problem with this would be
that other lessons might lose critical time, therefore the learning experience for other
lessons might be impacted. So while one area of learning might be improved by outside
learning, other areas might be negatively affected. It is like a see-saw effect. The teachers
have to find a way to balance out their learning experiences for the children, and they find
that there is not enough time to do the teaching in the way they want.
One barrier identified in the literature review to learning outside was lack of green space
(Louv, 2006) (see Table 1). Because there was a lack of available green space, people were
not able to go and experience nature, and therefore people were becoming more
withdrawn from nature, and as a result people were starting to experience ‘nature deficit
disorder’. In this study, the participants indicated that ability to access nature space was a
real hindrance. 40% indicated that natural space was inaccessible (see question 5) and this
therefore agrees with the existing literature.
Question 1 from the results indicates that the participants in this study came from a variety
of roles in the education setting. This could have had a beneficial effect on this study’s
results. The goal of the study was to find out about the perceptions from the top of the
teaching organization down to the actual teachers and teaching assistants. By having 4 of
the 6 different roles included in this study, this should have given a more comprehensive
result than if all the participants were from the same role.

37
Question 2 showed that the participants had been in the profession for varying lengths of
time: 40% over 10 years, 40% 5-7 years, and 20% 3-5 years. This helps to identify in which
stage of the LOTC manifesto roll-out they began their careers. The participants that are 10+
years would have been actively working in the education sector during the onset of the
outdoor manifesto in 2006. The others would have been starting their jobs during the
progressive role out since 2006. The participants that had been in their careers more than
10 years would have already set up their delivery methods prior to LOTC, making taking the
ideas of LOTC on and putting the ideas into practice might have been problematic. Those in
their careers for less than 10 years would have had LOTC ideas as part of their training or
planning and may have had the opportunity to take the information on board early on in
their teaching. Had this study only included people with 10 years or more experience, the
results might have been different in that they might have been less aware of the changes in
the industry towards LOTC. Had the study only included people who had recently joined the
profession the results might have indicated a higher percentage of individuals looking to
incorporate LOTC into their practice. In future studies, it may be enlightening to look at
surveying only teachers with either longer or shorter careers to see if indeed this difference
in appreciation of LOTC exists.
Question 3 from the study showed that all years of primary school teaching was represented
by the participants in the study. Year six was the most common year group taught by the
participants. This study, then, sampled participants from all years of primary school, and
therefore the results represent data from all the years (albeit from a very small sample size).
Future studies could focus on the differences that may or may not exist between different
years in primary school, and the sample could focus on one year at a time to see if
differences exist.

38
As the sample size was so small, question 4 has very limited value. As none of the
participants indicated that they were from a rural setting it is impossible to see if there are
any trends or differences between rural and urban settings. A larger sample size might help
find out if any trends exist in this way in future studies.
With schools and educational professionals identifying children with dyslexia and autism at
an increased rate over the past decade, schools are having to adapt the learning
environment to the needs of the learner/learners, therefore some form of holistic
education/teaching might be beneficial to be adopted. This would allow for an individual or
a groups of students to learn more effectively. The proven benefits of the outdoors in
conjunction with education set in a holistic format allows for greater interaction within the
learning cycle, and gives a direct and hands on experience to students which can benefit
learning for some children with and without learning difficulties.
Question five on the survey looked at the ease with which the participants believed they
could access natural space at their schools. Had the survey generated more responses, a
cross-tabulation analysis could have been done to see if accessibility was linked to amount
of outdoor learning that was attempted. Similarly, the survey was meant to see if there
were trends between urban, suburban, and rural (Question 4) and access issues to nature.
Again, a larger sample size would have allowed a statistical analysis of this trend, but with
only 5 responses, any statistical analysis is fairly meaningless (Bryman, 2008). “Whether a
correlation is . . . statistically significant or not will be affected by . . . the size of the sample”
(Bryman, 2008, p. 335).

39
Question six looked at the amount of time spent outdoors with children each month. 40%
indicated they spent no time outdoors each month. Again, had the sample size been bigger,
it would have been useful to see if a cross-tabulation analysis would have shown whether
there was a link between location of school (urban vs rural) and the amount of time a
teacher had been in the educational setting (a few years or more than a decade) to see the
relevance of these variables to teaching outdoors. Unfortunately, without a larger sample
size this analysis was not possible.

40
Conclusion:
In conclusion throughout the research process for this study the emphasis was on
identifying the relationship between education in primary school and LOTC and its
frequency of occurrence within primary school education. The research was meant to look
at the trends and critical factors that affect the processes involved with LOTC at the
classroom level.
The hope was to determine if the hypothesized barriers to LOTC currently exist and how
they affect the ability of educational professionals to offer a different kind of learning to
that which exists inside the classroom. This study was also meant to see if there are trends
between the situation a student finds themselves in and the chances of them receiving an
outdoor education: did the length of time a teacher had been teaching have an influence on
this? Did their physical location influence their chances of learning outside?
This study was inconclusive on all fronts due to the small sample size. Despite numerous
contacts by the researcher, only a few schools responded to the online survey. A larger
population should have been selected overall. Instead of choosing a particular range of
schools in a relatively small area, a whole set of schools from a larger area could have been
contacted. Upon reflection, if 500 schools had been contacted overall, and only 1% had
responded, that would have been a marked improvement over the current study. In this
study, the number of schools contacted was 65, and only 5 (8.5%) replied to say that they
would be willing to receive the online survey. If each school had approximately 25 members
of staff that could have filled out the survey, the total number of individuals that could have
participated was over 1600. At the time, this seemed more than adequate. Of those schools
that responded positively, only 3 actually had one or more members of staff complete the
survey. This represents an uptake of 0.2%. The researcher assumed that the response rate
would have been much higher than this. In hindsight, it may have been prudent to contact a

41
much higher number of schools, as it appears (as predicted by Denscombe (2010), online
surveys are easy to ignore.
In a future repeat of this survey, the research could have been done over a longer period of
time, with the researcher actually going to the schools to drop off paper surveys and having
a bit of face to face time with the school administrators and potentially some of the
teaching staff. This may well have gotten a much higher response rate. This sort of method
would require more time and financial resources and would therefore be a more difficult
method of collecting data than an online survey. Stretching out the timeframe for the
researcher to collect the data from 10 months to 24 months might allow for the right
amount of data to be collected.
Furthermore, if this research was conducted again, the questions would be better if they
were more detailed. Future questions might include some examples of barriers to help the
participants think about their situation with the right amount of specificity. This would
hopefully get the participants to think more deeply about the questions.
In creating this survey, the researcher did not want to get too personal with the questions
with regards to the kinds of experiences the participants had had. However, the data
collected was somewhat vaguer than was expected. On reflection, the research might have
had better results if the questions had looked more deeply at the experiences of the
participants. Originally, interviewing head teachers was planned to be a part of this study.
The logistics of meeting head teachers was deemed to be too complicated and too time
consuming so this was not ultimately part of the project. However, if a future study was
undertaken that allowed for more time, perhaps this sort of qualitative data collection
would be useful to find out more of the personal background details of the schools and their
staff members in relation to LOTC.

42
References:
BBC, (2012) ‘Forest play aids nursery children's mediation skills’. Available From:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-17099694 [Accessed: 01.03.15].
Beames, S., Higgins, P. and Nicol, R. (2012). Learning outside the classroom. Routledge, London.
Beard, C. and Wilson, J. (2012) Experiential Learning. Kogan Page: London.
Berry, M. (2011) Learning and Teaching in Adventure Education. In Adventure Education. Berry, M.,
and Hodgson, C (Eds). Routledge: Abingdon.
Bilton, H. (2005) ‘Education for all’. In Learning Outdoors, Improving the quality of young childrens'
play outdoors. James, K., Marsh, J., Wilson, A., and Woonton, M. Eds. Fulton, London.
Bilton, H. (2010) Outdoor Learning in the Early Years. Routledge, London.
Broome, R. (2009) The Benefits of Alfresco Education. BBC News. Available From:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/southeastwales/hi/people_and_places/nature/newsid_8376000/83768
17.stm [Accessed: 28.02.15].
Cotrtrell, S. (2008) The Study Skills Handbook, Third Edition. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Council for Learning Outside the Classroom (2015) ‘Beyond barriers to LOtC in the Natural
Environment’ Available from http://www.lotc.org.uk/ [Accessed: 16.03.15].
David, T., Curtis, A. and Siraj Blatchford, I. (1996) Effective Teaching In The Early Years: Fostering
Children’s Learning In Nurseries and In Infant Classes. Trentham Books Limited, Stoke-on-Trent.
Denscombe, M. (2010) The Good Research Guide. OUP: Maidenhead
DfES (2006) Learning outside the classroom manifesto. Nottingham: DfES Publications.
DOE (2012) Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage. Dept of Education. Available
from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/271631/eyfs_stat
utory_framework_march_2012.pdf [Accessed: 28.04.15].
EOC (2015) ‘English Outdoor Council who we are’. English outdoor council. Available from
www.englishoutdoorcouncil.org [Accessed: 16.02.15].
Foundation Years (2012). Principles for early year’s education. Foundation Years. Available from
www.foundationyears.org.uk. [Accessed: 24.03.15].
Gill, T (2007) No Fear: growing up in a risk averse society. Calluste: London.

43
Gill, T. (2013) ‘German Children Enjoy Far More Everyday Freedom Than Their English Peers’.
Available From: http://rethinkingchildhood.com/2013/01/14/children-freedom-england-germany/
[Accessed: 01.03.15].
Gov.uk (2015). ‘Survey reveals importance of outdoor visits in England’. Crown Copyright. Available
from https://www.gov.uk/government/news/survey-reveals-importance-of-outdoor-visits-in-
england [Accessed: 03.03.15].
Hammond, S. (2007) ‘Taking the Inside Out’. In Letting the outside in. Austin, R. (Ed.) Stoke on Trent:
Trentham.
Harun, M. and Salamuddin, N. (2010) ‘Cultivating personality development through outdoor
education programme: the Malaysia experience’. Procedia social and behavioral sciences 9: 228-
234.
Hopkins, D and Levin, B. (2000) ‘Government Policy and School Development’. School Leadership &
Management, Vol 20, No 1 P 15-30.
HSE (2012) ‘Outdoor Play-Let Our Children Take A Risk’. Health and Safety Executive. Available From:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/news/judith-risk-assessment/kidsoutdoors070612.htm [Accessed: 01.03.15].
HSE (2015) ‘The adventure activities licensing service’. Health and safety executive. Available from
www.hse.gov.uk [Accessed: 16.02.15].
Hughes, M. (2015) ‘Lets Give Children Back Their Childhood’. YouTube. Available From:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niLOptgimws [Accessed: 21.04.15].
IOL (2005) ‘What is outdoor learning’. Institute for outdoor learning. Available from
http://www.outdoor-learning.org/Default.aspx?tabid=207, [Accessed: 03.03.15].
IOL (2015) ‘Institute for outdoor learning, home’. Institute for outdoor learning. Available from
www.outdoor-learning.org [Accessed: 01.01.15].
Jarvis, P. (2006), The Theory and Practice of Teaching, Routledge, London.
Kivner, M. (2012) ‘Does learning outdoors help to keep the doctor away?’ BBC News. Available from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16963807 [Accessed: 01.03.15].
Knight, S. (2013) Forest School and Outdoor Learning in the Early Years. London: Sage.
Kolb, D. (2014) Experiential Learning. Pearson: NJ.
Loscalzo, S. (2013) ‘Why Playing Outdoors Makes Children Smarter’. Portland Family. Available from
http://www.portlandfamily.com/posts/20-reasons-why-playing-outdoors-makes-children-smarter/
[Accessed: 01.03.15].
Louv, R. (2006) Last child in the woods. Algonquin: Chapel Hill.

44
Martin, B. Cashel, C., Wagstaff, M., Breunig, M. (2006) Outdoor leadership theory and practice.
Human Kinetics: Leeds.
Moore, A. (2000) Teaching and Learning. London: Routledge.
O’Hagen, M., and Smith, M. (1993) Special Issues in Child Care. London: Tindall.
Olgilvie, K (2005) Leading and managing groups in the outdoors. IOL: Penrith.
Orwell, G. (1954) 1984. Penguin Books: Harmondsworth.
QCA (2000) Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage, London: QCA.
Rasheed, E., Hetherington, A., Irvine, J. (2010) Health and Social Care. Hodder: London
RPFHP (1990) Phenomenology. Research proposals for health professionals. Available from
www.researchproposalsforhealthprofessionals.com [Accessed 29-4-15].
Rudestam, K., Newton, R., (2007), Surviving Your Dissertation, Sage Publications, London.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007) Research Methods For Business Students, Prentice
Hall, Essex.
Selby, J. (2014) ‘Bear Grylls: ‘Children should be allowed to play with knives.’ The Independent.
Available from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/bear-grylls-children-should-be-
allowed-to-play-with-knives-9325756.html [Accessed: 01.03.15].
Skates, I. (2014) ‘Learning outside the classroom - The Ofsted perspective’, Ed. Business, Available
from http://www.educationbusinessuk.net/ [Accessed: 24.03.15].
Stradling, B. and Saunders, L. (1993) ‘Differentiation in practice: responding to the needs of all
pupils’. Education Research Vol 35 No 2 Pages 127-137.
Surveymonkey (2015) Create and send surveys. Survey Monkey. Available from
www.surveymonkey.com [Accessed 05.09.14].
Trochim, W. (2006) Deduction and Induction. Research methods knowledge base. Available from
www.socialresearchmethods.net. [Accessed 29.04.15].
Tulley, (nd) ’50 Dangerous Things You Should Let Your Children Do (This Summer)…’ Available from:
http://www.50dtcamp.org.uk/ [Accessed: 01.02.15].
Waite, S. and Pratt, N. (2011) ‘Theoretical perspectives on learning outside the classroom:
relationships between learning and place’. In Children Learning Outside the Classroom. Waite, S.
(Ed). London: Sage.

45
Appendices:
Appendix 1.1:
Why Playing Outdoors Makes Children Smarter:
1. Outdoor play is a multi-sensory activity. While outdoors, children will see, hear, smell and touch
things unavailable to them when they play inside. They use their brains in unique ways as they
come to understand these new stimuli.
2. Playing outside brings together informal play and formal learning. Children can incorporate
concepts they have learned at school in a hands-on way while outdoors. For example, seeing and
touching the roots of a tree will bring to life the lesson their teacher taught about how plants get
their nutrients.
3. Playing outdoors stimulates creativity. Robin Moore, an expert in the design of play and learning
environments, says, “Natural spaces and materials stimulate children’s limitless imagination and
serve as the medium of inventiveness and creativity.” Rocks, stones and dirt present limitless
opportunities for play that can be expressed differently every time a child steps outside.
4. Playing outdoors is open-ended. There is no instruction manual for outdoor play. Children make
the rules and in doing so use their imagination, creativity, intelligence and negotiation skills in a
unique way.
5. Playing in nature reduces anxiety. Time spent outside physiologically reduces anxiety. Children
bring an open mind and a more relaxed outlook back inside when they are in more traditional
learning environments.
6. Outdoor play increases attention span. Time spent in unstructured play outdoors is a natural
attention builder. Often children who have difficulty with pen and paper tasks or sitting still for
long periods of times are significantly more successful after time spent outside.
7. Outdoor play is imaginative. Because there are no labels, no pre-conceived ideas and no rules,
children must create the world around them. In this type of play, children use their imagination
in ways they don’t when playing inside.
8. Being in nature develops respect for other living things. Children develop empathy, the ability to
consider other people’s feeling, by interacting with creatures in nature. Watching a tiny bug, a
blue bird or a squirrel scurrying up a tree gives children the ability to learn and grow from others.
9. Outdoor play promotes problem solving. As children navigate a world in which they make the
rules, they must learn to understand what works and what doesn’t, what lines of thinking bring
success and failure, how to know when to keep trying and when to stop.
10. Playing outside promotes leadership skills. In an environment where children create the fun,
natural leaders will arise. One child may excel at explaining how to play the game, while another
may enjoy setting up the physical challenge of an outdoor obstacle course. All types of leadership
skills are needed and encouraged.

46
11. Outdoor play widens vocabulary. While playing outdoors, children may see an acorn, a
chipmunk and cumulous clouds. As they encounter new things, their vocabulary will expand in
ways it never could indoors.
12. Playing outside improves listening skills. As children negotiate the rules of an invented game,
they must listen closely to one another, ask questions for clarification and attend to the details of
explanations in ways they don’t have to when playing familiar games.
13. Being in nature improves communication skills. Unclear about the rules in an invented game?
Not sure how to climb the tree or create the fairy house? Children must learn to question and
clarify for understanding while simultaneously making themselves understood.
14. Outdoor play encourages cooperative play. In a setting where there aren’t clear winners and
losers, children work together to meet a goal. Perhaps they complete a self-made obstacle
course or create a house for a chipmunk. Together they compromise and work together to meet
a desired outcome.
15. Time in nature helps children to notice patterns. The natural world is full of patterns. The petals
on flowers, the veins of a leaf, the bark on a tree are all patterns. Pattern building is a crucial
early math skill.
16. Playing outdoors helps children to notice similarities and differences. The ability to sort items
and notice the similarities and differences in them is yet another skill crucial to mathematical
success. Time outdoors affords many opportunities for sorting.
17. Time spent outdoors improves children’s immune systems. Healthy children are stronger
learners. As children spend more and more time outdoors, their immune systems improve,
decreasing time out of school for illness.
18. Outdoor play increases children’s physical activity level. Children who play outdoors are less
likely to be obese and more likely to be active learners. Children who move and play when out of
school are ready for the attention often needed for classroom learning.
19. Time spent outdoors increases persistence. Outdoor games often require persistence. Children
must try and try again if their experiment fails. If the branch doesn’t reach all the way across the
stream or the bark doesn’t cover their fairy house, they must keep trying until they are
successful.
20. Outdoor play is fun. Children who are happy are successful learners. Children are naturally happy
when they are moving, playing and creating outside. This joy opens them up for experimenting,
learning and growing.
Stacey Loscalzo is a freelance writer and mother of two girls living in Ridgewood, NJ. She and her girls
have been getting outside to play for nearly a decade.
http://www.portlandfamily.com/posts/20-reasons-why-playing-outdoors-makes-children-smarter/

47
Appendix 2.1:
Ethical Approval Form.
Your Name: TJ (John) Vile
Student ID: 100321406
Unimail address: j.vile1@unimail.derby.ac.uk
Other contact
information
John.Vile@live.co.uk
Programme name
and code
Outdoor Activity Leadership And Coaching (X151)
Module name and
code
Independent Study 6OU997
Name of supervisor Peter Gilliver
Name of co-ordinator TBC
Title of proposed research study
Learning Outside The Classroom, Barriers To Participation within Primary School
Education.
Supervisor Comments
Are the ethical implications of the proposed
research adequately described in this
application?
Yes  No 
Does the overall study have low, moderate or
high risk in terms of ethical implications?
Low  Moderate 
High
Does the study method describe a process of
research that is ethically sound?
Yes  No 

48
Signatures
The information supplied is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, accurate. I
clearly understand my obligations and the rights of the participants. I agree to act
at all times in accordance with University of Derby Policy and Code of Practice on
Research Ethics:
http://www.derby.ac.uk/research/ethics-and-governance/research-ethics-and-governance
Signature of applicant TJ (John) Vile
Date of submission by applicant 02.01.2015
Signature of supervisor
Date of signature by supervisor
For Committee Use Reference Number (Subject area initials/year/ID number)………………….
Date received……………… Date approved …………….
Signed………………………
Comments

49
1. What is the aim of your study? What are the objectives for your study?
To find out if there are barriers to LOTC (Learning Outside The Classroom) within mainstream primary
school education in order to help identify barriers to participation with the ultimate aim of trying to
overcome them. A questionnaire to practising education professionals. The data will then by statistically
analysing with a qualitative means.
2. Explain the rationale for this study (refer to relevant research literature in your
response).
The goal of this study is to determine if LOTC is happening enough for students and also the teaching staff
and what each of these groups might be missing out on by not getting enough time learning outside. A
secondary goal is to determine barriers to learning outdoors that might exists for teachers and students
and attempt to find solutions to some of these barriers.
There may be a lack of previous research in this area. Learning why there are barriers to going outside the
classroom can help policy makers overcome these barriers.
3. Provide an outline of study design and methods.
Distribute questionnaires to current education professionals. The questions will be open ended looking to
find out about their perceptions relating to children learning outdoors and their perceived barriers to
making this happen.
A phenomenological approach looking at other peoples' experiences of working within mainstream
education. An inductive, qualitative study using open ended questions on a questionnaire at one
particular time (a cross-sectional study).
4. Please provide a detailed description of the study sample, covering selection, sample profile,
recruitment and if appropriate, inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Distribute questionnaires electronically to education professionals within primary schools. The questions
will be open ended looking to find out about their perceptions relating to children learning outdoors and
their perceived barriers to making this happen. With the use of education professionals who are over the
age of 18 and work within primary school education.

50
5. Are payments or rewards/incentives going to be made to the participants?
Yes  No 
If so, please give details below.
6. Please indicate how you intend to address each of the following ethical
considerations in your study. If you consider that they do not relate to your study
please say so.
Guidance to completing this section of the form is provided at the end of the
document.
A. Consent
 The use of a consent form prior to participation on the study and will be stored in accordance
with DPA (Data Protection Act) Guidelines and university guidelines.
B. Deception
 N/A-Not Part of Study.
C. Debriefing
 At the end of the survey the participants are debriefed and are given the researcher and the
supervisor’s details in case they wish to withdraw or ask further questions.
D. Withdrawal from the investigation
 All participants will have the opportunity to remove themselves from the study at any time with
the use of the last three digits of their phone number as verification, with a contact details being
available for contacting myself or my supervisor.
E. Confidentiality
 All data will be held securely in accordance with university policy and DPA guidelines, the
participants names are not to be disclosed with anyone outside of the study,
F. Protection of participants
 Accordance of DPA and university guidelines.
G. Observation research
H. Giving advice-N/A
I. Research undertaken in public places
J. Data protection
 In accordance of DPA and university guidelines.
K. Animal Rights-N/A
L. Environmental protection-N/A

51
7. Are there any further ethical implications arising from your proposed research?
Yes  No
If your answer was no, please explain why.
8. Have / do you intend to request ethical approval from any other
body/organisation? Yes  No 
If ‘Yes’ – please give details
9. What resources will you require? (e.g. psychometric scales, IT equipment, specialised software,
access to specialist facilities, such as microbiological containment laboratories).
Questionnaires sent electronically, via the use of Survey Monkey.
10. What study materials will you use? (Please give full details here of validated
scales, bespoke questionnaires, interview schedules, focus group schedules etc
and attach all materials to the application)
The use of an e-survey online system Survey Monkey.
Which of the following have you appended to this application?
 Focus group questions  Psychometric scales
 Self-completion questionnaire  Interview questions
 Other debriefing material  Covering letter for participants
 Information sheet about your research
study
 Informed consent forms for participants
 Other (please describe)

52
Appendix 3.1:
Survey Monkey Questions:
Question No: Question:
1: Are You Currently Working Or Based Within Primary School Education As Any Of The Following?
 Head Teacher
 Deputy Head
 Head Of Department
 Teacher
 Teaching Assistant
 Administrator
2: How Long Have You Been Working Within Education?
 Less Than 1 Year
 1 To 3 Years
 3 To 5 Years
 5 To 7 Years
 7 To 10 Years
 10 Years +
3: Please Indicate Which Year Group Or Year Groups You Currently Work With? (Please Indicate One Or All
That You Have Or Currently Work With).
 Reception (Year 0)
 Year 1
 Year 2
 Year 3
 Year 4
 Year 5
 Year 6
4: From The List Below Please Indicate If Your School Is:
 Rural (Countryside)
 Suburban (Within A Neighbourhood)
 Urban (Within The Setting Of A Built Up City)
5: On A Scale Of 1 To 10 Please Indicate Your Schools Access To A Natural Space (1 Being Inaccessible And
10 Being Readily Accessible). For The Purposes Of This Research Playing Field/S And The Playground Are
Not Considered A Natural Space.
6: On Average How Many Hours Per Month Have You Taken Children Outside To Learn, (Excluding Physical
Education)?
 None
 0 To 2 Hours
 2 To 4 Hours
 4 To 6 Hours
 6 To 8 Hours
 8 To 10 Hours
 10 Hours +
7: Please Describe In Detail How You Take Learning Outside The Classroom With Your Pupils, If Not Then
Please Describe What Stops You From Doing So.

53
8: Does Your Current School Use Initiatives Such As “Forest School”?
 Yes
 No
 Will Be Considering For The Future
 Currently Setting Up/Looking Into “Forest School” Schemes
 Unsure Of What “Forest School” Is
9: As A Child Please Tell Us Of Any Learning Outside That You Did Whilst At Primary School, Excluding
Physical Education And Playtime (Please Briefly Describe), (Please Also Place The Last Three Digits Of
Your Telephone Number At The End In Brackets In Case You Wish To Withdraw).
End: Thank You For Taking Part In This Survey, If You Wish To Withdraw Within The Next Two Weeks Please
Contact The Researcher Via Email To: john.vile@live.co.uk Along With The Last Three Digits Of Your
Telephone Number.

54
Appendix 4.1:
Participant Invitation
University of Derby Buxton
1 Devonshire Road
Buxton
SK17 6RY
[Date]
[Recipient Name]
[School Name]
Dear [Recipient Name]:
I hope you do not mind me contacting you.
My Name Is John Vile and I am currently studying with the University of Derby Buxton I am currently working on
my dissertation.
For this piece of research I am collecting data from current education professionals working within primary school
education. I would appreciate it if you took approximately 5 to 10 minutes to answer this online survey, if you have
any concerns or questions please feel free to contact me.
The information will be collected anonymously and stored securely and will only be use for the purposes of this
research project and WILL NOT BE SHARED WITH EXTERNAL THIRD PARTIES.
This Project in conjunction with the University of Derby meets the required ethical approval guidelines and a copy is
available from: http://www.derby.ac.uk/research/ethics-andgovernance/research-ethics-and-governance
This Survey Will Close on the (Date), If you wish to participate, ask further questions please contact the researcher via
email to: john.vile@live.co.uk
Yours Sincerely.
John Vile

55
Appendix 5.1:
Participant Briefing Sheet
1 Devonshire Road
Buxton
SK17 6RY
[Date]
Participant Briefing:
For this piece of research I am collecting data from current education professionals working within primary school
education who are over the age of 18. I would appreciate it if you took approximately 5 to 10 minutes to answer this
online survey, if you have any concerns or questions please feel free to contact me.
This Survey will close on the (Date) via the following link:
(https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/QHPGXMN ) please use the last 3 digits of your telephone number for
verification purposes if you wish to withdraw.
If you wish to withdraw please contact the researcher via email to: john.vile@live.co.uk
Thank you for your time.
John Vile

56
Acknowledgments:
I would like to acknowledge some critical and key people without whom the success of this
research project would not have been possible.
There is one person who does need a special mention my supervisor, Peter Gilliver who has
put up with me throughout this process, thank you for putting up with me and motivating
me to finish this no matter what has been thrown at me.
The Outdoor Department at Buxton who without a shadow of a doubt have helped me to
think and look at things in a more concise way and have enabled me to question more and
look deeper at everything from the small to the big, despite at times butting heads with one
another!
The student wellbeing team at Buxton, a million thanks, for all the times where you have
told me that “it will be all worth it in the end” you were right.
To Dan Rhode thank you for all the endless hours that you have selflessly given up in order
to help me get through this, at times I have been big headed thank you for showing me how
to do this without bursting into flames!
Lastly to my mum and my sister, the two people who gave the kick in the backside that I
needed at times thanks to you and your continuous nagging and questioning of everything I
have done.

57
Epilogue:
At times throughout this process I have been sometimes like Tigger, bouncing around all
over the place with an endless source of energy to being just like Eyore where I have been
down in the dumps banging my head against my desk in frustration. Despite all that has
been thrown at me despite not being very academical, I am a hands on learner but during
this process I have had to adapt.
Throughout this project the motivating factor for me was to complete my final big piece of
work and to stake my claim as an experience outdoor practitioner and facilitator.
Despite being dyslexic, dyspraxic, autistic and also having Asperger’s syndrome and this
being an extremely difficult process but with it now being over I am somewhat ‘relived’ at
times I was so enthusiastic and others banging my head against my desk in absolute
frustration.
Contact Details:
John.Vile@live.co.uk
07983101226

Learning Outside The Classroom

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Learning Outside The Classroom

Similar to Learning Outside The Classroom (20)

Learning Outside The Classroom