Forest School: Bringing Visual Arts Outdoors Marie Claire Murphy (MIC) Background of the Study

PRIMARY SCHOOL MA STUDENT, EXPLORING MY OWN HOLLY TREES SCHOOL, EARTHFORCE TEACHER LIMERICK SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS; STUDIO BRENTWOOD, ESSEX, EDUCATION, ART AND DESIGN SPACE UK. WICKLOW, IRELAND Forest School

• 1993; Bridewater and Taunton College, Somerset visited Denmark on an exchange visit • Inspired by ‘Frulitsliv’ open-air culture that permeates early years education • Established their own ‘Forest School’ for children attending the college creche • Provided training since 1995 • Training in Wales and across England since 2000 • 2003; Open College Network qualification established • Established in 2011 (UK) and 2016 (Ireland)

• Defines Forest School as: The Forest an inspirational process, that offers ALL learners regular opportunities to achieve School and develop confidence and self-esteem through hands-on learning experiences in Association a woodland or natural environment with trees

Identified Key Features of Forest School… 1. Forest School is a long-term process of frequent and regular sessions in a woodland or natural environment, rather than a one-off visit. Planning, adaption, observations and reviewing are integral elements of Forest School. 2. Forest School takes place in a woodland or natural wooded environment to support the development of a relationship between the learner and the natural world. 3. Forest School aims to promote the holistic development of all those involved, fostering resilient, confident, independent and Six Guiding creative learners. 4. Forest School offers learners the opportunity to take supported Principles risks appropriate to the environment and to themselves. 5. Forest School is run by qualified Forest School practitioners who continuously maintain and develop their professional practice. 6. Forest School uses a range of learner-centred processes to create a community for development and learning. Forest School participants are viewed as:

Equal, unique and valuable Competent to explore and discover Entitled to experience appropriate risk and challenge Entitled to choose, and to initiate and drive their own learning and development Entitled to experience regular success Entitled to develop positive relationships with themselves and other people Entitled to develop a strong, positive relationship with their natural world Research- Positive Outcomes

Attainment of UK National Curriculum Objectives (O’Brien, 2009; Swarbrick, Eastwood and Tutton, 2004)

Social Skills and Impersonal Skills (Harris, 2017; Waite, Bolling and Bentsen ,2015; O’Brien, 2009)

Language and Communication Skills (Waite, Bolling and Bentsen ,2015)

Gross and Fine Motor Skill Development (Waite, Bolling and Bentsen ,2015)

Motivation and Concentration (Roe and Aspinall, 2011; O’Brien, 2009)

New Perspectives (O’Brien, 2009)

Pride, Inclusivity and A Sense of Belonging (Cumming and Nash, 2015)

Self-Esteem and Self-Confidence (Waite, Bolling and Bentsen ,2015; Roe and Aspinall, 2011; O’Brien, 2009; Swarbrick, Eastwood and Tutton, 2004)

Deeper Awareness of the Natural Environment (Turtle, Convery and Convery, 2015; Ridgers, Knowles and Sayers, 2012; Harris, 2017; O’Brien, 2009) Forest School; a Constructivist Pedagogy?

A focus on learning and not performance

A view that learners are active co-constructors of meaning and knowledge

That a teacher pupil relationship is established and built upon the idea of guidance and not instruction

That learners are engaged in tasks seen as ends in themselves and having implicit worth

And that assessment is promoted as an active process of uncovering and acknowledging shared understanding

(O’ Brien, 2009, p. 47). North- Integrate/ Mentor NorthE- Pedagogy in NorthW- Opening the learning Reflect/ experience/ Close and listen for Historian what's Forest School next/ready/cultural creative

West- East- Guided by Gather and Inspire/ share/ Joseph Cornell’s Arrived Set

Flow Learning Cycle SouthW- Take a (1989) break/ SouthE- Resting Activate/ Moving South- Focus/ Learning What does Forest School look like? However, there is criticism…

• The Scandinavian philosophy of ‘Frulitsliv’ may be lost due to cultural differences (Leather 2013; 2018; Lloyd, Truong and Gray, 2018; Waite and Goodenough, 2018) • The rapid development and commodification of Forest School leading to a loss of awareness of the philosophical underpinnings (Leather, 2018; 2013) • Forest Schools is under-theorised in outdoor education literature (Leather, 2013). Research of large scale, long-term effects is required and the need to deepen the research-based understanding of the outdoor learning process (Harris, 2017). • Slade, Lowery and Bland (2013) argue that many of the forest school studies are anecdotal, and there is a need for a systematic approach to the impact of forest school in primary schools • Forest School activities should be linked to the planned work in school (Slade, Lowery and Bland, 2013) There is a tension between the achievement of academic curricular aims and playful learning (Waite and Goodenough, 2018; Slade, Lowery and Bland, 2013, Harris, 2017; Maynard, 2007) • Standard of qualification (Knight, 2018) An initial exploration of the Forest School approach in the Primary School Curriculum

VISUAL ARTS; OVERALL QUITE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION POSITIVE; THE NEW VOCABULARY STRAND CHILDREN NOTED THAT THEY ‘LIKED’ THE LESSONS

OBSERVED AWARENESS OF THEIR ENGAGED IN THE ENTHUSIASM AND NATURAL PROCESS OF MAKING ENGAGEMENT SURROUNDINGS ART Co-operative learning; a natural formation of groups with freedom to change

Some unanticipated Enjoyment of space; control over their results of this proximity to other children study

Change of attitude towards the outdoors; earthworm Continuing this exploration

• ‘How Children and Teachers in Four Primary School Classes Perceive the Impact of the Introduction of Forest School Sessions on Teaching and Learning’ • How do the children perceive the Forest School sessions? • Do the teaching and learning methodologies adopted in the Forest School sessions differ to the practice and methodologies articulated in the Irish Primary Curriculum? • How do the teachers perceive the Forest School sessions? • Were there any teaching and learning methodologies that the class teachers may incorporate into their own practice? References

• Cornell, J. (1989). Sharing Nature with Children II. Formally Sharing the Joy of Nature. Nevada City: Dawn Publications • Cumming, F. and Nash, M. (2015). An Australian perspective of a forest school: shaping a sense of place to support learning. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 15 (4), pp. 296- 309 • Harris, F. (2017). The nature of learning at forest school practitioners’ perspectives. International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education 3 - 13, 45 (2), pp. 272 – 291 • Knight, S. (2018). Translating Forest School: A response to Leather. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21, pp. 19 - 23 • Leather, M. (2018). A critique of "Forest School" or something lost in translation. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21, pp. 5 - 18 • Leather, M. (2013). Lost in translation: A critique of ‘Forest School’ in the UK. Future faces: Outdoor education research innovations and visions, 93. • Lloyd, A., Truong, S. And Gray, T. (2018). Place-based outdoor learning: more than a drag and drop approach. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21, pp. 45 – 60 • Maynard, T. (2007). Encounters with Forest School and Foucault: A Risky Business? Education. 35 (4) p. 3-13 • Murphy, M.C. (2018). Exploring the ‘Construction’ strand in the Irish Primary School Visual Arts Curriculum through the Forest School Approach. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning. 18 (2) pp. 1- 19 • O’Brien, L. (2009). Learning Outdoors: The Forest School Approach. Education. 37 (1) pp. 45 – 60 • Ridgers, N., Knowles, Z. & Sayers, J. (2012). Encouraging play in the natural environment: a child-focused case study of Forest School. Children’s Geographies, 10 (1) p. 49-65. • Roe, J. and Aspinall, P. (2011). The restorative outcomes of forest school and conventional school in young people with good and poor behaviour. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 10, pp. 205-212 • Slade, M., Lowery, C., & Bland, K. (2013). Evaluating the impact of Forest Schools: a collaboration between a university and a primary school, British Journal of Learning Support, 28 (2) pp. 66- 73 • Swarbrick, N. Eastwood, G and Tutton, K. (2004). Self-esteem and successful interaction as part of the forest school project. Support for Learning, 19 (3) pp. 142- 146 • Turtle, C., Convery, I., and Convery, K. (2015) Forest Schools and environmental attitudes: A case study of children aged 8 - 11 years. Congent Education, 2: 1100103 • Waite, S., Bolling, M. and Bentsen, P. (2015). Comparing apples and pears a conceptual framework for understanding forms of outdoor learning through comparison of English Forest Schools and Danish udeskole. Environmental Education Research, 22 (6), pp. 868 – 892 • Waite, S. and Goodenough, A. (2018). What is different about Forest School? Creating a space for an alternative pedagogy in England. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21, pp. 25 – 44