In this post-pandemic world, with children more likely to be glued to iPads than climbing trees, it’s easy to see why a pedagogical phenomenon like the Forest School has grown in popularity. According to Save the Children, just one in four children regularly plays out on their street, compared to three quarters of their grandparents’ generation.
Returning to and reclaiming nature are prominent parts of the health and wellbeing zeitgeist, so the rise of the Forest School is unsurprising. This Scandinavian method of outdoor learning first arrived on UK shores in 1993, but in the five years since the first Covid lockdown, it has proliferated: there are now more than 200 Forest Schools in the UK.
Essentially, Forest School is a method of teaching and learning that takes place outdoors (in a wooded area) and encompasses both risk-taking and play. Children might be encouraged to partake in small conservation activities such as coppicing, taught how to light a fire or identify species of plants and flowers. Sometimes practitioners are teachers already working for the school or are contracted in from an external company to conduct sessions.
Founded in Denmark in 1952 by Ella Flautau, a Danish educator and naturalist, Forest School encompasses open-air, nature-based learning and play that are designed to foster childhood development and learning. They have been a popular addition to early years and primary learning in the UK – but have also been known to offer benefits for older children, teenagers and even adults.
I first heard about Forest School from my mother. Having been a primary teacher for more than 30 years and a lasting lover of the outdoors, she is currently pursuing a Level 3 qualification, which will allow her to lead and facilitate a Forest School on-site at the school where she teaches in Sedbergh, Cumbria. But what benefits can Forest School bring to early years education? And what are the challenges of its delivery in the UK?
In Denmark – and Scandinavia more widely – the practices attached to Forest School do not align to a specific movement but stem from the philosophy friluftsliv. “Forest School is a kind of UK invention,” said Mel McCree, a senior lecturer in early childhood studies at Bath Spa University. “It’s borrowing from lots of different practices.” McCree has conducted extensive studies into the benefits of Forest School and its use in schools and educational settings across the UK. She explained that Forest School is built on the principle of holistic development. It encourages children to engage with nature, to explore their surroundings and to engage in the development of key skills such as curiosity, creativity and problem-solving. The term “Forest School” is a UK invention – it is here that processes have become formalised.
Indeed, a Forest School can’t strictly be termed as such unless it chimes with six principles set by the Forest School Association (FSA), the professional body for Forest School practitioners. These are: it is a long-term process; it takes place in a natural wooded environment; it aims to promote holistic development; it offers learners the opportunity to take supported risks; it is run by a qualified practitioner; and it uses a range of learner-centred processes.
If the practice doesn’t meet these criteria, it isn’t a Forest School. “You can’t really call it a Forest School if there aren’t some trees,” Sarah Lawfull, a teacher and representative of the FSA told me. She explained that in order to see the intended and most beneficial outcomes from Forest School, it is important to have these six principles in place.
Central to the overall approach of Forest School, however, is the emphasis on supporting a child to learn through play. It may appear simplistic, but it is essential. “Play for play’s sake is really valuable,” McCree said. She explained that play is important as it allows children to develop and to learn crucial tools such as curiosity, creativity and problem-solving. She pointed to the example of a child who, when asked to define play, said: “Play is what I’m doing when nobody else tells me to do it.” In other words, the child has made their own decision as to how to use their time rather than following orders from an adult or a curriculum.
“That’s a really important skill to learn,” McCree said. “Following your own curiosity, or interests – for creativity and problem-solving – is the foundation of so much learning.” She pointed out that maths, English and the sciences are reliant on “that spirit of enquiry”. McCree added: “So those kinds of basic investigations – for example, a child might think ‘I wonder if there are any worms in this hole!’ – are really important.”
Then there is risk. As Lawfull told me, allowing children to take and manage risks can be an essential part of their early development. “Risky, challenging play is key within Forest School,” she said. “Children are trusted to manage risk, but they should also be empowered to manage risk.” Obviously in this health-and-safety-obsessed era, no “risky” Forest School activity is done without adult supervision. But ensuring it is an option is essential. “If you take opportunities [to take risk] away from children, or physical opportunities away from children, they lose the chance to build neural pathways in their brain,” said Lawfull. “If little children don’t learn that, by the time they’re 14 they could be hot-wiring cars or getting into all sorts of mischief, because they don’t know what good and bad scary looks like,” she added.
Likewise, Forest School can prove an excellent counter to a growing problem: a lack of safe, green space. If wildlife, nature and the outdoors can prove so helpful to children’s learning and development, why aren’t UK kids spending more time outside? Because access to nature is not a given. In urban areas, children may face barriers like traffic, a lack of independent mobility or a limited number of outdoor spaces. Still, choosing where and when to hold Forest School sessions in a city or town can prove difficult; some Forest Schools in London, for example, are held on the expansive Hampstead Heath, but not all UK cities are lucky enough to have such a prime, wooded landmass on their doorstep.
But the question of space is not limited to urban areas that may visibly appear more challenging. Children in rural areas also struggle with access to suitable outdoor locations. Much of this is to do with a lack of access to public transport and the ubiquity of cars and roads. “It’s sort of a myth that children in rural areas have more access to the countryside… most children now don’t have the independent mobility to go more than 50 metres from their front door without their parents’ blessing because of traffic,” McCree told me. She explained: “In rural areas there are single-track roads – with nowhere you would feel safe about letting a child wander off.” Forest Schools – when delivered effectively – can be a salve to a world becoming increasingly inhospitable to a childhood spent with access to nature.
Questions of “holistic development” and a well-rounded childhood feel somewhat alien in the context of the UK’s results-driven, controlled education system. Though Forest Schools have proven increasingly popular, they might be viewed as a “nice to have”, rather than an essential pedagogical method in their own right. Mark Leather, associate professor of adventure education and outdoor learning at Plymouth Marjon University, told me that much of this is down to mindset. “The biggest challenge [to the delivery of outdoor education] is mindset,” he said. He pointed to the emergent framing of “parents as customers of education”, imposing tight controls on risk or objecting to elements of outdoor learning. This can conflict with the “child-led nature of Forest Schools” where, as mentioned, risk and uncertainty are an essential facet of success. Teachers, too, need a shift in mindset, Leather explained, as does the wider education system.
But Leather does not put Forest Schools on a pedestal. In fact, in an article titled “A Critique of Forest Schools: Something Lost in Translation”, he examined whether their increasing ubiquity is truly conducive to the promotion of outdoor learning and its benefits. In other words, Forest School is not and should not be the only way in which children are taught to appreciate the great outdoors. “It’s great, but it’s not for every child,” he said. “I think a lot of the teachable moments get missed,” he explained. “I’m concerned if the only way to take children into woodland and to light fires is the Forest School way, they miss out on other ways of doing it.”
Leather would like to see a wider revolution in the UK education system, one that places far more value on outdoor experiences, whether that be fire-lighting or tree-climbing or taking a biology or geography lesson out of the classroom. Inevitably it comes back to politics: “I wish policymakers would acknowledge the value and power of outdoor experiences as a mandatory part of the curriculum,” Leather said. And some do. The former Green Party leader and MP, Caroline Lucas, worked to promote a new “Natural History GCSE”, and the Lib Dem MP, Tim Farron, has campaigned to make outdoor education a required part of the curriculum.
In the end, there is a wider question here: what do we mean by outdoor education? And what do Forest Schools hope to achieve by championing it? For Leather, if the UK wants its purpose to be “to grow and nurture each individual to be best of their capacities to contribute to society” then it must “really embrace outdoor learning as a place that some really good lessons can happen”.
For McCree, its benefits and importance are more literal: “The biggest skill [a child can gain from Forest School] is that they’re realising that they’re part of nature and that they can care for it. They can look after it.” Indeed, with the number of UK Forest Schools steadily rising, perhaps there is not long to wait before the dawn of the outdoor revolution.
This article first appeared in our Spotlight Skills supplement of 7 February 2025.
Content from our partners
Related
