Challenge 4: how do you solve a problem like the curriculum?
The curriculum gets people excited. In the starter discussions, the need to focus on the curriculum was raised by many.
The weight given to outdoor learning in the curriculum varies from nation to nation:
In Wales the Foundation Phase has an expectation that 50% of the taught day should be outside and that children should be playing outside.
The Curriculum for Excellence in Scotland carries an explicit expectation for learning outside and the Learning for Sustainability report of the One Planet Schools group recommends (amongst other things) that all pupils should have regular access to outdoor learning and regular contact with nature. These recommendations were accepted by the Scottish parliament last March and are now beginning to be actioned by a series of Education Scotland conversations. This is backed up through GTCS accreditation of outdoor learning modules provided by LTL and Grounds for Learning.
The new national curriculum in England has now been published, with the use of the local environment or outdoor spaces required by science, geography and physical education (primary) whilst the secondary curriculum requires fieldwork in geography and outdoor or adventure training in physical education. By asking simply that “there must be more outdoor learning within the delivery of the national curriculum”, there is a danger that the government will respond “great idea, but it’s up to teachers.” Some have suggested the ask needs to be around policy/frameworks rather than practice/implementation.
Possible things to focus on in this discussion:
1. What the challenges and/or potential levers could be that lead to outdoor learning being a core component of the national curriculum.
2. This might be assessment, teacher confidence (through Initial Teacher Training and Continuous Professional Development), school leadership, costs and opportunities.
If we were to have a mission statement for what we want to happen this could fit the bill –
> “Government will promote the importance of embedding learning in the natural environment into recruitment, line management, appraisal, competency and assessment processes through senior leadership in schools, and Academy sponsors.”
What do you think?
Amanda Elmes Wed 28 May 2014 3:55PM
We have discussed this at the UK National Park educators group and there are interesting variations across the regions.
In Scotland, the entitlement to regular, frequent OL has been written in to the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence, which is great, but has been backed up by there being an OL Development worker within Education Scotland as well as a Senior Education Officer with responsibility for seeing that OL is used across all curricular areas. The creation of local education authority OL strategy groups to coordinate , gather and share examples of good practice and organise OL CPD has helped as has having a National Network for OL and a Scottish government appointed National Implementation Group for OL, national parks and other environment agencies sit on this group. Schools are increasingly inspected on the OL work they do, this is a key driver to it being on their improvement plans and embedded within the school.
In England Outdoor learning is now appearing in non-statuary guidance and this should be encouraged. However the entitlement to learning outdoors should be firmly embedded into the OFSTED framework with schools being unable to achieve outstanding without clear evidence of how they use such opportunities to raise standards and attainment.
Ultimately it is the exam boards who influence what teachers teach – schools need to get A – Cs – they can only do this by teaching the syllabus. So the link is between content and opportunities for OL – ITT / teacher CPD to help them see the way learning outdoors adds value to core content is essential to achieve this.
Suzanne · Fri 11 Apr 2014 11:32AM
As you know, the RSPB warmly welcomes the opportunity to consider the curriculum through this process and TWN’s national policy priorities. However, I think it is crucial that I make clear that we do not mean that in terms of targeting specific content to National Curriculum programmes of learning, or entitlements to LOtC, for instance.
Rather, this seems more appropriate to return to the recommendations of the Coalition’s own expert panel for the curriculum review (edited highlights and link to full document attached). Given TWN’s ambition and significant levels of support, it feels that an education policy ask and debate should at the level of ‘what schools are for’ – or, as the expert panel describe it ‘Affirming system-wide educational aspirations for school curricula’.
To the best of my knowledge, the current reforms to the National Curriculum did not first consult widely on the ultimate purpose for schooling. I understand that was different in Scotland with the development of the Curriculum for Excellence, where the purpose was consulted and agreed, prior to subsequently developing the content (including both knowledge and experiences). Given that TWN is openly not just about targeting the education system (rightly, in my eyes), then this approach would also be useful in opening up the debate and public discussion around the role, if any, of schools in connecting children with nature. And – contentiously – if schools are not deemed to need to play a key role, where then does that then turn the focus of responsibility and action?...
I recently spoke with a colleague who worked in the Welsh Government, implementing its core sustainability duty through education for sustainable development and global citizenship (ESDGC). They confirmed that through having that high-level requirement, ESDGC had filtered down through supplementary education policies – into Estyn’s school inspection brief, syllabi and curricula, guidance for school governors, and professional standards for teachers.
While the impact of all those aspects in Wales still depends on them actually being fully implemented, it strongly suggested to me that by achieving an over-arching statement of core intent for schools relating to children and nature would lead to numerous consequences across education policy. In other words, it would necessitate complementary action in policy areas already under consideration by TWN – school grounds and buildings, teacher training (ITT and CPD), Ofsted criteria etc – as well as potentially in future National Curriculum programmes of study.
What might this mean in practical terms? A few weeks ago, I heard Joan Wally MP – chair of the Environmental Audit Committee – present the keynote speech at SEEd’s annual policy and evidence forum. While proposing that a great deal of responsibility for delivering ‘learning for sustainability’ fell at the feet of the attendees (NGOs, schools, universities, individual practitioners...), she also recognised that there was one thing Government could do to – add a ‘sustainability duty’ for all schools to the Education Act.
As you may know, the RSPB has been exploring and developing its thinking about this type of amendment to legislation for the last year or so, and is beginning to discuss it externally. In particular, we are looking at Section 78 of the Education Act (2002), which defines the requirements in England for ‘a balanced and broadly based curriculum’ (in the sense of all that schools contribute to childhood). Two further legislative points worth noting are that: the Education Act (section 79) also places a ‘duty to implement’ these requirements in every maintained school on the Secretary of State, local education authorities, and the governing body and head teacher; and that schools with academy status must also satisfy these same requirements (Section 6(a), Academies Act, 2010).
The precise wording of any amendment would ultimately fall on qualified legislative drafters. However, the expert panel offered some indication of what may required in terms of ‘environmental stewardship’. Building on that, and taking into consideration the wider wellbeing aspects of children’s connection to nature, we are currently working with draft amendment text for an additional clause (‘c’) to section 78 along the lines of: ‘... instills an ethos and ability to actively care for oneself, others and the natural environment, now and in the future’.
We will be continuing to progress our plans in this area over coming months, and will be happy to share more as we have it.
I hope that is a helpful contribution to the discussion.