Outdoor play and learning in early childhood from different cultural perspectives

Abstract

Any item and its associated metadata held in the University of Cumbria's institutional repository Insight (unless stated otherwise on the metadata record) may be copied, displayed or performed, and stored in line with the JISC fair dealing guidelines (available here) for educational and not-for-profit activities provided that• the authors, title and full bibliographic details of the item are cited clearly when any part of the work is referred to verbally or in the written form• a hyperlink/URL to the original Insight record of that item is included in any citations of the work • the content is not changed in any way• all files required for usage of the item are kept together with the main item file. You may not• sell any part of an item• refer to any part of an item without citation • amend any item or contextualise it in a way that will impugn the creator's reputation• remove or alter the copyright statement on an item.The full policy can be found here. Alternatively contact the University of Cumbria Repository Editor by emailing insight@cumbria.ac.uk.

Why do children not play in nearby nature? Results from a Norwegian survey

“…An indepth study from England shows that, for some young girls, woodlands were seen as 'out of bounds' due to parental concerns about safety issues (Milligan & Bingley, 2007). Although many educationists and parents feel a personal responsibility to consider risk and carry out supervision of children, perceptions of risk are very much subject to cultural interpretation (Prince et al, 2013). Compared with many other western countries, children's free play still seems to be an important part of childhood in Norway and the rest of Scandinavia (Borge et al, 2003;Guldberg, 2009;Little et al, 2012;Prince et al, 2013;Sandberg, 2012;Sandseter, 2012).…”

“…Although many educationists and parents feel a personal responsibility to consider risk and carry out supervision of children, perceptions of risk are very much subject to cultural interpretation (Prince et al, 2013). Compared with many other western countries, children's free play still seems to be an important part of childhood in Norway and the rest of Scandinavia (Borge et al, 2003;Guldberg, 2009;Little et al, 2012;Prince et al, 2013;Sandberg, 2012;Sandseter, 2012). However, much of the Norwegian research on outdoor play is based on studies in pre-schools or kindergartens focusing on how teaching practice can support this kind of play without compromising safety.…”

“…These benefits range from health, including physical, mental and social well-being (Chawla, Keena, Pevec, & Stanley, 2014;Faber Taylor & Kuo, 2006;Fjortoft, 2004), to a wide range of learning opportunities (MacQuarrie, Nugent, & Warden, 2015;Wells, 2000) and the chance to develop a caring connection with nature (Chawla, 1998;Ewert, Place, & Sibthorp, 2005). In parallel with this, there is increasing global concern that children nowadays are getting fewer opportunities to engage with nature, because of reduced access to nature spaces, because of competing screen time and because children's play to a greater extent today seems to be supervised by adults with the consequence that free play is often replaced by organized sports and leisure activities (Clements, 2004;Francis & Lorenzo, 2006;Karsten, 2005;Prince, Allin, Sandseter, & Ärlemalm-Hagsér, 2013;Skår & Krogh, 2009).…”

Love letters to services past: risk and outdoor education in youth work

“…These societal and cultural concerns can, ironically, put children and young people more at risk by not giving them enough experience of managing risk successfully; further a lack of opportunity to access the outdoors can, it is claimed, impair hild e s development (Gill, 2007;Humberstone & Stan, 2009;Prince et al, 2013). This has led Baillie, amongst others, to pose the question -how far should we expose young people to risk?…”

“…Dunning, a protégé of Elias , exemplified this idea through boxing, which eventually became more i ilised by becoming apparently less violent over time. The employment of the concept of the civilising spurt to outdoor education is a useful lens through which to view societal and parental anxieties, which have, over time, given rise to the idea that young people need to be protected and not exposed to any risk from outdoor education activities (Gill, 2007(Gill, , 2010Humberstone & Stan, 2009;Prince et al, 2013). Young people are thus kept in an artificial state of dependence and one that is longer than would have previously deemed to be appropriate, whilst those who care for them face more scrutiny than ever.…”