Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning

Abstract

Outdoor learning is a promising practice demonstrated to enhance health, wellbeing and academic achievement in students. Despite related benefits, there are very few programs and schools that systematically implement outdoor learning within the Canadian public education system. There is a need to examine how to scale outdoor learning using multi-level participation to support equitable access for students. This methods paper provides insight into how participatory engagement can be utilized throughout the research process to enhance research impacts related to increasing the uptake of outdoor learning. Importantly, this work focuses on incorporating stakeholder perspectives at multiple levels of influence situated within the outdoor learning context, including children, parents, educators, policy-makers and community-based organizations. Inclusion of varying perspectives in the study was essential to understanding the complexity of the issues that impact outdoor learning within the Canadian public education context. We outline how consultation with participants informed the design of subsequent stages of research, and the development of knowledge mobilization strategies, allowing for the co-creation of research and knowledge sharing methods. This participatory approach provides insight into how multiple stakeholder perspectives can be meaningfully incorporated into research, as well as how to tailor knowledge mobilization to distinct stakeholder groups, to strengthen insight and amplify research outcomes. This work is relevant to researchers exploring new ways to engage multiple levels of stakeholders within implementation research.

Keywords

outdoor learning participatory research knowledge mobilization multi-method research co-production

Introduction

Outdoor learning offers many benefits to students, teachers, and for environmental conservation, including improving student wellbeing, classroom dynamics, and nature-connectedness leading to pro-conservation behaviours (Becker et al., 2017; Bellefeuille, et al., 2026, forthcoming; Donison & Halsall, 2023; Kweon et al., 2017; Mann et al., 2022; Miller et al., 2021; Zelenski et al., 2015). However, institutional and process-based barriers limit the implementation of outdoor learning at scale. Participatory approaches can be useful to support scaling of innovations to facilitate engagement from key stakeholders and co-production of systems change (Rütten et al., 2019; Shelton & Brownson, 2024).

This paper provides a detailed description of the iterative participatory approach taken to engage diverse perspectives within a study designed to support increased scaling and uptake of outdoor learning within the Canadian public education system. In this study, key stakeholders were involved from multiple levels, including students, families, educators, administrators/policy-makers and community-based organizations. Participants were consulted at numerous stages using a range of strategies to ensure meaningful involvement. We begin with a review of research related to the benefits of outdoor learning in relation to youth, educators and equity-deserving groups, current issues related to inequitable access, implementation challenges, and participatory approaches with particular emphasis on considerations for the involvement of young children. We integrate some findings gained through engagement of stakeholders and participants to illustrate the relevance of these participatory approaches.

Benefits of Outdoor Learning for Students and Educators

Outdoor learning is an experiential educational practice that takes place primarily outside (Priest, 1986). Outdoor learning incorporates varying frameworks, perspectives, and pedagogical approaches such as student-led, land- and place-based education (Lee et al., 2022; Zeni et al., 2025). Play and learning, especially for young children, are described as intricately linked and interwoven within this approach (Lee et al., 2022). In our study, we focused on outdoor learning in Canadian elementary schools, which includes Kindergarten to grade eight youth, placing a greater emphasis on play-based learning that often takes place on school grounds or in nearby nature.

According to Article 31 of the Convention for the Rights of the Child, children have the right to engage in leisure, recreational activity and play, and all children deserve equal access to these opportunities (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child [UNCRC], 1989). Outdoor learning can serve to uphold these basic rights. Outdoor learning has been found to improve student wellbeing, academic performance, social development, physical health and identity development (Becker et al., 2017; Bellefeuille, et al., 2026, forthcoming; Kweon et al., 2017; Mann et al., 2022; Miller et al., 2021). Children who participate in outdoor learning experience increased social and self-awareness, positive peer relationships, creative engagement, confidence building, and empathy for those around them (Boileau & Dabaja, 2020; Kiviranta et al., 2024; Molyneux & Oberle, 2022). These behavioural changes have been shown to improve classroom dynamics, reduce behavioural management concerns and relieve educator stress (Bellefeuille, et al., 2026, forthcoming; Zeni et al., 2023). Additional studies suggest that outdoor learning may serve to alleviate other difficulties educators are facing such as heavy workloads, mental distress and a lack of support while improving overall classroom functioning and enhancing the quality of education that children receive (Barker et al., 2024; Creagh et al., 2025; Hine, 2022; Jucker, 2022; Marchant et al., 2024; Meijer, 2023; Sokal et al., 2020; Zeni & Brussoni, 2026). Moreover, outdoor learning has been linked with nature connectedness, leading to pro-environmental and pro-nature conservation behaviours (Barragan-Jason et al., 2022; Pirchio et al., 2021; Wood et al., 2025).

Outdoor learning represents an important opportunity for students from equity-deserving groups to experience the benefits of time spent outdoors and in nature. For example, outdoor learning and nature exposure may offer additional benefits for children who have difficulties learning within a traditional classroom approach. Children with learning and neuro-developmental disabilities, such as Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and dyslexia, can benefit from time in the outdoors (Faber Taylor et al., 2001; Faber Taylor & Kuo, 2009). Further, students who are experiencing mental health issues exhibit improved symptoms following time in the outdoors (Chawla et al., 2014; Mutz & Muller, 2016; Swank, 2024). Despite the potential benefits of outdoor learning, these opportunities are usually offered through private programming (see Andrew Fleck Children’s Services, 2026) and thus often not accessible for many students, particularly those in low-income and racialized communities who have more limited access to quality green spaces (Pinault et al., 2021; Rigolon, 2016).

Challenges Related the Scaling and Implementation of Outdoor Learning

The implementation of outdoor learning within schools can be challenging because of a variety of systemic and individual factors. These include pressures related to rigid schedules; curriculum and instruction; risk management policy; as well as a lack of resources, administrative support, infrastructure; and educator training and buy-in (Baró et al., 2021; Oberle et al., 2021; Patchen et al., 2024; Van Velzen & Helbich, 2023). A common theme expressed by educators is that they lack confidence in their ability to connect outdoor learning to curriculum targets and to effectively manage a class in the outdoors (Van Dijk-Wesselius et al., 2020). Teachers also struggle due to insufficient institutional supports such as professional development, procedures, policies and standards for outdoor learning practices (Asfeldt et al., 2022; Zeni et al., 2024).

There continue to be many policy-related barriers that impact the implementation of outdoor learning (Oberle et al., 2021; Schenetti et al., 2023; Tremblay et al., 2015). There is a lack of administrator buy-in to support outdoor learning, which contributes to difficulties with classroom management and educator strain, as well as ineffectual, under-resourced and under-funded outdoor learning programs (Schenetti et al., 2023). Currently, there is a considerable range in the extent to which play-based and outdoor pedagogy is incorporated into provincial curriculum in Canada (McCuaig & Bertrand, 2019). For example, while the Ontario curriculum only includes recommendations to learning in the outdoors at the kindergarten level (Ontario, 2016), in British Columbia, outdoor learning is encouraged and incorporated across all grade levels, with a particular focus on environmental learning and place-based learning in the early years (British Columbia Ministry of Education and Child Care, 2019, 2024, 2025; Zeni et al., 2023). The incorporation of Indigenous education within the B.C. curriculum has been critical in advancing practice around land-based approaches and outdoor learning in general (Government of British Columbia, 2026).

The Value of Applying Participatory Research Approaches

Participatory research is known to enhance the quality and credibility of findings (Zeldin et al., 2012) as well as to improve the likelihood of practice-related impact (Patton, 2008). It involves “sharing decision-making to ensure research is relevant and translational” (Vaughn & Jacquez, 2020, p. 2) through collaboration with participants and other individuals with relevant lived experience to support inclusion of their perspective (Kemmis et al., 2014; McIntyre, 2008). Building on an established body of participatory methods, Feekery (2024) identified core components of participatory research as being cyclical, collaborative, context-specific, combining theory and practice, critically reflective, change-focused and conversation driven, coined ‘the 7 Cs’. Researchers have highlighted the importance of participatory and co-production strategies within implementation research (Rütten et al., 2019; Shelton & Brownson, 2024) and recommend that health equity-focused implementation science strategies be community-driven, build on existing contextual strengths, place a focus on policy and take a responsive and adaptive approach (Rütten et al., 2019; Shelton & Brownson, 2024). Participatory research is intended to be dynamic and adaptable to the needs of the population (Malloy et al., 2024; McIntyre, 2008) and findings can be tailored to the specific group of interest so that relevant information can be shared and used to inform implementation strategies (Laycock et al., 2016; Phipps et al., 2016).

When considering outdoor learning, participatory approaches can enhance research findings by incorporating perspectives from educators, administrators, parents and students, who are implicated in and impacted by the implementation of outdoor learning. Participatory engagement can facilitate institutional and policy change by combining evidence and tailored knowledge mobilization targeted towards decision-makers. In particular, it is critical to involve children in research on issues that directly impact them (Clark, 2010; Olsen, 2025) as they offer unique ideas about the topics that affect them and can provide valuable, novel insight to enhance research findings (Bailey et al., 2024). The UNCRC advocates for increased child participation, and Article 12 stipulates that children’s voices should be included to inform matters that impact them (UNCRC, 1989). Despite the importance of including student perspectives to evaluate research impacts in education (Wilhelm et al., 2021) and outdoor learning (Mann et al., 2022; Marchant et al., 2019; Moore et al., 2021), there has been limited research that involves them as partners in the research process (Marchant et al., 2019; Merewether, 2015). There are examples of student inclusion in the outdoor learning literature, although few meaningfully engage students (see for example Ghafouri, 2014; Green, 2012; Marchant et al., 2019; Merewether, 2015; Sahrakhiz et al., 2017). In addition, there is a need for child-centered, in-depth exploration of the meaning and impact associated with outdoor learning (Norwood et al., 2019).

Purpose

The objective of this research was to identify factors that influence implementation of outdoor learning and capture lessons learned to support increased access. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, many educators were moving their classes outdoors and adopting creative approaches to teaching in open-air environments (Fanel, 2020; Howells, 2020; Mahoney, 2020; Take Me Outside, 2020). Taking advantage of this unique moment in time, this research captured student and educator experiences of outdoor learning during the pandemic. Further, we examined how educators were adapting their learning content to work within their existing school context and developing new ways to integrate outdoor learning within traditional school settings. We applied a comprehensive and iterative participatory approach to highlight the experiences of educators, policy-makers, students and their families who were involved with outdoor learning within the Canadian public education context.

Methods

This research involved multiple stages and participant groups (see Figure 1) including: 1) an initial co-design phase that involved collaborators and outdoor learning champions, 2) an exploratory data collection with students, their families and educators, 3) an interim knowledge mobilization phase that included participants and broader audiences, 3) a second data collection focusing on geographical data, and 4) an environmental scan examining outdoor learning policy issues. Input from key stakeholder groups helped inform each stage of the project, including identification of priority evidence gaps, barriers, enablers, and strategies for improvement. The outcome and use of information provided by the involved parties was then reported back in ways that suited the needs of each stakeholder group.

Figure 1.

Timeline of the outdoor learning study and participatory stages

Initial Co-Design With Partners and Outdoor Learning Champions

The first stage of the project was focused on developing the research plan alongside stakeholders. This occurred in the winter and spring of 2021. The initial funding proposal was developed in collaboration with co-applicants (TH, KM, RB, MZ) and one collaborator from a school board located in Ontario. After the funding was awarded, the proposal was presented to outdoor learning champions working across our partner school board to gain their insight into the methodology and timeline.

Outdoor learning champions were defined as educators within the school board who were committed to advocating and leading outdoor learning initiatives related to curriculum, training and Indigenous education. Seventeen outdoor learning champions participated in a workshop that comprised a presentation describing the study partners, objectives, design, and initial plans for data collection. The workshop included a discussion and follow-up survey so that participants could provide feedback on the initial project plan. Participants offered recommendations related to timelines that would be beneficial for data collection, recruitment strategies, knowledge mobilization plans, and they provided feedback on the draft interview guide questions.

Recruitment Strategies and Partnerships

The first formal data collection involved virtual interviews conducted with educators and K-8 students with a parent/caregiver. Recruitment was initially conducted within one public school board through social media channels and the school board website. Participants were invited to share recruitment materials with their networks to increase participation through snowball sampling to further recruit participants (Patton, 2002). To increase participant numbers, the recruitment campaign was later expanded to a national population supported by research partners (Outdoor Play Canada, Take Me Outside Canada, Zeni) to capture broader perspectives within K-8 public schools across Canada. This recruitment was implemented through social media channels, blogs, websites and newsletters.

First Data Collection: Exploring Experiences of Educators, Students and Parents From Across Canada

Semi-structured interviews were facilitated over Zoom from December 2021-2022. The interview guides were tailored to the participant subgroup (i.e. educator or child) to capture experiences with outdoor learning. Staff interviews ranged from 21 to 78 minutes, averaging 42 minutes. Child interviews ranged from 23 to 50 minutes, averaged 34 minutes, including parents and, occasionally, siblings. Informed written and verbal consent was received from teachers and parents before data collection. Verbal agreement was attained from children before the interview. This study protocol has been approved by Carleton University’s Research Ethics Board (CUREB# 116021).

Students and Parent Interviews

Parents responded to demographics surveys about their family and children. Seven students (N = 7, 6 boys, 1 girl) participated in the interviews (M = 6.4 years, range = 4-7 years). One parent identified their child as having an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis and another an ADHD diagnosis. Five mothers participated in the interviews, one identifying as a single parent, three were middle class and two upper-middle class. Parents were asked to characterize outdoor activity opportunities for their child within their home-life (see Appendix A).

Student interviews centered on personal experiences with outdoor learning; perceptions of benefits gained from outdoor learning; and suggestions for implementing outdoor learning programs. We asked students about what subjects they learned about outside, how learning outside is different than in a classroom, and what things they like and dislike about both outdoor learning and classroom learning. Five questions were included in the student interview, with one additional question used with younger participants (Kindergarten through grade four students) to support more concrete reflection on outdoor experiences (see Appendix B). Engagement of the younger students was facilitated using a YouTube video recording of the children’s book, ‘When Sophie Gets Angry- Really, Really Angry’ by Molly Bang, which follows a child’s first-person experience in nature. The storytelling aspect of the interview was employed to encourage student reflection and to enrich their descriptions of outdoor experiences (see Davis, 2014; Green, 2004; Lawrence & Paige, 2016; Phillips, 2013).

These methods were intended to support a child-centered approach that provided opportunities for the children to share their experiences and perspectives of the outdoors despite the constraints of the online interview. The semi-structured interview had a set of pre-determined questions; however, it was flexible and provided space for the children to take the conversation in a direction that was meaningful for them. For example, Ranger, aged 7, brought out his rock and stick collection to show the interviewer. This increased his enthusiasm and willingness to discuss his learning experiences, as well as the depth and meaning derived through the analysis. Parents were asked to provide support during the interviews to encourage the children to speak to, and feel more comfortable with, the interviewers.

The children’s interviews in our study provided an important contribution to our overall understanding of the experiences they had during outdoor learning and the importance of outdoor learning for young children. It helped provide insight into what children enjoy about outdoor learning and validated the benefits of outdoor learning for children’s wellbeing (see Bellefeuille, et al., 2026, forthcoming; Donison & Halsall, 2023).

Educator Interviews

A total of 28 staff participants from across Canada were interviewed. All staff were educators, but some held other positions simultaneously, such as being a Principal, Vice Principal or Environmental & Land-Based Learning Lead. Many of the educators simultaneously taught multiple grades from Early Childhood Education (ECE) through to grade eight (Table 1).

Table 1.

Demographics of the Educators Who Participated in Interviews

Educator characteristics	n	%
Geographical basis
Ontario	17	61
British Columbia	8	28.5
Alberta	2	7
Manitoba	1	3.5
Gender
Female	25	89
Male	3	11
Ethnicity
White North American	15	53.5
White European	5	18
Métis	1	3.5
East Asian	1	3.5
Iranian	1	3.5
Grade level taught
ECE/Kindergarten	18	64
1 to 8	11	39
Role
Principal	2	7
Vice Principal	1	3.5
Educator	23	82
Environmental & Land-Based Learning Lead	1	3.5

The interview focused on educators’ perceptions about outdoor learning, their experiences with implementing outdoor learning, and the supports they have received to advance their outdoor learning practice (see Appendix C). Educators described the benefits they perceived related to outdoor learning, and they provided insight into factors that influenced their practice (see themes in Table 2). They were able to discuss what challenges they thought contributed most to difficulties in outdoor learning implementation. Common inequities discussed were those due to resource availability and green space access. Participants discussed the benefits they had witnessed related to outdoor learning, including benefits to the children, to the school climate and to themselves. Although not a part of the original data collection plan, some educators shared photos of outdoor learning spaces and activities to better depict how outdoor learning functions within the contexts of the school and the classroom (see Appendix D).

Table 2.

Recommendations of Priority Findings and the Related Target Audience Identified by Participants During the 2023 Take Me Outside Workshop

Audience	Outdoor learning themes	Recommendations for each target audience offered by conference participants
Policy-makers	Current practices	• Enrich funding for teaching support, donations and volunteers
		• Be open to flexible policies and support learning outside of the indoor classroom to help create opportunities for access to green space and learning
		• Create policy to support outdoor learning and link curriculum
		• Incorporate knowledge about the socio-emotional and physical benefits of outdoor and risky play into policy
	Benefits	• Support educators with taking risks and be open to different ways of reaching curricular targets and assessing students so that students can benefit
	Challenges	• Need to understand that learning can occur in many ways, and that classroom and time management issues can be improved
	Challenges	• Professional development is needed for all levels of stakeholder
	Strategies to support	• Allocate funding for PD for clothing, tools, and support
	Strategies to support	• Incorporate land-based language and learning into policy
	Equity	• Provide more funding opportunities and clear policy guides to take the burden off parents and ensure equal opportunity for schools and students
	Equity	• Create partnerships to support land-based learning, access to outdoor space and promote resource sharing
School Administrators	Current practices	• Need to engage with and understand the use of nature and the outdoors in education to support educator’s outdoor practices
	Benefits	• Recognizing that students learn more outside, see outdoor learning as play and are more engaged with their learning and the surrounding world
	Benefits	• Create solutions to issues to allow more students to access outdoor learning and allocate professional development time for educators
	Challenges	• Communicate about the need for: flexible schedules, collaboration, team building, educator fear of failure and supporting and growing as educators
	Strategies to support	• Leverage outdoor classes, time and weather for fun outdoor activities
	Strategies to support	• Students will spread the word by sharing experiences with their families
	Equity	• Leverage affordable and lost gear to build school closets
Educators	Current practices	• Collaboration, sharing of resources and professional development opportunities provide great support for outdoor learning and activities
	Benefits	• Can address inequities by leveling the playing field and reaching challenged students, improves wellbeing and stress levels
	Benefits	• Creates student led learning and discovery when learning follows the kids’ interests
	Challenges	• Encourage teachers to invest time, work and collaborate with other educators, families and community members to support outdoor learning
	Challenges	• Communicate the need for support with classroom and time management issues to administrators so that solutions can be found
	Strategies to support	• Shifting mindsets to think of outdoor learning as an opportunity rather than extra work
	Strategies to support	• Advocating for support to prevent stress and strain
	Equity	• Bring together parents, educators and community members to support and volunteer in the outdoors
Researchers	Current practices	• Great need for evidence showcasing benefits of risky play to convince policy-makers
	Current practices	• Observational methods can enhance understanding
	Benefits	• Informing stakeholders about the benefits of outdoor learning by disseminating knowledge informed by research
	Challenges	• Examine how to support urban teachers
	Strategies to support	• Sharing publications on learning opportunities where people are engaged and interested
	Equity	• Data collection/survey to see what people need, what they struggle to support financially within outdoor learning
Other (not-for-profit, advocacy…)	Current practices	• Need understanding, responsibility and engagement from parents and community, especially to prepare for weather challenges
	Current practices	• Partnerships can be sources of education for families and advocates for green space development
	Benefits	• Ensuring there are dedicated spaces for outdoor learning
	Challenges	• Communications capturing outdoor learning successes
	Strategies to support	• Engage parents and families through advisory boards, newsletters, emails, pictures and phones for support and gear
	Equity	• Provide access to gear so students can learn in all types of weather

Student, Parent and Educator Interview Analysis

The interviews were transcribed and coded using a reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2014, 2022) in QSR NVivo. The interviewer (LD) completed the first full round of inductive coding. The codes were reviewed and refined by TH. Both coders collaborated to revise the final set of themes and sub-themes (see summary findings in Table 2).

Multi-Level Interim Knowledge Mobilization

The results from the student, parent and educator interviews were combined and used to provide feedback and capture recommendations to inform the design of future stages of the project including knowledge mobilization.

Knowledge Mobilization With Research Participants

To share findings with parents and educators, an email containing an infographic was sent to each adult participant that included a summary of the results. The infographic summarized major themes identified during the interviews, including benefits of outdoor learning; challenges and supports for outdoor learning; pedagogical approaches to outdoor learning; equity and accessibility; and pandemic influences (Figure 2). The infographic contained a link to more detailed documentation describing the main themes of the interviews that incorporated educator and child quotes. Participants were invited to provide their input, via Qualtrics survey, as to the best way to communicate the detailed findings to important target audiences that should receive the information.

Figure 2.

Infographic developed to share back findings to participants and capture feedback regarding knowledge dissemination

To communicate the results of the child and parent interviews back to students, a short, animated video was created in collaboration with the Students Commission of Canada (see Students Commission of Canada, 2024; Figure 3). The YouTube link was shared with parents in the early spring of 2024. The video script was informed by direct quotes from the children’s interviews and was designed to communicate the findings in an easily digestible and engaging way. It showcased the importance of the children’s insights and highlighted some of the common themes that were identified through the analysis of the data. The video was released on YouTube and available for public viewing, providing opportunities for others working in the field to hear directly from the children and learn about their perspectives and experiences in relation to outdoor learning.

Figure 3.

Screenshot of the animated video designed to share the findings with children, available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ew1gxXttSY&t=3s

Take Me Outside

In May of 2023, co-authors (LD, TH) participated in the Take Me Outside (TMO) Conference to share our findings and to solicit feedback regarding how to utilize the findings to enhance outdoor learning practice. The TMO mandate is to facilitate and encourage the implementation of outdoor learning programs in schools across North America. Its mission is achieved by interacting with learners and educators, specifically targeting early childhood through secondary education, to help schools start outdoor education initiatives as regular teaching practices (see Take Me Outside, 2013). The TMO conference engages educators and other key stakeholders from across Canada in hands-on experiences and discourse.

LD and TH ran a workshop where conference participants were provided with a description of the main findings from students and educators that described: 1) current outdoor learning practices, 2) strategies that support outdoor learning, 3) challenges in outdoor learning, 4) equity issues, 5) and benefits of outdoor learning (see Table 2). Audience members were invited to choose the topic of greatest interest from among the main findings and five focus groups were created to discuss each topic.

Within the focus groups, participants read representative quotes from their chosen theme and were then asked to write suggestions regarding what information is the most important to share, as well as the best way to share that information with target audiences (i.e.: policy-makers, principals, educators, researchers, administrative staff). See Table 2 for a summary of the participant discussions.

Second Data Collection: Geographical Survey and Analysis

To acquire insight into the environmental characteristics surrounding schools of the educators who participated in the project, geographical data was collected using Google Earth images in ArcGIS pro v.3,2 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA, USA) to capture proportions of school grounds with different features, including trees, grass, impervious surfaces and roads. We created 200m buffers around each school and drew polygons around each type of feature on the school grounds or in areas within the buffer considered accessible to students (e.g., adjacent fields). Other parameters, such as school proximity to supportive infrastructure, like parks and other amenities, and primary roadways were also identified. Geographical data provided measures of accessibility to green space, environmental noise and non-natural recreational structures. This was critical because the environment around schools impacted outdoor learning in different ways, influenced student experiences, and helped us better understand the educators’ stories and context around their schools.

These findings will be used to substantiate advocacy with respect to schoolyard greening initiatives and policy and the need for equitable access to green spaces near school grounds. Quantitative evidence is crucial to increase buy-in and support when addressing decision-makers with the goal of informing policy. This data will be used to support participant voice and substantiate the needs highlighted by educators to scale outdoor learning.

Third Data Collection: Exploring Policy-Maker Perspectives on Outdoor Learning via Environmental Scan

Based on the findings from the interviews with educators, students and families; the feedback from the TMO participants; research and organizational partner input; and recent research focused on implementation of outdoor learning (see Ayotte-Beaudet et al., 2024; Burriss & Burriss, 2011; Mitra, 2018; Oberle et al., 2021; Patchen, 2024; Van Dijk-Wesselius, 2020), we developed an environmental scan to examine new policy directions to support scaling of outdoor learning. Environmental scans are useful to explore trends and emerging research to support decision-making in practice or policy (Choo, 2001; Nguyen et al., 2024). They apply a range of methods, often including consultations with key informants (Jenkins et al., 2020; Lannoy et al., 2022; Nguyen et al., 2024). The scan focused on responding to the following research questions: 1) What is the current landscape with respect to policy in outdoor learning? 2) What are the factors that contribute to this landscape from the perspective of policy-makers? and 3) What are the existing opportunities to support policy change to increase outdoor learning practice?

To address these questions, we conducted interviews with school administrators as well as other organizational leaders to explore their experiences related to policy development and implementation that influences outdoor learning practice within public education across Canada. Policy-makers were interviewed over Zoom using a semi-structured interview guide (see Appendix E). The interviews ranged from 25 to 80 minutes, averaging about 45 minutes.

Policy-Maker Interviews

There were 19 policy-makers from across Canada who participated in these interviews (14 men, 5 women). Their roles ranged from principals and administrators, to consultants, government policy-makers, and outdoor education directors. Much like the educators, many of the policy-maker participants held multiple concurrent or previous decision-making roles within the education system or with outdoor education (Table 3).

Table 3.

Demographics of the Decision Makers Who Participated in Interviews

Policy-maker characteristics	n	%
Geographical basis
Ontario	6	31.5
British Columbia	4	21
Alberta	2	10.5
Manitoba	1	5
Nova Scotia	2	10.5
New Brunswick	2	10.5
Nunavut	1	5
Quebec	1	5
Gender
Female	5	26
Male	14	74
Role
Principal	7	37
Vice Principal	2	10.5
Director Outdoor Education Centre	5	26
Administrator	2	10.5
Government	1	5
School Board	1	5
Guidance Counsellor	1	5
Consultant	1	5
Active Smarter Kids Project Lead	1	5

The interviews captured varying perspectives about outdoor learning policy, benefits of outdoor learning, challenges and equity issues seen from a decision-maker’s perspective. Analyses are being finalized by ES, TH and LD for publications. Knowledge mobilization to policy-makers will include the major themes identified, highlighting supports and strategies that can be used to maintain outdoor learning programs at the administrative level to direct future policy improvements.

Discussion

This paper outlines the multi-method participatory approaches utilized in a study designed to capture experiences of Canadian children and educators learning outdoors within the public education system to understand key factors that influence the implementation of outdoor learning. We showcase how diverse stakeholder perspectives were captured to inform research design and knowledge dissemination. Our approach involved three major sources of data collection, with reciprocal knowledge exchange informing an emergent research design and a unique inter-disciplinary combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches (see Table 4). This process enabled in-depth participant engagement and targeted knowledge sharing to enhance research impacts.

Table 4.

Overview of the Multiple-Levels of Stakeholder Involvement and Knowledge Mobilization (KMb)

	Educators leading outdoor learning efforts within one school board	Participants (students & parents)	Participants (educators)	Outdoor educators (TMO participants)	Policy-makers
Perspective Captured	Experiences implementing outdoor learning	Experiences participating in outdoor learning	Experiences implementing outdoor learning	Perceptions regarding key themes and knowledge mobilization	Experiences related to outdoor learning policy
Engagement & Utilization	Virtual workshop to support the design of student/educator interviews and initial research design	Interview and story-focused reflection to gather recommendations regarding environmental scan and KMb	Interview used to capture recommendation for outdoor learning and inform the environmental scan	Workshops to identify themes related to outdoor learning and inform the environmental scan	Interviews used to inform future recommendations and future case study
Knowledge Mobilization	Report back about final research design	Infographic summary of research findings; Animated video	Infographic summary of research findings	Formal knowledge dissemination; blogs, websites and newsletters	Formal knowledge dissemination

Ethical Considerations

The pandemic created recruitment challenges, necessitating an online approach for outreach. Although virtual interviews offered some opportunities and advantages, they also created challenges. For example, parental involvement and presence in the interviews might have influenced the children’s responses. Researchers have identified that parental involvement can have positive or negative impacts, depending on the topics being discussed and the extent of parent influence over the topic of discussion (Donison et al., 2023; Spratling et al., 2012). In the case of this study, it is likely that parental involvement was primarily beneficial, as children were discussing neutral or positive experiences at school and parents mainly supported by helping children feel comfortable with the interviewer while keeping them focused on the interview, rather than guiding the direction of the conversation.

As this study occurred in the wake of COVID-19 restrictions, virtual interviews were the most practical and safe way to reach participants. Virtual interviews facilitated student participation as it gave children the opportunity to complete the interview in their home space (Bichard et al., 2022). As this was a single interview, the interviewer did not have a previous opportunity to build a relationship with the participants, therefore the home environment helped interviewees feel more comfortable. In this study, parental participation was beneficial because the parents were able to provide additional context and expand on their child’s responses. Virtual interviews allowed children, like Ranger, the freedom to showcase personal belongings within their home, which facilitated their story-telling and engagement with the researcher.

An additional difficulty created by the virtual interviews was that discussions were focused on experiences in nature and children likely had difficulties accessing memories and communicating them in an indoor environment. Future research in this area may benefit from a design that integrates in-person interviews with students that take place within their outdoor learning environment. Walking interviews can facilitate this immersion (Kinney, 2021) and enhance recall with respect to outdoor learning (Docherty & Sandelowski, 1999). Further, the presence of peers may make the children feel more comfortable in the space and deepen the researcher’s understanding of participant responses (Spratling et al., 2012). Regardless of the type of interview, whether in-person or online, power imbalances, building rapport, equity and privacy need to always be considered (O’Reilly & Dogra, 2017; Wagman et al., 2025).

One advantage of virtual interviews is that they offer flexibility to facilitate inclusion. Since participants can engage with the interview in their home space, it does not require travel (Bichard et al., 2022; Keen et al., 2022). The virtual format allowed the project to be scaled to a national level, including children from across the country who otherwise would not have been able to participate. When doing research with young children, accessibility needs to be considered because their participation can be limited if parents do not have access to transportation or are located far away from the researchers (Hokke et al., 2018). Some children and parents had busy schedules therefore using online interviews created convenience as children and parents participated from their home in between other commitments (Bichard et al., 2022).

We were unable to accommodate for access to technology, which should be a consideration with respect to virtual formats. Not all families have a device that can be used for virtual interviews or stable and reliable access to internet. Some evidence indicates that digital accessibility issues could bias the participant sample (Bichard et al., 2022; Hokke et al., 2018). Public spaces, such as libraries and community centers, may be a useful source for digital access in these instances.

Article 12 of the UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child describes the right for children to express themselves and to have their views heard (Hart, 1992; UNCRC, 1989). Expanding on this principle, researchers have argued that child participation contributes to improved services and policies, and that participation can increase youth accountability, civic responsibility, community involvement and empowerment (Fielding, 2011; Lansdown, 2018; Lundy, 2007; Shier, 2001). Children in this project were not simply included as sources of data, but their feedback informed discussion with educators and administrators because it addressed aspects of outdoor learning that were important to them. Furthermore, children were included in knowledge dissemination, with knowledge products designed specifically for them.

When developing the animated video with the Students Commission of Canada, we recorded other children’s voices to create the audio based on the quotes from our participants. Through this process, we recognized that it would have been more impactful to use the original recordings, but we had not requested this in our consent process. Particularly for small children, voice recordings convey meaning and sentiment much more clearly than transcribed text. When possible, future research should include child voice recordings within knowledge mobilization to enhance salience, meaning and effectiveness of knowledge mobilization and advocacy efforts.

Most research focused on student and educator perspectives do not enact meaningful change; intentional inclusion of these perspectives is necessary to create critical impact in research within education (Gillett-Swan & Baroutsis, 2024). Student voices enhanced our findings by providing a unique perspective in the context of Canadian outdoor learning. The inclusion of student perspective will help educators and policy-makers better understand student priorities and how they benefit from outdoor learning.

Rigour

There were several methodological components that contributed to strengthened rigour in this design. Incorporation of the geospatial data collection enhanced interview findings by providing descriptions of the green spaces and other learning contexts. This data will be useful for conceptualizing policy with respect to schoolyard and curriculum design, as well as to inform decision-making to support equitable access to outdoor spaces.

We applied unique, tailored knowledge sharing practices, such as arts-based methods with the creation of the animated YouTube video with the Students Commission of Canada (2024). Using arts-based knowledge translation can augment research impact (Kukkonen et al., 2025) and enhance participation of young children as well as the public. Storytelling and visual methods “are highly accessible modalities that do not require specialized knowledge and skills to connect with or derive meaning from” (Scott et al., 2013, p. 2). This is important to consider when trying to engage with a variety of different audiences. The short video shares some of the key findings from the children that may be relevant to other education settings attempting to engage children and initiate dialogue around outdoor learning.

Similarly, this video can be shared with policy makers and other stakeholders at different levels to inform them about children’s perspectives in this area and to support advocacy (Kukkonen et al., 2025; Miller, 2025) and capacity-building efforts. Our research team has used the video for participatory knowledge mobilization with pre-service educators, early childhood educators and childhood and youth studies students in post-secondary settings.

Participatory approaches were used to gather a range of stakeholder perspectives to refine research methods and co-create strategies that encourage the effective uptake of outdoor learning in Canadian schools. Research that values community input can help promote co-learning between researchers and community members, build community self-sufficiency, independence and sustained implementation practices (Collins et al., 2018; McIntyre, 2008; Ziegahn et al., 2021). Engaging policy-makers is fundamental to successful implementation of population-level initiatives (Diedrichs et al., 2018). We explicitly approached stakeholders when designing each stage of the project and used their feedback to inform later stages of the project. In this way, we were able to engage the community and ensure that our research focus and design were tailored to existing needs, thereby increasing the robustness and applicability of the implementation suggestions shared with stakeholders.

Participatory research activities are beginning to incorporate conferences, especially those that are practitioner-focused, to enhance key stakeholder engagement (Diedrichs et al., 2018; Papageorgiou et al., 2023; Siddiq et al., 2023; Ziegahn et al., 2021). As TMO is an outdoor learning conference, it incorporates hands-on, experiential opportunities for registrants to strengthen their knowledge and practice of outdoor learning. In the context of this study, breakout groups enabled individuals with varying backgrounds to discuss outdoor learning findings. This provided multi-faceted insight into outdoor learning across Canada as the participants were coming from diverse backgrounds. Discussions from the workshops informed the design of the policy-maker environmental scan. The opportunities for workshops at TMO encouraged idea sharing and participant-led discussions. Within our project, participating in the TMO conference led us to make more connections to individuals involved with outdoor learning in Canada and provided an opportunity to share information about the project, invite others to engage with some of the findings and offer their insight to improve the research design.

Despite these benefits, it is important to note that conferences can limit participant groups to specific demographics, are time restrictive and can be costly to attend (Acuña Mora & Borregaard, 2024; Siddiq et al., 2023). The cost to register in the 2026 TMO conference is regularly 625$ (see Take Me Outside, 2026), which limits accessibility. This cost exceeds professional development allowances in many school boards.

Another advantage of collaborative knowledge dissemination is the development of relationships with other community members that can strengthen the process and improve outcomes (Kukkonen et al., 2025). Our partners played a pivotal role in expanding our reach (see for example Lannoy, 2023). Connecting with these organizations and their large networks of educators served as a successful recruitment strategy for those involved in outdoor learning.

The learning from key stakeholders was used to inform each successive stage of the study and applied to new research. In addition, there were several key findings from interviews that inspired the design of a new case study. Firstly, the important role of administrators in supporting the scaling of outdoor learning at the school level. Second, student voice offers unique benefits to advocacy efforts. Finally, outdoor learning may support educator wellbeing, and by extension, healthier school climate. This new project will apply case study methodology to explore the context and processes that interact within the school environment to influence implementation of outdoor learning. It will capture student voice in-depth through walking interviews that explore their school spaces with them. Lastly, we will examine variations in school climate as it relates to outdoor learning across school classrooms and grades. This research, informed by the current study, will follow a participatory approach that will integrate involvement from students, families, educators and administrators.

Conclusion

This paper offers an in-depth description of the participatory methods applied within a study exploring opportunities to support increased implementation and scaling of outdoor learning in Canadian public elementary schools. A range of participant voices were included, and unique methods of engagement were utilized to enhance engagement and share findings. These methods offer a useful framework for other researchers interested in learning new ways to integrate a range of stakeholder perspectives within their research projects through participatory practices. This paper highlights the unique advantages offered by engaging each stakeholder group that is impacted by outdoor learning and who are implicated in the implementation of outdoor learning within public education. We highlight unique opportunities to capture student voice. This interactive and interdisciplinary approach offers a comprehensive view of critical issues related to the nature of outdoor learning and considerations related to the implementation context. Methods used within this research may be useful to enhance the practicality and relevance of research findings within other applied fields that implicate a range of stakeholders and beneficiaries.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning

Supplemental Material for Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning by Emma Simpson, Laurel Donison, Megan Zeni, Louise de Lannoy, Kim Matheson, Rachel Buxton, and Tanya Halsall in International Journal of Qualitative Methods.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Applying Diverse Participatory Approaches to Co-Produce Research Impacts Within Outdoor Learning

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

Emma Simpson

Laurel Donison

Tanya Halsall

Ethical Considerations

This study protocol has been approved by the This study protocol has been approved by Carleton University’s Research Ethics Board (CUREB# 116021). Ethical approval will be extended to cover the full time frame of the study.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was received from all participants.

Author Contributions

TH was responsible for the conception and design of the work. TH and LD supported data collection and analysis, revised the manuscript and approved the final submitted version. ES supported analysis, drafted and revised the manuscript, and approved the final submitted version. KM, LL, RB and MZ supported conceptualization, design, revised the manuscript, and approved the final submitted version.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC; award # 430-2021-00804).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.*

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Acuña Mora

Borregaard

(2024). From networking to knowledge sharing: Cracking the code of scientific conferences. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 23(4), e28–e30. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvae035

Andrew Fleck Children’s Services . (2026). Our Fees. https://www.afchildrensservices.ca/ottawa-forest-and-nature-school/our-fees/

Asfeldt

Purc-Stephenson

Zimmerman

(2022). Outdoor education in Canadian public schools: Connecting children and youth to people, place, and environment. Environmental Education Research, 28(10), 1510–1526. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2061919

Ayotte-Beaudet

J.-P.

Vinuesa

Turcotte

Berrigan

(2024). Pratiques enseignantes en plein air en contexte scolaire au Québec: Au-delà de la pandémie de COVID-19. Université de Sherbrooke. https://hdl.handle.net/11143/22234

Bailey

Allemang

Vandermorris

Munce

Cleverley

Chisholm

Cohen

Davidson

El Galad

Leibovich

Lowthian

Pillainayagam

Ramesh

Samson

Senthilnathan

Siska

Snider

Toulany

(2024). Benefits, barriers and recommendations for youth engagement in health research: Combining evidence-based and youth perspectives. Research Involvement and Engagement, 10(1), 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-024-00607-w

Baró

Camacho

D. A.

Pérez Del Pulgar

Triguero-Mas

Anguelovski

(2021). School greening: Right or privilege? Examining urban nature within and around primary schools through an equity lens. Landscape and Urban Planning, 208, Article 104019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.104019

Barker

Chisholm

Foran

(2024). Discussing mental health benefits for teachers participating in outdoor education in Canada: a conceptual analysis and future research directions. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 25(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2024.2366927

Barragan-Jason

de Mazancourt

Parmesan

Singer

Loreau

(2022). Human-nature connectedness as a pathway to sustainability: A global meta-analysis.. Conserv Lett, 15(1), e12852.

Becker

Lauterbach

Spengler

Dettweiler

Mess

(2017). Effects of regular classes in outdoor education settings: A systematic review on students’ learning, social and health dimensions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(5), 485. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050485

10.

Bellefeuille, A., Simpson, E., Donison, L., Zeni, M., de Lannoy, L., Matheson, K., Buxton, R., Halsall T. (submitted). 'I feel like nature's healing, it just brings me joy': Exploring the interactions among students and educators learning outdoors that promote wellbeing. Submitted to the Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 26 pages.

11.

Bichard

McKeever

Wray

Bench

(2022). Research behind a webcam: An exploration of virtual interviewing with children and young people. Nurse Researcher, 30(4), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2022.e1857

12.

Boileau

E. Y. S.

Dabaja

Z. F.

(2020). Forest School practice in Canada: A survey study. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 23(3), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-020-00057-4

13.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

14.

Braun

Clarke

(2014). What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers? International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 9(1), Article 26152. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v9.26152

15.

Braun

Clarke

(2022). Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology, 9(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000196

16.

British Columbia Ministry of Education and Child Care . (2019). Play Today. B.C. Handbook. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/early-learning/teach/earlylearning/play-today-handbook.pdf

17.

British Columbia Ministry of Education and Child Care . (2024). Learning in the Primary Years. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/early-learning/teach/resources/learning-in-the-primary-years.pdf

18.

British Columbia Ministry of Education and Child Care . (2025). B.C.s Redesigned Curriculum. An orientation guide. https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/sites/curriculum.gov.bc.ca/files/pdf/supports/curriculum_brochure.pdf

19.

Burriss

(2011). Outdoor play and learning: Policy and practice. International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 6(8), https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2011v6n8a306

20.

Chawla

Keena

Pevec

Stanley

(2014). Green Schoolyards as Havens from Stress and Resources for Resilience in Childhood and Adolescence. Health & Place, 28, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.03.001

21.

Choo

C. W.

(2001). Environmental scanning as information seeking and organizational learning. Information Research, 7(1), 1.

22.

Clark

C. D.

(2010). In a younger voice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195376593.001.0001

23.

Collins

S. E.

Clifasefi

S. L.

Stanton

The

L. A. B.

Straits

K. J. E.

Gil-Kashiwabara

Rodriguez Espinosa

Nicasio

A. V.

Andrasik

M. P.

Hawes

S. M.

Miller

K. A.

Nelson

L. A.

Orfaly

V. E.

Duran

B. M.

Wallerstein

(2018). Community-based participatory research (CBPR): Towards equitable involvement of community in psychology research. American Psychologist, 73(7), 884–898. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000167

24.

Creagh

Thompson

Mockler

Stacey

Hogan

(2025). Workload, work intensification and time poverty for teachers and school leaders: A systematic research synthesis. Educational Review, 77(2), 661–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2196607

25.

Davis

(2014). Towards a further understanding of what Indigenous people have always known: Storytelling as the basis of good pedagogy. First Nations Perspectives, 6(1), 83–96.

26.

Diedrichs

P. C.

von Ranson

K. M.

Thomas

J. J.

(2018). Innovation in eating disorders research and practice: Expanding our community and perspectives at the 2018 International Conference on Eating Disorders: Editorial to accompany IJED virtual issue in honor of the 2018 International Conference on Eating Disorders. The International Journal of Eating Disorders, 51(6), 585–587. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22881

27.

Docherty

Sandelowski

(1999). Focus on qualitative methods: Interviewing children. Research in Nursing & Health, 22(2), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199904)22:2<177::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-H

28.

Donison

Halsall

(2023). ‘I’d rather learn outside because nature can teach you so many more things than being inside’: Outdoor learning experiences of young children and educators. Journal of Childhood, Education & Society, 4(3), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.37291/2717638X.202343281

29.

Donison

Raby

Waboso

Sheppard

L. C.

Grossman

Harding

Myatt

(2023). ‘I’m going to call my friend to join us’: connections and challenges in online video interviews with children during COVID-19. Children’s Geographies, 22(1), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2023.2253176

30.

Faber Taylor

Kuo

F. E.

(2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park. Journal of Attention Disorders, 12(5), 402–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054708323000

31.

Faber Taylor

Kuo

F. E.

Sullivan

W. C.

(2001). Coping with add: The surprising connection to green play settings. Environment and Behavior, 33(1), 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160121972864

32.

Fanel

(2020). Very natural and sturdy’: Hull principal buys tents and logs for fun, outdoor learning. CTV News. https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/very-natural-and-sturdy-hull-principal-buys-tents-and-logs-for-fun-outdoor-learning-1.5083667

33.

Feekery

(2024). The 7 C’s framework for participatory action research: Inducting novice participant-researchers. Educational Action Research, 32(3), 332–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2234417

34.

Fielding

(2011). Patterns of partnership: Student voice, intergenerational learning and democratic fellowship. In Mockler

Sachs

(Eds.), Rethinking Educational Practice Through Reflexive Inquiry (pp. 61–75): Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0805-1_5

35.

Ghafouri

(2014). Close encounters with nature in an urban kindergarten: A study of learners’ inquiry and experience. Education 3-13, 42(1), 54–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2011.642400

36.

Gillett-Swan

Baroutsis

(2024). Student voice and teacher voice in educational research: A systematic review of 25 years of literature from 1995–2020. Oxford Review of Education, 50(4), 533–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2257132

37.

Government of British Columbia . (2026). Indigenous Education in British Columbia. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/education-training/k-12/administration/program-management/indigenous-education

38.

Green

M. C.

(2004). Storytelling in teaching. The Association for Psychological Science Observer, 17(4), 37–39.

39.

Green

(2012). Listening to children: Exploring intuitive strategies and interactive methods in a study of children’s special places. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-012-0075-9

40.

Hart

(1992). Children’s participation: From tokenism to citizenship. UNICEF. https://participationpool.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Hart-R.-1992-Children-Participation-from-Tokenism-to-Citizenship.pdf

41.

Hine

Patrick

Berger

Diamond

Hammer

MorrisReupert

Z. A. A.

(2022). From struggling to flourishing and thriving: Optimizing educator wellbeing within the Australian education context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 115, Article 103727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103727

42.

Hokke

Hackworth

N. J.

Quin

Bennetts

S. K.

Win

H. Y.

Nicholson

J. M.

Zion

Lucke

Keyzer

Crawford

S. B.

(2018). Ethical issues in using the internet to engage participants in family and child research: A scoping review. PLoS ONE, 13(9), Article e0204572. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204572

43.

Howells, L. (2020). Classrooms in the forest: Yukon school teaching largely outside this fall, CBC News, 2020, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/hidden-valley-elementary-forest-school-class-outside-1.5710348.

44.

Jenkins

McGuinness

Haines-Saah

Andres

Ziemann

M.-J.

Morris

Waddell

(2020). Equipping youth for meaningful policy engagement: An environmental scan. Health Promotion International, 35(4), 852–865. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daz071

45.

Jucker

Von Au

(2022). Outdoor learning—why it should be high up on the agenda of every educator: Introduction. In Jucker

Von Au

(Eds.), High-Quality Outdoor Learning (pp. 1–26). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04108-2_1

46.

Keen

Lomeli-Rodriguez

Joffe

(2022). From challenge to opportunity: Virtual qualitative research during covid-19 and beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, Article 16094069221105075. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221105075

47.

Kemmis

McTaggart

Nixon

(2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2

48.

Kinney

(2021). Walking Interviews: A Novel Way of Ensuring the Voices of Vulnerable Populations Are Included in Research. In Borcsa

Willig

(Eds.), Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health: Innovative and Collaborative Approaches (pp. 65–82). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65331-6_4

49.

Kiviranta

Lindfors

Rönkkö

M.-L.

Luukka

(2024). Outdoor learning in early childhood education: Exploring benefits and challenges. Educational Research, 66(1), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2023.2285762

50.

Kukkonen

McGregor

H. E.

Flavin

Cooper

(2025). Inviting engagement with climate change education research: An arts-based knowledge translation approach. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 26(2), https://doi.org/10.17169/FQS-26.2.4313

51.

Kweon

B.-S.

Ellis

C. D.

Lee

Jacobs

(2017). The link between school environments and student academic performance. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 23, 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.02.002

52.

Lannoy

L. D.

(2023). Research: “I’d rather learn outside because nature can teach you so many more things than being inside” » Outdoor Play Canada. Outdoor Play Canada. https://www.outdoorplaycanada.ca/2023/12/07/research-id-rather-learn-outside-because-nature-can-teach-you-so-many-more-things-than-being-inside/

53.

Lannoy

L. D.

MacDonald

Barbeau

Tremblay

M. S.

(2022). Environmental scan of child and youth outdoor play-based projects, programs, activities and services available in Canada during the covid-19 pandemic. Children, Youth and Environments, 32(1), 84–127. https://doi.org/10.1353/cye.2022.0004

54.

Lansdown

(2018). Conceptual framework for measuring outcomes of adolescent participation. UNICEF. https://www.unicef.org/media/59006/file

55.

Lawrence

R. L.

Paige

D. S.

(2016). What our ancestors knew: Teaching and learning through storytelling. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 149(Spring), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20177

56.

Laycock

Bailie

Matthews

Bailie

(2016). Interactive dissemination: Engaging stakeholders in the use of aggregated quality improvement data for system-wide change in australian indigenous primary health care. Frontiers in Public Health, 4, 84. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00084

57.

Lee

E. Y.

Lannoy

L. D.

De Barros

M. I. A.

Bentsen

Brussoni

Crompton

Fiskum

T. A.

Guerrero

Hallås

B. O.

Jordan

Leather

Mannion

Moore

S. A.

Sandseter

E. B. H.

Spencer

N. L. I.

Waite

Wang

P. Y.

Zorica

(2022). Play, learn, and teach outdoors—Network (Plato-net): Terminology, taxonomy, and ontology. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 19(1), 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-022-01294-0

58.

Lundy

(2007). “Voice” Is Not Enough: Conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, 33(6), 927–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701657033. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30032800

59.

Mahoney

(2020). Classes move outdoors to prevent COVID-19 spread. The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-classes-move-outdoors-to-prevent-covid-19-spread/

60.

Malloy

J. A.

Partridge

S. R.

Kemper

J. A.

Roy

(2024). Co-designing a social media health promotion for young women: A study protocol. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, Article 16094069241230413. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241230413

61.

Mann

Gray

Truong

Brymer

Passy

Sahlberg

Ward

Bentsen

Curry

Cowper

(2022). Getting out of the classroom and into nature: A systematic review of nature-specific outdoor learning on school children’s learning and development. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, Article 877058. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.877058

62.

Marchant

Dowd

Bray

Rowlands

Miles

Crick

James

Dadaczynski

Okan

(2024). The well-being and work-related stress of senior school leaders in Wales and Northern Ireland during COVID-19 “educational leadership crisis”: A cross-sectional descriptive study. PLOS ONE, 19(4), Article e0291278. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0291278

63.

Marchant

Todd

Cooksey

Dredge

Jones

Reynolds

Stratton

Dwyer

Lyons

Brophy

(2019). Curriculum-based outdoor learning for children aged 9-11: A qualitative analysis of pupils’ and teachers’ views. PLOS ONE, 14(5), Article e0212242. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212242

64.

McCuaig

Bertrand

(2019). Policy Oversight of Outdoor Play in Early Childhood Education Setting in Canadian Provinces and Territories. Atkinson Centre for Society and Child Development. https://www.oise.utoronto.ca/atkinson/publications?page=4

65.

McIntyre

(2008). Participatory action research. Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483385679

66.

Meijer

(2023). Outdoor Education and Teachers’ Subjective Well-Being: A correlational study on the well-being of Dutch primary school teachers and the use of outdoor education. Linköping University. https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-195909

67.

Merewether

(2015). Young children’s perspectives of outdoor learning spaces: What matters? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(1), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693911504000113

68.

Miller

(2025). The Black Saturday bushfire disaster: Found poetry for arts-based knowledge translation in disaster risk and climate change communication. Arts & Health, 17(1), 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17533015.2024.2310861

69.

Miller

N. C.

Kumar

Pearce

K. L.

Baldock

K. L.

(2021). The outcomes of nature-based learning for primary school aged children: A systematic review of quantitative research. Environmental Education Research, 27(8), 1115–1140. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1921117

70.

Mitra

(2018). Outdoor Play and Learning (OPAL) in school communities: Results from the pilot programming in Toronto. https://transformlab.torontomu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/OPAL-Report-Final-2020-Revised2.pdf

71.

Molyneux

Zeni

Oberle

(2022). Choose your own adventure: Promoting social and emotional development through outdoor learning. Early Childhood Education Journal, 51(8), 1525–1539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-022-01394-3

72.

Moore

Morrissey

A.-M.

Robertson

(2021). I feel like I’m getting sad there’: Early childhood outdoor playspaces as places for children’s wellbeing. Early Child Development and Care, 191(6), 933–951. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2019.1651306

73.

Mutz

Muller

(2016). Mental health benefits of outdoor adventures: Results from two pilot studies. Journal of Adolescence, 49(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.03.009

74.

Nguyen

Esmail

Di Rezze

Colquhoun

Graham

(2024). An environmental scan of studies reporting current practices for the conduct of environmental scans. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(3). https://doi.org/10.37464/2024.413.816

75.

Norwood

M. F.

Lakhani

Fullagar

Maujean

Downes

Byrne

Stewart

Barber

Kendall

(2019). A narrative and systematic review of the behavioural, cognitive and emotional effects of passive nature exposure on young people: Evidence for prescribing change. Landscape and Urban Planning, 189, 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.04.007

76.

Oberle

Zeni

Munday

Brussoni

(2021). Support factors and barriers for outdoor learning in elementary schools: A systemic perspective. American Journal of Health Education, 52(5), 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2021.1955232

77.

Olsen

R. K.

(2025). The value of child participation in research — A qualitative child-centered approach to the early development of an empowerment inventory for children. Child & Youth Services, 46(2), 400–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2024.2336914

78.

Ontario . (2016). The Kindergarten Program 2016. https://www.ontario.ca/document/kindergarten-program-2016

79.

O’Reilly

Dogra

(2017). Interviewing children and young people for research. Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526419439

80.

Papageorgiou

Dewa

L. H.

Bruton

Murray

K.-K.

Hewlett

Thamm

Hamza

Frumiento

Steward

Bradshaw

Brooks-Hall

Petretti

Ewans

Williams

Chapko

(2023). “Building bridges”: Reflections and recommendations for co-producing health research. Research Involvement and Engagement, 9(1), 113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-023-00528-0

81.

Patchen

A. K.

Rakow

D. A.

Wells

N. M.

Hillson

Meredith

G. R.

(2024). Barriers to children’s outdoor time: Teachers’ and principals’ experiences in elementary schools. Environmental Education Research, 30(1), 16–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2099530

82.

Patton

M. Q.

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.): Sage.

83.

Patton

M. Q.

(2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.): Sage.

84.

Phillips, L. (2013). Storytelling as pedagogy. Literacy Learning : The Middle Years, 21(2), ii–iv. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.355892307046496.

85.

Phipps

Cummins

Pepler

Craig

Cardinal

(2016). The co-produced pathway to impact describes knowledge mobilization processes. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 9(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.54656/GOKH9495

86.

Pinault

Christidis

Toyib

Crouse

D. L.

(2021). Ethnocultural and socioeconomic disparities in exposure to residential greenness within urban Canada. Health reports, 32(5), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.25318/82-003-x202100500001-eng

87.

Pirchio

Passiatore

Panno

Cipparone

Carrus

(2021). The effects of contact with nature during outdoor environmental education on students’ wellbeing, connectedness to nature and pro-sociality. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 648458. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648458

88.

Priest

(1986). Redefining outdoor education: A matter of many relationships. The Journal of Environmental Education, 17(3), 13–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1986.9941413

89.

Rigolon

(2016). A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 153, 160–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.017

90.

Rütten

Frahsa

Abel

Bergmann

De Leeuw

Hunter

Jansen

King

Potvin

(2019). Co-producing active lifestyles as whole-system-approach: Theory, intervention and knowledge-to-action implications. Health Promotion International, 34(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dax053

91.

Sahrakhiz

Harring

Witte

M. D.

(2017). Learning opportunities in the outdoor school–empirical findings on outdoor school in Germany from the children’s perspective. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 18(3), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2017.1413404

92.

Schenetti

di Nisio

Rubat du Mérac

(2023). Wellbeing of outdoor education teachers: The role of school management and organization. Investigación En La Escuela, 106, 44–52.

93.

Scott

S. D.

Brett-MacLean

Archibald

Hartling

(2013). Protocol for a systematic review of the use of narrative storytelling and visual-arts-based approaches as knowledge translation tools in healthcare. Systematic Reviews, 2(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-19

94.

Shelton

R. C.

Brownson

R. C.

(2024). Enhancing impact: A call to action for equitable implementation science. Prevention Science, 25(S1), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-023-01589-z

95.

Shier

(2001). Pathways to participation: Openings, opportunities and obligations. Children & Society, 15(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/chi.617

96.

Siddiq

Jones

Magnes

Booker-Vaughns

Young-Brinn

Williams

Washington

Agonafer

Solomon

Oliva

Wells

Heilemann

M. V.

(2023). Using community-partnered participatory research to value the “community lens” and promote equity in community-academic partnerships. Health Equity, 7(1), 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1089/heq.2023.0096

97.

Sokal

Trudel

L. E.

Babb

(2020). Canadian teachers’ attitudes toward change, efficacy, and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, Article 100016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100016

98.

Spratling

Coke

Minick

(2012). Qualitative data collection with children. Applied Nursing Research, 25(1), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2010.02.005

99.

Students Commission of Canada . (2024). Research on Outdoor Learning: “I’d Rather Learn Outside. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ew1gxXttSY

100.

Swank

J. M.

(2024). Taking Learning Outside: The Effect on Middle School Students’ Mood. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 47(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2024.2309133

101.

Take Me Outside (2013). About Us- Take Me Outside. https://takemeoutside.ca/about-us/

102.

Take Me Outside . (2020). Take Me Outside Day: October 21, 2020. https://takemeoutside.ca/take-me-outside-day/

103.

Take Me Outside . (2026). Outdoor Learning Conference. https://takemeoutside.ca/conference/

104.

Tremblay

Gray

Babcock

Barnes

Bradstreet

Carr

Chabot

Choquette

Chorney

Collyer

Herrington

Janson

Janssen

Larouche

Pickett

Power

Sandseter

Simon

Brussoni

(2015). Position statement on active outdoor play. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(6), 6475–6505. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120606475

105.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) . (1989). Assembly, U. G. United Nations Treaty Series, 1577(3), 1–23.

106.

Van Velzen

Helbich

(2023). Green school outdoor environments, greater equity? Assessing environmental justice in green spaces around Dutch primary schools. Landscape and Urban Planning, 232, Article 104687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104687

107.

Van Dijk-Wesselius

J. E.

Van Den Berg

A. E.

Maas

Hovinga

(2020). Green schoolyards as outdoor learning environments: Barriers and solutions as experienced by primary school teachers. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2919. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02919

108.

Vaughn

L. M.

Jacquez

(2020). Participatory research methods – choice points in the research process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1), https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.13244

109.

Wagman

Iseyas

Mohmand

Watson

Mahant

(2025). Methods for engaging vulnerable and marginalized children through community based participatory research: A scoping review. Research Involvement and Engagement, 11(1), 104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00783-3

110.

Wilhelm

A. K.

Pergament

Cavin

Bates

Hang

Ortega

L. E.

Bigelow

Allen

M. L.

(2021). Lessons learned in implementing youth and parent participatory action research in a school-based intervention. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 15(1), 15–36. https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2021.0002

111.

Wood

K. A.

Jupe

L. L.

McCutcheon

E. E.

Cooke

Newth

J. L.

(2025). Nature-based activities improve human-nature connectedness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 23(4), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2025.08.001

112.

Zeldin

Bestul

Powers

(2012). Youth-adult partnerships in evaluation (Y-AP/E): A resource guide for translating research into practice. ACT for Youth Center of Excellence, Cornell University.

113.

Zelenski

J. M.

Dopko

R. L.

Capaldi

C. A.

(2015). Cooperation is in our nature: Nature exposure may promote cooperative and environmentally sustainable behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.01.005

114.

Zeni

Brussoni

(2026). Embracing Risky Play at School: Getting Kids Outdoors to Explore, Learn, and Grow. Teachers College Press.

115.

Zeni

Schnellert

Brussoni

(2023). “We do it anyway”: Professional identities of teachers who enact risky play as a framework for Education Outdoors. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 26(3), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-023-00140-6

116.

Zeni

Schnellert

Brussoni

(2024). Outdoor play and learning in elementary schools: A critical participatory action research project. The Canadian Journal of Action Research, 24(3), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.33524/cjar.v24i3.675

117.

Zeni

Schnellert

Brussoni

(2025). Pathways for outdoor play and learning: pedagogical decisions and curricular intent in elementary school outdoor classrooms. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2025.2517042

118.

Ziegahn

Joosten

Nevarez

Hurd

Evans

Dumbauld

Eder

M. M.

(2021). Collaboration and context in the design of community-engaged research training. Health Promotion Practice, 22(3), 358–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839919894948

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.11 MB

0.17 MB

0.51 MB

0.27 MB

0.42 MB

0.00 MB