MSC ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Get on my land
What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have of environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?

-Will Marcombe

July 2013



Abstract: The Department for Education and Skills Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto, as
well as Natural Englands The Natural Choice White Paper were both significant pieces of
government work that pledged to remove barriers to outdoor learning and increase the ability of
schools to get more children in England learning outdoors. Despite this work, significant research
has shown that young people are becoming more disconnected with the natural world. Building on
previous work, this research project examined education practitioners and their levels of
awareness and engagement with outdoor learning opportunities. A questionnaire survey was used
to collect data about teaching staffs knowledge of four environmental organisations and the
outdoor learning opportunities that they offer, as well as identifying the perceived barriers to the
effective delivery of environmental learning. Results of the research found that whilst almost half
of all respondents were aware of the organisations, their resources and learning opportunities;
these figures were not reflected in respondent engagement with the organisations. Whilst 58% of
all respondents were aware of outdoor sites near their schools, 68% felt they did not make good
use of these sites, with 85% never having visited any of the sites within an educational capacity.
The main perceived barriers to the effective delivery of outdoor learning by respondents were the
cost of transport to sites and a lack of knowledge of the environmental organisations. Following
an analysis of the research results, recommendations, as well as suggestions for further research
were made.
1

























2











If we are going to save environmentalism and the environment, we must also
save an endangered species: the child in nature
(Louv, 2005)











3

Contents


Acknowledgements and declaration

6
1. Introduction

8
1.1 Background

8
1.2 What are the Benefits of Outdoor Learning to young people?

9
1.2.1 Improved physical and mental health

9
1.2.2 Supporting those at risk

9
1.2.3 Personal development

10
1.2.4 Advancing ecological practice

10
1.3 Where are we now?

12
1.3.1 Nature Deficit Disorder and the bogeyman

12
1.3.2 Adult lack of awareness

13
1.3.3 What is being done?

13
1.4 Research aims

16
2 Methods

17
3 Results

19
3.1 Question 1: What knowledge do you have of UK environmental
organisations?

19
3.2 Question 2: Which organisations do each of these logos belong to?

19
3.3 Question 3: Have you heard about the following organisations? If so how?

20
3.4 Question 4: What knowledge do you have about environmental outdoor
learning opportunities in your area?

22
3.5 Question 5: Which of these environmental organisations provide access to
outdoor sites for environmental education?


22
4

3.6 Question 6: Which of these environmental organisations produce free
educational resources?

23
3.7 Question 7: Which of these organisations have outdoor sites within a one
hour drive of your school?

24
3.8 Question 8: If any of the environmental organisations in question 7 have
outdoor sites within a one hour drive of your school, please write the name
of the site/s below

26
3.9 Question 9: As a school, we have good links with this environmental
organisation

26
3.10 Question 10: As a school, we make good use of this environmental
organisations outdoor site/s.

28
3.11 Question 11: Within your role, how often have you used any of these
environmental organisations free educational resources?

3.12 Question 12: Within your role, how often have you visited any of these
environmental organisations outdoor sites?

29



31
3.13 Question 13: I would like our school to undertake more outdoor learning.

32
3.14 Question 14: Please read the following statements relating to outdoor
learning and rate them accordingly

33
3.14.1 The cost of transport prohibits our school from visiting outdoor sites

33
3.14.2 It is too much of a health and safety risk taking the pupils to an outdoor site

34
3.14.3 The travel time to and from the site is too long

35
3.14.4 I have never considered visiting an outdoor site before

36
3.14.5 Outdoor learning is not relevant to what I teach

37
3.14.6 It is easier for me to deliver environmental subjects in school

38
3.14.7 I don't know enough about environmental organisations to use their resources

39
3.14.8 I am not involved in organising visits

40
3.15 Postcode map

41
4 Discussion


43
5

4.1 What awareness do those teaching staff surveyed have of the
environmental organisations that support outdoor learning?

43
4.2 What awareness do those teaching staff surveyed have of outdoor learning
opportunities in their areas?

44
4.3 What levels of engagement do those teaching staff surveyed have with
outdoor learning and environmental organisations?

44
4.4 Awareness versus engagement

44
4.5 The barriers to the delivery of outdoor learning

45
4.5.1 I don't know enough about environmental organisations to deliver outdoor learning

46
4.5.2 The cost of transport prohibits our school from visiting outdoor sites

48
4.6 Recommendations and further research

49
4.7 Sources of error

50
5 Conclusion

51
References

52
Appendices
56












6

Acknowledgements
Firstly, I would like to extend my thanks to all of those people who took the time to complete the
questionnaire surveys, without whom this research could not have been completed. I would also like
to thank Professor Richard Wall and Dr Emma Smith who supported me throughout the work. My
gratitude also goes out to the organisations who allowed me permission to feature them in the
research, with particular thanks going to Rachel Giles of the Forestry Commission whose input
helped me to tailor the questionnaires. Finally, I would like to thank The Council for Learning
Outside the Classroom, the Food for Life Partnership and Farming and Countryside Education for
promoting this research on their websites and to their database of members.




















I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the Regulations of
the University of Bristol. The work is original except where indicated by special reference in the text.
Any views expressed in the dissertation are those of the author and in no way represent those of the
University of Bristol. The dissertation has not been presented to any other University for
examination either in the United Kingdom or overseas.

Will Marcombe, 15
th
July 2013

7













I have been astonished at the small epiphanies I see in the eyes of
a child in truly close contact with nature
(Louv, 2005)












8

1 Introduction

1.1 Background
In 2006, the Department for Education and Skills produced the Learning Outside the
Classroom Manifesto which brought together a range of UK organisations committed to
enabling every young person to experience the world beyond the classroom as an essential
part of learning and personal development, whatever their age, ability or circumstances
(DfES, 2006). Within the manifesto, it defined outdoor learning as the use of places other
than the classroom for teaching and learning.

Five years after the release of the Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto, the UK
Government published its Natural Environment White Paper The Natural Choice in 2011;
detailing its vision for the natural environment over the next fifty years, with practical
guidelines on how this vision may be delivered. Chapter four of the paper was titled
Reconnecting people and nature and within it set out four key reforms, one of which
included action to get more children learning outdoors - Paragraphs 4.14 to 4.20 set out the
Governments position on how this may happen (HM Government, 2011).

Both the Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto and The Natural Choice White Paper
were significant pieces of UK government work that pledged to ensure school staff and
others have easy access to the information, guidance and resources they need (DfES, 2006)
and to remove barriers to outdoor learning and increase the ability of schools to teach
outdoors when they wish to do so (HM Government, 2011).

This aims of this research are to investigate outdoor learning in educational establishments
whilst examining the current levels of awareness and engagement that teaching staff have
with some of the largest UK environmental organisations.











9

1.2 What are the benefits of outdoor learning to young people?

Research undertaken by Kings College London (2011) found that outdoor learning could
offer a range of direct and indirect benefits to a young persons personal development. The
report indicated that young people could gain direct educational, health and psychological
benefits, as well as indirect social and financial benefits. Dillon et al. (2005) suggested that
whilst much of the learning in outdoor environments was the same as that which took place
at home or in school (acquiring knowledge, improving skills and changing attitudes etc.), it
was the quality and nature of the experience that was often enhanced whilst outdoors.

1.2.1 Improved physical and mental health

In 2010, the Scottish Government issued guidance on the benefits of outdoor learning
experiences. The report showed that learning in an outdoor environment usually resulted in
increased levels of physical activity, with a visit very often involving a walk around the site or
participation in a practical activity such as tree planting or hedgerow surveying (Learning and
Teaching Scotland, 2010). Links between human contact with the natural world and
improved mental health have also been well-established. Many studies have shown that
exposure to the natural environment lowers the effects of those mental health issues that
may make it difficult for students to pay attention in the classroom (Natural England, 2012).
Two such studies were carried out by Kuo & Taylor (2001) and Pretty et al. (2005). Kuo &
Taylor (2001) found that the symptoms of disorders such as ADHD were reduced when young
people had access to outdoor environments, whilst Pretty et al. (2005) showed that outdoor
experiences could aid recovery from stress and anxiety, while also protecting from future
conditions.

1.2.2 Supporting those at risk
In October 2012, a government paper set out the results of a number of Back on Track
projects for modernising alternative provision for young people who had been excluded
from, or were unable to attend school for other reasons. One of the core aims of the pilot
projects was to re-engage young people by providing alternative experiences to mainstream
schooling and to approach education more broadly. Some such experiences included
opportunities to engage through practical outdoor activities including fence construction and
10

land maintenance. The paper found evidence of positive attitudinal changes by many of the
programme participants in relation to their education and learning (White et al, 2012).

In a number of cases where practical learning activities have been offered to learners at risk
of exclusion, teaching staff and education officers have identified improvements in learners
behaviour. One education officer noted that the behaviour of a group of disaffected year ten
learners had improved since they had been taking part in a farm work programme. It was his
belief that the practical work involved was more appropriate and engaging for them than the
activities that they were required to undertake in class (Dillon, et al 2005).

1.2.3 Personal development
In their report of March 2004, Ofsted highlighted their interest in pupils spiritual, moral,
social and cultural development. The report indicated that as part of their inspections, Ofsted
would show an interest in and gather evidence of (amongst other things) learners abilities to
show respect for living things and the environment (Ofsted, 2004). Additionally, one of the
key findings of their 2008 report into Learning Outside the Classroom was that when
planned and implemented well, learning outside the classroom contributed significantly to
raising standards and improving pupils personal, social and emotional development (Ofsted,
2008).

1.2.4 Advancing ecological practice

In chapter twelve of his book Last Child in the Woods, Richard Louv (2005) raised the
question Where will the future stewards of nature come from? He referred to a number of
studies in England, Germany, Switzerland, Greece, Slovenia, Austria, Canada, El Salvador,
South Africa, Norway and the USA that examined the formative influences of
environmentalists and what had steered them to develop their professional careers in this
direction. Many of the surveys found that childhood experience of nature and participation
in outdoor activity had led directly to a future career in environmental conservation.

Research by Palmer & Suggate (1996) examined those significant influences in peoples lives
which had led to their increased environmental awareness. It found that within the UK, the
most significant factor that influenced peoples concerns about the environment was
11

childhood experience of the natural world. Additionally, the work of Chawla (1996)
questioned 56 environmental professionals within the USA and Norway to find out what had
motivated them to take action to protect the environment. Respondents were asked the
question: How would you explain the sources of your commitment to environmental
protection? What personal experiences have turned you in this direction and inspired you to
pursue it? All but three of the respondents cited formative experiences in childhood as the
foundation for their relationship with the environment. These findings were supported by a
report for the RSPB (Bird, 2007), suggesting that the critical age of influence was sometime
before 12 years of age and that contact with the natural world before this age strongly
influenced positive future behaviours towards the environment.

Evidently, childhood experiences matter and can result in a lifelong interest in ecology.
Through fieldwork, learners are able to begin to appreciate natural history whilst
contextualising the theoretical aspects of biological curriculum content such as biodiversity,
sustainability, conservation and animal welfare (Barker et al, 2002).

It is important that relationships with nature are developed from an early age in order to
motivate adults to protect the natural world. By inspiring school children through outdoor
learning, the environmental industry is able to develop a talent pool of engaged young
people who will form the basis of the next generation of countryside managers and
professional ecologists. The House of Commons Education and Skills Committee supported
this view in their report on education outside the classroom:

the value of outdoor education and the skills students develop outside the classroom
is very directly linked to the employment market. For example, The Institute of
Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) has identified biological recording,
survey and monitoring as a growing area that depends greatly on specialist skills
being taught in schools, colleges and universities. This link is also in evidence in the
bioscience and ecological sectors and the growing environmental protection sector
(House of Commons, 2005)




12

1.3 Where are we now?

A survey carried out by England Marketing in 2009 on behalf of Natural England, found that
children now spend less time playing in natural spaces than previous generations, with less
than 10% now playing in such areas compared to 40% of adults that did when they were
young. Despite these figures, both children themselves as well as their parents wanted
children to have more freedom to play outdoors. Fear of strangers and road safety were the
main factors that prevented parents from giving children these freedoms (England
Marketing, 2009).

This disconnection with the outdoors was in turn impacting upon childrens knowledge of
the natural world with many being completely unfamiliar with our commonest species. A
National Trust survey in 2008 reported that one in three could not identify a magpie; half
could not tell the difference between a bee and a wasp; yet nine out of ten could recognise a
Dalek (National Trust, 2008; cited in Moss, 2012). Whilst many young people may be
interested in the environment and are still studying biology and zoology degrees, increasing
alienation with nature from an early age means that practical field knowledge has been lost
(Bird, 2007).

1.3.1 Nature Deficit Disorder and the bogeyman
In the book Last Child in the Woods, Richard Louv coined the term Nature Deficit Disorder.
Louv (2005) suggested that increased alienation from nature leads to higher levels of
physical and mental illness, attention difficulties and a reduction in sensory awareness. Louv
theorised that fear of the bogeyman stranger was the most potent force that prevented
parents from allowing their children to have the freedom to enjoy themselves in natural
environments. He argued that sensationalist media coverage of stranger-danger, alongside
an increasingly litigious culture, promoted a culture of fear that had confined young people
indoors and disconnected them from the outside world. In the final section of chapter ten,
Louv concluded by asking the questions - So where is the greater danger? Outdoors in the
woods and fields? Or on the couch in front of the TV?


13

1.3.2 Adult lack of awareness
In June 2012, the Learning Escape undertook an online survey to look at headteachers
perceptions of environmental citizenship development within UK Primary Schools and Early
Years settings. The survey started by looking at the use of outdoor space within the
educational establishment. Of those that responded, 14% did not know how much time
their children were spending outdoors during the school day, whilst 19% did not know how
much outdoor space they had at their educational establishment. The survey also looked at
the barriers to developing successful environmental citizenship programmes. Whilst many of
those surveyed identified passion by staff as being one of the secrets to a successful
environmental programme, 39% felt that lack of staff understanding / training was one of
the biggest barriers (The Learning Escape, 2012). A report commissioned by Natural England
in 2012 found indications of teachers views on outdoor learning being influenced by their
own educational experiences (Rickinson et al, 2012). Many teachers and teaching staff
currently in their twenties also progressed through the education system during a time
when outdoor learning and access to nature was becoming less commonplace. This being
the case, it is not unreasonable to make the assumption that a member of staff who is
themselves disconnected with nature, may very well in turn find it difficult to engage and
enthuse their own pupils through outdoor learning.

1.3.3 What is being done?

There has been much discussion by parents, educational staff, doctors, conservationists and
the media about childrens increasing alienation from the natural world. There is a general
consensus between these groups that children benefit from greater freedom to explore and
enjoy the outside world (Moss, 2012) and many organisations and governments have
developed programmes to reverse this trend of environmental alienation.

In 2009, the USA introduced the No Child Left Inside Bill which aimed to improve the
mental and physical health of American learners, whilst also enhancing their environmental
awareness (Scientific American, 2009; cited in Indian Paediatrics, 2009). Within the UK, there
are a wide range of governmental and non-governmental organisations that offer support
and access to outdoor learning teaching resources and countryside sites.

14

The Council for Learning Outside the Classroom (CLOtC) is a registered UK charity that is
responsible for raising the profile of outdoor learning, whilst also supporting education and
outdoor learning professionals. The Council formally took over responsibility for the
Department for Education and Skills Learning Outside the Classroom manifesto in April 2009
(CLOtC website, accessed 2013). Organisations such as the Forestry Commission, the Wildlife
Trusts, the Woodland Trust and the RSPB all support this manifesto and all have their own
outdoor education strategies and accessible sites for learning.

The Forestry Commission are the government department responsible for protecting,
expanding and promoting the sustainable management of woodlands and increasing their
value to society and the environment (Forestry Commission England website, accessed
2013) In 2009, the Forestry Commission England launched its Leafing the Classroom
strategy for Forestry Commission estate education and learning services with the aim of
using the national forests near where people live and learn to improve peoples quality of
life through education and learning (Thorp, 2009). In March 2013, the Commission released
a new strategy to increase and improve learning opportunities on the public forest estate in
England.

The RSPB are responsible for 200 publically accessible nature reserves that cover nearly
130 000 hectares and are home to 80% of the United Kingdoms rarest or most threatened
bird species. Through their For schools webpages, they provide access to a number of their
school learning programmes and resources. All of the RSPBs education sites have been
externally verified to ensure that they provide high quality learning experiences through the
LOtC Quality Badge scheme (RSPB website, accessed 2013). Their UK education policy (2012)
stated the RSPBs belief that every child and young person should have regular opportunities
to connect with nature, so they value it, prioritise it and take action to save it now and as
adults.

As well as managing a network of its own accessible woodland sites, one of the Woodland
Trusts main goals is to increase the publics understanding of woodland. As part of their
education strategy, the Trust has many projects and activities that are aimed at engaging
children with woodlands and nature conservation. As well as producing learning resources
for teachers, they also have their own Nature Detective website for children (Woodland
Trust website, accessed 2013).
15

The Wildlife Trust comprises forty-seven regionally organised individual trusts whose
purpose is to protect wildlife and wild places, whilst inspiring people and communities to
take action for nature. Each of the regional trusts has its own specific education programme
that offers learning support to schools whilst also providing outdoor learning opportunities
at their wide network of Wildlife Trust sites (Wildlife Trust website, accessed 2013). In 2007,
the Wildlife Trust published Natural Inspiration - Learning Outside the Classroom to
demonstrate the work that they were undertaking to support the education sector whilst
also signposting to the services and resources available (Taylor, 2007).

In addition to this work, section 4.18 of the Government white paper detailed their
commitment to supporting the Natural Connections initiative to link schools with
environmental organisations such as those in the preceding four paragraphs. The aim is to
deliver a better co-ordinated local service to schools and teachers, to enable much greater
numbers of schoolchildren to experience the benefits of learning in the natural environment
(HM Government, 2011). Following the white paper, The Natural Connections
Demonstration Project was established to test the effectiveness of a new delivery model set
up to support schools whilst stimulating supply and demand for learning outside the
classroom in natural environments services (Rickinson et al, 2012).

Support from these and other organisations provide educational establishments with a key
opportunity to embed environmental awareness into a young persons learning experience.
It is this support, as well as an awareness of and engagement with accessible learning
resources and outdoor sites, that provides educational staff with the opportunity to present
their children with the chance to learn about the environment, the natural world and embed
a culture of conservation for the future (The Learning Escape, 2012).







16

1.4 Research aims
The aims of this research are to examine what levels of awareness and engagement teaching
staff have of environmental organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities. It asks
three specific questions:

What awareness do those teaching staff surveyed have of the environmental
organisations that support outdoor learning?
What awareness do those teaching staff surveyed have of outdoor learning opportunities
in their areas?
What levels of engagement do those teaching staff surveyed have with outdoor learning
and environmental organisations?





















17

2. Methods
Four organisations were identified as the basis of a questionnaire survey - The Forestry
Commission, the Wildlife Trusts, the Woodland Trust and the RSPB. These were chosen as
each of the four organisations supported the Learning Outside the Classroom manifesto and
all had their own outdoor education strategies and accessible sites for learning.

A questionnaire survey [Appendix 1] was constructed comprising fifteen quantitative and
qualitative questions designed to investigate the aims laid out in section 1.4.

A project proposal detailing the research aims [Appendix 2] was emailed to each of the four
organisations to determine if they would be willing to have the organisations name included
in the questionnaire. All four of the organisations responded positively. The proposal also
asked if any of the organisations had any particular questions or concerns about their
outreach work that they would wish to have incorporated into the questionnaire. The
Forestry Commission responded with a number of requests that related to their own
research into public engagement.

Questionnaires were designed to address each of the three main aims. Questions one to
three examined what awareness teaching staff had of each of the four organisations.
Questions four to eight examined what awareness teaching staff had of outdoor learning
opportunities in their areas. Questions nine to thirteen examined what levels of engagement
teaching staff had with the four organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities.
Question fourteen examined some of the barriers that may restrict outdoor learning.
Question fifteen collected data including school postcode and respondent role within the
school.

The sampling process was designed with the aim of receiving responses from any teachers,
support staff, parents and governors throughout the UK involved in the delivery of teaching
to learners in key stages one (five to seven years of age), two (seven to eleven years of age),
three (eleven to fourteen years of age), four (fourteen to sixteen years of age) and five
(sixteen to eighteen years of age). State and private schools, as well as Further Education
Colleges were included in the research. For the purpose of this research, these broad ranges
of educational establishments were referred to generally as schools.

18

Questionnaire responses were collected through two methods - online and hard copy. Hard
copy responses were collected from four different Food for Life Partnership
(www.foodforlife.org.uk) farm educational access training events in England. The events
were run in Totnes, Halifax, Bath and Warwickshire between February and May 2013 and
were open to Food for Life Partnership enrolled schools. The events were delivered by the
author of this report and were designed to assist schools within Food for Life Partnership
commissioned areas to establish and maintain educational links to local farms. A total of
eighteen respondents completed hard copy questionnaires.

The online survey was hosted at the Survey Monkey website between 1
st
March and 31
st

May 2013. A total of fifty-seven respondents completed online questionnaires. Respondents
were directed by a web link to the online survey through four key routes:

Website Council for Learning Outside the Classroom news and events webpage
http://www.lotc.org.uk/2013/04/new-research-into-learning-outside-the-classroom/
School contacts database Emailed to teaching staff by Farming and Countryside
Education (FACE)
Social media (personal) Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn sites
Social media (organisations)- Food for Life Partnership Twitter site and Soil Association
staff network e-newsletter

Entry into a prize draw to win a twenty pounds amazon.co.uk voucher was offered as an
incentive to respondents to complete the questionnaire. A total of seventy-five completed
questionnaire responses were analysed using Microsoft Excel.








19

3%
17%
37%
32%
11%
Extremely knowledgeable
Moderately knowledgeable
Somewhat knowledgeable
Slightly knowledgeable
Not at all knowledgeable
3. Results

A total of 75 completed questionnaires were returned and analysed. Responses were drawn
from teaching staff from all key stages from 1 to 5. Figure 18 on page 40 shows the spread of
respondents across the United Kingdom.

3.1 Question 1: What knowledge do you have of UK environmental organisations?
There was a highly significant difference between the perceived levels of knowledge
respondents had of UK environmental organisations (2=31.47, n=75, p<0.001). Two
respondents said they were extremely knowledgeable (3%), 13 were moderately
knowledgeable (17%), 28 were somewhat knowledgeable (37%), 24 were slightly
knowledgeable (32%) and 8 were not at all knowledgeable (11%), [Fig. 1].










3.2 Question 2: Which organisations do each of these logos belong to?
There was a highly significant difference between correct, incorrect and unsure respondent
identification of the RSPB, Forestry Commission and Woodland Trust logos (2=62.72 RSPB,
2=17.36 Forestry Commission, 2=24.56 Woodland Trust, n=75, p<0.001). Fifty-seven
respondents (76%) correctly identified the RSPB logo, 5 respondents (7%) incorrectly
identified it and 13 respondents (17%) were unsure as to which organisation the logo
represented. Nine respondents (12%) correctly identified the Forestry Commission logo, 38
Figure 1: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who claimed different levels
of knowledge of UK environmental organisations
20

respondents (51%) incorrectly identified it and 28 respondents (37%) were unsure as to
which organisation the logo represented. Seven respondents (9%) correctly identified the
Woodland Trust logo, 42 respondents (56%) incorrectly identified it and 26 respondents
(35%) were unsure as to which organisation the logo represented.
There was no difference between correct, incorrect and unsure respondent identification of
the Wildlife Trusts logo (2=2.96, n=75, p=0.22). Twenty nine respondents (39%) correctly
identified the Wildlife Trusts logo, 18 respondents (24%) incorrectly identified it and 28
respondents (37%) were unsure as to which organisation the logo represented [Fig. 2].












3.3 Question 3: Have you heard about the following organisations? If so, how?
The 75 respondents had heard about the Forestry Commission a total of 113 times through a
range of methods, with the most common being word of mouth. Thirty-nine respondents
(52%) had heard of the Forestry Commission through word of mouth [Table 1].

The 75 respondents had heard about the RSPB a total of 194 times through a range of
methods, with the most common being through the website. Thirty eight respondents
(51%) had heard of RSPB through their website [Table 1].
57
9
29
7
5
38
18
42
13
28 28
26
RSPB Forestry
Commission
Wildlife Trust Woodland Trust
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

r
e
s
p
o
n
d
e
n
t
s

Unsure
Incorrect
Correct
Figure 2: The number of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who made correct, incorrect and
unsure identifications of four environmental organisations
21


The 75 respondents had heard about Wildlife Trusts a total of 117 times through a
range of methods, with the most common being word of mouth. Twenty-eight
respondents (37%) had heard of the Wildlife Trusts through their word of mouth [Table 1].

The 75 respondents had heard about Woodland Trust a total of 157 times through a
range of methods, with the most common being at a stand at an event. Thirty-nine
respondents (52%) had heard of the Woodland Trust at a stand at an event [Table 1].









Table 1: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had heard of four
environmental organisations; and their methods of recognition.

Seen
website
Social
media
TV
campaign /
programme
Newsletter
/Magazine
Stand
at an
event
Word
of
mouth


Membership
Not
heard
of
them
before
Forestry
Commission
32% 16% 15% 12% 21% 52% 3% 5%
RSPB 51% 23% 37% 47% 31% 48% 23% 1%
Wildlife
Trust
29% 17% 12% 29% 17% 37% 13% 9%
Woodland
Trust
39% 16% 12% 36% 52% 44% 11% 9%
22

1%
13%
27%
38%
21%
Extremely knowledgeable
Moderately knowledgeable
Somewhat knowledgeable
Slightly knowledgeable
Not at all knowledgeable
3.4 Question 4: What knowledge do you have about environmental outdoor learning
opportunities in your area?
There was a highly significant difference between the perceived levels of knowledge
respondents had of environmental outdoor learning opportunities in their areas (2=27.73,
n=75, p<0.001). One respondent said they were extremely knowledgeable (1%), 10 were
moderately knowledgeable (13%), 20 were somewhat knowledgeable (27%), 28 were slightly
knowledgeable (37%) and 16 were not at all knowledgeable (21%), [Fig. 3].










3.5 Question 5: Which of these environmental organisations provide access to outdoor
sites for environmental education?
For each of the four organisations, there was a highly significant difference between those
respondents that were aware the organisation provided access to outdoor sites for
education, those which werent aware and those which were unsure (2=32.24 Forestry
Commission, 2= 38.96 RSPB, 2=37.52 The Wildlife Trusts, 2=39.12 The Woodland Trust,
n=75, p<0.001). The majority of respondents were either aware that each organisation
provided access to outdoor sites or they were unsure [Table 2].

When analysing the yes response data, there was no significant difference in responses to
indicate more awareness of one organisations access to sites over any of the others (2=
1.15, n=75, p=0.741).
Figure 3: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who claimed different levels of
knowledge of outdoor learning opportunities in their areas.
23







3.6 Question 6: Which of these environmental organisations produce free educational
resources?
For each of the four organisations, there was a highly significant difference between those
respondents that were aware the organisation produced free educational resources, which
werent aware and which were unsure (2=39.92 Forestry Commission, 2=37.52 Forestry
Commission, 2=40.88 Wildlife Trusts, 2= Woodland Trust, n=75, p<0.001). The majority of
respondents were either aware that each organisation produced resources or they were
unsure [Table 3].

When analysing the yes response data, there was no significant difference in responses to
indicate more awareness of one organisations production of resources over any of the
others (2=2.26, n=75, p=0.520).






Table 2: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who were aware, unaware
or unsure of which of the four environmental organisations provide access to outdoor sites for learning
Yes No Unsure
Forestry
Commission
52% 3% 45%
RSPB 61% 3% 36%
Wildlife Trust 49% 0% 51%
Woodland
Trust
56% 0% 44%
Table 3: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who were aware, unaware
or unsure of which of the four environmental organisations produce free educational resources
Yes No Unsure
Forestry
Commission
43% 0% 57%
RSPB 51% 0% 49%
Wildlife
Trust
41% 0% 59%
Woodland
Trust
56% 0% 44%
24

3.7 Question 7: Which of these organisations have outdoor sites within a one hour
drive of your school?
Four respondents (5%) stated that they had a Forestry Commission site within less than 5
minute drive from the school, 4 (5%) had a site within a 5 and 15 minute drive from their
school, 7 (9%) had a site within a 16 minute and 30 minute drive, 3 (4%) had a site within a
31 minute and 45 minute drive and 7 (9%) had a site within a 46 minute and 60 minute drive
from the school. Fifty (67%) didnt know whether there was a Forestry Commission site
within a 60 minute drive.

No respondents had an RSPB site within less than 5 minute drive from the school, 3 (4%) had
a site within a 5 and 15 minute drive from their school, 11 (15%) had a site within a 16
minute and 30 minute drive, 6 (8%) had a site within a 31 minute and 45 minute drive and 9
(12%) had a site within a 46 minute and 60 minute drive from the school. Forty-six (61%)
didnt know whether there was an RSPB site within a 60 minute drive [Table 4].

Two respondents (3%) had a Wildlife Trust site within less than 5 minute drive from the
school, 8 (11%) had a site within a 5 and 15 minute drive from their school, 8 (11%) had a
site within a 16 minute and 30 minute drive, 4 (5%) had a site within a 31 minute and 45
minute drive and 1 (1%) had a site within a 46 minute and 60 minute drive from the school.
52 (69%) didnt know whether there was a Wildlife Trust site within a 60 minute drive [Table
4].

Four respondents (5%) had a Woodland Trust site within less than 5 minute drive from the
school, 3 (4%) had a site within a 5 and 15 minute drive from their school, 6 (8%) had a site
within a 16 minute and 30 minute drive, 4 (5%) had a site within a 31 minute and 45 minute
drive and 5 (7%) had a site within a 46 minute and 60 minute drive from the school. 53 (71%)
didnt know whether there was a Woodland Trust site within a 60 minute drive [Table 4].


25








Thirty-two respondents (42%) were unsure whether there were any sites managed by any of
the four organisations within a 60 minute drive of their schools. The remaining 43 (58%)
stated that they had between 1 and 4 sites within a 60 minute drive of their respective
schools. Discounting the 32 respondents who were unsure whether or not there were any
sites near their schools, 11 of 43 who knew of sites near the schools (26%) stated that there
was one site within a 60 minute drive, 13 (30%) that there were 2 sites, 14 (33%) that there
were 3 sites and 5 (12%) that there were 4 sites within a 60 minute drive of their schools
[Fig. 4].











Table 4: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers had one of the four
environmental organisation's outdoor sites within a sixty minute drive

Less than
5 minute
drive
Between 5
and 15
minute
drive
Between
16 minute
and 30
minute
drive
Between
31 minute
and 45
minute
drive
Between
46 minute
and 60
minute
drive
Dont
know
Forestry
Commission
5% 5% 9% 4% 9% 67%
RSPB 0% 4% 15% 8% 12% 61%
Wildlife
Trust
3% 11% 11% 5% 1% 69%
Woodland
Trust
5% 4% 8% 5% 7% 71%
11
13
14
5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 site 2 sites 3 sites 4 sites
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

r
e
s
p
o
n
d
e
n
t
s

Number of sites
Figure 4: The number of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had a total of between one
and four outdoor sites within a sixty minute drive

26

3.8 Question 8: If any of the environmental organisations in question 7 have outdoor
sites within a one hour drive of your school, please write the name of the site/s
below
Thirty-five (81%) of the 43 respondents from question 7 who knew of 1 or more sites within
a 60 minute drive of their school, were able to attribute a name to at least one of the sites.

3.9 Question 9: As a school, we have good links with this environmental organisation
For all four of the organisations, there was a highly significant difference between
respondent perceptions of their schools links with each organisation (2=61.27 Forestry
Commission, 2=100.00 RSPB, 2=30.80 Wildlife Trusts, 2=26.54 Woodland Trust, n=75,
p<0.001).

One respondent (1%) strongly agreed that their school had good links with the Forestry
Commission, 4 (5%) somewhat agreed that there were good links, 8 (11%) somewhat
disagreed that their school had good links and 36 (49%) strongly disagreed with the
statement that their school had good links with the Forestry Commission. 25 (34%)
respondents didnt know whether or not their school had good links to the organisation
[Table 5].

Two respondents (3%) strongly agreed that their school had good links with the RSPB, 14
(19%) somewhat agreed that there were good links, 7 (9%) somewhat disagreed that their
school had good links and 29 (39%) strongly disagreed with the statement that their school
had good links with the RSPB. Twenty-two respondents (30%) didnt know whether or not
their school had good links to the organisation [Table 5].

Five respondents (7%) strongly agreed that their school had good links with the Wildlife
Trusts, 8 (11%) somewhat agreed that there were good links, 9 (12%) somewhat disagreed
that their school had good links and 29 (39%) strongly disagreed with the statement that
their school had good links with the Wildlife Trusts. Twenty-four respondents (32%) didnt
know whether or not their school had good links to the organisation [Table 5].
27

11%
11%
11%
38%
29%
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Don't know

Five respondents (7%) strongly agreed that their school had good links with the Woodland
Trust, 9 (12%) somewhat agreed that there were good links, 10 (14%) somewhat disagreed
that their school had good links and 29 (39%) strongly disagreed with the statement that
their school had good links with the Woodland Trust. Twenty-one respondents (28%) didnt
know whether or not their school had good links to the organisation [Table 5].






Data for all four organisations was combined to analyse the general perception of links with
the environmental organisations. Eleven percent of respondents strongly agreed with the
statement that they had good overall links with the organisations, with another 11%
somewhat agreeing. Eleven percent somewhat disagreed with the statement and 38%
strongly disagreed. Twenty nine percent did not know if their school had good overall links
with the environmental organisations [Fig. 5].









Table 5: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of
perception of their schools links with each of the four environmental organisations

Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Dont know
Forestry
Commission
1% 5% 11% 49% 34%
RSPB 3% 19% 9% 39% 30%
Wildlife Trust 7% 11% 12% 39% 32%
Woodland
Trust
7% 12% 14% 39% 28%
Figure 5: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of
perception regarding general links with all four environmental organisations
28

3.10 Question 10: As a school, we make good use of this environmental organisations
outdoor site/s.
For each of the four organisations, there was a highly significant difference between
respondent perceptions of their schools use of each organisations sites (2=57.20 Forestry
Commission, 2=53.47 RSPB, 2=45.60 Wildlife Trusts, 2=57.47 Woodland Trust, n=75,
p<0.001).

Two respondents (3%) strongly agreed that their school made good use of Forestry
Commission sites, with 5 (7%) somewhat agreeing. Twelve respondents (16%) somewhat
disagreed that their school made good use of their sites and 39 (52%) strongly disagreed
with the statement. Seventeen respondents (23%) didnt know whether or not their school
made good use of Forestry Commission sites [Table 6].

Three respondents (4%) strongly agreed that their school made good use of RSPB sites, with
4 (5%) somewhat agreeing. Thirteen respondents (17%) somewhat disagreed that their
school made good use of their sites and 38 (51%) strongly disagreed with the statement.
Seventeen respondents (23%) didnt know whether or not their school made good use of
RSPB sites [Table 6].

Four respondents (5%) strongly agreed that their school made good use of Wildlife Trust
sites, with 4 (5%) somewhat agreeing. Sixteen respondents (21%) somewhat disagreed that
their school made good use of their sites and 36 (48%) strongly disagreed with the
statement. Fifteen respondents (20%) didnt know whether or not their school made good
use of Wildlife Trust sites [Table 6].

Two respondents (3%) strongly agreed that their school made good use of Woodland Trust
sites, with 3 (4%) somewhat agreeing. Thirteen respondents (217%) somewhat disagreed
that their school made good use of their sites and 38 respondents (51%) strongly disagreed
with the statement. Nineteen respondents (25%) didnt know whether or not their school
made good use of Woodland Trust sites [Table 6].

29

4%
5%
18%
50%
23%
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Don't know





Data for all four organisations was combined to analyse the overall usage of outdoor sites.
Four percent of respondents strongly agreed with the statement that they made good use of
outdoor sites, with 5% somewhat agreeing. Eighteen percent somewhat disagreed with the
statement and 50% strongly disagreed. Twenty-three percent did not know if their school
was utilising any of the organisations outdoor sites [Fig. 6].











3.11 Question 11: Within your role, how often have you used any of these
environmental organisations free educational resources?
For each of the four organisations there was a highly significant difference between the
frequencies of respondents use of educational resources (2=124.92 Forestry Commission,
2=67.16 RSPB, 2=123.80 Wildlife Trusts, 2=65.40 Woodland Trust, n=75, p<0.001) [Table
7].
Table 6: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of
perception of their schools use of each of the four environmental organisation's outdoor sites

Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Dont know
Forestry
Commission
3% 7% 16% 52% 23%
RSPB 4% 5% 17% 51% 23%
Wildlife Trust 5% 5% 21% 48% 20%
Woodland
Trust
3% 4% 17% 51% 25%
Figure 6: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of
perception regarding their schools use of all four environmental organisation's outdoor sites
30








Discounting those respondents who didnt know whether they had used any of the
organisations free educational resources, data for all four organisations was combined to
analyse the overall frequencies of resource usage. Sixty-four percent of respondents had
never used any of the resources produced by any of the four organisations, 12% had only
used some kind of resource once, 14% had used a resource at least once a year, 7% at least
once a term and 3% were using some kind of resource at least once a month [Fig. 7].

Figure 7: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of
perception regarding their schools use of all four environmental organisation's environmental resources



64%
12%
14%
7%
3%
Never
once
at least once a year
at least once a term
at least once a month
Table 7: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of perception
of their schools use of each of the four environmental organisation's free resources


Dont
know
Never Once
At least
once a
year
At least
once a
term
At least
once a
month
Forestry
Commission
13% 64% 9% 8% 4% 1%
RSPB 13% 49% 15% 19% 5% 0%
Wildlife
Trust
13% 64% 3% 8% 7% 5%
Woodland
Trust
7% 51% 15% 13% 9% 5%
31

85%
7%
4%
4% 0%
Never
once
at least once a year
at least once a term
at least once a month
3.12 Question 12: Within your role, how often have you visited any of these
environmental organisations outdoor sites?
For each of the four organisations there was a highly significant difference between the
frequencies of respondents visits to outdoor sites (2=200.60 Forestry Commission,
2=193.08 RSPB, 2=219.48 Wildlife Trusts, 2=184.12 Woodland Trust, n=75, p<0.001)
[Table 8].





Discounting those respondents who didnt know whether they had visited any of the
organisations outdoor sites, data for all four organisations was combined to analyse the
overall frequencies of site usage. Eighty five percent of respondents had never visited any of
the four organisations sites, 7% had only visited a site once, 4% visited a site at least once a
year, 4% at least once a term and 0.4% (1 person) had visited a site at least once a month
[Fig. 8].








Table 8: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of perception
of the number of times their schools visit outdoor sites


Dont
know
Never Once
At least
once a
year
At least
once a
term
At least
once a
month
Forestry
Commission
4% 58% 6% 2% 5% 0%
RSPB 7% 57% 6% 4% 1% 0%
Wildlife
Trust
8% 60% 2% 2% 3% 0%
Woodland
Trust
8% 56% 5% 3% 2% 1%
Figure 8: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different levels of
perception regarding their schools use of overall outdoor sites
32

83%
12%
1%
4%
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Somewhat disagree
Neutral / No opinion
3.13 Question 13: I would like our school to undertake more outdoor learning.
There was a highly significant difference between respondent opinions on whether or not
they would like their schools to undertake more outdoor learning (2=187.33, n=75,
p<0.001).

Sixty-two respondents (83%) strongly agreed with the statement that they would like their
school to undertake more outdoor learning. Nine (12%) somewhat agreed, one (1%)
somewhat disagreed and three (4%) had no opinion. None of the respondents strongly
disagreed with the statement [Fig. 9].


















Figure 9: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who had different opinions
on whether they would like their schools to undertake more outdoor learning
33

25%
43%
9%
9%
14%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14 Question 14: Please read the following statements relating to outdoor learning and
rate them accordingly
3.14.1 The cost of transport prohibits our school from visiting outdoor sites
There was a highly significant difference between respondent opinions on the cost of
transport restricting outdoor visits (2=30.53, n=75, p < 0.001).

Nineteen respondents (25%) strongly agreed with the statement, with 32 (43%) somewhat
agreeing. Seven respondents (9%) somewhat disagreed and another 7 (9%) strongly
disagreed. Ten respondents (14%) had no opinion [Fig. 10].
















Figure 10: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that transport costs prohibit their school from visiting outdoor sites
34

3%
12%
35%
33%
17%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.2 It is too much of a health and safety risk taking the pupils to an outdoor site
There was a highly significant difference between respondent opinions on health and safety
(2=28.67, n=75, p<0.001). Two respondents (3%) strongly agreed with the statement, with
9 (12%) somewhat agreeing. Twenty-six respondents (35%) somewhat disagreed and 25
(33%) strongly disagreed. Thirteen respondents (17%) had no opinion [Fig. 11].






















Figure 11: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that it is too much of a health and safety risk to take pupils to an outdoor site
35

3%
30%
19%
8%
40%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.3 The travel time to and from the site is too long
There was a highly significant difference between respondent opinions on travel times to
and from sites (2=36.00, n=75, p<0.001). Two respondents (3%) strongly agreed with the
statement, with 23 (30%) somewhat agreeing. Fourteen respondents (19%) somewhat
disagreed and 6 (8%) strongly disagreed. thirty respondents (40%) had no opinion [Fig. 12].























Figure 12: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that travel time to and from the site is too long
36

4%
5%
20%
54%
17%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.4 I have never considered visiting an outdoor site before
There was a highly significant difference between respondents thoughts on visiting outdoor
sites (2=59.60, n=75, p<0.001). Three respondents (4%) strongly agreed with the
statement, with 4 (5%) somewhat agreeing. Fifteen respondents (20%) somewhat disagreed
and 40 (54%) strongly disagreed. Thirteen respondents (17%) had no opinion [Fig. 13].























Figure 13: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that they have never considered visiting an outdoor site before
37

5%
4%
7%
75%
9%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.5 Outdoor learning is not relevant to what I teach
There was a highly significant difference between respondents views on the relevance of
outdoor learning to their teaching subjects (2=140.67, n=75, p<0.001). Four respondents
(5%) strongly agreed with the statement, with 3 (4%) somewhat agreeing. Five respondents
(7%) somewhat disagreed and 56 (75%) strongly disagreed. Seven respondents (9%) had no
opinion [Fig. 14].






















Figure 14: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that outdoor learning is not relevant to what they teach
38

3%
15%
22%
33%
27%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.6 It is easier for me to deliver environmental subjects in school
There was a highly significant difference between respondent views on the delivery of
environmental subjects in school (2=20.93, n=75, p<0.001). Two respondents (3%) strongly
agreed with the statement, with 11 (15%) somewhat agreeing. Seventeen respondents
(22%) somewhat disagreed and 25 (33%) strongly disagreed. Twenty respondents (27%) had
no opinion [Fig. 15].






















Figure 15: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that it is easier for them to deliver environmental subjects in school
39

16%
37%
16%
15%
16%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.7 I don't know enough about environmental organisations to use their resources
There was a significant difference between respondents views on their knowledge of
environmental organisations (2=14.13, n=75, p=0.006). Twelve respondents (16%) strongly
agreed with the statement, with 28 (37%) somewhat agreeing. Twelve respondents (16%)
somewhat disagreed and 11 (15%) strongly disagreed. Twelve respondents (16%) had no
opinion [Fig. 16].





















Figure 16: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that they don't know enough about environmental organisations to use environmental
organisations resources
40

15%
16%
20%
32%
17%
strongly agree
somewhat agree
somewhat disagree
strongly disagree
no opinion
3.14.8 I am not involved in organising visits
There was no difference between respondent views on their involvement in organising site
visits (2=7.33, n=75, p=0.119). Eleven respondents (15%) strongly agreed with the
statement, with 22 (16%) somewhat agreeing. Fifteen respondents (20%) somewhat
disagreed and 24 (32%) strongly disagreed. Thirteen respondents (17%) had no opinion [Fig.
17].






















Figure 17: The percentage of respondents to a questionnaire survey of 75 teachers who expressed their views
on the statement that they are not involved in organising visits
41

3.15 Postcode map
Using postcode data collected, a map of respondent schools was produced. Respondent
locations were evenly spread across England, with an additional one respondent recorded in
Scotland, one in Northern Ireland and one on the Isle of Man [Fig.18].
























Figure 18: The location of questionnaire respondents across the United Kingdom
42













As fewer teachers have outdoor experience and training themselves,
they are less likely to venture outside and so the cycle continues
(Barker, et al. 2002)














43

4 Discussion
4.1 What awareness do those teaching staff surveyed have of the environmental
organisations that support outdoor learning?

Questions 1 to 3 examined the levels of awareness that respondents had of each of the four
organisations. Respondents were asked in question 2 if they recognised each of the four
logos with the wordings removed, in order to determine their brand awareness. The most
widely recognised logo was that of the RSPB, with 57% of respondents correctly identifying
it. Of those that guessed the Forestry Commission logo incorrectly, 53% thought that the
logo belonged to the Woodland Trust. Conversely, of those that identified the Woodland
Trust incorrectly, 76% thought that the logo belonged to the Forestry Commission [3.2].
These findings suggested that many of the respondents were confusing the Forest
Commission and Woodland Trust logos with each other.

4.2 What awareness do those teaching staff surveyed have of outdoor learning
opportunities in their areas?

Questions 4 to 8 examined the levels of awareness that teaching staff had of the access to
resources and accessible sites in their areas. Questions 5 and 6 determined what level of
awareness staff had of outdoor sites and educational resources. The general trend indicated
a half and half split between those that knew the four organisations provided educational
resources and access to sites and those that were unsure. When examining the data of those
that were aware of the work each of the organisations undertook, the results found that the
respondents were no more aware of any particular one organisations outdoor learning
opportunities than any of the others [3.5]. Likewise, there was no evidence of awareness of
any one organisations production of educational resources over any of the others [3.6]. This
may suggest that no particular marketing strategies are impacting over any of the others.

Questions 7 and 8 examined what awareness respondents had of outdoor sites within a one
hour drive of their schools. As with educational resources, the trend indicated roughly a
50/50 split between those that were aware of any sites and those that were not. 42% were
unsure whether there were any sites at all within a 60 minute drive of their schools. The
remaining 58% stated that they had between 1 and 4 sites within a 60 minute drive of their
44

respective schools [3.7]. Of those that said they were in proximity to a site, 81% were able
to attribute a name to at least one of the sites.

4.3 What levels of engagement do those teaching staff surveyed have with outdoor
learning and environmental organisations?

Questions 9 to 13 examined how well-engaged the respondents were with the four
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities. None of the four organisations
stood out as having better school links than the any of the others and only 9% of
respondents agreed with the statement that their schools had good links with any of the
organisations [3.9]. Sixty four percent of respondents had never personally used any free
educational resources, with only 1 in 4 (24%) using a resource once a year or more [3.11].

Regarding visits to outdoor sites, even though nearly two thirds of respondents schools
were within an accessible driving distance, only 9% of respondents agreed with the
statement that their school made good use of these sites [3.10]. Likewise, responses from
question 12 indicated that 85% of respondents had never personally used these sites for
education, with only 8% using the sites on a regular basis of once a year or more [3.12].


4.4 Awareness versus engagement
Through examination of the results, it is clear that although roughly half of all respondents
were aware of the organisations and their learning opportunities, these figures were not
reflected in respondent engagement with the organisations. Whilst over half of all
respondents (58%) were aware of outdoor sites near their schools [3.7] and 81% of those
could name at least one of the sites [3.8], 68% felt they didnt make good use of these sites
[3.10], with 85% never having visited any of them in an educational capacity [3.12].

This pattern of higher awareness / lower engagement was similar when examining
educational resources, although the results did indicate that resource use was higher than
the use of outdoor sites. This is hardly surprising considering the logistics and costs involved
in setting up an off-site school visit. Respondents themselves were aware of the low
engagement levels, as seen in the responses to question 13 where 95% of respondents
agreed that they would like their school to undertake more outdoor learning. With this
45

being the case, the question to be asked is if awareness of the organisations and their
learning opportunities is not an issue, why are teaching staff not engaging with these
opportunities?

4.5 The barriers to the delivery of outdoor learning
Question 14 examined the potential barriers to the delivery of outdoor learning and asked
respondents to rate a number of statements relating to their opinions on the provision of
outdoor learning within their schools. The results found that 74% of respondents had
considered visiting an outdoor site [3.14.4], with a similar amount (82%) believing that
outdoor learning was relevant to their teaching subjects [3.14.5].

Sixty eight percent of respondents did not believe that health and safety was a barrier when
taking children to outdoor sites [3.14.2], although 68% did agree that the cost of transport to
and from the site was something that had prohibited their school from undertaking outdoor
visits [3.14.1]. Opinion was split when presented with the statement that travel time to and
from the site is too long with 33% agreeing with the statement and 27% disagreeing. The
remaining 40% had no opinion on this matter [3.14.3]. This 40% figure correlates closely
with question 7 [3.7] where 42% of respondents were unsure if there were any sites within a
60 minute drive of their schools.

Only 18% of respondents thought that it was easier to teach environmental subjects in
school whilst 55% of respondents disagreed with the statement [3.14.6]; but a similar
amount (53%) felt that they didnt know enough about environmental organisations to use
their resources [3.14.7].

By examining the results of the research, it can be concluded although large numbers of
respondents could see the relevance of outdoor learning; had considered visiting an outdoor
site and did not feel restricted by health and safety, there were concerns regarding a lack of
knowledge of environmental organisations and transport costs.


46

4.5.1 I don't know enough about environmental organisations to deliver outdoor learning
In their review of research on outdoor learning, Rickinson et al. cited several pieces of
research that discussed teachers confidence and expertise in the delivery of outdoor
learning. Work by Clay (1999, cited in Rickinson et al. 2004) described how an OFSTED survey
of outdoor activities in 33 schools had found that teachers expertise was a key factor that
had affected the quality of outdoor activities in schools.

In September 2004, the House of Commons Education and Skills Committee announced its
inquiry into education outside the classroom. One of the outcomes of this enquiry was the
release of the Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto in 2006.

Within the report, evidence submitted by the English Outdoor Council stated its concerns in
terms of Initial Teacher Training and outdoor learning when it said we are not convinced
that initial teacher training does a good enough job in terms of giving trainee teachers the
confidence they need to take their pupils out of the classroom (House of Commons
Education and Skills Committee, 2005). It also took evidence from witnesses who stated that
many younger science teachers, who themselves had suffered from a decline in outdoor
learning, were lacking the knowledge to effectively embed outdoor learning into their
curriculums. This issue of teacher expertise was also raised in a focus group report for the
FSC - Teaching Biology outside the classroom Is it heading for extinction? The report
raised concerns that many biology teachers who have entered the profession have received
very little experience of fieldwork, ecology and biodiversity (Barker, et al. 2002). Later
research by The Learning Escape (2012) found that 39% of teaching staff felt that lack of
staff understanding / training was one of the biggest barriers to the effective delivery of
outdoor learning.

The Commons Education and Skills Committee report did note however that there was no
evidence of a lack of outdoor learning CPD opportunities for teachers to develop their skills.
Indeed, many organisations such as the Food for Life Partnership deliver free teacher CPD
sessions on setting up and maintaining successful educational links to outdoor sites. But,
seven years after the release of the Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto and its
commitment to enabling every young person to experience the world beyond the classroom,
47

much of the research in this area is still finding that teaching staff are not engaging with the
organisations and training opportunities that offer support in the field of outdoor learning.

It may be that those organisations that deliver CPD in outdoor learning need to do more
work into how they market these opportunities. Each of the four organisations has
education programmes that are designed to support outdoor learning through the use of
resources and access to sites. Usually these educational resources and information on
upcoming events are accessible through dedicated online web pages. Success of these
programmes is largely dependent upon being able to provide specific information and access
to resources to particular groups such as teaching staff. Research by Wenham, Stephens and
Hardy (2003) into NGO marketing examined 32 environmental charities including the RSPB,
Woodland Trusts and Wildlife Trust. Their findings suggested that there was a need for non-
profit organisations to address their marketing strategies in order to maximise the support
they received and the number of people using their services.

This being said, it is wholly unfair to put the blame for a lack of teacher training completely
at the door of the organisations that offer this training. Many passionate individuals working
within such organisations feel an element of frustration at the difficulty involved with
engaging teaching staff. Funding limitations can make promoting events difficult for
environmental organisations, whilst pressures on teachers such as time limitations, other
teaching / training responsibilities and limited teaching cover are also factors. Research by
Hustler, et al. (2003) found that a third of teachers expressed a need for improvement in
supply cover to facilitate greater uptake of courses, with the lack of time and funding also
raise as concerns.

CPD uptake can also be highly dependent upon support from senior management within the
school. Those schools with a head teacher who is receptive towards outdoor learning may
be more likely to send staff on related training courses. A report produced by Natural
England (NECR097, 2012) noted that having someone who was passionate about outdoor
learning on the staff, combined with support from senior management, was an important
enabler.

48

4.5.2 The cost of transport prohibits our school from visiting outdoor sites
It is clear from the results that the majority of respondents found transport costs a barrier to
the effective delivery of outdoor learning. In a 2008 report, Ofsted noted that in law, schools
may not charge for any activities within the school day. However, they are able to ask for
voluntary contributions as long as they point out that the activity will not take place if
sufficient contributions are not received (Ofsted, 2008). This meant that learning outside the
classroom was rarely provided free and that schools saw this as a barrier because they were
reluctant to ask parents to contribute too much. Indeed an online survey of educational staff
by The Learning Escape in 2012 found that when asked about the biggest barriers to
Environmental Citizenship, lack of funding featured highly (The Learning Escape, 2012).
Research by Ross, et al. (2007) found that there was an overwhelming pattern in respondent
data on the importance of visit costs. They argued that these issues were often under-
represented in media and public discussions on school outdoor study, compared to issues
such as health and safety. Interestingly, health and safety was not considered a major
barrier to those respondents who participated in this survey.

Conversely, there is also evidence that shows that cost alone is not the only barrier to the
effective delivery of outdoor learning. As stated in Natural Englands NECR097 report of
2012, there are many examples of schools with restricted budgets delivering exemplary
outdoor learning and well-funded schools doing little (Natural England, 2012). During its first
five years, the Food for Life Partnership was funded by 16.9 million from the BIG Lottery
Fund. Through this funding, bursaries were offered to partnership school to support
transport costs for outdoor visits. Despite access to these free bursaries, difficulty was often
experienced in getting schools to take up and utilise the payments that were offered to
them. The same issue was reported by the DfES London Challenge Programme to the House
of Commons Education and Skills Committee inquiry into education outside the classroom.
The inquiry was told that despite full funding for off-site visits being provided by the FSC,
one third of schools did not take up the offer. The Committee noted that we do not believe
that cost alone is responsible for the decline of education outside the classroom (House of
Commons Education and Skills Committee, 2005).


49

4.6 Recommendations and further research
It is apparent from this research that many educational staff have concerns relating to
outdoor visit costs and knowledge of environmental organisations. In order to ensure that
the current trend of environmental disengagement does not continue, it is important to
develop and promote a coordinated signposting and support network for schools. Whilst
some excellent programmes are being developed in this area, it is important that there is a
coordinated approach to environmental education and outdoor learning at a national level.
Current opinion amongst some people in the industry is that there is a need for a more
coordinated message in terms of outdoor learning. At the time of this research, the Natural
England and Defra funded Natural Connections Demonstration Project has been launched on
the 5
th
July 2013 to support environmental education in schools. This project is also
complemented by the launch of an online resource hosted on FACEs Growing Schools
website. Conversely, there is currently much talk within the industry regarding the
governments plans for school and college performance tables from 2015 and the omission
of Edexcel levels 1 and 2 qualifications in environmental and land-based studies from the list
of recognised qualifications (BTEC website, accessed July 2013). This kind of uncoordinated
approach raises concerns for the future of vocational environmental learning and learner
progression through the education system.

Findings from this research will be reported to all of the organisations which featured in the
questionnaire. Findings will also be forwarded to The Natural Connections Demonstration
Project, the Council for Learning Outside the Classroom and FACE All of whom were
contacted prior to this research taking place.

There is scope to examine in more detail the key findings from this research and specifically
those concerns around visit costs and training. Additional work may be undertaken with
schools to examine in more depth those issues that have been raised in sections 4.5.1 and
4.5.2. The research should focus upon an examination of ways in which signposting to
funding and CPD can be improved. Such work should be carried out in close consultation and
with the offer of supporting The Natural Connections Demonstration Project.


50

Additional work may also set out to examine the marketing strategies of environmental
organisations. This research could be run in conjunction with an examination of teacher
awareness of specific environmental education programmes and the support that is on offer
to them.

4.7 Sources of error
Due to limitations within the questionnaire design, the accuracy of the open ended
responses in question 3.7 could not be verified.

Additionally, it is possible that there may have been issues with the reliability and validity of
the results taken from questions comprising from Likert scales. Psychometric response
scales are designed to obtain participants preferences or degree of agreement with a
statement or set of statements (Bertram 2011). Reliability of individual psychometric
responses may be influenced by participant bias, which may occur for a number of
reasons including Central tendency bias Participants may avoid extreme response
categories. Acquiescence bias Participants may agree with statements as presented in
order to please the experimenter [and] Social desirability biasPortray themselves in a
more socially favourable light rather than being honest (Bertram 2011).

Regarding questionnaire size, there is a general assumption that questionnaire length
impacts response rate and response quality. The longer a questionnaire continues,
respondents may become bored and this can decrease the effort and thought that
respondents put into their answers (Galesic, accessed 2013). Regarding this research, a total
of 103 questionnaires were started by respondents. Of those 103, 75 were completed (73%)
and 50 were not (27%). From these figures, it can be concluded that the questionnaire
design was a reasonable length for respondents.

Geographic spread may also be an issue when conducting questionnaires with specific
factors in certain areas skewing the results. As an example, more respondents from schools
in urban areas may have meant that teaching staff had less access to outdoor sites.
Examination of the postcode map indicates that in this case of this research, the geographic
spread was good.
51

5 Conclusion
In order to ensure that future generations are motivated to protect the natural world, it is
important that children develop positive and meaningful relationships with nature from an
early age. Recent research has indicated that children now spend less time playing in natural
spaces than previous generations, with this having potentially negative impacts upon a
young persons knowledge of the natural world. Educational establishments and their staff
play a key role in reversing this trend, whilst at the same time supporting the development
of their pupils environmental learning. In order to be able to do this, these staff must be
aware of and engaged with the various environmental organisations that provide access to
resources and outdoor sites for learning.

This research set out to examine what levels of awareness and engagement teaching staff
had of four environmental organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities. A
questionnaire survey comprising fifteen quantitative and qualitative questions relating to
this aim was completed by a total of 75 respondents.

Whilst approximately half of all respondents were aware of the organisations in question
and their learning opportunities, these figures were not reflected when examining
engagement levels; with large percentages admitting that they had never used an outdoor
site for learning. The majority of respondents stated that they would like to undertake more
outdoor learning but were concerned with transport costs and prior knowledge of the
supporting organisations. Several pieces of research support these findings and describe
how teachers expertise can affects the quality of outdoor learning, whilst concerns over
funding may restrict opportunities to develop links.

In order to ensure that the current trend of environmental disengagement does not
continue, it is important that organisations such as those is this research, as well as projects
including the Natural Connections Demonstration Project are promoted to schools.
Additionally, more research should be carried out with target schools to examine in more
detail thee concerns surrounding visit costs and training. By developing these opportunities
it is hoped that the extinction of the child in nature is averted and thus future custodians of
biodiversity are born.
52

References
Barker S, Slingsby D & Tilling S (2002) Teaching biology outside the classroom Is it heading for
extinction? A report on biology fieldwork in the 14-19 curriculum. Field Studies
Council/British Ecological Society, Shrewsbury . Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.field-studies-
council.org/media/268869/2002_biology_fieldwork._is_it_heading_for_extinction.pdf

Bertram, D (accessed 2011) Likert Scales...are the meaning of life. CPSC 681 Topic Report.
Accessed online on 28.6.13 at: http://poincare.matf.bg.ac.rs/~kristina//topic-dane-likert.pdf
Bird W (2007) Natural Thinking A report for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.
Investigating the links between the Natural Environment, Biodiversity and Mental Health.
Accessed online on 14.3.13 at: http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/naturalthinking_tcm9-
161856.pdf

BTEC website (accessed 2013) BTEC Firsts from 2012 and 2013 | BTEC and School
Performance Tables (England only) Accessed online on 9.7.13 at:
http://www.edexcel.com/quals/firsts2012/Pages/btec-school-performance-tables-
england.aspx

Chawla L (1999) Life Paths into Effective Environmental Action. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 1999.31:1 P15-26. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/ArchitecturePlanning/discover/centers/CYE/
Publications/Documents/chawla%20-
Life%20Paths%20Into%20Effective%20Environmental%20Action.pdf

Council for Learning Outside the Classroom (accessed 2103) Who are the Council for
Learning Outside the Classroom? Accessed online on 30.4.13 at:
http://www.lotc.org.uk/about/

Department for Education and skills [DfES] (2006), Learning Outside the Classroom
Manifesto. DfES Publications, Nottingham. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.thegrowingschoolsgarden.org.uk/downloads/lotc-manifesto.pdf

Dillon J, Morris M, ODonnell L, Reid A, Rickinson M, Scott W - National Foundation for
Education Research (2005) Engaging and Learning with the Outdoors The Final Report of
the Outdoor Classroom in a Rural Context Action Research Project. Accessed online on
13.3.13 at: http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/publications/OCR01/OCR01.pdf
England Marketing (2009) Report to Natural England on Childhood and Nature: A survey of
changing relationships with nature across generations. Accessed online on 14.3.13 at:
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/Childhood%20and%20Nature%20Survey_tcm6-
10515.pdf
53

Forestry Commission England website (accessed 2013) Learning in your Forest Accessed
online on 8.5.13 at: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-94VDC5
Galesic M (accessed 2013) Effects of questionnaire length on response rates: Review of
findings and guidelines for future research Accessed online on 28.6.13 at:
http://mrav.ffzg.hr/mirta/Galesic_handout_GOR2002.pdf
HM Government (2011) The Natural Choice: Securing the value of nature. TSO, London.
Accessed online on 13.3.13 at: http://www.official-
documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8082/8082.pdf
House of Commons Education and Skills Committee (2005) Education Outside the Classroom
TSO, London.

Hustler D, McNamara O, Jarvis J, Londra M & Campbell A Teachers Perceptions of
Continuing Professional Development Department for education and skills Research
Report RR429. DfES Publications, Nottingham. Accessed online on 28.6.13 at:
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/4754/1/16385164-58c6-4f97-b85b-2186b83ede8c.pdf

Indian Pediatrics (2009) News in Brief Nature Deficit Disorder. Indian Pediatrics, 2009:V46
P821. Accessed online on 14.3.13 at: http://indianpediatrics.net/sep2009/821.pdf

Kings College London (2011) Understanding the diverse benefits of learning in natural
environments. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/KCL-LINE-benefits_tcm6-31078.pdf

Kuo F & Taylor A (2001) A potential natural treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity
Disorder: Evidence from a national study. American Journal of Public Health, 2004.94:9.
Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.niu.edu/~carter/courses/526/articles/Kuo_and_Taylor.pdf

Learning and Teaching Scotland (2010) Curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning.
Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/images/cfeoutdoorlearningfinal_tcm4-596061.pdf

Louv R (2005) Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder,
Chapel Books, London.

Moss, S (2012) National Trust Natural childhood Accessed online on 14.3.13 at:
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheader=application%2Fp
df&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=MDT-
Type&blobheadername3=Content-
Type&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B+filename%3D327%252F285%252FNatural%2BChildhoo
d%2BBrochure%252C0.pdf&blobheadervalue2=abinary%3B+charset%3DUTF-
8&blobheadervalue3=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=
1349106781252&ssbinary=true
54


Natural England (2012) Natural England Commissioned Report NECR092 - Learning in the
Natural Environment: Review of social and economic benefits and barriers. Accessed online
on 28.6.13 at: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/1321181

Natural England (2012) Natural England Commissioned Report NECR097 Insights into
Learning Outside the Classroom in Natural Environments Accessed online on 28.6.13 at:
http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/1989824?category=129003

Ofsted (2004) Promoting and evaluating pupils spiritual, moral, social and cultural
development HMI 2125. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/promoting-and-evaluating-pupils-spiritual-moral-
social-and-cultural-development

Ofsted (2008) Learning Outside the classroom How far should you go? Accessed online on
13.3.13 at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/learning-outside-classroom

Palmer A, Suggate J, Bajd B & Tsaliki E (1998) Significant Influences on the Development of
Adults Environmental Awareness in the UK,Slovenia and Greece. Environmental Education
Research, 4:4, 429-444. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1350462980040407

Pretty J, Murray G, Peacock J, Hine R, Sellens M & South N (2005) A Countryside for Health
and Well-Being: The Physical and Mental Health Benefits of Green Exercise-Report for the
Countryside Recreation Network. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
https://www.sx.ac.uk/ces/occasionalpapers/Kerry/CRN%20Report%20FINAL%20Feb14.pdf

Rickinson M, Hunt A, Rogers J, Dillon J (2012) Natural England Commissioned Report
NECR097 - School Leader and Teacher Insights into Learning Outside the Classroom in
Natural Environments Natural England Accessed online on 30.4.13 at:
http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/1989824?category=129003

Rickinson M, Dillon J, Teamey K, Morris M, Choi M, Sanders D, Benefield P (2004) A review of
Research on Outdoor Learning National Foundation for Educational Research and Kings
College London Field Studies Council, Telford Accessed online on 18.6.13 at:
http://www.field-studies-
council.org/documents/general/NFER/A_review_of_research_on_outdoor_learning.pdf

Ross H, Higgins P, Nicol R (2007) Outdoor study of nature: teachers' motivations and contexts
Accessed online on 28.6.13 at: http://ser.stir.ac.uk/pdf/184.pdf

RSPB Website (2012) Education Policy across the UK Accessed online on 8.5.13 at:
http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/policy/education/index.aspx

RSPB Website (accessed 2013) Various webpages Accessed online on 8.5.13 at:
http://www.rspb.org.uk/

55

The Learning Escape (2012) The outdoor environment: How can our children learn to care
about their futures? Accessed online on 8.5.13 at:
http://www.tgescapes.co.uk/sites/default/files/the-outdoor-environment.pdf

Taylor, K (2007) Natural Inspiration Learning Outside the Classroom The Wildlife Trusts,
Newark. Accessed online on 28.5.13 at: http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/sites/wt-
main.live.drupal.precedenthost.co.uk/files/files/Natural%20Inspiration%20brochure.pdf
Thorp D (2009) Forestry Commission England Leafing the Classroom strategy for Forestry
Commission estate education and learning services Accessed online on 8.5.13 at:
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/LEAFINGTHECLASSROOM2.pdf/$file/LEAFINGTHECLASSROO
M2.pdf

Wenham K, Stephens D & Hardy R (2003) The marketing effectiveness of UK environmental
charity websites compared to best practice Department of Information and Science,
Loughborough University. Accessed online on 20.6.13 at:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/nvsm.214/pdf

White R, Martin K & Jeffes J (2012) The back on track alternative provision pilots -Final report
Department for Education Research Report DFE-RR250. Accessed online on 13.3.13 at:
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DFE-RR250.pdf

Wildlife Trust website (accessed 2013) Kids and School. Accessed online on 8.5.13 at:
http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/learning
Woodland Trust website (accessed 2013) Outdoor Learning. Accessed online on 8.5.13 at:
http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/reserves-wildlife/outdoor-learning












56












Appendices






What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?

This questionnaire forms a piece of personal research into environmental organisations and
the outdoor learning opportunities they offer to schools and teaching staff.
When answering the questions, please choose the option that you agree with most.
The questionnaire is composed of 15 short questions.
Please complete all questions. The questionnaire should take about 7 minutes to complete.
Completed questionnaires should be emailed to: willmarcombe@yahoo.co.uk or posted to
the address found on the final page

1. What knowledge do you have of UK environmental organisations? Would you say
you were..(Please select one box)

Extremely
knowledgeable
Moderately
knowledgeable
Somewhat
knowledgeable
Slightly
knowledgeable
Not at all
knowledgeable










2. Which organisation do each of these logos belong to? (Please add the name or
select dont know)

Organisation name Dont know




























Appendix 1 - Questionnaire






What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?




3. Have you heard about the following environmental organisations? If so how?
(Please select all boxes that apply)

Forestry
commission
RSPB The Wildlife
Trusts
The Woodland
Trust

Seen website









Social media











TV campaign /
programme













Newsletter /
Magazine













Stand at an
event












Word of mouth









Membership









Ive not heard
of them before













Other
(please specify)





















What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?












4. What knowledge do you have about environmental outdoor learning
opportunities in your area? Would you say you were.. (Please select one
box)

Extremely
knowledgeable
Moderately
knowledgeable
Somewhat
knowledgeable
Slightly
knowledgeable
Not at all
knowledgeable










5. Which of these environmental organisations provide access to outdoor sites
for environmental education? (Please select one box for each organisation)

Yes No Dont know

Forestry
Commission










RSPB







The Wildlife Trusts







The Woodland Trust












What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?



You are now nearly halfway through the questionnaire
6. Which of these environmental organisations produce free educational
resources? ( Please select one box for each organisation)

Yes No Dont know

Forestry
Commission










RSPB







The Wildlife Trusts







The Woodland Trust






7. Which of these environmental organisations have outdoor sites within a 1 hour
drive of your school? (Please select all boxes that apply)


Less than
5 minutes
away
Between 5
and 15
minutes
away
Between
16 and 30
minutes
away
Between
31 and 45
minutes
away
Between
46 and 60
minutes
away
Dont
know

Forestry
Commission



















RSPB













The Wildlife
Trusts



















The Woodland
Trust
























What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?



8. If any of the environmental organisations in question 7 have outdoor sites
within a one hour drive of your school, please write the name of the site/s
below (Please add the name or select I dont know the site name)


The site name/s are:




I dont know the site name/s


9. As a school, we have good links with this environmental organisation (consider use
of resources & websites, visiting speakers, fundraising activities etc. Do NOT
consider your use of outdoor sites as this is a separate question).

Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Dont know Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree

Forestry
Commission
















RSPB











The Wildlife
Trusts
















The Woodland
Trust


















Other
organisation
(please
specify)
































What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?










10. As a school, we make good use of this environmental organisations outdoor site/s.

Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Dont know Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree

Forestry
Commission
















RSPB











The Wildlife
Trusts
















The Woodland
Trust














Other
organisation
(please
specify)































What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?











11. Within your role, how often have you used any of these environmental
organisations free educational resources? (please select all boxes that apply)

At least
once a
year
At least
once a
term
At least
once a
month
Once Never Dont
know

Forestry
Commission



















RSPB













The Wildlife
Trusts



















The Woodland
Trust



















Other (please
specify)




























What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?






12. Within your role, how often have you visited any of these environmental
organisations outdoor sites? (please select all boxes that apply)

At least
once a
year
At least
once a
term
At least
once a
month
Once Never Dont
know

Forestry
Commission



















RSPB













The Wildlife
Trusts



















The Woodland
Trust



















Other (please
specify)





















13. I would like our school to undertake more outdoor learning..(please select one
box)

Strongly agree Somewhat
agree
Neutral / no
opinion
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly disagree
















What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?

14. Please read the following statements relating to outdoor learning and rate them
accordingly (please select one box for each statement)

Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral /
no opinion
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree

The cost of transport
prohibits our school from
visiting outdoor sites
















It is too much of a health
and safety risk taking the
pupils to an outdoor site
















The travel time to and
from the site is too long











The school has never
considered visiting an
outdoor site before
















Outdoor learning is not
relevant to what I teach
















It is easier for me to
deliver environmental
subjects in school
















I dont know enough
about environmental
organisations to use their
resources





















I am not involved in
organising visits












Other (please specify)






















What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?


School name:

School postcode:

That is the end of the questionnaire. As a thank you for participating, please turn over to be given the
chance to win an amazon.co.uk 20 gift voucher
15.What is your role in the school and which key stages do you work with? (Please
select all boxes that apply)

KS 1 KS 2 KS 3 KS 4 KS 5 Not
Applicable

Teacher
Subject (if applicable):





















Teaching Assistant













Year head













Deputy Head













Headteacher













Parent













Governor













Volunteer













Other (Please specify)


























What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?

You have now completed the questionnaire.
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. The answers that you have
provided will be used to help determine the current levels of engagement that
schools and teaching staff have with environmental organisations and the outdoor
learning opportunities that they offer.

As a thank you, I would like to give you the opportunity to win a 20 Amazon.co.uk gift
voucher. If you would like to be entered into the prize draw to win the voucher, please write
your email address below. All responses must be returned before Friday 31
st
May 2013 in
order to be entered into the draw. The draw will take place on Wednesday 5
th
June 2013
and the winner will be notified shortly afterwards.







Your email address will be kept strictly confidential and will not be used for any other purpose than for the prize draw. Your email address
will not be passed to any other party.


Please return the completed questionnaire to Will Marcombe
Email: willmarcombe@yahoo.co.uk
Postal: 10 Eirene Terrace, Pill, Bristol, BS20 0ET

Yes please - I would like to be entered into the prize draw to win a 20
Amazon gift vouchers.
My email address is:







What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?
Research proposal Will Marcombe
Background
In 2011, the UK Government published its Natural Environment White Paper The Natural Choice;
detailing its vision for the natural environment over the next fifty years, with practical guidelines on
how this vision may be delivered. Chapter four of the paper is titled Reconnecting people and
nature. It sets out four key reforms, one of which includes action to get more children learning
outdoors - Paragraphs 4.14 to 4.20 set out the Governments position on how this may happen.

4.14 - As well as having important health benefits, access to the natural environment can
also improve childrens learning. We want to see every child in England given the chance
to experience and learn about the natural environment.

4.17 - We welcome the work already done by local schools and environmental
organisations. In 2010, 1.2 million children participated in environmental education
activities at outdoor learning sites managed by Natural England, the RSPB, The Wildlife
Trusts, the National Trust and the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust. We also support the many
other activities run for schools, including the annual Big Schools Birdwatch, in which
around 100,000 children discover wildlife in their own school grounds.

4.18 - Natural Englands support for the Natural Connections initiative will match schools
with a range of environmental charities that can provide sites to visit. The aim is to
deliver a better co-ordinated local service to schools and teachers, to enable much
greater numbers of schoolchildren to experience the benefits of learning in the natural
environment.

Research
This research project will be jointly undertaken as part of my current role with Soil Association and
my MSc in Ecology. It will examine the connections that schools currently have with the natural
world, following the release of the White Paper. It will aim to identify the current levels of
awareness and engagement that educational staff have with environmental organisations and
outdoor learning opportunities.
Project title: What awareness do teaching staff have of environmental organisations and their
outdoor learning opportunities?

Aim - Identify what awareness teaching staff have of environmental organisations that
support outdoor learning

Aim - Identify what awareness teaching staff have of outdoor learning opportunities in
their areas

Aim - Identify the levels of engagement that teaching staff have with outdoor learning and
environmental organisations

Appendix 2 Research Proposal






What levels of awareness and engagement do teaching staff have with environmental
organisations and their outdoor learning opportunities?

Methodology
Teaching staff are being contacted and asked to complete a questionnaire relating to the research.
Responses will be collated to determine the current levels of awareness and engagement that
educational staff have with environmental organisations and outdoor learning opportunities.
The questionnaire will be broadly based upon environmental organisations and the learning
opportunities that they offer. Four environmental organisations have been identified - All of which
support the Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto, launched by the Secretary of State for
Education and Skills on 28 November 2006. They are: The Woodland Trust, The RSPB, The Wildlife
Trusts and The Forestry Commission. These organisations have been chosen as they all have active
outdoor learning programmes, educational resources and public access sites.
An online survey has been produced and will be live until the end of May 2013. It can be accessed at:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/willmarcombe

About me
My name is Will Marcombe and I am the Food for Life Partnerships Farm Links Education Officer at
the Soil Association in Bristol. I have worked in the environmental sector since completing my BSc in
Wildlife Management in 2005 as a youth worker and volunteer coordinator for BTCV and lecturer in
Countryside Management at Hartpury College. I have a Post Graduate Certificate in Education;
Qualified Teacher status through the Institute for Learning; and am currently studying a part-time
MSc in Ecology and Management of the Natural Environment at the University of Bristol.

Please feel free to circulate this document to anyone who you think may be interested.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your time and am more than happy
to discuss this project further.


Sources of reference: HM Government (2011) The Natural choice Securing the value of nature









Appendix 3
Glossary of acronyms
ADHD Attention Deficit Hypersensitivity Disorder
BTEC Business and Technology Education Council
CLOtC Council for Learning Outside the Classroom
CPD Continuing Professional Development
DfES Department for Education and Skills
FACE Farming and Countryside Education
FSC Field Studies Council
LOtC Learning Outside the Classroom
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
Ofsted Office for Standards in Education, Childrens Services and Skills