Outdoor Learning DefinitionsBeames, Higgins, and Nicol (2012) specified the term outdoor learning to mean all learning that takes place outside of the classroom. Ford (1986) described outdoor education as that which can take place in any place that is outdoors, urban, rural, or natural space. It could either be a specific curriculum about the outdoors or about other subject areas and taught in and through the outdoors (Ford, 1986). Potter and Dyment (2016) declared that if outdoor and out-of-classroom learning “is seen as a methodology, then it is about process, pedagogy and approaches to outdoor learning that transcend subject areas” (p. 148). There are many different theories and approaches to out-of-classroom and outdoor learning including: experiential (Ord & Leather, 2018), environmental (Strife, 2010), adventure (Brown & Beames, 2017), place or community based (Gruenewald, 2003a), and land-based (Simpson, 2014). While these outdoor approaches may have some differences in goals and methods, they have similar theoretical foundations and practices. Gathering these different approaches under outdoor learning creates a meshwork with them connected and having a role within each other but also able to be implemented as a separate pedagogy.
|
Experiential EducationExperiential education, as outlined by Dewey (Ord & Leather, 2018; Quay & Seaman, 2013) and by Kolb and Kolb (2009), is considered to be one of the foundational educational theories of many outdoor education and learning paradigms (Ord & Leather, 2018; Potter & Dyment, 2016; Quay & Seaman, 2013). Beames et al. (2012) asserted that experiential education is a big part of the theory of all forms of outdoor learning. They use the analogy of trying to describe what a banana tastes like to someone who has never eaten a banana. A person has to eat (experience) that banana to know what it tastes like. In the same way, students need to experience the curriculum to truly understand it.
Teachers and students often view experiential education through the lens of hands-on learning. According to Ord and Leather (2018), Dewey viewed true experiential education as a transaction where the environment had an impact on the student and the short term and long-term effects on the student of that experience, but there is also a consequence for the environment. In experiential education, we are not passive bystanders. We act, and our actions have consequences for ourselves, those around us, and the environment that we are in (Ord & Leather, 2018). As part of the transactional view of the experience, Dewey felt that learning should make the learner aware of and act on the issues of the community which would result in a better future (Ord & Leather, 2018). If students are going to mature into democratic citizens, they need to be learning to live democratically now. Dewey further pointed out two criteria for appropriate experiential education activities were the fact of a transaction taking place and its effect on the growth and development of the participant (Ord & Leather, 2018). |
Environmental Education
Cole (2007) identified a commonly accepted definition of environmental education as being “fostering an awareness of environmental issues and problems, developing the skills to solve those problems, and inspiring a willingness to make effective decisions as action-orientated citizens” (p. 37). A commonly accepted goal is to create awareness of and concern for the environment (Cole, 2007; Fraser, Gupta, & Krasny, 2015; Monroe, Andrews & Biedenweg, 2008). Gilbertson, Bates, Ewert, and McLaughlin (2006) suggested that environmental education is a natural offshoot of outdoor learning and is concerned with gaining knowledge about environmental problems. Environmental education is about going beyond learning about environmental concerns and taking action to address those concerns (Monroe et al., 2008; Strife, 2010). Cole (2007) stated that lots of EE programs focus on understanding and planning and taking action to improve the physical environment. Wals, Geerling-Eijff, Hubeek, van der Kroon, and Vader (2008) argued that environmental education’s main objective is to foster changes in behaviour that will lead to acting in a more sustainable way.
|
Adventure Education
Adventure education has traditionally focused on personal development including social skills and problem-solving through adventure activities such as canoe excursions, rope courses, and camping trips (Brown, 2009; Quay & Seaman, 2013). Loynes (2018) felt that that activity choice and facilitation decisions are crucial to successful adventure education programming and need to be geared to the specific group that is being worked with. Challenge does not have to mean a risk of injury. Adventure education leverages perceived and actual risk to create uncertainty or a problem to solve (Brown & Beames, 2017). Useful and educative risk or challenges are not about physical danger or the possibility of personal harm and more about “creating an environment where students feel able to move beyond what they know, to question and to speculate without fear or risk of being wrong, is the educational challenge” (Brown & Fraser, 2009, p. 68). Dewey himself supported the idea that “the unknown and presence of risk are important elements to any process of inquiry” (Ord & Leather, 2018, p. 50).
|
Place-Based Education
Place-based education “is a mode of uncovering connections, revealing and strengthening the ways in which we are placed in the social as well as physical landscape” (Harrison, 2011, p. 89). By using a place-based lens, we will hopefully live better in our places (Harrison, 2011). The relationships between the community and the environment along with the classroom make up the theoretical framework of place-based education (Gruenewald, 2008; Sobel, 2013). It is important to examine the natural and human-constructed settings (Sobel, 2013; Somerville & Green, 2011). Place-based education is “a way to develop a more locally responsive education that acknowledges natural locales and their associated ecosystems” (Somerville & Green, 2011, p. 19). Gruenewald (2003a) urged that place-based education “must identify and confront the ways that power works through places to limit the possibilities for human and non-human others” (p. 7) and calls for a critical pedagogy of place which includes understanding how a place and its definitions and organization can be a method of control.
|
Land-Based Education
Land-based education underlines how all living and non-living things are connected and is the foundation of learning and all relationships and is viewed by many Indigenous peoples as the original teacher (Haig-Brown & Hodson, 2009; Tuck et al., 2016). The land is much more than just a place to live on and use and land-based education should reflect this and "uphold land as our relative" (Band et al., 2016, p. 26). From this view of the land as a relative, a land-based pedagogy has a distinct focus on relationships between people and people and the land (Simpson, 2014). Land refers to the physical realm including the earth, water, and air, to all the physical things that are on the land like the animals and plants and it also refers to the spiritual connection and relationships that exist between all of these things with humans as part of that relationship (Tuck et al., 2016). Education on the land is the best practice for learning (Whitehouse, Lui, Sellwood, Barrett, & Chigeza, 2016). Land-based education is also considered to be an essential and effective approach to decolonizing education as land-based education is about identifying Indigenous connections to land and interrupt colonial settler ways of knowing that have dominated and refused entry to other viewpoints in environmental education (Whitehouse et al., 2016). Simpson (2014) went further and stated that decolonization could not take place if members of the Indigenous community and students are not connected to the land and their community and are instead co-opted into the current Eurocentric system of schooling. "The land must once again become the pedagogy" (Simpson, 2014, p. 14).
|
Situatedness
Situated learning is unintentional and situated within an authentic activity, context, and culture where many things combine to create learning (Brown, 2009; Schunk, 2012). Varied contexts and communities are locations and subjects of learning which means looking at the community for learning opportunities (Gruenewald, 2008). Schools and classrooms by themselves are so separated from their communities that the problems that exist cannot be addressed in the school. There is a need to get outside into the community and search for the varied and contextual experiences that cannot happen at school (Gruenewald, 2008).
In all forms of outdoor learning, due to its situatedness, there is no prescribed script which means that what one group of people in a particular place and time might view as a social or ecological problem can be completely different from what a different group in that same place or in a different place might view as a problem (Gruenewald, 2003a). Context matters. Outdoor learning calls on classes of students and teachers to experience and question the actual places that are part of their context and not just talk about them in class.
The reality and the challenge are that for all forms of outdoor learning, there can be no prescribed script or set of places and assignments for teachers as it is locally dependent in both geography, context, and time (Gruenewald, 2003b). Outdoor learning is very location dependent, as defined by geography, participants, and time. It resists being homogenized by its very nature and definition (Smith & Sobel, 2010; Theobald & Siskar, 2008)
In all forms of outdoor learning, due to its situatedness, there is no prescribed script which means that what one group of people in a particular place and time might view as a social or ecological problem can be completely different from what a different group in that same place or in a different place might view as a problem (Gruenewald, 2003a). Context matters. Outdoor learning calls on classes of students and teachers to experience and question the actual places that are part of their context and not just talk about them in class.
The reality and the challenge are that for all forms of outdoor learning, there can be no prescribed script or set of places and assignments for teachers as it is locally dependent in both geography, context, and time (Gruenewald, 2003b). Outdoor learning is very location dependent, as defined by geography, participants, and time. It resists being homogenized by its very nature and definition (Smith & Sobel, 2010; Theobald & Siskar, 2008)
Outdoor Learning as a Meshwork and Holistic Approach
Out-of-classroom and outdoor learning is a multi-faceted meshwork of opportunities for learners and educators. Each of the individual theories of outdoor learning has different strengths to offer to students. Environmental education with its focus on sustainability and environmental protection. Land-based education with its focus on reconnecting with and learning from and on the land. Place-based education with its focus on connecting with the community and challenging the dominant views of our places. Adventure education with its focus on team building and providing autonomous experiences. Experiential education with its focus on hands-on experiences and consequences for the learner and community. The weakness of one approach is the strength of another. Students stand to gain the most from these pedagogies when educators utilize a holistic approach that incorporates most or all of the out-of-classroom and outdoor learning theories.
Click on the PDF file to the right to download a PDF copy of the overall Outdoor Learning Mesh.
|
|