The State of Outdoor Education in Northe
The State of Outdoor Education in Northe
The State of Outdoor Education in Northe
8-2018
Recommended Citation
Landy, Cathy, "The State of Outdoor Education in Northeast Tennessee: Preschool Teacher Attitudes Toward Outdoor Education"
(2018). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 3453. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3453
This Dissertation - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State
University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East
Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected].
The State of Outdoor Education in Northeast Tennessee: Preschool Teacher Attitudes Toward
Outdoor Education
_____________________
A dissertation
presented to
In partial fulfillment
_____________________
by
Cathy Landy
August 2018
_____________________
The State of Outdoor Education in Northeast Tennessee: Preschool Teacher Attitudes Toward
Outdoor Education
by
Cathy Landy
The purpose of this study was to investigate the state of outdoor education in preschool
classrooms in Northeast Tennessee, with a specific focus on preschool teachers’ attitudes toward
outdoor education. This comparative, mixed-methods study focused in part on teachers’ current
beliefs about outdoor education, how they use the outdoor environment, and whether their
attitudes influence their lesson planning for outdoor education. Participants were preschool
teachers in public, private, church-affiliated, and Head Start preschools in 4 counties in northeast
Tennessee. The study sample consisted of 81 participants (80 female; 1 male). Ages ranged
from 20-65 years (M = 40.76). The survey consisted of 42 questions, including demographics,
outdoor education experiences, and attitudes toward outdoor education. Teachers were compared
on several factors: attitudes toward outdoor education, their early experiences in the outdoors,
and how they use the outdoor environment. Thirty-three outdoor environments in the
Measurement Scale (POEMS) (DeBord, Hestenes, Moore, Cosco, & McGinnis, 2005). Eight
preschool teachers from the pool of 81 participants were selected at random based on their
school’s playground/outdoor environment assessment (high vs. low quality) and their own
attitudes (positive vs. negative) toward outdoor education. Interviews were conducted to give a
2
Results showed that preschool teachers had relatively high attitudes on outdoor education (M =
75.86, SD = 7.99) on a scaled score where 100 was the highest possible. Teachers who reported
planning lessons for outdoor learning had slightly higher attitudes (M = 76.9, SD = 7.6) toward
outdoor education than those who do not plan (M = 74.1, SD = 9.0), although differences were
not significant F(1, 76) = 1.134, p = 0.29. Most teachers referred to the outdoor area as a
playground (84%) and used it used it most frequently for supervised play (99%). These findings,
along with others reported, indicate that although preschool teachers see the benefits of outdoor
3
DEDICATION
This study is dedicated to my children, grandchildren, and children around the world.
May your days be blessed with hours of enjoyment and fun in beautiful natural surroundings.
“Those who contemplate the beauty of the earth find reserves of strength that will endure as long
4
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
A study such as this involved the contributions of many individuals in order to complete.
I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank all those who helped me along
this journey. First I would like to thank my husband, children and their spouses for all your love,
patience, support and encouragement along the way and always; and especially to my grandchild
who provided inspiration for this project! To my family, friends and colleagues who are too
numerous to name (you know who you are!): a big thank you for pushing me along—
encouraging, proofreading, typing, and most of all being my strength and sustaining me during
the long days. I would also like to recognize the participants in this study—the dedication of the
Chair, for her support, insight, understanding, and willingness to guide me through this process.
To my committee members Dr. Pam Evanshen and Dr. Jane Broderick: thank you for
introducing me to the most exciting program I have undertaken thus far—I couldn’t have done it
without your kindness and friendship. I have learned so much in the field of early childhood and
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................2
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................................4
ACKNOWLDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................................5
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................16
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................22
Introduction ........................................................................................................................23
6
Jean Piaget .............................................................................................................29
Howard Gardner.....................................................................................................32
3. METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................57
Research Design.................................................................................................................57
Population ..........................................................................................................................58
Phase I—Survey.................................................................................................................58
Sample……............................................................................................................58
Measures ................................................................................................................59
Procedures ..............................................................................................................60
7
Phase II—Playground Assessment ....................................................................................61
Sample....................................................................................................................61
Measures ................................................................................................................62
Procedures ..............................................................................................................62
Sample....................................................................................................................63
Measures ................................................................................................................64
Procedures ..............................................................................................................65
4. RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................66
Q2: How Did You Use the Outdoor Area in the Past Year? .................................68
Q4: Outdoor Education Includes Exploring (Check All That Apply) ...................71
8
Q5: How Often Do Your Children Use the Outdoors for Learning? .....................73
Q6: How Much Time Do the Children Spend Outdoors Per Lesson? ...................74
Q9: What Are the Most Important Benefits to Outdoor Education? ....................76
Q10: What Are Your Biggest Challenges to Teaching Children Outdoors? ........77
Education?..............................................................................................................78
Q12: What Things Would Enable You to Teach More in the Outdoors? ..............79
Q15: When Outside Playing, How Frequently Were You Supervised? ................82
Interview Themes...................................................................................................86
9
Central Research Question: What Is the Overall State of Outdoor Education in
5. DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................99
Benefits ................................................................................................................100
Barriers.................................................................................................................100
Attitudes ...............................................................................................................101
Phase II--POEMS.............................................................................................................102
Conclusions ......................................................................................................................107
Limitations ...........................................................................................................107
Summary ..............................................................................................................109
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................111
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................125
VITA ............................................................................................................................................133
11
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
7. How Often Do Your Children Use the Outdoors for Learning ...............................................73
21. Descriptive Statistics – Preschool Teacher Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey .............88
12
Table Page
22. Descriptive Statistics for the Preschool Teacher Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey
23. Descriptive Statistics for the Preschool Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey (Scaled), for
24. Descriptive Statistics for How Many Types of Childhood Experiences a Teacher Selected ..94
25. Distribution of Teachers’ Use of an Outdoor Area vs the Name Teachers Use for the
26. Descriptive Statistics for the POEMS Assessment for All Teachers and Teacher’s Name for
Play Area..................................................................................................................................97
13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
18. Attitude toward outdoor education (scaled) sorted by lesson planning ...................................90
21. Distribution of POEMS scores among teachers by teacher’s name for outdoor play area ......98
14
Figure Page
15
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
decrease in opportunities for children to connect with the natural world. When children enter
school, many have little direct contact with natural environments. Research suggests that it is
important for children to have the opportunity to interact with nature and learn in an outdoor
environment (Dowdell, Gray, & Malone, 2011; Louv, 2008; Rice & Torquati, 2013). Exposing
children to nature enhances their growth and development. Furthermore, educators need to
recognize that students, just being outdoors, feeling the dirt in their hands, grasping and
examining trees and other plants, impacts a child's cognitive development in a positive way.
Children must be allowed time to ponder their world while investigating their surroundings.
Although teachers may feel awkward teaching in an outdoor environment at first, a concerted
effort to gain a bit of training and experience will increase their confidence and provide both
The outdoor environment offers an authentic context for learning and provides
opportunities for students to develop a wide range of important skills. Researchers have found
opportunity for children to develop physical, social, cognitive, and emotional skills, positively
affects many aspects of a child’s health and well-being (Chawla, 2014; Jacobi-Vessels, 2013;
16
Introduction to Outdoor Education
In Louv's (2008) book, Last Child in the Woods, he stated that contemporary children,
who spend all their classroom and home hours indoors suffer from what he labeled "Nature
Deficit Disorder." He reported that newer studies clearly indicate that a daily dose of the
outdoors is crucial to a student's development, including behavior, attitude, and even class
attendance. Outdoor classrooms prevent the fatigue of sitting in a traditional classroom and
allow an authentic way for students to learn. As early as the 1930’s, L. B. Sharp said
and simple. The principle thesis which underlies the implications of outdoor education
for all subject matter…is: That which can be learned in the out of doors through direct
experiences, dealing with native materials and life situations, should be learned there
Adkins and Simmons (2002) discussed many of the definitions of outdoor and
environmental education and the perception that they are interchangeable. The purpose of their
study was to clarify the boundaries: outdoor education deals primarily with educational
experiences taking place in the outdoors, whereas environmental education has the goal of
developing a mindset of concern and awareness for the environment and its issues. Outdoor
education has arisen as a context for learning and can be viewed as a process where the learner
constructs knowledge about the outside world, as well as skill and value from direct experiences.
The history of outdoor education in the early part of the 20th century was based on a
philosophy of “roughing it” in the outdoors. As educators began to realize the potential of
outdoor classrooms and also with the environmental education movement in the1970s, more
emphasis was placed on tying outdoor learning experiences with the curriculum. Today,
17
however, there is a push for testing based on “book learning”, and with the advancement of
technology there has been a reduced connection between children and nature in educational
programs. A growing number of individuals have been working in the last decade to call
attention to the importance of a child’s access to nature (Keeler, 2008; Louv, 2008). They tout
the benefits of special outdoor places that enhance a child’s connection with the natural
environment.
There are many different types of preschools including for-profit, not-for profit, public
schools, and private child care facilities. The issue of quality in child care centers, especially
planning outdoor spaces for young children, has been examined in work by DeBord, Moore,
Hestenes, Cosco and McGinnis (2010). Preschool and child care programs can contribute to
investigation, exploration and movement, and enrich both teacher-child and peer interactions.
Natural outdoor play spaces engage children’s curiosity and stimulate their imaginations as they
explore their surroundings, learning in ways that go beyond their indoor experiences. Working
educators, and natural products that transform children’s lives. In a research study with a Nature
Explore Classroom, it was reported that preschool children developed a variety of skills
Rosenow, 2012).
18
Environment as Third Teacher
Outdoor education that is well planned and taught effectively offers students
opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills in ways that add value to their everyday
experiences in the classroom (Dillon et al., 2006). Beyond the four walls of the school, the
outdoor classroom offers possibilities through which children can be stimulated in various
curriculum areas. Many teachers fail to recognize these opportunities, and some schools use
only their indoor classrooms for teaching. However, schools that initiate an outdoor education
program as part of their curriculum assume that outdoor education aids in student learning
(Chase, 1969). An article by Luckner and Humphries (1992) provides a rationale for using the
outdoors as a way to enrich learning that takes place in the classrooms. Using the outdoors can
be applied to all curriculum areas. Lessons that take place in the outdoors help to enhance the
skills, appreciation, and attitudes of the students relating to nature and the environment. Using
the outdoors as a learning laboratory is an exciting way to provide concrete, direct experiences
that are easy to generalize to the real world because that is where the real learning is taking
place.
Teaching Outdoors
environments as children may not understand the benefits in natural outdoor settings due to their
own lack of experiences (Crim, Desjean-Perrotta, & Moseley 2008). Additionally, there are
many perceived barriers that may also limit the practice of those early childhood educators who
recognize the fundamental importance of nature experiences in childhood. Many educators are
Chakravarthi (2009) suggested that astute teachers believe that the perfect outdoor learning
19
environment facilitates growth in a child's burgeoning skill set and physical development.
Additionally, it was determined that outdoor settings contributed greatly to their emotional and
social development. Naturally, the outdoor setting is the ideal place to teach and learn man's
relationship with the planet and its natural resources. Children learn, and grow, with the addition
Outdoor learning environments can enhance the development of children across all
domains. However, studies conducted by Chakravarthi (2009) and Davies (1997) found that
teachers mainly reported their role in the outdoor environment as supervising and maintaining
safety, thus limiting opportunities that teachers can provide for children outdoors. Teachers can
miss the opportunity to scaffold children’s learning in outdoor settings due to their limited
perceptions of their role as supervisor and lack of meaningful involvement in children’s outdoor
play.
Kuo (2010) and Chawla (2012) are at the forefront of spreading awareness about outdoor
benefits. In a report for the National Recreation and Park Association, Kuo (2010) makes the
case for nature in the lives of everyone, especially children. Many of the benefits she discusses
about spending more time in nature include: better cognitive functioning, more self-discipline
and impulse control, and greater resilience in response to stressful life events. She also reveals
that less nature results in: exacerbated ADHD symptoms, more sadness and depression, and
greater rates of childhood obesity (Kuo, 2010). Chawla (2012) says that natural environments
produce better concentration, better motor coordination and agility, and more cooperative,
20
Barriers to Outdoor Play
Half a century ago, it was taken for granted that children spent time outdoors (Clements,
2004). Our society's evolutionary process has brought us to the point where our children's
natural inclinations to explore outdoors and nature at home are frequently hampered. Concerns
such as safety; pollution; busier family schedules; availability of space; and too much TV, video
games, and cell phones have eroded the former joy of outdoor activities for our children. One
child was quoted as saying he wanted to play indoors because “that’s where the electrical outlets
are” (Louv, 2008, p. 10). Technology is not the enemy—adults must provide a balance of indoor
and outdoor activities if they are to help a child develop in all areas.
Many families are also concerned when their children play outside alone, therefore
parents place them in more organized activities. “Stranger danger” and the possibility of their
child being abducted leads parents to be cautious. The Center for Missing and Exploited
Children, founded in the 1980s, has increased awareness of these dangers, however, only a small
Research in regards to educators’ attitudes toward outdoor classrooms are seldom found
(Moffett, 2012). The goal of this study was to investigate preschool teacher attitudes about
outdoor education and to illustrate the need for further education of our teachers on the
importance of using outdoor classrooms in instruction. The results showed that an outdoor
classroom program should be implemented into the structured education curricula, especially for
young children. Behaviors of individuals are influenced in a large part by their attitudes—and
knowledge of teacher attitudes towards outdoor education makes it possible to design a program
21
The significance of the problem leading to this study is that most teachers concentrate on
children’s construction of knowledge in the indoor classroom environment; there is very little
research on preschool teachers’ attitudes in relation to outdoor education. Therefore, the focus of
this study was to determine preschool teacher attitudes on outdoor education and whether or not
this affected their use of outdoor play spaces for learning. The purpose of this mixed-methods
study was to explore, and to the extent possible, identify patterns in teacher attitudes toward
outdoor education, their early childhood outdoor experiences, and how teachers use the outdoors
for learning. Additionally, the overall quality of preschool outdoor classrooms was evaluated
Definition of Terms
learning that takes place in the outdoor environment (Hammerman et al., 1994). It is
based on the premise that learning experiences outdoors in nature can heighten an
awareness and action (Clarke & Mcphie, 2014). The term outdoor education is
education (Gillenwater, 2009). Although it does draw upon activities related to these
areas, adventure education focuses on the recreation side, while environmental education
based learning in the outdoors with a variety of subjects (e.g., science, math, art, etc.)
that can be developed into a natural study ground for educators (and) students. ….All
22
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction
This chapter focuses on the literature that supports the purpose of the study discussed in
Chapter 1. Education is seen as a means for transmitting and acquiring cultural knowledge and
values as well as skills (Pai & Adler, 2001; Spindler & Spindler, 1997) with “the express purpose
of inducting the young into the culture of the society into which they were born and in which
they must learn to live as responsible and useful members of the community” (Pulliam 2003, p.
4).
Outdoor education (OE) can be interpreted in many different ways, depending on time
period and culture, therefore it is difficult to define. Conservationists relate it to the use of
natural resources, recreationalists see it as a means for pursuing joyful experiences, and
environmentalists view it as helping others to develop an attitude of responsibility and care for
our environment (Hammerman et al., 1994). The views of classroom teachers may be for the
purpose of imparting knowledge about the environment. Information about outdoor education,
theories, nature play, outdoor classrooms, and teacher attitudes will be presented.
elements for outdoor education (Hammerman et al., 1994). John Amos Comenius (1592-1670)
advocated for sensory learning because he believed that children should first experience the
natural world through the five senses before academic learning. These early observations helped
to prepare for future studies in earth sciences. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) continued
Comenius’s nature principles through the education of Emile. Rousseau sought to encourage the
23
child’s curiosity and physical activity so that learning evolved through direct, sensory, and
rational experiences, rather than literary, linguistic, indirect experiences through books.
Rousseau claimed, “Our first teachers are our feet, our hands, and our eyes. To substitute books
for all these…. is to teach us the reason of others” (Hammerman et al., 1994, p. 2).
John Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827), in his Switzerland farm home, also stressed
firsthand experiences through teaching practical skills as well as academic ones. He believed
through farming, housekeeping, spinning, weaving, nature study, and geography the learner
would develop independent principles and generalizations in later studies (Neill, 2007). Like
children need nature (Neill, 2007). Nature, the true teacher, inspires them to listen, and to learn
from the natural world around them. The effective teacher simply walks alongside student,
quietly observing, but engaging with them as they ask questions (Neill, 2007).
Taking the ideas of the earlier philosophers another step forward, John Dewey (1859-
1952) proposed that educators change the traditional methods of learning to something that more
closely resembles the child’s life in the physical, natural, and social world which would result in
more significant learning (Mooney, 2002). Dewey posited that if the learner and teacher were
freed from traditional educational norms, then there would be a natural correlation between
The nature study movement grew out of a response to industrialized America in the late
1800s. Nature study advocates believed that children growing up in society would be happier
studying and discovering nature, thus giving rise to science teaching in schools. According to
Liberty Hyde Bailey (1858-1954) in The Nature Study Idea, this movement began developing
between 1884 and 1890 (Neill, 2007). Bailey recognized Louis Agassiz (1807-1873) as the first
24
scientist to take his students into the field, supporting his motto: study nature, not books (Neill,
2007). His summer school for teachers made a significant impact to the American nature study
movement (Neill, 2007). From Dewey’s early 20th century work and the previous philosophies
above, the nature study movement evolved, leading to the methodologies now used in today’s
These early contributions led to a major breakthrough in outdoor education during the
1930s when many educators began recognizing the inherent educational values in summer camp.
Contributing an early study, L.B. Sharp’s (1930) dissertation delineated a relationship between
Dewey’s goals and the camp environment, encouraging camping to be a part of the regular
school program, arguing that it is an educational process because of the similarities between real-
life and camping. Sharp’s (1930) significant ideas led to a rapid nationwide expansion of school
camping.
As these ideas grew, the terminology changed starting in the 1950s. “Camping” was
replaced with “outdoor school” and “outdoor laboratories,” and the curriculum for these
educational experiences began to focus on the needs and interests of the students themselves.
Sharp then founded the Outdoor Education Association. In May 1958, sponsored by the
American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation, the First National
Conference on Outdoor Education was held in Washington, DC, attracting many representatives
The literature of the 1960s extended the growing influence of outdoor education in the
school sector. The Role of Outdoor Education (1965); Curriculum Enrichment Outdoors (1965);
Outdoor Education (1967) and Hammerman and Hammerman’s Outdoor Education (1968)
25
reflected this growth. Those seeking to experience self-discovery in the wild in order to transfer
lessons of self-awareness, respect for others, and environmental concerns to regular life at
school, home, and community popularized the idea of adventure education. Mankind’s
during the later 1960s, furthering the influence of outdoor education and environmental
education, and in some cases combining the two, centering on the idea: education in the
environment, for the environment, and about the environment (Donaldson & Donaldson, 1958).
In the 1970’s it became clear that some environmental problems were created by
humanity. As people began to realize the depth of the environmental crisis, environmental
education. Some believe the synthesis of nature studies and learning in or from the environment,
and most recently, education focused on environmental protection, has evolved to what we
leading to the enactment of the National Environmental Education Act (October, 1970) and the
establishment of Earth Day (April 22, 1979). Simon Chavez was adamant that people understand
the correlations between man and the environment in order to effectively face the environmental
crises of the time (Hammerman, Hammerman, & Hammerman, 2001). He felt that children
should, and do, learn better from reality, as opposed to a traditional classroom structure. Their
subsequent education is based on their actual experiences and questions; discovery and final
analysis make the lessons learned more vivid. It is a very effective way for children to develop
and exercise their natural physical, aesthetic, and cognitive abilities, which can be achieved with
outdoor education (Hammerman et al., 2001). As a result of the many dedicated educators and
26
others in the fields of recreation, conservation, social welfare, camping, and even natural science,
a new vision, referred to as the outdoor education movement, has taken hold.
continuing the age-old idea of learning from reality. From its back-to-basics roots, this
innovative learning force has grown to include advancements in the categories of urban ecology,
field studies, and adventure education, to name a few. No longer in the experimental phase, these
curricular trends are enduring. Learning from experience with nature will always be a key
component of education, regardless of how complicated our technology or how modernized our
society becomes. The natural impulses to connect with our environment that began what we call
Current Trends
Early 20th century nature study and outdoor educators offered many reasons for studying
nature that sound surprisingly similar to contemporary views. Fueled by the publication of his
book, Last Child in the Woods (Louv, 2008), the Children & Nature Network (C&NN) was co-
founded by Louv and others in 2006 to provide resources and success stories about children
learning from nature and includes links to the latest research that is dedicated to the many
reconnect children to nature. With C&NN’s support, in 2014, 396 grassroots campaigns
connected more than 3.5 million children to nature encounters in 48 states and 12 nations
(www.childrenandnature.org).
The new nature movement (NNM) is described in Louv’s book The Nature Principle
(2011) as an effort to expand on the initiatives of the worldwide children and nature
movement. Louv (2011) and other guest writers offer commentaries with a goal of creating
27
a nature-rich society. Chawla (2013) states that the foundation of this movement is based
on “the idea that as humans we cannot only make our ecological footprints as light as
possible, but we can actually leave places better than when we came to them, making them
As students continue to turn on computers, play video games and watch countless hours
of TV, the world faces environmental crises such as the greenhouse effect, water pollution, etc.
Lieberstein (1991) touts that if poor environmental ethics are to be changed, outdoor education
must come to the forefront. It is often noted that EE should be taught in the lower grades with
the study of the natural world (Adkins & Simmons, 2002; Basile, 2000; Leemimg, Dwyer,
Porter, & Cobern, 1993; Wilson, 1996). However, teaching environmental education and
Advocates for OE believe it should be taught in preschool and say that EE should be kept
for the later grades. Sobel (1996), in line with Piaget (1952), believes empathy should be
stressed in early childhood, and elementary school is when environmental education should be
introduced. Early childhood activities should be more connected to the natural world. Middle
childhood should focus on exploration, and early adolescence should inspire social action to help
change their world for the better, which can truly be enhanced by early, frequent exposure to the
Children must develop a loving relationship with the natural world first. Outdoor
education in the early years provides opportunities to connect children to nature. Children will
be more likely to help heal and improve their natural world after having had firsthand
experiences with the natural environment, learning to love and respect it, and to feel comfortable
28
in its surroundings. Simply put, children must learn to love the world before they can protect it.
John Burroughs, American naturalist (1837 – 1921), stated “Knowledge without love will not
stick. But if love comes first, knowledge is sure to follow” (White & Stoeklin, 2008, para. 6).
For this reason, it is vital for preschools in the U.S. to promote outdoor education. Teachers must
use engaging activities in their local outdoor environment to motivate their students to,
hopefully, make the kinds of choices and behave in a way that will sustain our planet.
Theoretical Framework
Childhood growth and development depend in a large part on being connected to the
natural world. Time outdoors allows children the freedom to explore, create their own activities
and use their imagination. However, today’s children are spending more time indoors and less
time in nature (Rosenow, 2008). White (2008) aptly recognized that an exhilarating outdoor
environment will certainly provide a more all-encompassing growth for a child's body and mind
The guiding theories that provide the basis for this study include those of the
constructivist philosophers Piaget (1952) and Vygotsky (1962); child development expert, John
Dewey (Mooney, 2000); and multiple intelligence theorist, Howard Gardner (1983).
Jean Piaget
Children between birth and 6 years old learn best through their senses; therefore they
benefit from direct contact with nature (Humphreys, 2000). Piaget (1952) declares that lack of
differentiation between the self and other is characteristic of the early childhood years. Empathy,
especially for creatures living in their world, should be encouraged for children in preschool.
Promoting relationships with real or imagined animals can foster empathy during these years.
Sobel (1996) expounded upon early childhood development by explaining that a young child's
29
activities should include outdoor natural play and learning, thus developing a feeling of empathy
with nature.
Improving the sensory awareness of a child suggests improving the ability to use all
senses and being able to better observe and distinguish details and concepts, as well as promoting
the ability to appreciate beauty, express creativity, and perceive patterns (Torquati & Barber,
2005). Understanding nature can be enhanced through exploring, making observations, and
discovering details as experienced through the senses. Nature can improve sensory awareness
and can extend into learning areas such as literacy, problem-solving, and observation. Nature
offers limitless opportunities to expand a child’s play (Torquati & Barber, 2005). In addition to
play development, it can also cultivate social, literacy and language skills. Fostering a child’s
connection to the natural world is somewhat easily done as almost everything a child engages in
is connected to nature. For instance, children may become closer to nature through interactions
with their peers outdoors. As children develop a sense of closeness with nature, their respect of
the environment grows. When children feel a connection to nature, they not only recognize its
beauty, but also their role as stewards (Boeve-de Pauw, 2012; Davis, 1998; Hayes, 2009).
Lev Vygotsky
Play is not only the work of children, but it is what they need to do to learn. The process
for the healthy development of children requires play. Lev Vygotsky, a forerunner in early
education, believed that play is the highest level of development for young children and that play
helps to develop areas of creativity, problem-solving, logic, social skills, and language
acquisition (Vygotsky, 1962). Like Piaget, Vygotsky (1962) believed that when children play,
much learning takes place. Vygotsky (1962) believed that children’s development and learning
language build on each other. Children constantly use language as they play. One of Vygotsky’s
30
(1962) primary contributions to our understanding of a child’s development is realizing the
understood that teachers need to be acute observers of children in order to scaffold well.
Vygotsky (1962) also believed that to help build a child’s cognitive development, teachers and
peers present the language necessary through shared experiences—interactions are important to
learning. Teachers can encourage conversations, interactions, and experimentation so that the
Nature activities that provide quality experiences and allow exploration foster children to
examine materials in many ways, including through actions and questions (Henderson &
Atencio, 2007). Henderson and Atencio (2007) recognized that play gives children the
opportunity for exploration and discovery in their experiences, behaviors, roles, thoughts, and
skills at a degree substantially higher than their normal degree of cognition. Isaacs in Social
Development in Children (1946) extolled the virtues of childhood playing. She said it is not
simply a means of discovery; it is also crucial for achieving psychic equilibrium in a child's early
developmental stages.
John Dewey
John Dewey’s works have contributed much to the progressive education movement in
American education (Mooney, 2000). In the early 20th century, Dewey published his book
Experience and Education (1938), which promoted experiential learning. At the time, teachers
shifted their teaching from formal, abstract education to more experienced-based approaches.
This type of meaning-making was essential to a child’s learning. The issues Dewey (1938)
wrote about are still relevant to educators today. As educators speak of purposeful curricula,
31
dispositions for learning, and well-planned environments, they are talking about the same
struggles present in Dewey’s time. Dewey (1938) shared with Vygotsky and Piaget the ideas of
the progressive education movement that education should be active and interactive, involve the
child and the community, and most of all be child-centered. Dewey (1938) agreed with
Vygotsky and Piaget that education should involve material and experiences common in real life
because children learn from doing. Independent thinking and experimentation should be
encouraged. Curricular planning should be formed from children’s interests, with teachers
learning (Dewey, 1938). Dewey (1938) also believed that to provide appropriate activities for
nurturing inquiry, a teacher needed to trust her own skills and knowledge of the world, thereby
Howard Gardner
Connections with the natural environment are supported by Howard Gardner (1983)’s
theory of multiple intelligences. His theory indicates that children have seven intelligences:
personal. In 1996, he added “naturalistic intelligence” to the list (Gardner, 1999), and recently
nature and making sense of them. Children who are “nature smart” are interested in behaviors
and habitats of other species. Their interest in the outside world and with different animals
begins early in life. They are sensitive to their surroundings and show a preference to learning
about animals, the weather, rocks, and the sky. They are aware of shifts in the environment due
to heightened sensory perception, which enables them to notice subtle changes. They enjoy
32
reading about nature and often are the ones who categorize things easily through collecting and
classifying objects. If teachers spend most of the time indoors with the children, this naturalistic
intelligence is being thwarted. If this intelligence is to be nurtured, teachers must let children
play outside to explore, get their hands dirty, looking at or under rocks, and finding new
intelligence (Gardner, 1999), whereas, nature can provide connections for every child’s
intelligence. Nature allows for deeper understanding and insight and can easily connect to all
academic areas. The traditional classroom cannot replicate hands-on, personal experiences and
the endless learning possibilities in nature. Providing experiences in nature and supporting a
child’s interest can provide lifelong benefits. Maller (2009) pointed out that engaging outdoor
activities promote a more intensive and effective connection to the social and biophysical aspects
of life. In addition, children use more of their natural senses outdoors. One result is that children
develop a more distinctive understanding of their relationship with their natural world.
The natural world enhances a child’s learning process and welfare. Healthy development
for a child includes discovery, exploration, hands-on experiences, observation, appreciation, and
play. Nature must be reconnected to today’s children, not only as a means to enhance academic
experiences but also their well-being. Even if a child is not innately connected to nature, through
providing connections to nature, his/her overall development and growth will benefit. Likewise,
even if the educator does not feel completely confident about teaching in the outdoors, the
teacher’s passion for nature can also affect the students for a lifetime (Maller, 2009). The desired
outcome is for children to be prepared to connect, observe, and understand the power and
33
Developmentally Appropriate Practices
Copple and Bredekamp (2009) define developmentally appropriate practices (DAP) for
helping children learn: treating children as individuals and showing them respect, recognizing
their stage of development, and being patient as they develop and learn. Curriculum that is DAP
should have hands-on experiences and multimodal sensory learning opportunities (Torquati &
Barber, 2005). Outdoor natural learning environments can provide limitless opportunities when
embedded into the preschool curriculum, such as new experiences, physical activity, and feelings
of being connected to nature. This may also foster environmental stewardship later in life.
Samuelsson and Kaga, (2010) claim that children who participate in outdoor play regularly and
who enjoy sustained, positive experiences, are much richer for those occurrences. They are more
likely to attain sustainable lifestyles and behaviors in general. Chawla and Hart (1995) agree that
frequent exposure to positive experiences in nature early in life is an effective way to foster
The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) has an
accredited program with standards outlining the basic fundamentals to improve quality programs
in early childhood education. The tenets include a variety of factors essential to a positive
relationship between children and adults including: a comprehensive structured curriculum that
includes both emotional and social as well as physical domains; well-maintained, safe learning
environments, indoor and outdoor, with routine, systematic assessments of both developmental
and learning achievements; teaching practices that focus on student development, ensuring
accommodation for cultural as well as linguistic considerations; safety and health in general;
efficient management and leadership; and an active partnership with families and their
community (NAEYC, www.naeyc.org). However, despite the concerted efforts being applied,
34
parents and administrators tend to be more focused on school readiness and academic
preparation. Furthermore, a myriad of state policies impedes advancements in the more realistic,
practical approach that recognizes the benefits of incorporating outdoor learning experiences and
Children’s play today has transformed from mainly being outdoors to indoor activities
related to media such as computer games and the like. The National Wildlife Federation’s
document on Creating High Performance Learners reports that children who spend more time
outdoors develop a strengthened immune system and gain better skills at balancing, agility,
dexterity, and depth perception (Coyle, 2010). They also attained higher levels of concentration
and better behavior in the classroom, which stimulates their learning (Coyle, 2010).
According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC, 2012), the incidence of obesity in
children 6-11 has more than doubled over the past 20 years. The CDC recommends that children
spend an hour each day in physical activity with games such as running, jumping, and climbing
(Kohatsu et al., 2010). Obese children have a 70% chance of becoming obese as adults (Kohatsu
et al., 2010). Research suggests that children need a connection to their natural world. The
omission, or nature-deficit disorder, so prevalent today, may even be associated with the current
epidemic of childhood diabetes, depression, obesity, behavioral disorders, and more (Charles,
Louv, Bodner, Bill, & Stahl, 2009). Furthermore, it could also lead to a decline in a child's sense
of community and disorientation about his place in the world (Charles et al., 2009).
When children are burning off excess energy in the outdoors, they are better able to
concentrate on academic materials inside the classroom. Burdette and Whitaker (2005) suggest
that experiences in the outdoors also gives children the opportunity to enhance decision-making
35
skills, problem-solving and creative thinking. Children learn through trial and error about how to
solve issues; an adult just telling them how to solve problems is less effective. They must
always involves interacting with others. Role play such as being the leader or follower requires
cooperation. Creative interactions during free play (rule-making, turn-taking, etc.) cultivate a
child’s emotional abilities such as self-regulation and sharing (Burdette & Whitaker, 2005).
Lightfoot, Cole, and Cole (2005) maintain that play helps children to learn how to control their
feelings, thoughts and actions. Burdette and Whitaker (2005) affirm this by declaring that
interactions and activity in outdoor play decrease anxiety, depression and aggression, as well as
increase the benefits of exposure to sunlight. Negative results for a child's inactivity with the
natural world may include: stress, poor academic achievement, health problems, reduced creative
and cognitive abilities, aggression, and a subsequent diminishing of productivity in school and
Historically, researchers of playground safety and design, such as Joe Frost in the 1980s,
have not included research about the benefits of outdoor nature play. Today, the research is
flourishing thanks to Taylor and Kuo (2009), Chawla (2006), and Louv (2005). Rivkin (2014)
agreed with Louv’s (2014) conclusion that every child has the inherent right to benefit from the
gifts and joys of play and nature, even those whose lives are not blessed with parents who
appreciate nature, in an elevated social status or culture, or are gifted with a set of abilities. In
2005, Louv further pointed out that, by nature, green play spaces provide a feeling of social
inclusion and sense of belonging for children, regardless of intellectual abilities, race, sex, or
social class.
36
In 2015, Louv noted that current studies affirmed the lack of outdoor learning
environments for students and, consequently, the lack of positive outcomes that the outdoor
learning environment can provide. One such study discovered that at-risk students, having spent
only one week in an outdoor camp setting, showed significantly higher scores on science tests
than similar students in an indoor classroom setting. The University of Illinois' Human-
Environment Research Laboratory research studies disclosed that children as young as five years
old displayed significant reductions in their typical symptomatic ADHD behavior when playing
Children appreciate the beauty around them, inside and outside of the classroom (Isbell &
Evanshen, 2012). Environments where children play should be aesthetically pleasing and balance
nature play, experience, and the learning process. Nature play should promote child inquiry.
When children can use all of their senses in an activity, learning becomes easier and retention is
improved (Kaplan, 1995; Martensson et al., 2009). The natural environment is also a place
where children can develop problem-solving and social skills. As children interact with each
other in the natural environment, they share and discuss curiosities more, as well as negotiation
skills. This type of engagement allows complex learning to take place. Children may develop
emotionally through focused physical activities that use their problem-solving, social and
physical skills (Jones, 2005). Learning experiences in the natural environment are richer than
Rosenow and Bailie (2014) explored a collection of papers (seven research articles, three
field reports, and one personal voice essay) to investigate settings that provided nature
experiences for young children, with attention to the effect of what these initiatives had on the
37
holistic development and environmental awareness of the children involved, their teacher and the
staff. Multiple and diverse ways are emerging to connect children with nature. The benefits are
just starting to be realized. The motivation for this special issue was that children's access to
nature has changed due to many factors: increasing use of technology by children, diminishing
space for children to roam, helicopter parenting, and an unintended consequence of human
process. The results showed that there is no "one size fits all" way to bring more nature to early
Play areas that are special and intimate provide children with enjoyable experiences
where they can feel comfortable engaging in pretend play. No matter the season, outdoor
environments can create natural play spaces for children. Often educators assume that they need
to instruct children how to play or use materials; however, children have a more meaningful
experience when they can have uninterrupted time to interact and play freely in a space that is
special to them (Miles, 2009). Simply present the play space, then let the children explore and
interact with the materials and each other as they choose (Miles, 2009). Outdoor settings,
specifically designated spaces for creative play, can offer a new perspective in play, and special
Today’s society has become more dependent on technology and further separated from
nature. Nelson (2012) calls the changes in childhood today a “silent emergency” because adults
are overly protective of allowing children to spend time outdoors. This is detrimental due to the
fearing nature and the outdoors as unsafe, and lack of connection to the natural world.
38
In the past few decades, many schools have converted green spaces into playgrounds with
concrete and turf areas and manufactured equipment—with limited or no use of natural materials
(White, 2004). Early childhood education is sorely lacking in the utilization of natural outdoor
environmental spaces for children. The exclusive choice of relegating only indoor classrooms
and traditional man-made outdoor playgrounds leaves an empty space in a child's development.
Rice and Torquati (2013) studied children from 10 early childhood programs in Nebraska and
California. Six had outdoor classrooms, and 4 had more traditional play areas. The purpose of
this research was to: develop a reliable measure of children's attraction for nature or "biophilia",
determine whether the attraction is related to the "greenness" of the outdoor play area, and then
determine if demographic variables are associated with biophilia and whether demographics
biophilia scores were not correlated with maternal education and family income, but both
maternal education and family income were associated with selection of programs with natural
have a tendency to reduce the beneficial aspects of a more natural setting and even inhibit a
child’s developmental process. Research on the advantages of natural settings is now providing
new evidence for schools to landscape their outdoor environments to improve a child’s learning,
health and social relationships (Chawla, 2015; Fjortoft, 2001; Keeler, 2008). In one study at the
University of Colorado Boulder, headed by Louise Chawla, it was found that green schoolyards,
not just asphalt and play equipment, reduces stress and inattention in children (Chawla, Keena,
Pevec, & Stanley, 2014). Chawla et al.’s (2014) feeling was that in contemporary stress
management programs, as provided by many schools, too much emphasis is placed on dealing
39
with stress instead of creating or capitalizing on environments that reduce stress. Chawla et al.
(2014) recognized that children have an opportunity for analyzing, interpreting, and making
ideal environment. Chawla et al. (2014) also found that natural-terrain schoolyards cultivate
caring relationships with nature and others while instilling feelings of competence. Combination
schoolyards also have positive impacts on children; therefore Chawla et al. (2014) suggest
schools with only built outdoor environments tear out some of the asphalt and incorporate
natural-habitat landscaping.
Coe (2012) reported that natural playgrounds inspire different types of play that is more
beneficial for children than a traditional playground with metal equipment and plastic parts. The
study is one of the first to observe changes in the physical activity of children who played on a
traditional playground versus a natural playground. Coe (2012) concluded that children in a
natural playground engaged in more muscle- and bone-strengthening activites and spent more
Dyment (2005) conducted a study in Toronto on different school environments and how
they affect children and teachers. The schools changed their asphalt areas into green settings.
Results from 400 questionnaires sent to principals, teachers and parents showed that the majority
of participants agreed the greener school grounds had a positive effect on how the curriculum
was being taught and received. Teachers were motivated to use innovative strategies for all
learning styles, and students’ engagement for learning increased with hands-on, outdoor
activities. There was not only an improvement in science, but also in the areas of art, literacy
40
Sali, Akyol and Baran (2014), examined the similarities and differences between actual
schoolyards and what children dream of their schoolyards being like by making use of their
drawings. Environmental opportunities are very important to early childhood development and
positive attitudes about the environment affect their overall attitude. Children's drawings are a
way for them to reflect their observations, experiences, problems and ideas; a means of
expressing themselves. Statistical data showed that there was a significant relationship between
drawing fixed play equipment and the type of school children attend in favor of independent
kindergartens (Sali et al., 2014). Children drew seesaws, swings, whirls, slides and fixed
equipment while children from preschool classes in public elementary schools drew basketballs,
volleyballs, football fields, basketball hoops, nets, and goals (Sali et al., 2014). A significant
element that affects the quality of the education in preschool settings is the organization of
playgrounds; with various types of equipment, different playing grounds such as asphalt, grass,
sand, soil, and sunny and shady spaces. There should also be space for running, walking and
For many people, an outdoor classroom is still considered a place where children have
always played. But it is much more than that—it is a return to child-centered learning. It shifts
early childhood education from primarily an indoor, teacher-led endeavor to child-initiated play,
which is crucial for a child’s development. By moving them outdoors, children become more
responsible for their own learning while teachers are there to ensure safety and stimulation
(Maynard & Walters, 2007). Outdoor classrooms enable students to connect with their
environment in ways that are beyond learning in a traditional indoor classroom. However,
41
outdoor learning is not entirely separated from indoor learning—outdoor learning enhances
Winters, Ring, and Burris (2010) describe the outdoor area as not only a project-based
learning center, it also represents the ideal environment for observation and reflection. They
depict nature as a tool for growth and development, and maintain that an outdoor classroom is a
resource that should be supported. It is the environment outdoors on school grounds where
teachers and students gather to experience learning in nature. The outdoor classroom is based on
the idea that children are constantly learning. They need a variety of learning experiences and
opportunities to grow and develop properly in such areas as gross- and fine-motor skills, social-
emotional development, language and creativity. Mastering such skills is crucial to a child’s
As they explore their world and generate new ideas, children move from awareness to
knowledge to understanding, and information and knowledge are transformed into experiences
and skills. Maynard and Walters (2007) convey that if children are allowed to move freely in an
open outdoor classroom, this movement creates a more natural and powerful form of learning.
Reports from both teachers and students show an increase of knowledge and understanding of
lessons taught outdoors (Dillon et al., 2006). Along with increase in achievement, students were
more motivated when they studied in an outdoor environment. Louv (2015) reports that
educators benefit as well when teaching in natural outdoor settings—Canadian researchers found
that there was a renewed enthusiasm for teaching while engaging students in outdoor classrooms.
In another survey of grade-school teachers, it was reported that those who used the garden area
as a unique, dynamic teaching environment were elated over it. The children were still given
42
standardized tests there, and each child received the attention and instructions necessary to
natural resources and better learn how to care for their environment (Kimbro, 2006). But an
outdoor classroom doesn’t have to focus only on environmental topics. Classes that can be taught
outside include language arts, social studies, reading, writing, art, music, local geography and
history. The outdoor classroom is also conducive to studying science, technology, engineering
and math (STEM). Sites can be used for observation and inquiry-based science, while
technology can expose them to the wonders of their world. According to Sobel (1996), children
are born researchers and scientists; they are naturally inquisitive and desire hands-on activities
Children between 4–7 years old usually play near home or school. They crave
immersion, solitude and interaction in a close and knowable world (Sobel, 1996). Young
children need gradual exposure to nature so they may become familiar with flora and fauna in the
schoolyard before walking in the woods. Environmental awareness emerges out of firsthand
experiences in a child’s natural world in small, manageable spaces (Sobel, 1996). The preschool
outdoor classroom should be designed for the child’s whole being. Developmental domains such
as adaptive, aesthetic, cognitive, emotional, social and physical should be addressed, along with
curiosity, imagination, and sense of wonder. They need to have positive experiences to show
them the world is a safe place to play and be. Experiences that are memorable and pleasant
produce a lifelong learning interest for children. They learn more effectively when they are
actively engaged, including interacting with adults and peers and manipulating materials (Harlan,
1992). Harlan (1992) believes that teachers should act as facilitators who create an inviting and
43
stimulating learning environment. This allows the children to feel competent while inviting
Nature engages children through sensory awareness, observation and attention to details.
This in turn broadens a child’s problem-solving and literacy skills, as well as play development
(Torquati & Barber, 2005). Complex learning and cooperative play are extended as children
explore and play in nature (Jones, 2005). Isaacs (1929) noted that children learn through play,
enhancing their knowledge of their natural world. Isaacs (1929) also acknowledged that the
average, healthy, eagerly active child certainly matches the energy, drive, and thirst for
knowledge of even the most devoted experimental scientist. Nature as a living laboratory sparks
a child’s interest when connecting with the natural world. It allows abstract concepts to become
more relevant to the classroom curriculum. Children need sensory stimulation and manipulation
of materials to learn and grow – they learn through experience, not by what they’re told. What is
missing in many children’s lives today are natural environments rich with opportunities for
creative play, thoughtful inquiry and reflection. Teachers should give children more time to
benefit from these experiences rather than hurrying them from one program to another (Louv,
2008).
Outdoor learning environments provide a setting that allows teachers to observe students
in ways that they would not normally see, creating a different kind of child-teacher relationship
(Hammerman et al., 1994). In a study by Foran (2005), it was discovered that astute teachers
recognized that an outdoor classroom is much more than mere space. The environment gave
teachers an experience that included an enhanced awareness of their endowed value, fond
memories, and a feeling of identity and connection with the natural world. The teachers found
that in the outdoors they were learning, along with the children, in that environment. Common to
44
the teachers in this study were degrees of intense feelings of connection that arose from moments
According to Wilson (1996) young children learn best through tactile interaction. Using
natural items found in the outdoors, they can produce art and building projects, learn addition
and subtraction, create music based on nature sounds, and initiate dramatic play. For most
children, inquisitiveness is awakened through contact with the natural environment. The love of
nature can be brought out through integration of nature in the everyday curriculum which can
provide opportunities to make abstract concepts more relevant and meaningful. By teaching
nature-driven lessons, teachers can teach less and guide children by using open-ended questions
to spur their interest and investigation. One aspect of the natural outdoor classroom is the
opportunity for inquiry and problem-solving. This leads to data collection, discovery and
knowledge of something previously unknown. The students and teachers are co-learners in the
investigative process. Since children are naturally curious, the teachers must formulate questions
in ways that they may not necessarily have answers to (Wilson, 1996).
appropriate practices stemming from children’s interests and provide activities that are
ability to deal with them personally and are fundamental to effective learning (Copple &
Bredekamp, 2009). In Nelson’s (2012) book, Cultivating Outdoor Classrooms: Designing and
equipped outdoor classrooms such as having the time and freedom to explore, either alone or
with friends; big movement and social play; comprehensive and emergent curriculum where
teachers engage, support, observe and respond to children’s interests. According to Nelson
45
(2012), some of the characteristics of an outdoor classroom that promote learning throughout all
• Experimental spaces where children can use open-ended materials, both natural and man-
Outdoor classrooms provide opportunities for children to learn the cause and effect of
outdoor activities while affording them a wide range of activities for a more holistic
development. It also addresses the trials children face in learning how to safely handle outdoor
risks; playing on uneven surfaces helps improve balance and coordination (Nelson, 2012). Other
challenges that are resolved by having an outdoor classroom are: 1) getting children outside, 2)
involving them in hands-on activities and loose parts play, and 3) connecting them more deeply
Young children should not be limited to the classroom for their learning experiences.
Children that have opportunities to learn outdoors are believed to learn quicker; knowledge
gained through the use of nature-oriented activities is retained far longer than if simply read to
(Hammerman et al., 2001). It is estimated that 95% of all learning takes place outside school
walls (Odoy & Foster, 1997). The outdoors should be considered as an extension of the
classroom, where children can develop cognitive, social, emotional and physical skills.
Educators who incorporate nature-based education must prepare and plan developmentally
appropriate practices (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). Teaching young children within their
46
natural environment is challenging but provides a sense of wonderment, which is vital for
effective learning. “It is not half so important to know as to feel…the years of early childhood
curiosity and exploration. By effectively integrating nature into learning experiences, students
may improve in creativity, self-confidence, self-discipline, social skills, literacy and language,
and problem-solving (Woyke, 2004). Children who have ample opportunities for direct sensory
experiences and positive peer interaction with the natural world learn and develop better than
those that are not allowed such conditions (Woyke, 2004). A study by Jorgensen (2016)
contributed to an understanding of outdoor education in the early years. The driving force for
children’s curiosity about their world is creating a sense of wonder in a natural landscape. To be
emotionally involved and having an appreciation of their environment, teachers need to supply
children with time and space to allow such moments to occur (Jorgensen, 2016).
Schools can make a difference by providing green spaces with trees and gardens.
Teachers can take students and the curriculum outside to provide hands-on learning experiences.
Since children spend much of their time in a school setting, the school becomes one of the
biggest influences in a child’s development. By giving them multiple contexts in which to learn
and interact in the environment, children will have the opportunity to connect knowledge with
real-life situations (White, 2004). The benefits of integrating the outdoors, daily, into a child's
life cannot be understated. Children spend a large portion of their life hours in school, so
providing some invigorating outdoor activity is an integral part of their development and
47
According to Keeler (2008) schools that have outdoor classrooms come in different sizes
and shapes, have a variety of resources, and are used by students and teachers for a variety of
purposes. With the physical changes in an outdoor environment, such as the addition of natural
materials, there are presumably changes in how teachers and children use the school yard. The
teachers, in turn, learn from the children. This continuing cycle of change and development
keeps the learning and teaching fresh and interesting to children and teachers alike; the outdoor
per day indoors (Coyle, 2010). By viewing nature as something that can be looked at and not
touched, they are losing the benefits that the outdoors can provide. Outdoor play is an important
component in a child’s life, and outdoor play spaces that are special to a child can provide many
learning opportunities. When children can use natural elements to play, it helps them develop
important skills for learning and academic success later in life (Benson & Miller, 2008). It is
often the small, simple things that can trigger the biggest interest. Through unstructured use and
access to a variety of materials, children will demonstrate imaginative play and respond to their
desire to rearrange and combine materials for investigative and inventive play (Curtis & Carter,
2005).
Although this infant body of research is relatively new, evidence of psychological and
physical benefits is emerging from studies of outdoor play (Fjortoft, 2001; Handler & Epstein,
2010; White, 2004). Experiences with nature help children to learn, improving academic
performance and increasing creativity. Outdoor play has also been shown to lower the chances of
childhood obesity and to reduce the symptoms of ADD/ADHD (Ansari, Pettit, & Gershoff, 2015;
Taylor & Kuo, 2001). Louv (2008) discusses the growing evidence about the positive impacts of
48
nature play on children’s well-being in his book Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children
from Nature Deficit Disorder. Some of the benefits include cognitive, creative, physical, social
investigate, test, and manipulate objects. Compared to the standard indoor classroom, the
outdoors is a more vigorous and effective setting. Research suggests that the more exposure to
the natural world, the better (Louv, 2008). Furthermore, the greener that those surroundings are,
more is the feeling of relief (Bratman et al., 2015; Keeler, 2008). The problem is that educators
may or may not understand the benefits of nature to children’s development. The natural
environment has many positive benefits for children including lessening the burdens of
emotional distress, anxiety, and depression (Frumpkin et al., 2017; Keeler, 2008). Regular
outdoor activity in nature heightens creativity and imagination, encourages play and cooperative
Recently, researchers have been studying the negatives effects produced by an indoor
lifestyle and determining if children’s interactions with a natural environment counteracts this
(Rideout, Foehr, Roberts, & Kaiser, 2010). The National Wildlife Federation conducted a survey
in 2010 where 1,900 educators believed that classroom attentiveness and performance were
demonstrably advanced in 78% of the children who had an unstructured outdoor play area. A full
75% of those surveyed felt that regular outdoor activities inspire students to heightened creativity
and more effective problem-solving, subsequently, in the indoor learning environment (Coyle,
2010). Maller’s (2009) study involved interviews with community participants, and 12
principals and their lead teachers about the advantages of children conducting nature activities in
the school’s outdoor settings. Results showed that the benefits of hands-on, outdoor contact in
49
an outdoor environment improved children’s ability to focus; improved their self-esteem;
reduced stress; help to alleviate depression; and generally improved their mental health and
overall well-being (Maller, 2009). This study supports that connections in nature increase
Nelson (2012) discussed the many reasons that outdoor play is beneficial to children
today. There are physical, cognitive, and psychological outcomes that are influenced from
outdoor play both in the home environment and in the school environment. The physical benefits
that are derived from outdoor play are developmentally appropriate physical development,
creating a baseline for a healthy long-term activity level, and a decrease in childhood obesity as
well as a decrease in symptoms from ADD/ADHD (Gallahue, 1993; Johnson, Christie & Wardle,
2005; Nelson, 2012; Rosenow, 2008). A few of the cognitive benefits that children receive from
provide outside of the schoolroom thinking, and developing social norms in a setting that allows
the child to connect to the world around them (Dhanapal & Lim, 2013). The psychological
benefits noted in the literature are an increase in overall self-esteem, social and emotional self-
regulation, and effective relationship building with both other children and the natural
environment that surrounds them (Gallahue, 1993; Johnson et al., 2005; Nelson, 2012).
Learning through the natural environment helps students be able to cement their learning
in both meaningful and individual experiences in order to maintain the information over time
(Dale, Corbin, & Dale, 2000). The learning that they create at a school environment or outdoor
classroom can also be carried over into other realms of their lives such as outdoor play at the
home instead of behaviors that involve only seated activities (Dale et al., 2000). There are many
developmental needs that are currently going unmet due to the increase in seated behaviors, such
50
as gross-motor development and creative play within a natural environment (Greenman, 1993).
The literature suggests that through increasing the use of outdoor play and outdoor classrooms,
this will decrease the deficits that children are beginning to show in these areas (Nelson, 2012).
Because nature is vital to the healthy development of children, educators need to focus on
Considering that more people now live in cities than in rural areas, the barrier to providing
natural, outdoor play environments is no longer about the nature of cities; it's about the lack of
nature in cities (Louv, 2014). Past generations had access to nature, unlike the current
generation, producing what Louv (2008) calls nature-deficit disorder. The term was coined in his
book Last Child in the Woods and refers to children being disconnected from nature. Although
not a true disorder, this term brings to mind the severity of the problem. Some of the causes of
• Urbanization and the loss of parks; poor design of cities and poor transportation are
• A culture of fear, real and imagined, of traffic, toxins, and “stranger-danger” have caused
parents to avoid letting their children play outdoors. Although the natural world does
pose some risks, the benefits far outweigh them. The more experiences we have in the
• Children are immersed in technology, which in itself is not harmful; however the balance
between inactivity and playing outdoors has shifted to playing in a virtual world.
• Time spent in nature is no longer seen as necessary for children’s growth and
development, despite research to the contrary. Many parents and educators, as well as
policy makers, are unaware of the results of the health benefits that nature provides.
51
Although the research on outdoor classrooms shows the importance of getting children
outside in a learning environment that is developmentally appropriate, there are various reasons
why some succeed and some fail. An effective outdoor classroom is one that has community
Wildlife Federation (GWF), 2004). According to the GWF (2004), the top 5 reasons that
outdoor classrooms fail is: 1) lack of maintenance, 2) teachers unsure how to incorporate the use
of the outdoor classroom into their lesson plans, 3) no funding, 4) vandalism, and 5) school
expansion.
Teachers need more support and better professional training opportunities. Teachers have
indicated that the main barriers for utilizing outdoor classrooms and creating outdoor
opportunities are: lack of funds, transportation challenges, and complicated schedules (Ernst,
2014). In order for nature to foster environmental stewardship, it must be modeled before
children in addition to teaching about nature through the curriculum and hands-on experiences
(Zeece, 1999).
An educator should model enthusiasm within play, sharing wonder, nurturing curiosity,
and observe and listen as children interact with nature. According to Miles (2009), children gain
more as they are allowed to interact freely with one another in nature, especially in a space
created for imaginative play. Open-ended materials also stimulate a child’s desire to continually
combine materials and rearrange them for invention and exploration (Curtis & Carter, 2005). In
a study by Hammerman, et al. (2001), children learned more quickly when connected to nature;
thus young children retain knowledge through hands-on experiences. Louv (2008) provides
extensive resources describing the importance of access to nature for young children, including
52
Network website (https://www.childrenandnature.org), which provide links to research on over
DAP guidelines from the NAEYC identify best practices in early childhood programs
(Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). “Preschool children learn best when they have positive and caring
relationships with adults and other children; when they receive carefully planned, intentional
guidance and assistance; and when they can safely encounter and explore many interesting things
environment for children to flourish is one part of the outdoor experience; effective teachers who
provide open-ended materials and questions are the other part (Kostelnik, 1993). According to
Kostelnik (1993), there are three principles teachers can use that define DAP for helping children
learn:
• Apply what you know about learning and children’s development to your curriculum and
teaching strategies.
• Show children respect - recognize their growth, and be patient as they develop and learn.
According to Cornell (1998) as children become more disconnected to the natural world,
their physical, emotional, and psychological health suffers. This disconnection also adversely
affects their learning and creates challenges for educators. Teachers play a critical role in helping
children become more aware of the world around them. Cornell (1998) considers 5 tenets of
outdoor teaching:
• Teach less and share more – inspire children to love and respect the earth;
• Be receptive – communicate with the child; form a natural trust and friendship;
• Focus on the child’s attention – let children feel that their findings are interesting;
53
• Observe first; talk later – let children experience the wonders for themselves; and
According to a study by Mosley, Reinke, and Bookout (2002) teachers' attitudes and
knowledge of outdoor education are crucial to the overall effectiveness of outdoor learning.
Their attitudes may be measured by their expectations and the actual results. Mosley et al. (2002)
found that low self-efficacy contributed to teachers' low expectations, and that proper
training increases teachers' expectations and subsequent results. Mosley et al. (2002) went on to
The premise was to provide pre-service teachers with a practical application of outdoor
education for themselves. As a result, it was found that their own students exhibited a broader
environment. They discovered the solid connection between mathematics and nature, and its
In a study by Sandseter, Little, and Wyver (2012), different pedagogical approaches were
explored to determine if they led to different teaching practices. According to Sandseter et al.
(2012) Australian and Norwegian teachers have similar levels of training and exposure to theory.
Norwegian teachers prioritize play and risk taking in outdoor environments. The two curriculums
in Norway and Australia were used to partially explain the different approaches to risky outdoor
play in these two countries. Interviews were used to access the data from teachers which showed
that both groups of teachers from both countries have similar understandings of the importance
of risk taking in play, but more consistency was demonstrated between belief and practice in the
54
Another study by MacQuarrie, Nugent, and Warden (2015) focused on nature-based
learning in different countries. MacQuarrie et al. (2015) found that children are more likely to
engage in activities, risky or otherwise, when they are endorsed by adults of the same culture.
According to MacQuarrie et al. (2015) a group discussion and 3 case studies explored practices
that occurred in nature-based programs. The emphasis was on the relationship between the adult
and child, where teacher-child learning is a shared approach. Nature is viewed as a setting in
terms of its role and also as a pedagogical environment. One of the most important ways an
educator can foster environmental stewardship is to expose children, as early as possible, to the
natural environment (MacQuarrie et al., 2015). Chawla (2006) says that the development of
that their commitment to environmental issues is attributed to 2 things: 1) many hours spent
outdoors in childhood, and 2) an adult who taught them respect for nature.
Many teachers believe that it is difficult to consciously develop an appreciation for the
environment and create a sense of environmental stewardship in their students. They believe that
these things are primarily influenced through life experiences, which can occur both inside and
outside of the classroom. Life experiences provided by nature are a key component to acquiring
environmental awareness (Ewert, Place, & Sibthorp, 2005). It has been shown that to appreciate
the natural world as adults, children need to develop a sense of respect for nature in their early
childhood years (Ewert et al., 2005). According to Woyke (2004) teachers can foster an
atmosphere where students not only thrive in a variety of developmental areas, but also reinforce
care for the environment. Even if all students are not interested in studying the natural
environment, it is still possible to bring them closer to nature. As educators and child care
professionals, the challenge is to recognize and take advantage of nature’s teachable moments.
55
When children create a connection to nature early in childhood, they are more inclined to be
adults who appreciate the natural world. This connection can be achieved by a child’s
experience of instruction and activities in nature and by educators modeling passion for the
environment. Passion for the outdoors can be the greatest influencer, as enthusiasm and
Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to answer the following questions:
Central Research Question: What is the overall state of outdoor education in preschools in
Northeast Tennessee?
between teachers who plan lessons for outdoor learning and those who do not?
RQ 4. Is there a significant relationship between preschool teachers who plan lessons for
RQ 5. Is there a significant relationship between teachers’ name for outdoor spaces and how
RQ 6. Do the names teachers use to refer to their outdoor education areas relate to the type of
56
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
This study used a mixed-methods approach to examine the overall state of outdoor
quantitative and qualitative forms of research (Creswell, 2009) and mixes both approaches. The
design of the study made use of a survey, an interview, and an observational playground/outdoor
environment assessment. The data were analyzed from a number of sources including: 1) the
Preschool Teacher Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey (PTOEAS) (Appendix A), providing
teacher demographics and practices, and teacher attitudes on outdoor education, 2) the Preschool
environment assessment, and 3) the Outdoor Education Interview (OEI) (Appendix C), a series
In Phase I, quantitative data was collected, using survey methods, on teachers’ attitudes
toward outdoor education, as well as their beliefs about, and actual use of, the outdoor
classroom. Additionally, survey data was collected on participant’s early childhood experiences
with nature and the outdoors. In Phase II of the study, preschool outdoor play areas were
assessed through observations using POEMS (DeBord et al., 2005). The POEMS was used to
classify outdoor play areas according to quality of the natural playspace (high or low). In Phase
III of the study, qualitative data was collected through interviews with a select number of
preschool teachers exhibiting high or low attitudes toward outdoor education (as measured by the
survey) and who were in high or low quality outdoor classrooms (as measured by the POEMS,
Domain 3). Creswell (2009) explains that qualitative research has as its focus the meaning of
57
human lives and experiences. Qualitative data provides a depth of understanding of concepts
regarding the human condition. The interviews were used to get more in-depth information on
teacher. Only the researcher had access to the list of names and case numbers. No identifying
information was given in the study. All scoring was completed by the researcher. The answers to
the survey questions were uploaded into an SPSS program for ease of scoring and analysis.
Population
The potential population of this study included all preschool teachers in three counties in
Northeast Tennessee: Washington, Sullivan, and Greene, along with the cities of Johnson City,
Bristol, Kingsport, and Greeneville. From a list of all the preschools in this region, the
researcher selected 34 preschools which were chosen for ease of location (driving distance) and
variation of affiliation. Preschools contacted were in public schools (n = 13), private (n = 5),
church-affiliated (n = 9) and Head Start programs (n = 7). The 7 Head Start programs were both
public school-based (n = 3) and private (n = 4). Principals and administrators for all 34 selected
preschools agreed to allow the study to be conducted (100% participation), and all preschool
teachers in the 34 preschools were invited to participate in the survey. Further descriptions of the
actual participants can be found in the sample section of each phase of data collection.
Phase I—Survey
Sample
The sample for Phase I of this study was obtained from the population above. The survey
was sent out to all 100 teachers (male = 1, female = 99) at the 34 preschools, with a return rate of
88%. Of the 88 teachers who agreed to partcipate, seven teachers (all female) did not fully
58
complete the forms and were removed from the study. The total sample therefore consisted of
81 preschool teachers (male = 1, female = 80), from 34 preschools, who voluntarily completed
the survey.
Measures
practices is based on studies related to factors influencing teacher attitudes on outdoor education
(Chawla, 2006). The first part of the survey consists of 16 questions, some open-ended.
Questions include early experiences in the outdoors, how often teachers use the outdoor area for
learning, and their definition of outdoor education. The purpose of the demographic information
is to allow the researcher an understanding of the background of teachers and whether or not this
The second part of the survey contained questions on teacher attitudes about outdoor
education. The original Outdoor Education Inventory Survey (OEIS) on teacher attitudes
developed by Chase (1969) was given to elementary teachers; it was modified for this study to
ask questions appropriate for preschool teachers. This modified survey consisted of 27 questions,
including questions on teachers’ opinions of outdoor education and their beliefs on how to teach
it. It used a Likert-type scale which consists of “strongly disagree”, “disagree”, “neutral”,
“agree”, and “strongly agree” answers to questions, and an overall average score was calculated
to determine the teachers’ attitudes on outdoor education. Some of the survey questions were
reverse-coded, meaning that if a person answered “5” (strongly disagree) on the Likert scale, this
numbers 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 23, 24, 25, and 27. Scores were achieved by adding up
59
the total number. Possible raw scores ranged from 27 (low attitude) to 135 (high attitude), but
these raw scores were scaled to range from 0 (lowest score possible, negative attitude) to100
(highest score possible, positive attitude), for easier interpretation. Higher scores were
considered to indicate a more positive attitude toward, and an increased awareness of, outdoor
education. Data collected from the survey provided information on whether correlations can be
“whether one can draw meaningful and useful references from scores on particular instruments”
(Creswell, 2009, p. 235). The PTOEAS instrument was developed by the researcher to gather
descriptive measures of the teachers and also teacher practices in their outdoor classrooms.
Content validity for this instrument was sought by recruiting 3 colleagues to examine the
Reliability, according to Creswell (2015), “means that scores from an instrument are
stable and consistent” (p. 158). To establish reliability of the instrument, the researcher used the
alternate forms reliability approach (Creswell, 2015). This approach uses 2 instruments which
measure the same variables, for instance, the PTOEAS and the Outdoor Education Interview
(OEI, explained below) have similar questions about teacher practices on using the outdoor
classroom. The advantage of this method is that it would allow the researcher to determine if the
answers from one instrument are similar to the other instrument intended to measure the same
variables.
Procedures
in order to identify preschools that would possibly participate. The purpose of the research was
60
explained, and superintendents decided whether to allow this research to be presented to the
principals. Principals were then contacted to discuss the specifics of the research project in order
for them to determine whether schools would agree to participate. Of the 34 preschools that were
approached, all (100%) agreed to participate, and a letter of introduction, a survey, and the
One hundred preschool teachers were approached by letter in accordance with the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) at East Tennessee State University in Johnson City, Tennessee.
All 81 participants in the study signed consent forms in accordance with IRB protocol (Appendix
D). This is a convenience sample, and preschools/teachers were not randomly chosen. Those
teachers in the schools who responded and completed the survey were included in the study. A
manila envelope with the surveys was hand-delivered to each participating school. Envelopes
were provided, and teachers were instructed to put the survey inside, seal and initial it. The
survey was delivered to the schools in April 2017, with a return date of 2 weeks, at which time
the researcher picked up the surveys. The estimated time for completion of the survey instrument
Sample
Preschools were selected by the researcher based in part on driving distance and variety of
settings (e.g., public, Head Start, private, church-affiliated). Teachers from all 34 preschools (N =
81) returned surveys, however by the time outdoor environment observations occurred, one of
the 34 preschools (a private Head Start) had closed. Therefore only 33 preschools were
61
represented in the assessment of the outdoor environment. The outdoor environment where the
preschoolers spent most of their outdoor time was assessed using the POEMS: Domain 3
Measures
Preschool Outdoor Measurement Scale: Domain 3. The instrument that was used to
assess the outdoor area is the POEMS (DeBord et al., 2005). POEMS, a checklist of 56 items
that address 5 domains in the quality of outdoor environments, is an assessment tool used for
evaluating childcare centers for children 3-5 years old. The 5 domains include physical
environment, interactions, play and learning settings, program, and teacher/caregiver role. The
outdoor classroom features used in this study and measured by this instrument are found in
Domain 3: Play and Learning Settings (see Appendix B). Some of the 13 items in Domain 3
include anchored play equipment, arts/crafts area, small stage, balance beam, water play, garden,
animal habitat, trees, open area, natural and manufactured play materials and loose parts, and
storage. Each of the 13 questions had a possible “yes” or “no” answer depending on whether or
not certain items were present. The “yes” column was added up, then the total number was
divided by 13 and multiplied by 100 to give a percent score for the outdoor environment. Scores
Procedures
The researcher directly observed the outdoor environment at each participating school. At
times, teachers accompanied the researcher and at other times the observation was done alone.
In order to obtain detailed information regarding the outdoor play areas at participating schools,
the researcher conducted independent observations and documentation of each outdoor space
according to the POEMS guidelines. The observation and filling out the POEMS Domain 3
lasted approximately 15-30 minutes. Inter-rater reliability was performed on this instrument by
62
comparison observations (9 out of 33 playgrounds) with an early childhood education master’s
student who was trained by the researcher in the use of the POEMS Domain 3. For 27% of the
observations, both the researcher and the assistant independently assessed the outdoor
environment using the POEMS Domain 3. Inter-rater reliability was found to be 89% agreement.
Scores were calculated and assigned to each outdoor environment and ranged from 38-92 out of
Sample
Ten percent of the teachers (8 out of 81) from the survey sample who filled out the
survey were interviewed and chosen at random depending on their attitude scores and the
assessment of their playgrounds. Thus, 2 teachers from each category were randomly selected
according to attitude (low and high) and playground assessment (low quality and high quality)
Random selection was achieved in the following manner: a list was created of preschool
playgrounds sorted into two groups (high quality = scores > 70; low quality = scores < 70) based
on scores on the POEMS Domain 3 and teacher attitudes on outdoor education sorted into two
groups (high attitudes = unscaled scores > 100; low attitudes = unscaled scores < 100). Scores of
70 and 100 were chosen based on their indicating a clear halfway break in each score range, and
a clear distinction between what were considered high and low scores. Each teacher was placed
in one of four groups: high attitude/high quality playground; high attitude/low quality
playground; low attitude/high quality playground; and low attitude/low quality playground. Then
playing cards were used in the following manner to randomly order the group lists: for each
name on the list, a playing card was drawn at random. The point value of the card determined the
63
teacher’s placement on the list. For example, if a 9 was drawn, then that teacher became #9 on
that list. Aces were = 1, Jacks = 11, Queens = 12, and Kings = 13. If the list had more than 13
teachers, than two suits of cards were used, for example Ace through King of Hearts = 1 to 13,
and Ace through King of Spades = 14 to 26. Once each of the four lists of teachers were
randomly ordered in this manner, the researcher contacted the first person on each list and asked
that teacher to participate. The research went down the list until two teachers from each group
subjects.
Measures
Interview (OEI) questions are based on the POEMS scale. The open-ended interview consisted
a child and when they teach the children outdoors. This was used to add to the richness of the
study (Creswell, 2009) and to determine the depth of information collected from the teacher
attitude part of the PTOEAS. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. A copy of the
transcript was provided to each participant and member checked for accuracy.
Validity and reliability of test instrument. The OEI questions were modified from the
POEMS instrument with permission of the authors. Validity was obtained by having 3 experts in
the field review the questions and provide a critique on whether the instrument contained
In this study, the researcher did line-by-line coding of the interview questions. Line-by-
line coding, as described by Charmaz (2006) is coding each line to generate a range of
information to net major categories. The objective of the coding process used in qualitative
64
research is to make sense of the data set by collapsing it into broad themes. This provided the
Procedures
Interviews were conducted during the first week in May 2017. The interview was given at
the completion of the school day. In all cases, teachers were allowed as much time as needed to
complete the interview which took approximately 20 minutes. Interviews were conducted by the
One aspect of this study was to identify possible differences in the attitudes of teachers
towards outdoor education and potential correlation with their early childhood experiences
outdoors. Qualitative data from the OEI was coded using line-by-line coding (Creswell, 2015).
early childhood experiences in the outdoors and was used to enrich the study.
65
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
As stated previously, the purpose of this study was to examine the state of outdoor
education in Northeast Tennessee. Specifically, preschool teachers were surveyed about their
attitudes toward outdoor education, their early childhood outdoor experiences, and whether there
was a relationship between the two variables. Interviews were conducted in order to give a better
The study sample consisted of 81 participants who were preschool teachers in the Tri-
Cities area of Northeast Tennessee. Of those who took the survey, 99% were female. Ages
ranged from 20-65 years with a mean age of 40.76 (SD = 13.56). Education levels included:
40.7% with a bachelor’s degree, 19.8% with a master’s degree, 7.4% with a master’s plus 30
hours of additional coursework. Those who reported “other” were 27.2% (see Table 1 for
detailed data). Prior outdoor education training was important to the researcher to add to the
education levels. The number of outdoor education trainings reported were 33.3% (n = 27) with
no prior training, 30.9% (n = 25) with 1 training, 6.2% (n = 5) with 2 trainings, and 8.6% (n = 7)
having 3 or more prior outdoor education training sessions (n = 64; 17 gave no response).
Teaching experience ranged from 0.5 years to 34 years, with a mean of 12.2 years (SD = 13.6)
(see Table 2). Finally, the total number of preschool children being served in this sample area as
66
Table 1
Highest Level of Education
Other 22 27.2
Master's+30 6 7.4
Table 2
Years of Teaching
Average
Mean 12.199
Minimum .5
Maximum 34.0
In relating to their preschool’s outdoor area, the majority of teachers reported that they
referred to it as a playground, 83.8%, while 15% called it an outdoor classroom and only 1.3%
67
Table 3
How Do You Refer to Your School’s Outdoor Area?
Name N Percent
Playground 67 83.75
15%
1%
Outdoor Classroom
Natural Playspace
Playground
84%
(98.8%). Other activities teachers reported using the outdoor area for were to walk outdoors
(82.7%), to observe nature (79%), to read/write (54.3%), planting a garden (35.8%), and
In the table below, the percent of teachers shows what percentage of the teachers selected
each activity. Since teachers were able to choose multiple answers, each teacher is represented
multiple times, and the total of the percent of teachers choosing activities will be greater than
68
100%. The percent of responses gives what part of all the responses from the teachers were for
each activity. The total percent of responses adds to 100% (see Table 4 and Figure 2).
Table 4
Uses of Outdoor Area
80
64 67
44
29
22 19
Outdoor Activities
69
Q3: Top 3 Outdoor Activities for Outdoor Learning
When this sample of teachers think about outdoor learning, 84% of teachers said science
activities were among the top three, followed by gardening (63%) and dramatic play (54%).
Math activities were chosen by 27% of teachers in the survey. Arts activities (21%), music
activities (18%), and literacy activities (17%) were each chosen by about 20% of the teachers in
the survey. Less than 10% of teachers chose block play as one of their top three outdoor
In the table and figure below, the percent of teachers gives what part of the teachers
selected each activity as one of their top three. Since teachers were able to choose multiple
answers, each teacher is represented multiple times and the total of the percent of teachers
choosing activities will be greater than 100%. The percent of responses gives what part of all the
responses from the teachers were for each activity. Since each teacher could pick three activities,
the total responses should be about three times the number of teachers, cutting an activities
percent of responses to about 1/3 of its representation among teachers. The total percent of
Table 5
Top 3 Outdoor Activities for Learning
70
Activity N Percent of Responses Percent of Teachers
84
63
54.3
27.2
7.4 21 18.5 17.3 18.5
Activities
outdoor learning. Teachers chose fauna (98.8%), weather (97.5%), flora (90%), soil (88.8%) and
rocks (85%) as activities they were most likely to explore in the outdoors, followed by water
(72.5%).
In the table and figure below, the percent of teachers gives what percentage of the
teachers selected each activity as one they would explore in outdoor education. Since teachers
were able to choose multiple answers, each teacher is represented multiple times and the total of
71
the percent of teachers choosing activities will be greater than 100%. The percent of responses
gives what part of all the responses from the teachers were for each exploration.
Table 6
Types of Outdoor Explorations
Outdoor Explorations
Percent of Teachers
98.8 97.5
88.8 85 90
72.5
7.5
72
Q5: How Often Do Your Children Use the Outdoors for Learning?
Most teachers (56.8%) take the children outdoors daily for learning. About ¼ of teachers
take children out weekly (11.1%) or once/month (13.6%). Table 7 and Figure 5 give the
distribution of teachers who reported taking their preschoolers outdoors for learning.
Table 7
How Often Do Your Children Use the Outdoors for Learning
Frequency N Percent
Once/Day 46 56.8
Once/Week 9 11.1
Once/Month 11 13.6
Once/Semester 1 1.2
Other 14 17.3
Note. n = 81
56.8
Percent of Responses
17.3
13.6
11.1
1.2
73
Q6: How Much Time Do the Children Spend Outdoors Per Lesson?
Children spend an average of 41 minutes outdoors per lesson, with a range of 15-180
minutes.
Table 8
Time Spent Outdoors Per Lesson
Minutes
Mean 41.01
Minimum 15.00
Maximum 180.00
Preschool children in the schools that were evaluated were accompanied by only their
teachers 13.6% of the time, while there was a combination of teacher and assistants 86.4% of the
Table 9
Who Accompanies Children Outdoors
Person N Percent
Teacher 11 13.6
Note. n = 81
74
Who Accompanies Children Outdoors?
14%
Teacher
Combination
86%
Over ½ of the teachers (67.9%) prepare lessons for outdoor learning. The remaining
24.8% reported that they do not prepare lesson plans for the outdoors (Table 10 and Figure 7).
Table 10
Prepare Lesson Plans
No Planning 23 28.4
Planning 55 67.9
67.9
28.4
NO PLANNING PLANNING
75
Q9: What Are the Most Important Benefits to Outdoor Education?
The highest ranked benefits to outdoor education as reported by teachers in this sample
include physical (43%) and psychological (38%). Awareness of the outdoor environment was
ranked first by 20% of teachers. Cognitive benefits, however, were not seen as highly beneficial,
as only 3 teachers said it was most important (see Table 11 and Figure 8). Since there were 20
teachers who incorrectly filled out this survey question, the non-response rate was 25% (20/81).
Table 11
Ranking of Benefits to Outdoor Education
Mean (SD) 2.03 (1.15) 3.07 (.89) 2.16 (.99) 2.64 (1.25) 4.98 (.13)
N 26 2 17 16 0
% of responding
43% 3% 38% 20% 0%
teachers
43
38
20
3 0
76
Q10: What Are Your Biggest Challenges to Teaching Children Outdoors?
The highest ranked challenges to teaching outdoors were reported to be time (19%),
classroom management (17%), limited background or training (17%), and safety concerns
(15%). Furniture/supplies (12%), support (10%), other (6%) were ranked number 1 for some of
the teachers. In the “other” category, teachers mentioned fencing children in on the play area,
and safety on the jungle gym. One said all the challenges were equally important. Two
categories, extra-curricular activity and disrepair of the outdoor environment were not related as
Table 12
Ranking of Challenges to Teaching Outdoors
Challenges N Mean (SD) Percent of Teachers
Ranking as Number 1
77
Teachers Ranking Category as Most Challenging to Teaching
Percent of Responding Teachers
Outdoors
19
17 17
15
12
10
6
4
0 0
Teachers reported that they find encouragement/support for outdoor education from their
administrators (75%), with faculty being second (67.1%), then students (61.8%), and last
parents/families (55.3%) and other (6.6%). (See Table 13 and Figure 10.)
Table 13
Encouragement or Support
N Percent of Teachers
Administration 57 75.0
Faculty 51 67.1
Students 47 61.8
Parents/Families 42 55.3
Other 5 6.6
78
Encouragement/Support
75
67.1
Percent of Teachers
61.8
55.3
6.6
The most important thing that teachers in this sample need to teach outdoor education is
supplies (33%), followed by space (21.6%) and time (17%). Training on outdoor education was
important for 9 teachers (10.2%). The rest of the options were ranked minimally by teachers (see
Table 14
Supplies 29 33.0
Space 19 21.6
Time 15 17.0
Training 9 10.2
Shade 4 4.5
79
Staff 4 4.5
Funding 3 3.4
Support 2 2.3
Nothing 2 2.3
Weather 1 1.1
29
Frequency
19
15
3 2 4 4 2 1
In the table below, the percent of teachers shows what percentage of teachers selected
each activity as their early childhood outdoor experience. Since teachers were able to choose
multiple answers, each teacher is represented multiple times, and the total of the percent of
teachers choosing experiences will be greater than 100%. The percent of responses gives what
part of all the responses from the teachers were for each experience. Since each teacher could
pick as many responses as they wished, the total responses is greater than the number of teachers,
reducing the percent of responses. However, the total percent of responses adds to 100%
80
For this sample of teachers, unstructured play was the most often early outdoor
experience (97.5%). Pretend play was 90.1%, park visits (88.9%), and use of public playgrounds
(87.7%) were next. Organized sports, hiking, and summer camp were also mentioned by a
majority of teachers, while Boy/Girl Scouts and other had less representation among teachers
(see Table 15 and Figure 12). For the “other” category, responses were: camping, backpacking,
horseback riding, playing in dirt, gardening, farming, and playing in the woods and creeks. One
wrote “I lived outside— from am. to pm. Happy times!” Another said “You name it, we did it!”
Table 15
Early Outdoor Experiences
Note. N = 88. Teachers could choose more than one so percentages total more than 100
81
Percent of Teachers Early Outdoor Experiences
97.5
88.9 87.7 90.1
Table 16
Daily 74 99
Weekly 1 1
(63%). About ¼ (26%) were almost always supervised. A small percentage (3%) were always
unsupervised, and 8% were always supervised (see Table 17 and Figure 13).
82
Table 17
Supervision During Outdoor Play as a Child
Always unsupervised 2 3
Always supervised 6 8
63
26
3 8
More than ¾ (78%) of teachers in this sample said they would like to have training on
outdoor education, while less than ¼ (22%) declined (see Table 18 and Figure 14).
Table 18
Interest in Training
Yes 57 78
No 16 22
83
Teachers Who Would Like Training on
Outdoor Education
22%
No
Yes
78%
(40%), private centers (15%), church-affiliated (27%) and Head Start preschools (18%). (See
Table 20 and Figure 15.) The largest number of preschools in this study came from the public
schools. Originally, 34 schools and centers were contacted about participation; all agreed,
however one preschool was dropped from Phase II because it closed shortly after Phase I.
Table 19
Types of Preschools
N Percent
Public 13 40
Private 5 15
Church-affiliated 9 27
Head Start 6 18
Note. n = 33 schools in Phase II; one preschool was dropped because it closed between Phase I
84
Type of Preschool
Head Start
18%
Public
Public
40%
Private
Church- Church-affiliated
affiliated
Head Start
27%
Private
15%
Descriptive statistics for the POEMS assessment of teachers’ outdoor environments are
listed in Table 20. The distributions of POEMS scores is shown in Figure 16. Originally, there
were 34 play areas to be evaluated, however one was not assessed because the school had closed
The 33 playgrounds ranged in scores from 38 to 92 out of 100. The closer the score is to
100, the more natural is the outdoor environment. The scores of each outdoor environment were
divided into arbitrary categories of high or low quality as measured by the POEMS, Domain 3.
Since the POEMS includes other domains for reporting on the true quality of the outdoor
environment, which were not used in this study, the assessment of quality is subjective at best.
The division between high and low quality environments is also a random number coinciding
with the mean of 70 (see Table 19). Those scores below 70 were considered low in quality
85
Table 20
Playground Scores—POEMS Assessment
Mean Maximum Minimum Median Mode SD
70.25 92 38 69 85 15.80743
POEMS Assessment
8
Number of Schools
4 4
3 3
2 2
38 46 54 62 69 77 85 92
Playground Scores
All 8 teachers who were interviewed took the children outside every day, but with
different motivations. Teachers with high attitude scores and high playground scores (HA/HP)
and high attitude scores with low playground scores (HA/LP) reported that they took the children
out and had lesson plans, even going out multiple times a day. One talked about going on nature
walks on the playground to look for critters, and she would ask the children questions,
prompting their curiosity. The teachers followed the children’s interests and took cues from
86
them, depending on what they were working on. As children, these teachers were raised in rural
areas, and their early childhood experiences were fairly unstructured: playing in the creek,
gathering sticks, playing in the mud, running around with friends and going out every day.
The teachers with low attitude scores and low playground scores (LA/LP) and those with
low attitude and high playground scores (LA/HP) also had a childhood similar to those above.
However, they mentioned that they preferred not going out as much as an adult as they did as
children. They talked about letting the children run and play with balls and on the playground
equipment. One said she was terrified of crickets! Therefore, she would call another teacher
over if the children presented her with any kind of bugs. These teachers mentioned that they take
the children on the playground for gross-motor skills and, occasionally, during the seasons for
lessons. Most of these teachers talked about using technology outdoors as well as indoors. Only
one of these teachers grew up in an urban area, and although outside daily, the games she played
Research Questions
Central Research Question: What Is the Overall State of Outdoor Education in Preschools
in Northeast Tennessee?
questions on the attitude part of the survey were calculated for each of the 81 participants.
Possible scores ranged from 27 to 135 (raw data) with a mean of 81. Scores for this sample of
teachers ranged from 81 to 124 (raw data), with a mean of 103 and SD = 10.66 (see Table 21 and
Figure 17). The “raw data” was on a scale of 27 to 135 (if a person scored 5 on each, they
would get a score of 135). Everyone’s score was statistically “scaled” to a maximum of 100 (M =
75.86, SD = 7.99).
87
Table 21
Descriptive Statistics – Preschool Teacher Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey
Mean Maxium Minimum Median Mode SD
education between teachers who plan lessons for outdoor learning (Survey Question 8) and
88
To answer this question, the means of the scaled Preschool Teacher Outdoor Education
and Attitude Survey (PTOEAS) scores were compared between teachers who reported planning
for their outdoor activities (N = 55) and those who reported not planning (N = 23). Three
teachers did not indicate whether they planned. Descriptive statistics for the two groups are listed
in Table 22. The distributions of the scaled PTOEAS scores for the two groups in this sample are
shown in Figure 18 along with normal curves fitting group means and standard deviations.
Both groups have fairly symmetric distributions in this sample, though the distribution of
scores for those who plan show a strong central peak while the distribution for those who do not
plan is more uniform. The distribution of PTOEAS scores for those who plan is located slightly
higher (M = 77) than those who do not (M = 74) and is slightly more compact (SD = 7.6 for
planners vs. 9.0 for non-planners). The difference in mean scores (3 pts out of 100) is between
Table 22
Descriptive Statistics for the Preschool Teacher Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey
89
Figure 18. Attitude toward outdoor education (scaled) sorted by lesson planning
Formal Test for Population Differences. To establish evidence from this sample for
whether the larger population of teachers in this area differ in their attitudes depending on their
planning behavior, an independent-samples t-test was performed. This test requires (a) that the
two samples represent normal population distributions and (b) that the population distributions
have equal variances (Green & Salkind, 2011). Shapiro-Wilkes tests for normal population
distributions were not significant at the 5% significance level for planners (W(55) = 0.98, p =
0.29) and for non-planners (W(23) = 0.969, p = .67), so there is no evidence that the samples are
from a non-normal distributions. Levene’s test for unequal population variances was not
90
significant at the 5% significance level (F(1, 76) = 1.134, p = 0.29), so there is no evidence that
the samples are from populations that have differing variances. These results mean that a t-test is
The t-test evaluated the research hypothesis (some effect of planning) against a null
hypothesis (no effect) at the 5% significance level. The results showed no statistically significant
effect of planning on PTOEAS scores (t (76) = 1.383, p = .171). The difference between group
sample means of 3 points gave a small effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.343). Therefore, this study
shows a small effect size for the association between planning and mean teacher attitudes toward
outdoor education in this sample, but no evidence for a difference in a population of teachers in
this area.
Research Question 2
This question cannot be answered using this sample because there was not enough
statistics for the different levels frequency of use is given in Table 23. Of those teachers who
answered this question, 99% (N = 74) reported they had played outdoors daily as a child, while
1% (N = 1) reported they had played outdoors weekly as a child. No teachers reported playing
91
Table 23
Descriptive Statistics for the Preschool Outdoor Education and Attitude Survey (Scaled), for All
Monthly 0 - - - -
Once/semester 0 - - - -
Once/year 0 - - - -
Note. Standard deviation, median, and interquartile range are undefined for 1 individual
1%
Daily
Weekly
99%
92
Research Question 3
education as compared by the types of early childhood outdoor experiences as a child (SQ13)?
PTOEAS scores against their responses to survey question13, types of childhood outdoor
experiences. This gives eight binary (no/yes) predictors (“park visits”, “hiking”, “public
playground”, “unstructured play”, “pretend play”, organized sports”, “boy or girl scouts”, or
“summer camp”) of teachers’ PTOEAS scores. The linear fit of reported childhood experiences
was not significantly related to adult attitudes toward outdoor education (F(8, 72) = 0.776, p =
0.625). R2 adjusted for the number of predictors was about zero (adj-R2 = -0.02), which indicates
that the model accounted for a negligible percentage of the variance in the dependent variable.
There is no evidence in this sample that teachers attitude toward outdoor education differs with
their early outdoor experiences. As stated earlier, Table 15 shows the types of early outdoor
experiences that teachers reported, sorted by percent of responses and percent of teachers
selecting that choice (teachers could select more than one experience). Figure 12 also illustrates
this data.
This lack of prediction showed that the survey question did not separate the teachers into
groups by their early outdoor experiences, especially since most teachers picked many of the
choices. Table 24 shows the descriptive statistics for the distribution of the number of possible
responses that were chosen by the teachers in this sample to question SQ13, types of early
childhood experiences, and Figure 20 shows the distribution. Fewer than 25% of teachers chose
only a few (2 or 3) of the 8 possible experiences, while 25% chose all except one, and 75% chose
more than half of them (5 or more). This means that many teachers chose the same fairly large
93
group of responses to the question. This survey question (SQ13) did not distinguish the teachers’
early experiences with the outdoors and cannot be used to understand teachers’ attitudes toward
outdoor education.
Table 24
Descriptive Statistics for How Many Types of Childhood Experiences a Teacher Selected
Figure 20. How many types of early childhood outdoor experiences a teacher selected
94
Research Question 4
RQ4. Is there a significant relationship between preschool teachers who plan lessons for
This question cannot be answered using this sample because there was not enough
statistics for the different levels’ frequency of use was given previously in Table 16 and Figure
19. Of those teachers who answered this question, 99% (N = 74) reported they had played
outdoors daily as a child, while 1% (N = 1) reported they had played outdoors weekly as a child.
No teachers reported playing either monthly, once per semester, or once per year.
Research Question 5
RQ5. Is there a significant relationship between teachers’ name for outdoor spaces (Q1)
To answer this question, the uses teachers reported making of their outdoor play area
were cross-tabulated against the names they selected as most appropriate for the area they use.
Table 25 shows the result. Notice that since teachers could choose more than one response for
the uses, the totals for each column add up to more than the 81 teachers in the sample. Only one
teacher chose “Natural playspace”, and that teacher indicated he/she used the area for all the
offered activities. A few (n = 12) chose to call the area the “outdoor classroom” while the
majority (n = 67) chose the term “playground.” One teacher did not indicate a choice.
The distribution of uses between those who chose “outdoor classroom” and those who
chose “playground” differ in this sample. Nearly all of both groups of teachers indicated they
used the area for supervised play (100% vs. 98%) and about half of each group indicated they
used the area for reading or writing activities (58% vs. 54%). However, the teachers who chose
95
“outdoor classroom” indicated they used the areas for other purposes more often. More than
twice as many used the area for a mathematics activity, measuring (58% vs. 21%), and a little
less than twice as many used the area for a science-related activity, planting a garden (50% vs.
33%). Most teachers in both groups indicated they used the area for another science activity,
observing nature, but those naming it an “outdoor classroom” did so more often (100% vs 75%).
Most teachers in both groups indicated they used the outdoor area for taking children for walks
Table 25
Distribution of Teachers’ Use of an Outdoor Area vs the Name Teachers Use for the Outdoor
Area
7 7 6 12 12 12
Outdoor Classroom
(58%) (58%) (50%) (100%) (100%) (100%)
36 14 22 50 55 66
Playground
(54%) (21%) (33%) (75%) (82%) (98%)
1 1 1 1 1 1
Natural Playspace
(100%) (100%) (100%) (100%) (100%) (100%)
Total 44 22 29 63 66 79
Note. Percentages are row-percents. They show what percentage of teachers using a name
marked the different responses. Row totals are more than 100% because teachers could mark
96
Research Question around POEMS Assessment
RQ 6. Do the names teachers use to refer to their outdoor education areas relate to the
The range of scores is about the same for teachers who classify their outdoor area as an
outdoor classroom or as a playground. Some outdoor areas that were classified as playgrounds
were actually closer to a natural area—scores ranged from 38 (low) to 92 (high). The same
situation occurred among the teachers who reported that they had an outdoor classroom—scores
also ranged from low (38) to high (92). Table 26 and Figure 20 show that some who categorized
their area as a playground actually had areas that were more suitable as an outdoor classroom
Table 26
Descriptive Statistics for the POEMS Assessment for All Teachers and Teacher’s Name for Play
Area
Note. Standard deviation, median, and interquartile range is undefined for 1 individual.
97
Figure 21. Distribution of POEMS scores among teachers by teacher’s name for outdoor play
area
98
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
Outdoor play in nature is essential for young children in early childhood programs and
preschools for two fundamental reasons. First, many developmental tasks can be most effectively
learned through outdoor play. Second, outdoor play is limited due to excessive technology use,
unsafe neighborhoods, busy and tired parents, no school recess, and increasingly demanding
academic standards.
As stated at the beginning of this study, there is not much empirical research in the field
needed in the areas of child development as it relates to present outdoor experiences, as well as
teacher attitudes and practices toward outdoor education (Gillenwater, 2009). The theories of
Piaget, Vygotsky, Dewey and Gardner suggest the need to connect abstract learning with
concrete experience. Outdoor education in the modern era is doing just that for our children.
For the purposes of this dissertation, outdoor education is defined as using the outdoors
for learning. To that end, the recommended curriculum includes encouraging teachers to utilize
all available resources to help create and develop a dynamic, engaging outdoor-learning
experience; expanding the everyday learning environment to incorporate outdoor settings; and
helping children to become familiar, comfortable and acclimated with natural outdoor materials.
Outdoor education as a part of the preschool curriculum is still evolving. Many educators
face problems in obtaining support from policy makers and administrators. In this sample of
teachers, however, 75% said they had support from their administrators. Some of the things that
99
they suggested would enable them to teach in the outdoors were more supplies (33%), space for
an outdoor classroom (21.6%), time (17%), and training (10.2%). It is important to note that
supplies, a well-designed space, and training are more readily available than time, although using
the time available when going outdoors to engage with students, allowing them to discover and
manipulate loose natural materials, can add value to opportunities experienced in nature.
Benefits
Teachers in this study ranked the benefits of outdoor education with physical (43%) as
most important, followed by psychological (28%) and awareness of the environment (26%). This
clearly shows that in relation to using the outdoors as a learning environment, teachers did not
Many research findings show a positive association between nature and one’s health.
Frumpkin et al. (2017) concluded that nature contact offers a range of health benefits such as
enhanced immune function, increased physical activity, and social connectedness. Nature contact
also has promise in addressing health challenges such as depression, anxiety, obesity, and
options. Although much has been learned about the associations between nature and health
connections, as well as the cognitive benefits, much is still out there to learn. It was proposed
that true experiments, natural experiments and observational studies need to be performed
(Frumpkin et al.,2017) .
Barriers
Some of the challenges faced by teachers in this sample include time (19%), classroom
management (17%), limited background or training (17%), and safety concerns (15%). As
mentioned previously, time is a difficult factor to overcome unless a teacher uses the space
wisely. Research has shown that classroom management is less in an outdoor classroom (Louv,
100
2008). Training is available through many avenues, including preservice and in-service
In a study by Ernst (2014), a survey was conducted with 46 early childhood programs.
The survey explored educators’ beliefs and practices about outdoor education in natural settings,
and investigated the barriers to teaching in the outdoors. Findings showed that an educator’s
belief in regards to the difficulty of using the outdoor settings and their own belief about their
relationship to nature were related to their use of the outdoors for learning. Although these early
childhood educators recognized the value of outdoor experiences for children, their beliefs were
not enough to translate into practice. In this case, it was shown that professional development on
the benefits of outdoor education would not have helped to get the educators outdoors more
frequently. The study suggested that barriers to outdoor education need to be dealt with.
Participants included the lack of walking access to a natural outdoor setting and the need for
transportation to a natural setting, along with other barriers such as lack of time, weather, safety
Attitudes
fairly positive attitudes on outdoor education. The range of possible scaled scores fom the
PTOEAS was 0-100, with teachers in this sample having a mean attitude score of 75.86. For the
purpose of this research, the mean of the total scores was used as an arbitrary number to
categorize teachers as high or low on the attitude scale. Therefore, any score 75 and below was
considered a low attitude on the PTOEAS and above 76 was treated as having a higher attitude in
regards to outdoor education. Results showed that preschool teachers had relatively high
attitudes on outdoor education on a scaled score where 100 was the highest possible.
101
The Chase (1969) attitude test, The Outdoor Education Inventory (OEI), grew out of the
Teaching in the Outdoors, which describes outdoor education as learning in the outdoors. In
Chases’s (1969) study, classroom teachers K-6 were surveyed on their attitudes toward outdoor
education using the OEI. They were pretested before attending an outdoor education program,
then post-tested after. Findings showed that the educators had positive changes in their attitudes
toward outdoor education. Since attitudes reflect behaviors, a teacher’s attitude on outdoor
Phase II—POEMS
response to providing a way of assessing the preschool outdoor area. The comprehensive
interactions and physical environment. The checklist in each domain is used to help childcare
centers work toward creating a higher quality outdoor environment, with activities that stimulate
not only physical activity, but play and learning. It was beyond the scope of this study to
administer all domains, therefore, Domain 3—Play and Learning Settings, was used to assess the
33 outdoor areas. This domain has a checklist with diverse play and learning features, along
with different types of developmentally appropriate materials and loose parts that children may
Most teachers (84%) in this study referred to their outdoor environment as a playground,
and 99% used it for supervised play. Of the 84%, some of the teachers had high attitudes on the
PTOEAS; showing possibly that they are not using it as a learning tool for academics except in
102
the realm of science. Most teachers (84%) said science was the top activity for outdoor learning.
Thus, it seems that preschools in this area underutilize their natural outdoor areas.
Teachers (56.8%) also said they take the children outside each day for an average of 40
minutes. According to the policy in Tennessee (tn.gov), preschoolers must have 130 minutes of
unstructured outdoor play per week as long as the temperature is above 32 degrees F and below
95 degrees F. Teachers who see the benefits of outdoor education need help with overcoming the
barriers of time, supplies, and accessing the outdoors as a learning environment. In this case,
professional development workshops could provide information on how to teach in the outdoors.
Help in designing a natural playspace with more natural materials would also be valuable. Each
outdoor environment should be unique to the local area. There are many resources that describe
how to build a natural playscape with very little cost (Keeler, 2008; Nature Explore; Nelson,
2012).
The following are examples of high and low quality outdoor environments in preschools
that participated in the study. Figure 22 represents high quality outdoor environments showing a
103
Figure 23 contains examples of low quality outdoor environments with man-made play
Phase III—Interviews
The interviews were conducted to examine teachers’ early childhood experiences in the
outdoors and examine if there was any relationship to their attitudes and use of the outdoor play
area. All 8 teachers interviewed shared memories of playing outside when they were young;
some in the dirt making mud pies, climbing trees, playing kickball and tag with neighbor
children. In spite of these fond recollections, some teachers were hesitant about taking the
children outside for learning. It is supposed that if teachers didn’t spend time themselves
outdoors as a child, this may be a factor, but the results in this study showed that 99% had played
outside daily and most (97%) in unstructured play. Attitudes of the 8 teachers ranged from 68 to
Teacher A (age 40) with a high attitude (80) and high outdoor environment score (77)
took the children out even in the cold weather, if only for 10 minutes. She believed they needed
more movement in the fresh air, which helped their behavior indoors. As a child, she played
more outdoors than inside and now limits her daughter’s structured activities to provide more
104
time for informal, unstructured play. “Oh, daily we were outside more than we were inside. It
was us and the neighborhood kids. Like, literally you would hear the momma ringing the
bell. Somebody would shout for all of us to come in and eat and then it was nice and summer
Teacher B (age 26) with a low attitude score (70) and high outdoor environment score
(92) said her main lesson with the children was to raise butterflies and release them yearly. As a
child, she recalled digging for worms in the dirt. She also liked sitting in a special place with
friends outside. Then the introduction of video games took her away from playing outside. As
she grew older, the appeal of digging for worms waned, and she forgot how wonderful it would
Teacher C (age 25) with a low attitude score (68) and low outdoor environment score
(46) talked about how she lets the students play with 2balls, trucks, and jump ropes outside,
however she only uses the outdoor area for seasonal lesson plans in spring and fall. She said she
played outside as a child with her mother—but now she lets her daughter go outside with
grandma while she stays inside in the air conditioning! “I remember we had a metal slide and
swings. That is about all I can remember. We did four wheelers and stuff, play jump rope.”
Teacher D (age 58) with a high attitude (84) and low outdoor environment score (54)
follows her students’ interests. She brings a variety of subjects to the outdoor area, including art,
dramatic play, and math. As a child, she played outdoors from sunup to sundown and safely
105
Research Questions
Research Question 1
Teachers who plan lessons for outdoor learning have a slightly higher attitude score as
measured on the PTOEAS (M = 77) than those who do not (M = 74). There was no significant
difference in the statistics, although it seems accurate that those who are more aware of the
importance of outdoor education would plan to use the outdoor environment for learning.
Research Question 2
This question was not effective for comparing teacher attitudes and frequency of playing
outdoors as a child. Although research shows that frequent, positive experiences in the outdoors
produces environmentally aware citizens (Chawla, 2006), the sample in this study showed no
Research Question 3
The survey question on early outdoor experiences did not distinguish how much of the
teachers’ playtime was divided between structured and unstructured play, therefore it could not
Research suggests that people’s attitudes are influenced by what they did in their early
years. Ewert et al. (2005) studied an individual’s environmental beliefs and attitudes and
analyzed how these are affected by early childhood experiences. Although outdoor education can
be effective in influencing one’s environmental beliefs, pre-existing attitudes and perceptions are
formed early in life by a number of variables. It was found that the most important factor
106
Research Question 4
comparison was made between groups who plan lessons for the outdoors and those who do not.
Research Question 5
Teachers who referred to their outdoor environment as an outdoor classroom used the
area for more purposes than those who saw it as a playground. Although both groups used the
area for supervised play and reading and writing activities, those who chose outdoor classroom
used the area for math, science, measuring activities, planting a garden, and observing nature.
How teachers view and name their outdoor environment may contribute to how they use it.
Research Question 6
The names teachers chose to refer to their outdoor environment did not always coincide
with the POEMS assessment. Some teachers who classified the area as a playground were closer
to a natural playspace; for others, the outdoor classroom did not score high on the assessment.
More education is needed for teachers to realize the potential of their play areas.
Conclusions
Limitations
• The small sample of teachers (81) was not enough to generalize the results to a larger
population of teachers
• The mean age of teachers (41) indicates that many were raised in the “baby boomer” or
“Generation X” eras where most spent the time outdoors in unstructured play (98%), and
63% said they were almost always unsupervised as children, therefore, no valid
comparison could be made about early childhood experiences and attitudes. It would be
107
interesting to see if a sample of predominantly millennial teachers would have different
outdoor experiences.
• Follow-up interviews consisted of only 8 teachers, not enough to generalize with the total
sample.
• The survey was long and not pilot-tested, therefore some of the questions may not have
been clear to the teachers. In fact 20 out of 81 teachers were unable to correctly answer
Question 9 which involved them having to rank order items from 1 to 10. For this
question, ¼ of the data had to be discarded due to lack of understanding of the question.
• Professional development was reported as important for teachers. Training was requested
by 78% of teachers in this area; however since they scored relatively high on attitudes and
beliefs about the benefits of outdoor education, the focus should not be on changing their
beliefs but on education on how to incorporate outdoor education in the curriculum. This
would provide more support for planning lessons for the outdoors. Additionally, it would
be beneficial to work with teachers to change how they view their outdoor area, getting
playground.
• Interview children to gain insight into their perceptions of the outdoor classroom and how
they view it. Compare with teachers’ views and see if their perceptions are different.
• Observe children outside with teachers before and after a natural playground is
constructed.
108
Summary
Children of this generation have limited access to the outdoor environment because many
adults do not make it a priority. Due to a culture of fear, there are concerns about health and
safety risks when outdoors. Advocating for nature experiences in early childhood outdoor
classrooms is imperative. When adults can view the outdoor environment as an area that permits
children to recognize potential dangers, they can assist children in learning how to deal with it
(White, 2004). Life today, for many children, is structured, supervised, hectic, and affords few
opportunities for free play. As reported in this study and generations ago, children roamed their
neighborhoods and played in their yards and parks almost always unsupervised. Now children
have become limited in what they can do. The outdoor environment at school may be one of the
Outdoor education is a powerful resource. Early childhood teachers are important guides
that have a direct impact on a child’s development and learning. The best designed outdoor
classrooms are only effective if adults explore nature with the children. As both observe and
appreciate their outdoor space, children develop holistic skills as teachers encourage discovery
and inquiry. As children get more involved in nature, in a rich environment, teachers are better
able to observe, while scaffolding and documenting their learning. As teachers provide outdoor
learning experiences daily, without teaching to the test, children will master skills that translate
Natural playgrounds with natural materials and loose parts encourage more types of play
than traditional playgrounds with metal equipment and plastic structures. Having a supportive
teacher and access to a natural playground or outdoor classroom would encourage a child’s
opportunity for holistic learning. Teachers’ mindsets need to change from viewing the outdoors
109
in just a supervisory role. The potential benefits of outdoor learning, such as reducing obesity
settings. Teaching strategies in regards to outdoor learning would provide the techniques
necessary for engaging a child’s interest, excitement, and love of nature. Louv (2008) relates that
hands-on learning builds a relationship with nature which may lead to future caring for the
environment. In this way, teachers could foster a new generation of environmental stewards.
“If a child is to keep alive his inborn sense of wonder, he needs the companionship of at
least one adult who can share it, rediscovering with him the joy, excitement, and mystery of the
110
REFERENCES
Adkins, C., & Simmons, B. (2002). Outdoor experiential, and environmental education:
Converging or diverging approaches? ERIC digest. Retrieved February 26, 2018 from
https://www.ericdigests.org/2003-2/outdoor.html
Ansari, A., Pettit, K., & Gershoff, E. (2015). Combating obesity in Head Start: Outdoor play and
Benson, J., & Miller, J. (2008). Experiences in nature: A pathway to standards. Young Children
viewcontent.cgi?article=1137&context=famconfacpub
Boeve-de Pauw, J. (2012). Valuing the invaluable: Effects of the individual, school and cultural
Bratman, G., Daily, G., Levy, B., & Gross, J. (2015). The benefits of nature experience:
Improved affect and cognition. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 41-50. Retrieved
experience-improved-affect-and-cognition.pdf
Burdette, H. L., & Whitaker, R. C. (2005). Resurrecting free play in young children: Looking
beyond fitness and fatness to attention, affiliation, and affect. Archives of Pediatrics &
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/485902
111
Carson, R. (1956). The sense of wonder. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC). (2012). Childhood obesity facts. Retrieved January 18, 2018
from https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/obesity/facts.htm
Chakravarthi, S. (2009). Preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices of outdoor play and outdoor
proquest-com.iris.etsu.edu:3443/eric/docview/304963418/379E46C5402946C4PQ/
2?accountid=10771
Charles, C., Louv, R., Bodner, L., Bill, G., & Stahl, D. (2009) Children and nature 2009: A report
on the movement to reconnect children to the natural world. Children & Nature Network,
1-55.
Chase, C. (1969). Changes in attitude toward outdoor education by teachers and administrators
after participation in the Cooperative Outdoor Education Project, title III, E.S.E.A.
Chawla, L. (2006). Learning to love the natural world enough to protect it. Retrieved January
Chawla, L. (2012). The importance of access to nature for young children. Early Childhood
Chawla, L. (2013). Bonding with the natural world: The roots of environmental awareness.
Chawla, L. (2015). Benefits of nature contact for children. Journal of Planning Literature,
112
Chawla, L., & Hart, R. A. (1995). The roots of environmental concern. The NAMTA Journal
20(1), 148-157.
Chawla, L., Keena, K., Pevec, I., & Stanley, E. (2014). Green schoolyards as havens from stress
and resources for resilience in childhood and adolescence. Health & Place, 28, 1-13.
doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.03.001
Clarke, D., & Mcphie, J. (2014). Becoming animate in education: Immanent materiality and
http://www.imaginationplayground.com/images/content/2/9/2960/An-investigation-Of-
The-Status-Of-Outdoor-Play.pdf
Coe, D. (2012). Natural playgrounds more beneficial to children, inspire more play. University
Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Basics of developmentally appropriate practice. NAEYC.
Cornell, J. B. (1998). Sharing nature with children. Nevada City, CA: Dawn.
Coyle, K. J. (2010). Back to school: Back outside! How outdoor education and outdoor school
time create high performance students. National Wildlife Federation, 1-41. Retrieved
Back%20to%20School%20full%20report.ashx
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
113
Creswell, J. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
Crim, C., Desjean-Perrotta, B., & Moseley, C. (2008). Partnerships gone WILD: Preparing
teachers of young children to teach about the natural world. Childhood Education 85(1),
Curtis, D., & Carter, M. (2005). Rethinking early childhood environments to enhance learning.
Young Children 60(3), 34-38. Retrieved January 23, 2018 from https://search-proquest-
com.iris.etsu.edu:3443/eric/docview/197697605/fulltextPDF/472A91D19E5A4BAAPQ/
1?accountid=10771
Dale, D., Corbin, C., & Dale, K. (2000. Restricting opportunities to be active during school time:
Davies, M. (1997). The teacher’s role in outdoor play: Preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices.
Davis, J. (1998). Young children, environmental education, and the future. Early Childhood
DeBord, K., Moore, R., Hestenes, L., Cosco, N. & McGinnis, J. (2010). Making the most of
outdoor time with preschool children. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative
http://www.communityplaythings.com/resources/articles/2010/making-the-most-of-
outdoor-time-with-preschool-children
114
DeBord, K., Hestenes, L., Moore, R., Cosco, N., & McGinnis, J. (2005). Preschool outdoor
Dillon, J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M. Y., Sanders, D., & Benefield, P.
(2006). The value of outdoor learning: Evidence from research in the UK and elsewhere.
School Science Review, 87(320), 107-111. Retrieved January 22, 2018 from
http://www.univie.ac.at/freilanddidaktik/literatur/Dillon_School%20Sc.%20Rev._2006_T
he%20value%20of%20outdoor%20learning.pdf
Dhanapal, S., & Lim, C. C. Y. (2013). A comparative study of the impacts and students’
perceptions of indoor and outdoor learning in the science classroom. Asia - Pacific
Donaldson, G., & Goering, O. (1970). Outdoor education: A synthesis. Office of Education,
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Retrieved January 22, 2018 from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED037286.pdf
Dowdell, K., Gray, T., & Malone, K. (2011). Nature and its influence on children’s outdoor play.
Dyment, J. E. (2005). Gaining ground: The power and potential of school ground greening in the
http://www.evergreen.ca/downloads/pdfs/Gaining-Ground.pdf
Ernst, J. (2014). Early childhood educators’ use of natural outdoor settings as learning
115
Education Research, 20(6), 735-752. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2013.833596
Ewert, A., Place, G., & Sibthorp, J. (2005). Early–life outdoor experiences and an individual’s
Fjortoft, I. (2001). The natural environment as a playground for children: The impact of outdoor
play activities in pre-primary school children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2),
111-117.
Experiential Education, 28(2), 147-163. Retrieved January 23, 2018 from https://search-
proquest-com.iris.etsu.edu:3443/eric/docview/274918415/fulltextPDF/
522506AA8E8B4816PQ/1?accountid=10771
Frumpkin, H., Bratman, G. N., Breslow, S. J., Cochran, B., Kahn, Jr., P. H., & Lawler, J. J.
(2017). Nature contact and human health: A research agenda. Environmental Health
Gallahue, D. (1993). Motor development and movement skill acquisition in early childhood
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic
Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York,
Georgia Wildlife Federation (GWF). (2004). Planning first to make your outdoor classroom last.
116
http://www.eealliance.org/assets/Documents/COOL_resources/bmps.pdf
Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2011). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh. Analyzing and
understanding data (6th Ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Greenman, J. (1993). Just wondering: Building wonder into the environment. Child Care
Hammerman, D., & Hammerman, W. (1964). Teaching in the outdoors. Minneapolis, MN:
Burgess.
Hammerman, D., Hammerman, W., & Hammerman, E. (1994). Teaching in the outdoors.
Hammerman, D., Hammerman, W. , & Hammerman, E. (2001). Teaching in the outdoors. (5th
Handler, D., & Epstein, A. (2010). Nature education in preschool. Highscope Extensions, 25(2),
1-7.
Harlan, J. (1992). Science experiences for the early childhood years. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Hayes, M. (2009). Into the field: Naturalistic education and the future of conservation.
Henderson, T., & Atencio, D. (2007). Integration of play, learning, and experience: What
museums afford young visitors. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(3): 245-51.
Humphreys, J. (2000). Exploring nature with children. Young Children 55(2), 16-20.
Isaacs, S. (1929). The nursery years: The mind of the child from birth to six years. London:
Routledge.
117
Isaacs, S. (1946). Social development in young children: A study of beginnings. London:
Routledge.
Isbell, R., & Evanshen, P. (2012). Real classroom makeovers. Lewisville, NC: Gryphon House.
Jacobi-Vessels, J. (2013). Discovering nature: The benefits of teaching outside of the classroom.
Johnson, J., Christie, J., & Wardle, F. (2005) Play, development and early education. Boston,
Jones, N. (2005). Big jobs: Planning for competence. Young Children, 60(2), 86-93. Retrieved
197685297/fulltextPDF/F102417879E44EDFPQ/1?accountid=10771
Jorgensen, K. A. (2016). Bringing the jellyfish home: Environmental consciousness and 'sense of
doi:10.1080/13504622.2015.1068277
Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal
Keeler, R. (2008). Natural playscapes: Creating outdoor play environments for the soul.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=utk_agexenvi
Kohatsu, W., Maizes, V., Miller, D., Rich, M., Stenmark, S., & Weil, A. (2010). Whole child:
Developing mind, body and spirit through outdoor play. Be Out There- National Wildlife
118
Federation. Retrieved January 18, 2018 from https://www.nwf.org/Get-
Outside/~/media/PDFs/Be%20Out%20There/BeOutThere_WholeChild_V2.ashx
Kuo, F. E. (2010). Parks and other green environments: Essential components of a healthy
human habitat. Executive summary. Ashburn, VA: National Recreation and Park
nrpa.org/Publications_and_Research/Research/Papers/MingKuo-Summary.PDF
Leemimg, F., Dwyer, W., Porter, B., & Cobern, M. (1993). Outcome research in environmental
65(1), 30-33.
Lightfoot, C., Cole, M., & Cole, S. (2005). The development of children. New York, NY:
Worth.
Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder.
Louv, R. (2011). The nature principle: Human restoration and the end of nature-deficit disorder.
Luckner, J. L., & Humphries, S. (1992). Using the outdoors as a learning environment. The
MacQuarrie, S., Nugent, C., & Warden, C. (2015). Learning with nature and learning from
others: Nature as setting and resource for early childhood education. Journal of
119
Adventure & Outdoor Learning, 15(1), 1-23. doi:10.1080/14729679.2013.841095
Maller, C. J. (2009). Promoting children’s mental, emotional and social health through contact
10.1108?09654280911001185
Martensson, F., Boldman, C., Soderstrom, M., Blennow, M., Englund, J., & Grahn, P. (2009).
Maynard, T., & Waters, J. (2007). Learning in the outdoor environment: A missed opportunity?
Early Years, 27(3), 255 – 265. Retrieved January 23, 2018 from http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/09575140701594400?scroll=top&needAccess=true
Miles, L. (2009). The general store: Reflections on children at play. Young Children 64(4), 36-
41.
Moffett, P. (2012). Learning about outdoor education through authentic activity. Journal of the
https://www.atm.org.uk/journal/archive/mt227files/atm-mt227-12-14.pdf
120
Mosley, C., Reinke, K., & Bookout, V. (2002). The effect of teaching outdoor environmental
The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(1), 9-15. Retrieved January 23, 2018 from
https://search-proquest-com.iris.etsu.edu:3443/docview/233056296/fulltextPDF/
2C13DDD36EBD4447PQ/1?accountid=10771
Neill, J. (2007). History of philosophers on 'natural learning'. Retrieved June 14, 2015 from
http://wilderdom.com/Philosophy.html?cv=1
Odoy, H., & Foster, S. (1997). Creating play crates for the outdoor classroom. Young Children,
52(6), 12-16.
Pai, Y., & Adler, S. (2001). Cultural foundations of education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
Prentice-Hall.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York, NY: International
Universities Press.
Pulliam, J. (2003). History of education in America. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-
Hall
Rice, C. S., & Torquati, J. C. (2013). Assessing connections between young children's affinity for
nature and their experiences in natural outdoor setting is preschool. Children, Youth and
Rideout, V., Foehr, U., Roberts, D., & Kaiser, H. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8-
to 18-year-olds. Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation, Menlo Park, CA. Retrieved January
121
Rivkin, M. (2014). The great outdoors: Advocating for natural spaces for young children.
Rosenow, N. (2008). Learning to love the earth…and each other. Young Children, 63(1), 10-14.
Rosenow, N., & Bailie, P. (2014). Introduction to the special Issue: Greening early childhood
education. Childrern, Youth and Environments, 24(2), 1-9. Retrieved January 23, 2018
from http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublication?journalCode=chilyoutenvi
Sali, G., Akyol, A., & Baran, G. (2014). An analysis of pre-school children's perception of
schoolyard through their drawings. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116,
2105-2114.
Samuelsson, I., & Kaga, Y. (2010). Early childhood education to transform cultures for
transformingcultures/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Early-Childhood-Education-to-
Transform-Cultures-for-Sustainability-Samuelsson-and-Kaga.pdf
Sandseter, E. B., Little, H., & Wyver, S. (2012). Do theory and pedagogy have an impact on
Sobel, D. (1996). Beyond ecophobia: Reclaiming the heart in nature education. Great
Spindler, G., & Spindler, L. (1997). Ethnography: An anthropological view. In G. Spindler & L.
Spindler (Eds.), Education and cultural process: Anthropological approaches (pp. 50-
122
Taylor, A. F., & Kuo, F. E. (2001). Coping with ADD: The surprising connection to green play
10.1177/00139160121972864
Taylor, A. F., & Kuo, F. E. (2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk
10.1177/1087054708323000
Torquati, J., & Barber, J. (2005). Dancing with trees: Infants in the garden. Young Children
60(3), 40-47.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanfman and Vakar, G., Eds. and Trans.).
White, J. (2008). Playing and learning outdoors: Making provision for high-quality experiences
White, R. (2004). Young children’s relationship with nature: Its importance to children’s
development & the earth’s future. White Hutchinson Leisure & Learning Group.
https://www.whitehutchinson.com/children/articles/childrennature.shtml
Wilson, E.O. (1984). Biophilia: The human bond with other species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard,
University Press.
Wilson, E.O. (2008). The nature of human nature. In S. Kellert, J. Heerwagon, & M. Mador
(Eds.), Biophilic design: The theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life
Winters, J., Ring, T., & Burriss, K. (2010). Cultivating math and science in a school
123
Wirth, S., & Rosenow, N. (2012). Supporting whole-child learning in nature-filled outdoor
Woyke, P. (2004). Hopping frogs and trail walks: Connecting young children and nature. Young
Zeece, P. (1999). Things of nature and the nature of things: Natural science-based literature for
young children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 26(3), 161-66. Retrieved January
accountid=10771&rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo
124
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Level of Education: Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Master’s +30 EdS EdD/PhD
Other:_______
Do you have a Teaching License? yes no If “yes”, please specify PreK-3 K-6
Other:______________
1. How do you refer to your school’s outdoor area that is used by teachers and students?
Outdoor Classroom Natural Playspace Playground
Other_______________________________
2. In the past year, did your class ever use an outdoor area to (please check all that apply):
Read or write outdoors?
Measure outdoors?
Plant a garden?
Observe wildlife, soils, habitats, plants, rocks, etc.?
Walk outdoors?
Engage in Supervised Play/Recess?
Other (Please list):
_________________________________________________________________________
3. When you think of learning outdoors, please check your TOP 3 activities:
block play arts dramatic play music science
math gardening literacy other
(specify)__________________________________________________
125
4. For you, Outdoor Education includes exploring (please check all that apply):
soil
rocks
vegetation (plants, trees, etc.)
local living things (animals, bugs, birds)
water in nature
weather
other (specify)____________
5. How often do your children use the outdoors for learning? once/day once/week
once/month once/semester once/year other
(specify)___________________________________________
6. During a typical outdoor lesson, how long do children spend time outdoors? ___________minutes
9. Rank the following from “most important” (1) to “least important” (6):
What are the most important benefits of Outdoor Education?
Physical: Increase in physical development; active healthy lifestyle
Cognitive: Stronger problem-solving, language and communication skills
Psychological/Socio-emotional: Happier; positive self-esteem; self-regulation; building
relationships
Understanding: Appreciation of nature; building stewardship for the environment
Other (specify):
___________________________________________________________________________
10. Rank the following from “most challenging” (1), to “least challenging” (10):
What are your biggest challenges to teaching children outdoors?
Safety concerns (fire ants, snakes, poison ivy, ticks, etc.)
Classroom management concerns
Outdoors is extra-curricular/not relevant/not as important as other subjects
Not enough time
Lack lesson plans, supplies for relevant activities
No support with set-up, clean-up
No tables, seating or other needed facility
Overgrown area, weeds, disrepair
Unfamiliar/limited background or training in Outdoor Education
Other (specify): ______________________________________________________________
126
11. Do you have encouragement/support for Outdoor Education from (please check all that apply):
Administration Faculty Parents/Families Students Other
(specify)_____________________
12. What is the one thing that would enable you to teach more in the Outdoor Classroom?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
13. Early Outdoor Experiences: Which of the following activities did you do outside as a child? (please
check all that apply):
Organized sports
Boy or Girl Scouts (Cub Scouts, Brownies, etc.)
Summer camp
Park visits
Hiking
Public playgrounds
Unstructured play (biking, swimming, yard games)
Pretend play with natural materials
Other
(specify)_______________________________________________________________________
14. How frequently did you go outside to play as a child (weather permitting)? daily weekly
monthly other
(specify)___________________________________________________________________________
16. Would you be interested in attending an Outdoor Education training workshop? Yes
No
127
The following items ask you to indicate your opinions, impressions, and attitudes toward
Outdoor Education.
For each item circle:
“1” if you Strongly Agree (SA) with the statement
“2” if you Agree with the statement
“3” if you are Neutral with respect to the statement
“4” if you Disagree with the statement
“5” if you Strongly Disagree (SD) with the statement
128
17. There is some subject matter that I teach (or 1 2 3 4 5
plan to teach) which I see little use for
outdoor education
18. On the job, or in-service training, in outdoor 1 2 3 4 5
education is of little use.
19. Special knowledge is necessary to effectively 1 2 3 4 5
teach students in the outdoors.
20. Special skills are necessary to effectively 1 2 3 4 5
teach students in the outdoors.
21. The ultimate educational experience in the 1 2 3 4 5
outdoors is the resident outdoor school in
which a teacher and his/her pupils live, work,
and study for several days in an outdoor
setting.
22. Outdoor education does little to enhance 1 2 3 4 5
classrooms objectives.
23. Every professional teacher education 1 2 3 4 5
program ought to include a practicum in
outdoor education.
24. Professional preparation of teacher in 1 2 3 4 5
outdoor education should take place both
during teacher training and on the job.
25. Training in outdoor education broadens a 1 2 3 4 5
teacher’s scope of education methods.
26. Outdoor education is usually more 1 2 3 4 5
destructive than instructive.
27. There should be an outdoor education 1 2 3 4 5
specialist in each school system.
129
Appendix B
130
Appendix C
131
Appendix D
11/23/2015
Dear Participant:
My name is Cathy Landy and I am a graduate student at East Tennessee State University. I am
working on my doctorate degree in Early Childhood Education. In order to finish my studies, I
need to complete a research project. The name of my research study is The state of outdoor
education in Northeast Tennessee: Preschool teacher attitudes toward outdoor education.
The purpose of this study is to discover preschool teacher attitudes about outdoor education. I
would like to give a brief survey questionnaire to preschool teachers in Northeast Tennessee. It
should only take about 20 minutes to complete. You will be asked questions about what your
opinions are on outdoor education, and also what you may teach in your outdoor school
environment. Since this project deals with your personal attitudes about outdoor education, it
might cause some minor stress. However, you may also feel better after you have had the
opportunity to express yourselves about outdoor education. This study may provide benefit by
providing more information about what your colleagues think about outdoor learning in this area
of Northeast Tennessee.
This method is completely confidential. In other words, your information will be coded and there
will be no way to connect your name with your responses. Although your rights and privacy will
be maintained, the ETSU IRB and personnel particular to this research have access to the study
records.
If you do not want to fill out the survey, it will not affect you in any way. There are no
alternative procedures except to choose not to participate in the study.
Participation in this research study is voluntary. You may refuse to participate. You can quit at
any time. If you quit or refuse to participate, the benefits or treatment to which you are
otherwise entitled will not be affected. However, all participants who choose to fill out and
return the survey will be entered in a drawing for a $100 gift card!
If you have any research-related questions or problems, you may contact me, Cathy Landy, at
xxx-xxx-xxxx. I am working on this dissertation project under the supervision of Dr. Amy
Malkus. You may reach her at xxx-xxx-xxxx. Also, the chairperson of the Institutional Review
Board at East Tennessee State University is available at (423) 439-6054 if you have questions
about your rights as a research subject. If you have any questions or concerns about the research
and want to talk to someone independent of the research team or you can’t reach the study staff,
you may call an IRB Coordinator at 423/439-6055 or 423/439/6002.
Sincerely,
Cathy Landy
132
VITA
Professional Experience: Research Assistant, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City,
Tennessee 2000-2003
Contractor: Watershed Representative, Tennessee Valley Authority,
Gray, Tennessee 2008-2011
Environmental Education Coordinator, Buffalo Mountain Camp,
Jonesborough, Tennessee 1996-2012
Doctoral Fellowship/Graduate Assistant, East Tennessee State
University, Johnson City, Tennessee, 2011-2016
Save Our Streams (SOS) Coordinator, UTRR, Abingdon, VA
2017-present
Publications: Chu Chang Chua, Balvin H L Chua, Zhongyi Chen, Cathy Landy
and Ronald C Hamdy (2002). TGF-beta1 inhibits
multiple caspases induced by TNF-alpha in murine
osteoblastic MC3T3-E1 cells. Biochim Biophys Acta,
1593(1), 1-8.
133
Honors and Awards: Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society, East Tennessee State University.
Kappa Delta Pi Honor Society, East Tennessee State University.
Who’s Who in America.
HonorSociety.org.
134