School Gardens: Teaching and Learning Outside the Front Door

This article reports on two projects: one that investigated the impact of school gardens on primary children’s learning and one that is currently exploring the pedagogies involved in teaching children in the garden. The evidence presented suggests that school gardens can be an interesting and effective way of engaging children with learning, but that there is a divide between those teachers who are willing to use the garden in their teaching and those who are not.

This article was downloaded by: [198.91.36.79]
On: 21 January 2015, At: 23:10
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Click for updates
Education 3-13: International Journa
of Primary, Elementary and Early Ye
Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rett20
School gardens: teaching and learni
outside the front door
Rowena Passy
a
a Faculty of Health, Education and Society, Plymouth University,
Rolle Building, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
Published online: 17 Feb 2012.
To cite this article: Rowena Passy (2014) School gardens: teaching and learning outside the
door, Education 3-13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 4
23-38, DOI: 10.1080/03004279.2011.636371
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2011.636371
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

School gardens: teaching and learning outside the front door
Rowena Passy*
Faculty of Health, Education and Society, Plymouth University, Rolle Building, Drake Circus,
Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
(Received 3 October 2011; final version received 17 October 2011)
This article reports on two projects:one that investigated the impact of school
gardens on primary children’s learning and one that is currently exploring the
pedagogies involved in teaching children in the garden.The evidence presented
suggests that school gardens can be an interesting and effective way of engaging
children with learning, but that there is a divide between those teachers who are
willing to use the garden in their teaching and those who are not.The article
considersthe reasonsfor this and arguesthat mixed messagesabout policy
relating to learning outside the classroom are a barrier to garden use.
Keywords: school gardens; teaching; learning; risk; policy
Introduction
Much attention has recently been paid to children’s learning outside the classroom,
in England prompted in partby the previous labour administration’s document
Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto (Departmentfor Education and Skills
[DfES] 2006;Nundy, Dillon, and Dowd 2009).This argues thateducation away
from the classroom can offer young people the kind of ‘direct experience’(DfES
2006,3) that provides a powerfulcontextfor learning in areas such as problem
solving and team working,and can have the effect of deepening and enriching the
learning undertaken in the classroom.There are many who would agree with this,
seen in the range of international journals that are now published on di fferent kinds
of teaching and learning outdoors, and by the proliferation of debates on the theory
and practice of outdoor learning (see, for example, Humberstone and Stan 2011; Rea
and Waite 2009;Taylor, Power,and Rees 2010).The focus of this article is work
undertaken in the school garden,and I report on two projects:one was concerned
with the impact of school gardens on primary children’s learning, while the other is
currently investigating the pedagogies associated with school gardens.
Within the discipline of outdoor learning, consideration has been paid to learning
away from the school site on adventureand residentialtrips (e.g. Journal of
Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning;Humberstone and Stan 2011;Taylor,
Power,and Rees 2010) and there has been an increasing interest in Forest Schools
(e.g. Knight 2011; O’Brien 2009). There has been relatively little concern, however,
*Email: [e-mail]
Ó 2012 ASPE
Education 3–13, 2014
Vol. 42, No. 1, 23–38, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2011.636371
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

with work undertaken in schoolgrounds and,more specifically,schoolgardens.
Literature from the United States of America is the exception to this,showing a
strong record of research and evaluation of this type of learning that is supported by
statedepartmentsin, for instance,Texas and California (Blair 2009,1–2). In
addition,Ozer (2007,847) points out that nationallegislation was passed in 2004
that enabled funding to help cover the initial costs of setting up a school garden if it
was to be used in conjunction with education on nutrition,while Blair argues that
school gardening has become something of a ‘national movement’, as an increasing
number of states have become involved. Evidence of this can plausibly be seen in the
Junior Master Gardener’s Program which was launched in 1999 (Ozer 2007),is
currently implemented by 28 universities at the state level and engages schools with
gardening partly through aligning gardening activitiesto each state’seducation
standards (http://www.jmgkids.us/). Similarly, California’s Edible Schoolyard initia-
tive (http://www.edibleschoolyard.org/#)has recently become a nationalproject
with the aim of establishing a food curriculum for the school system.
School gardens in England
Although the level of this type of activity is lower in England, there are a number of
policy initiativesand awardsthat that have clear connectionswith gardening:
Healthy Schools,with its emphasis on healthy eating and physicalactivity (DfES/
Departmentof Health 2005)and Eco-Schools(http://www.eco-schools.org.uk/
about/) and Sustainable Schools (National College for School Leadership n.d.), both
of which focuson issuesrelated to the environment,generally chime with the
practicalities of schoolgardening and can encourage the integration of gardening
into school life. The Department for Education (DfE) is a member of the Growing
Schools partnership (http://www.growingschools.org.uk/), which offers advice on a
number of aspects of outdoor learning that include gardening and keeping animals in
the school grounds, and the Department for International Development is currently
funding the 3-year Schools GlobalGardens Network project,which aims to raise
young people’sawarenessof global sustainabilityissues through gardening
(Richards n.d.). While the latter is a specialised project with specific aims, generally
interpretation of these different initiatives and policies is left up to individual schools,
and currently there is no government financial support for school gardens.
Nonetheless,schoolgardens in England are flourishing,due to a number of
developments that have encouraged both teaching practitioners and the wider public
to take a renewed interest in growing their own fruit and vegetables.In the first
place, a combination of environmental concerns related to food miles, the prospect
of economising in ‘austerity Britain’ with food that can be grown relatively cheaply,
and the arguably more intense flavour of home-grown produce have all contributed
to make gardening a fashionable as well as practical activity. In the school context,
there are concerns that children and young people have become detached from the
world of nature (Louv 2008)and/or thatthey have little understanding ofhow
vegetables are grown or how food is produced (e.g. Lakin and Littledyke 2008, 256),
and a schoolgarden can be a way ofresponding to these issues.Secondly,the
extended schools’ agenda, which encouraged schools to offer a range of after-school
activities (DfES 2005),offered an opening for the foundation of schoolgardening
clubs by providing some time outside the busy school day in which to undertake the
responsibility of a garden. Third, the range of different sources of support for school
R. Passy24
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

gardens promoted by different organisations has burgeoned and includes offers from
supermarketcompaniessuch asMorrisons and Sainsbury’s,nationalcampaigns
such Garden Organic for Schools as well as localised initiatives such as the ‘Dig it,
Grow it, Cook it, Eat it!’ competition in the WestCountry. Schoolsare also
encouraged to seek grantsfrom organisationssuch as the Big Lottery when
establishingtheir gardens (http://www.growingschools.org.uk/support/funding_
grants.asp).
A notable initiative in this context has been the RoyalHorticulturalSociety’s
(RHS) Campaign for School Gardening. The campaign’s aims are to:
. Encourage all schools to use gardening as a teaching tool
. Show how gardening can enrich the curriculum,teach children life skills and
contribute to their mental and physical health
. Demonstrategardening’spivotal role in developing activecitizensof the
future. (RHS 2010, 4)
One way of helping to achieve these aims is to persuade a critical mass of schools
to have a garden, and the RHS target was originally to encourage 80% of primary
schools to grow fruit and vegetables by the end of 2010.By July in that year,the
campaign had recruited 11,500 primary schools (Passy, Morris, and Reed 2010, 47),
which is a significant proportion of the approximately 17,000 primary schools in
England (DfE 2010a). Approximately a year after the campaign’s launch, the RHS
commissioned the National Foundation of Educational Research (NFER) to review
the progress ofthe campaign and explore the impactof gardening on children’s
learning.In this paper,I first report on the research findings,highlighting the
imaginativeways in which school gardenswere used to encouragechildren’s
developmentin a number ofareas.Drawing on the NFER projectand another
funded by Plymouth University,I then discusswhat appeared to be the divide
between those who used the garden to enhance their pupils’ learning and those who
did not, and examine the reasons that underpin this perception. Finally, I consider
the implications of the projects’ findings for policy and research.
The impact of school gardens: research design
The NFER research had three parts. The first was to ascertain the number of schools
registered to the campaign and to investigate the characteristics of those schools in
terms ofregion,size,socio-economic intake and attainmentlevels,the details of
which were reported in a document to the RHS.The second was to commission
questions in the NFER’s Teacher Voice omnibus survey to discover the views of a
wide range of teachers on school gardens, and the third was qualitative research that
investigated the use and impact of school gardens in 10 case-study schools. Although
relatively small-scaleresearch,this combination ofquantitativeand qualitative
methods was intended to provide a picture of the extent to which schoolgardens
were being used and the impact that this use could have;the results of the whole
project can be seen on the RHS website (RHS 2010). This paper, however, focuses on
the qualitative case-study research that was undertaken between May and November
2009 (Passy, Morris, and Reed 2010).
The campaign database showed that,in England, the majority ofregistered
primary schools tended to be urban of medium size (ranging from 189 to 429 pupils)
Education 3–13 25
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

and that they tended to be situated in more affluent areas and those with fewer issue
related to deprivation (Passy,Morris, and Reed 2010,50).Nonetheless,this early
analysisalso showed thesuccessof specialschoolsand schoolswith a high
percentage of pupils who had English as an additionallanguage in achieving the
highest ‘benchmark’levels (awards that recognised the extent to which the school
garden was integrated into teaching, learning and the wider activities of the school),
which suggested thatthe campaign wasinclusiveand enabled all schoolsto
participate to the extent they wished (51). The purpose of the qualitative study was to
add depth to this picture:to discover the detail of how schools used their gardens,
the impact of the campaign on this use and the effect that schools believed the garde
had on their pupils’ learning.The research team agreed with theRHS that
observationof gardeningactivitieswould demonstratethe extentof pupils’
involvement with the garden and that interviews with teachers,parents and pupils
would provide a range ofdifferentviews on how these gardening activities were
viewed and received by thesedifferentmembersof the school community.In
addition, the collection of any school documentation – such as lesson plans or school
policies – that related to the garden would provide evidence of the way in which it
was integrated into schoollife. This triangulation ofresearch methods(Cohen,
Manion, and Morrison 2004) would ensure that the findings were based on a robust
assessment of the activities associated with the garden in these 10 primary schools.
A representative sample of 10 case-study primary schools were selected from the
RHS database by a stratified random approach that took into account geographical
location,relative levels of deprivation,size of schooland pupilattainment levels.
Seven urban and threerural schoolsthat had achieved differentlevelsof the
campaign’s benchmark award system were chosen:two had reached levelfive (the
highest), three were at levels three or four and five were at level two. School gardens
ranged in size from those with large grounds with room for play areas, sports fields,
flower beds,vegetable growing areas and orchards,while others had more limited
space or no areas that could be converted to garden use (Passy, Morris,and Reed
2010, 11). In these cases, the lack of available grounds was made up by access to loc
allotments. The school garden was taken to include the areas used for cultivation of
flowers and surrounding lawns,the places used for the production offruit and
vegetables and any distinct area thathad a pond or had been designated as,for
instance, a sensory garden.
The schoolsthat were invited to participate in the study were enthusiastic
supporters of the research and gave generously of their time. Although the names of
individual interviewees remained confidential, schools were asked if they would like
to remain anonymous or be mentioned by name in the report; all chose to be named,
and the brief description of each school that was included in the report was approved
by the head teacheror a seniorleaderbefore publication.Although we gained
permission to take photographs of gardening activities with the pupils, we only used
them for presentations to the RHS as the time and expense involved were too great
to include them in the publication.
Each schoolwas visited twice.In the first visit,the focus was on exploring the
school’s motivation for joining the campaign, its use of the garden and the perceived
effects of the garden on children’s learning,behaviour and well-being.Interviews
were audio-recorded with participants’permission.During the second visit,the
emphasis was on collecting evidence of the impact of the school garden on di fferent
areas of children’s learning, and to discover the extent to which gardening had been
R. Passy26
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

integrated into the curriculum and schoollife. On both occasions,semi-structured
interviews were conducted with staff,pupils,parents and governors,together with
observations of gardening clubs and lessons that were related to or took place in the
garden. A total of 37 adults and 43 children were interviewed in the first visit, and 34
adults and 44 pupils were interviewed in the second;most members of staff were
interviewed on both visits (depending on availability on the day),but parents and
governors were interviewed once and differentchildren were interviewed on each
visit. Schools were given disposable cameras and diaries in which to record activities
between the visits (Passy, Morris, and Reed 2010, 51–3), but these yielded less data
than had been hoped;keeping the journalwas time-consuming and children’s
operation of the cameras – although in keeping with the spirit of sharing engendered
in these gardens– often resulted in imagesthat could be difficultto interpret.
Nonetheless, even though we lost the potential extra richness of description a fforded
by this kind of data, we found that discussing the diaries and the photographs with
interviewees in the second visit triggered memories and views that were helpful to th
research.
Research analysis and findings
The data were analysed thematically, drawing on Dillon et al.’s (2005, 22) framework
of four areas of learning:
. cognitive – the acquisition of knowledge,understanding and other academic
outcomes
. affective – the developmentof pupil attitudes,values,beliefsand self-
perceptions
. behavioural and physical– personal behaviours,physicalwell-being and
physical skills
. interpersonal and social – communication skills and teamwork.
This framework allowed careful examination of the different types of impact of
garden-related activity on pupils’ learning and behaviour and enabled us to explore
the relationship between the different types of learning. As we coded and categorised
the data,other themes emerged that included the different aims and rationales for
introducing a garden into schoollife, the effect that a garden could have on wider
school community relationshipsand the ways in which school gardenscould
contribute to different policy requirements. These included Every Child Matters and
the duty to promote community cohesion (Passy, Morris, and Reed 2010, 34–43).
In this paper, I focus on the wider benefits of school gardens that the case-study
schools reported. These could be grouped into four, sometimes overlapping, themes
(Passy,Morris, and Reed 2010,18).In the firstplace,as reported above and as
differentresearch suggests(e.g.Ozer 2007;Rickinson etal. 2004),the gardens
provided an arena for different types of learning. They also offered an area for what
could broadly be called pastoral care, sometimes in dedicated places such as sensory
gardens but often in places that were quiet, or where children could busy themselves
with activities such as digging or watering. Third, they presented a focus for school
and local community involvement through different types of activities: selling garden
produce,for instance,was a popular way of disposing of surplus stock that could
also raise fundsand engage parentsand carerswith the garden’sdevelopment.
Education 3–13 27
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

Finally, the garden wasregarded asa source of pleasure forthe entire school
community, something seen in the pride shown by school staff and pupils alike. The
following sections examine these different themes, using examples from the different
schools to show the ways in which they were expressed.
Theme one: to provide an arena for different types of learning that complement and
enrich the curriculum
Schools reported ways of using the garden that encouraged pupils to undertake their
own investigations or to experience things that they were learning in the abstract in
the classroom. Teachers often said that being outside in the garden ‘made it real’ for
the children:
It’s totally different going out into a living,growing garden than it is having a plant
stuck on a table . . .and you know that they [pupils]will remember it so much better
than if you stayed in the classroom and just showed them pictures. (teacher)
Another commented that the garden gave pupils:firsthand experience . . . We’ve painted sunflowers in class, but it’s a very different thing
to seeing things growing outside,and the greenfly and the caterpillars attacking the
plants; you can’t necessarily put those things in context in class. (teacher)
While all the research schools used the school garden for the topic area ‘growing
plants’,they also developed links with other areas of the curriculum.One school
undertook a week-long maths projectaimed atencouraging pupils to investigate
different aspects of plants and to explore links between maths and science.Pupils
undertook activities such as collecting and identifying leaves and measuring their
area,measuring plants by different methods and making graphs to represent their
results. Once she had set the task, the teacher wanted pupils to decide for themselve
the kind of data they needed, how to interpret and present their findings and then to
evaluate their methods: to develop pupils’ ability to be independent learners who had
the confidence to experiment with different approaches and then to reflect on and
critique the quality of their work.A similar type of lesson in other schools was a
‘Darwin thinking walk’in which pupils had to imagine the questions that Darwin
may have asked when he had been undertaking his different types of classification:
the shape of a leaf, for example, or whether it was a ‘bug cafe’ and, if so, where the
insects were harboured.The aims in this case were to trigger children’s curiosity
about the natural world as well as to introduce the concept of scientific classification.
While it was relatively straightforward to link the garden with scientific subjects,
schools also used gardens and their produce as a medium to encourage development
in other areas such as literacy. A class in one school designed and created a booklet
that described the fruit and vegetables they had grown in the garden and then sent
them off to partner schools in different countries with different climates and cultures
around food;these schools responded by sending details of their types of produce
and theirown food traditions.In other schools,children wrote lettersto local
companies to ask for donations to the school garden in the form of plants or tools, or
to the RHS to thank them for a visit to one of their educationalcentres.Another
schoolused the apple trees in the garden for a variety of tasks for Key Stage One
children (i.e. aged 5–7), in which they watched the setting and ripening of the fruit,
R. Passy28
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

picked the apples,measured them,weighed them,cooked and atethem and
compared the flavour to that of dried apples – and then wrote about apples.This
kind of direct experience can enhance the quality of children’s writing for,as one
teacher commented:
If they [pupils]have actually done something,it makes a lot more sense when they’re
writing aboutit. If they’ve physically done itthemselves,they don’tneed the extra
support and guidance to write about it. (teacher)
And pupils responded favourably to these types of lesson,reporting how they
enjoyed the combination of being outside and the practical activity:
I prefer it in the garden because in the classroom itgets allstuffy,and you’re just
writing. Out there it’s more free. (pupil)
while others felt that they could satisfy their curiosity in a way that was not possible
indoors:
You discover things outside.You can’t really do much inside,you justhave to sit
around (pupil).
Theme two: to provide a discrete area that facilitates pastoral care
Interviewees reported that the garden was useful for pastoral care in the sense that it
provided a space that was calm, where pupils could find some respite from the hurly-
burly of the classroom. In this sense, the garden was particularly helpful for pupils
who had difficulty with managing their behaviour or who found it hard to interact
with their peers. One head teacher described how:
We have some very troubled children here,who have some quite severe behavioural
problems; they can often become angry and run out of class. The first place we go and
look for them is often the garden, because for them that is some sort of sanctuary. They
seem to respond really well to what a garden has to offer, like the first flower appearing
. . . They get some support from nature somehow; hard to explain, but I think it gives
them some safety. (head teacher)
One pupil echoed these ideas, saying that for him the garden provided:
. . . a chance to get away from everyone in the classroom. They’re all noisy and they ain’t
listening and they start shouting. And then some of us get in trouble and it’s not even us;
people wind you up. (pupil)
Others reported how they appreciated the peacefulness of particular areas of the
garden:
We’ve got a pond and we find that really calming . . . it’s peaceful. No kids shouting . . .
it’s a happy place. (pupil)
By providing a space for quietreflection and allowing pupils to absorb their
peace and beauty, gardens can provide a valuable function in helping some children
to negotiatetheir way through primaryschool. One teaching assistant(TA)
described how the garden could be particularly helpfulto some children who,for
whatever reason, were having a troublesome time at school:
Education 3–13 29
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

I know children have to come to school . . . and they have to have their numeracy, they
have to have their literacy . . . but sometimes they just need something else. Something
else that’s going to help them through. (TA)
Gardens were also seen as places thatencouraged young people to talk;the
activity taking place within the garden can offer young people a focus so that they
can open up and discuss issues that are troubling them but that they find difficult to
express either in the confines of the classroom or during the busyness of breaks and
lunch time. One head teacher described how the garden had helped a number of boy
in her school who had behavioural problems:
Most of these boys come with other baggage, which is causing them not to be able to
focus in the classroom and to display challenging behaviour. When boys have got their
hands dirty, they talk; they talk and get it off their chest . . . and they feel lighter because
they have talked about it. (head teacher)
The theme of enabling children to be calm was expanded by another head teacher
when she talked about the way that the garden offered pupils a chance to have a
distinctive role in the schooland to develop a sense of quiet pride that they were
making a visible contribution:
I think it gives them a calmness,responsibility,sense ofpurpose,to see something
you’ve planted grow and develop and then maybe see it used back in school. Or to have
people walking around your schooland saying ‘This is lovely,who looks after these
grounds?’and you’re the person saying ‘Yeah,I’m [part of]the green team,I can do
this’. For some children that has been one of our biggest outcomes. (head teacher)
This senseof calmnessreported by this head teachercamefrom pupils’
knowledge that they had been part of making the school look more attractive and
that their effortswere appreciated by both the schoolcommunity and visitors,
contributing to a sense of belonging that is explored further in the following sections.
Theme three: to provide a focus that encourages staff, pupils, parents and the local
community to engage with and contribute to the school
On the one hand, gardens can be demanding places in terms of time and effort, but
on the other they can be a place in which to celebrate and share success whether this
is in the form ofedible produce or a border ofbeautifulflowers.Both offer the
opportunity for members of the local community to become involved with the school
and for the whole school community to contribute.
One school,for instance,wanted to develop theirgarden withoutspending
substantialfunds and believed that building a bottle greenhouse would fulfilthese
particular criteria. The head teacher reported that the response from school, parents
and community was ‘phenomenal’; children and families collected 1600 plastic bottle
which the Year 6 pupils (i.e. aged 10–11) prepared for construction by cleaning and
then threading onto lengths of bamboo. One parent then lent a post-driver to help wit
the greenhouse’s assembly and another parent donated and laid the patio slabs at its
entrance. In total, the cost to the school for the entire construction was £16 – and it is
now used round the year to grow plants in the milder months and to protect more
established plants in the colder parts of the year. The school also reported how they
held a once-a-fortnightly Market Square where Year 6 pupils organised the playgroun
R. Passy30
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

into market stalls in order to raise money for charity and the school,and how the
garden stall sold surplus plants and specially grown herb gardens to parents and othe
visitors. There were plans to keep chickens and for the eggs to be made into cakes fo
another stall in the market, possibly to be filled with jam made from raspberries grow
in the garden (Passy and Waite 2011, 165), and for other garden produce to be made
into soup or chutney.The (relatively new) head teacher reported that these garden
projects demonstrated the culture ofthe schoolwhere allmembers ofthe school
community could play a part in working towards a particular aim and in which all
contributions could be valued; the garden offered a focus for parents who, for instanc
were less interested in or had no time for helping in the classroom or on school trips.
Another example of community involvement that was triggered by the garden cam
from a school that invited the local pensioners’ club to help themselves to the fruit an
vegetables growing in the school allotment during the summer holidays. In return, the
pensioners invited the schoolto join in their harvest festival,so pupils picked and
bagged vegetables grown in the allotment to take to the festival; each pensioner rece
a bag of fresh produce. The relationship continued with the pensioners inviting a class
of pupils to sing at their tea dance and then to stay on for refreshments when the dan
was finished. During the course of the conversation over tea and games of chequers,
was revealed that the schoolhad a knitting and sewing club but lacked experienced
people who could teach the children – and the pensioners instantly volunteered to co
over and contribute to the clubs on two afternoons at the end of term. While not ever
school garden involved in the research had – or could have – a story such as this, it
illustrates how gardens can offer a medium through which localrelationships can
develop and flourish; the school’s generosity in offering the pensioners fresh produce
was amply repaid by their continued and reciprocal relationship.
Theme four: to provide a source of pride, pleasure and enjoyment for the entire schoo
community
The final area in which the schoolgardenswere seen to provide a significant
contribution to the schoolwas through offering a source ofpride,pleasure and
enjoymentfor all who were involved in orvisited the school.There were two
particular aspects to this; one was the kind of pleasure that comes from working in
the garden and enjoying the result,while the other was related to the types of
relationships that were fostered when undertaking gardening duties.
The pupils reported the ways in which they enjoyed the process of gardening;
getting messy, digging, and planting and watering the vegetables and flowers were a
cited as pleasurable,while attending to the compost heap and weeding,especially
dandelions ‘that have really strong roots’ (pupil), were regarded as the least favourite
jobs. Pupils also enjoyed watching how the garden changed over the growing period,
and typical comments included:
I like to see how it’s changed in the past week.Each day when you’re passing it,it
catches your eye and you think, ‘Oh, that’s changed. Something’s grown’. (pupil)
Similarly,pupils reported how looking atthe garden generated feelingsof
happiness:
I like walking into school and seeing all the plants; they’re bright and nice and tidy. It’s
quite a joyful feeling, it makes you kind of happy. (pupil)
Education 3–13 31
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

This was partly because the children could – again – take pride in their work,
knowing that the school’s flowers helped to make it a cheerful, welcoming place:
What I like about planting is . . .you don’t want to think this is a really grim school.
When you walk in the front gate, you see the flowers and that gives you a really good
start to school. It makes you feel good. (pupil)
An extra benefit from this pride was that children took care of the garden, with
several teachers commenting on the absence of vandalism at their schools:
We don’t have our local children climbing over the fence and smashing [the garden] . . .
because they care about it. (assistant head teacher)
Both teachers and pupils talked about the way that relationships could change
while working in the garden,particularly in schools where staff and children were
learning to garden together. Staff spoke of the garden as a ‘leveller’ in the sense that
all ages could learn from each other, and reflected on how they could see a di fferent
side to young people when they were outside to the one presented in the classroom;
informalconversation flowed in the garden when children were working in a way
that was impossible when indoors.In addition,pupils took pleasure in developing
new friendships through a common interest that involved working together:
You work better as a team in the garden; in the classroom you can’t work together as
much because you’re sitting in rows and you can’t be as friendly with people. Often in
the garden it changes you.You work with more people in the garden,not just your
friends. It will make you more friendly with them, it does kind of help you make more
friends. (pupil)
The finalword goes to a young pupilwho summed up her feelings about her
school garden in the following way:
Having a garden has made us happier because we’re not always in the classroom.It’s
made the teachers happier as well . . . When you’re out there you feel like you won’t get
told off if you say something. In the classroom you might be scared to say something in
case it was silly. (pupil)
A divide between teachers
These schools gave clear examples of how the garden could be used in a variety of
ways to engage children with different types of learning as well as to involve the loca
community in parts of schoollife; one of the aims of the research was to seek out
areas of good practice so that others can draw on the knowledge and experience of
the interviewees.However,the research also showed thatthereseemed to be
somethingof a division betweengarden enthusiastsand those who were
unresponsive to the potential that the school garden might offer; a major challenge
cited by respondents was the difficulty in promoting garden use,particularly if the
leading staff member of the garden was a TA,as hierarchies within some schools
meant that they were often perceived as having too little authority to do more than
suggest relevant activities to the teaching staff (Passy, Morris, and Reed 2010, 13).
Recognition of this apparent divide between garden enthusiasts and those who
did not engage was strengthened during the course of the author’s current school
garden project (the ‘pedagogy project’).This research is intended to develop and
explore a theme raised by the RHS study butthat was beyond itsremit:the
R. Passy32
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

underlying (orexplicit)theoriesof learning thatteachersare using when they
encourage their pupils to be outside in the garden.Four case-study schools are
participating,and analysis ofthe differentapproaches and theories used in these
schools is intended to contribute to the pedagogical debates that currently surround
learning outside the classroom (e.g. Waite and Pratt 2011). At an early point during
the course ofthis study,there wasa discussion among enthusiastsof outdoor
learning thatwas related to setting up an eventfor local schools – ‘Butyou’re
preaching to the converted!’ was one immediate response to the suggestion that suc
an event would help (in part) to promote the use of school gardens: ‘the people who
will want to come to such an event will already be interested in teaching and learning
in the garden!’.
While this may be something ofan exaggeration – the RHS has,after all,
recruited a high number of schools to their Campaign for SchoolGardening – it
highlights the point that,personalinterest aside,schoolgardens can be seen as an
area into which teachers can be unwilling to venture.In the following sections,I
examine why this might be so.
Gardens and school culture
Part of any evaluativeresearch isinvestigating thechallengesto the smooth
implementation to a programme or initiative,and the NFER research explored
accordingly the challenges involved in setting up,using and maintaining a school
garden. The principal concern from the case-study schools was that gardens involved
a great deal of hard work: managing thephysicallabour of developing and
maintaining the site,planning lessons around the garden and encouraging parents
and carers to engage with the garden – however rewarding these activities might be i
and of themselves – were all regarded as tasks that consumed a considerable amoun
of time and energy (Passy, Morris, and Reed 2010, 12–13). From another perspective,
the factors that enabled a schoolgarden to be developed included strong support
from senior management, a key member of staff to take responsibility for the garden
giving gardening activities a high profile within the schooland ensuring thatthe
garden-related tasks were manageable for staff (33).The subjective nature of these
factors,which alldepend on people’s attitudes and judgements,suggests that the
school culture plays an important part in decisions related to the garden by providing
the framework for the level of integration of the garden into school life and for the
personal and professional decisions on whether or not to become engaged.
‘School culture’ can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Daly (2008), for instance,
tells us that there were 156 definitions of the concept by 1952 and that it is likely
there are now many more as the importance of school culture has been recognised in
implementing change within schools.He argues,however,that the discourse has
been dominated by an unsatisfactory characterisation of schoolculture as ‘shared
vision and common values’ and suggests that it might be better described as a ‘zone
of polyculturalcontestation and ideologicalsettlement’(5–6).While this brings
together the idea of place, difference in values and the importance of negotiation, it
fails to acknowledge the ways in which a school’s culture is embedded in its history
(Solvason 2005), through the traditions and choices made by head teachers and sta ff
over a period of time that help to give schools their own rituals and identities. Glover
and Coleman offer a comprehensive definition when they suggest that school culture
can be seen as:
Education 3–13 33
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

the integration ofenvironmental,organisationaland experientialfeatures ofschool
existence to offer a context for teaching and learning and its subsequent improvement.
(2005, 266)
Here the school’s culture is dynamic and experienced as a context for the teaching
and learning activities within.It is expressed in expectations of how head teacher,
staff and pupils relate to each other, the way they experience these relationships and
in the way the schoolis organised.This can include the use ofthe grounds,the
management of the curriculum, attitudes towards inclusion and – importantly in this
context – the type of education that the schoolaims to offer the pupils.The head
teacher plays an important part in determining the schoolculture,particularly in
small primaries,through the leadership thatsuch a post entails,but the other
contributors of staff, pupils, parents and carers all help to determine the ‘context for
teaching and learning’ – in which learning in the garden can play a large, developing,
minimalor non-existentpart. In the following extractfrom an interview with a
deputy head teacher in the pedagogy project, she describes how using the garden as
an outdoor classroom is an intrinsic part of the school because:
. . .having this wonderfulspace is something that enables us to be as creative as we
possibly can be in order to, to get those children [who lack confidence] to a point where
they have good self-esteem, they have skills, they want to learn more. Because most of
the time they do, once they’ve started on something, they want to know more. And their
questioning skills . . . they romp ahead with questioning skills because they want to find
out more.Even if they’re just asking themselves,I wonder what’s going to happen to
that, how long it will take to grow, you know, when will we get the flowers, when can we
harvest this. (deputy head teacher)
This quotation describes a culture that is inclusive,that seeks to encourage all
children to develop socially,emotionally and academically and that has a creative
approach to fostering this development. The term ‘wonderful space’ suggests a love a
enthusiasm for the outdoors that needs to be communicated to all who are involved
with the school, and there is appreciation of how the outdoors can stimulate and exci
children’s curiosity; the garden and grounds are regarded as a pivotal part of the scho
This was substantiated by other teachers and pupils in their interviews, and the garde
lead teacher provided a practicalillustration of the generalapproach to the garden
through a staff meeting that had been spent preparing the vegetable beds for plantin
Most of the teachers are quite responsive here to taking, even if it’s just a small, part.
They’ve allgot pots outside their classrooms . . .we’ve had a staff meeting which was
totally out in the garden to,you know,get it moving a bit because I could see it was
taking a long time with the kids. So then we all went out and blitzed it. (teacher)
Policy constraints and the risk of uncertainty
Nonetheless,echoing the NFER research in which promoting garden use within
schools was seen as a significant challenge, and furthermore in a school that strongly
encourages use of the garden as part of children’s learning experiences,the same
deputy head teacher spoke of how using the school garden was perceived by some as
. . . very risky. And frowned on sometimes because it’s not the norm . . . And I do find it
really hard to get that across to younger staff . . . some of the younger staff coming in,
R. Passy34
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

they’re ‘Oh (panicking sound) the literacy hour or whatever, we’ve got to be doing that’
. . . And I keep saying to them . . . you will get such a lot from your children. And they
look at me as much as to say ‘Oh, is she all right? You know, she’s getting on a bit!’.
(deputy head teacher)
This sense of struggle is a reflection of how the framework for any school culture is
national education policy; as the younger staff cited above are acutely aware, schools
have certain dutiesthey mustdischarge,curricularrequirementsto teach and
compulsory examinations for which they must prepare their pupils.The belief here
seems to be that children can only learn indoors in their classrooms and that going
outside is neither desirable nor practical, a point echoed in other studies of learning
outside the classroom (e.g. Maynard, Waters, and Clement 2011; Nundy, Dillon, and
Dowd 2009).However,the importantpolicy documentExcellence and Enjoyment
(DfES 2003) seemed, when it was published, to herald an era in which primary childre
were entitled to a broad curriculum and in which teachers should have flexibility with
the curriculum to stimulate enjoyment of learning; the aim was ‘to encourage schools
take control of their curriculum, and to be innovative’ (DfES 2003, 16). Similarly, the
related teacher continuing professional development (CPD) materials were intended t
supportthe identification oflocal prioritiesfor improvementtogetherwith new
approaches to teaching and learning that would excite and engage both teachers and
pupils (Passy and Waite 2008; Waite, Carrington and Passy 2005). The rationale for
this was made clear in the Secretary of State for Education’s Foreword to the original
document: ‘Children learn better when they are excited and engaged . . . when there
joy in what they are doing, they learn to love learning’ (DfES 2003, 3) – the result of
stimulating children’s interest through enjoyment was to be that standards, measured
in test scores, would rise. As we have seen from the research cited in this paper, work
and learning outside in the garden was regarded by teachers and pupils as a highly
pleasurable activity that can inspire and motivate children while enhancing the learni
undertaken indoors.If Excellence and Enjoyment were combined with the Learning
Outside the Classroom Manifesto (DfES 2006),it would seem to provide a policy
context that directly encouraged learning outdoors.
However,as the research into the CPD materialsshowed,mixed messages
coming from centralgovernmentat the time emphasised the ‘excellence’of the
standards agenda rather than the ‘enjoyment’ outlined in the strategy. The pressures
emanating from high-stakes testing of children aged 7 and 11, in which the results ar
collated nationally and published in the form ofso-called ‘league tables’,from
Ofsted school inspections and from years of de-professionalisation in which teachers’
autonomy and judgement have been restricted (Pring 2001), all mitigated against the
implementation of a policy that encouraged greater freedom and flexibility in the
classroom (Passy and Waite 2008). More recently, Alexander’s (2010) comprehensive
review of primary education shows that these mixed messages have continued, and
he comments on ‘the excess of prescription and micro-management’by the former
Departmentfor Children, Schools and Families (now the Departmentfor
Education) together with the ‘reinforcement’ of this prescription through the system
of Ofsted school inspections and requirements for initial teacher training. He argues
that these have resulted in further loss of ‘professional flexibility and autonomy’ and
notes the problem of a ‘pedagogy which rates transmission more important that the
pursuit of knowledge in its wider sense’ (Alexander 2010, 251). The long-term e ffect
of this prescriptive system of primary education can be what he terms a ‘managerial
conformity’(281)that discouragesteachersfrom questioning orattempting to
Education 3–13 35
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

change the system.In practicalterms,this means that teachers can be reluctant to
risk experimentation with learning outside the classroom;the limits on time and
resources when undertaking new areas of planning,the uncertainty of measurable
resultswhen engaging in thistype of learning and an unwillingnessto try an
approach thatis – perhaps– outside theircomfortzone all contribute to the
difficulties of promoting garden use. And this is illustrated precisely in the quotation
above where the younger staff,who are in a school culture that strongly promotes
teaching and learning in the garden, find the idea of learning outside to be risky.
Conclusion
The research cited here illustrates how teaching and learning in the schoolgarden
can make a valuable contribution to children’ssocial,academic and emotional
development, and how the sheer pleasure of creating a garden can have a ripple e ffe
throughout the school,as others enjoy the beauty and/or the produce that result
from this effort. The research also shows how using the school garden as an arena for
learning is hampered by national policy that, on the one hand, recommends learning
outside as an experience thatdeepens and enriches learning inside the classroom
(DfES 2006;Ofsted 2008) but,on the other,fails to promote an environment in
which teachers can have the freedom and confidence to experiment with different
approaches without fear of external recrimination.These are not new critiques but
are particularly important at a time when there are concerns that children are both
losing touch with the natural world (Louv 2008) and are having fewer opportunities
to engage with learning outdoors (Taylor, Power, and Rees 2010; Waite 2010).
In addition, the research draws attention to some of the potential casualties of a
high-pressure,high-stakes performativity agenda in which practitioners align their
teaching to targets,indicators and evaluations (Ball2003)– those children and
young people who,for a host of differentreasons,are struggling with classroom
learning.The reported benefits of the schoolgarden included the capacity to offer
respite from the intensity of the classroom environment and a sense of enjoyment
and success that had been lacking in some pupils’ school experience; we were told a
numberof storiesthat illustrated how the garden had helped encourage young
people to engage with their learning.But these projects also show how the garden
can bring an authenticityto learning that was appreciated and enjoyed by
interviewees of all ages and abilities, highlighting how learning outside in the garden
is a truly inclusive experience in a way that is not always possible indoors. It may be
that the current government’s stated aims of creating a schoolsystem that has a
greater degree of autonomy, thus allowing greater innovation in the curriculum (DfE
2010b),may give teachers the greater freedom that was pledged in Excellence and
Enjoyment (DfES 2003); the promise to ensure that there is space in the school day
together with resources that will ‘guarantee a truly rounded education for all’ (DfE
2010b,45) certainly offers a reason to hope. However,as Waite (2010,123) points
out in relation to the academy programme, the practical effects of these policies will
only be known in the longer term.
In the meantime,it is worth noting thatschoolgardenshave a numberof
advantages over other types of outdoor learning.First, they are on site (or,in the
case of school allotments, within walking distance of the main school grounds) and
therefore easily accessible for both staff and pupils;second,their cost is relatively
small as they rely neither on transport or on expensive equipment (Passy and Waite
R. Passy36
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

2011).Health and safety issues are easily managed in the schoolgarden (Dyment
2005),although supervisingthe walk to an allotment can be more difficult,
particularly ifthe route is along a road.Gardens are also available atall times
throughout the year and, with careful planning and organisation, can provide a wide
variety of learning opportunities for children and staff alike with peaks of activity
during the spring and summer months.Briefly put,in these cash-strapped times
when opportunities for costly adventure education and residential trips seem to be
decreasing,the schoolgarden offers convenient,practicaland accessible opportu-
nities for both staff and pupils to engage with teaching and learning outdoors.
Finally, however, there is the issue of promoting garden use among teachers who,
for a variety ofreasons,are notreadily persuaded oftheir benefits.Here, more
research is needed that investigates the pedagogy, processes and outcomes of learni
in the garden and that explores more deeply the ways in which the school garden can
enrich school life. At a time when funding for such projects is increasingly scarce, this
may be difficult – but, given the wider political and financial environment, is of critica
importance for children’s social, emotional and academic development.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank the RHS and Plymouth University for funding these projects, the
schools that supported the research and her colleagues at NFER who were members of the
research team. The conclusions drawn are her own.
References
Alexander, R., ed. 2010. Children, their world, the education. Final report and recommendation
of the Cambridge Primary Review. London and New York: Routledge.
Ball, S. 2003. The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy
18, no. 2: 215–28.
Blair, D. 2009.The child in the garden:An evaluative review ofthe benefitsof school
gardening. Journal of Environmental Education 40, no. 2: 15–38.
Cohen, L., L. Manion, and K. Morrison. 2004. Research methods in education. 5th ed. London
and New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Daly, T. 2008.Schoolculture and values-related change:Towardsa critically pragmatic
conceptualisation. Irish Educational Studies 27, no. 1: 5–27.
Department for Education (DfE). 2010a. Schools, pupils and their characteristics January 2010
(provisional).StatisticalFirst Release.Available at: http://www.education.gov.uk/
rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000925/sfr09-2010.pdf.
Department for Education (DfE).2010b.The importance of teaching: The schools white paper
2010.Availableat: https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/CM-
7980.pdf.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES). 2003. Excellence and enjoyment: A strategy for
primary schools. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20040722013944/
http://dfes.gov.uk/primarydocument/pdfs/DfES-Primary-Ed.pdf.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES). 2005. Extended schools: Access to opportunities
and services for all. A prospectus. Nottingham: DfES.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES). 2006. Learning outside the classroom manifesto.
Available at: http://www.thegrowingschoolsgarden.org.uk/downloads/lotc-manifesto.pdf.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES)/Department of Health.2005.Nationalhealthy
school status: A guide for schools. London: Department of Health.
Dillon, J., M. Morris, L. O’Donnell, A. Reid, M. Rickinson, and W. Scott. 2005. Engaging and
learning with the outdoors: The final report of the outdoor classroom in a rural context acti
research project. Slough: NFER.
Dyment, J. 2005.Green school groundsas sites for outdoor learning:Barriers and
opportunities.InternationalResearch in Geographicaland EnvironmentalEducation 14,
no. 1: 28–45.
Education 3–13 37
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015

Glover,D., and M. Coleman.2005.Schoolculture,climate and ethos:Interchangeable or
distinctive concepts?Journal of In-Service Education 31, no. 2: 251–71.
Humberstone,B., and I. Stan. 2011.Outdoor learning:Primary pupils’experience and
teachers’ interaction in outdoor learning. Education 3–13 iFirst article: 1–12.
Knight, S. 2011. Forest School for all. London: Sage.
Lakin, L., and M. Littledyke. 2008. Health promoting schools: Integrated practices to develop
critical thinking and healthy lifestylesthrough farming,growing and health eating.
International Journal of Consumer Studies 32: 253–9.
Louv, R. 2008.Last child in the woods:Saving ourchildren from nature-deficitdisorder.
New York: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
Maynard,T., J. Waters,and J. Clement.2011.Moving outdoors:Further explorations of
‘child-initiated’learning in the outdoorenvironment.Education 3–13.DOI: 10.1080/
03004279.2011.578750
National College for School Leadership. n.d. What is a sustainable school? Available at: http://
www.nationalcollege.org.uk/index/leadershiplibrary/leadingschools/sustainable-schools/
about-sustainable-schools/what-is-a-sustainable-school–1.htm.
Nundy, S., J. Dillon,and P. Dowd. 2009. Improving and encouraging teacher confidence in
out-of-classroom learning:The impactof the Hampshire Trailblazerprojecton 3-13
curriculum practitioners. Education 3-13 37, no. 1: 61–73.
O’Brien, L. 2009. Learning outdoors: The Forest School approach. Education 3-13 37, no. 1:
46–60.
Ofsted.2008.Learning outside the classroom:How far should you go? Available at:http://
www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/learning-outside-classroom.
Ozer, E. 2007. The effects of school gardens on students and schools: Conceptualization and
considerations for maximising healthy development. Health Education and Behaviour 34,
no. 6: 846–63.
Passy, R., and S. Waite. 2008. ‘Excellenceand Enjoyment’continuingprofessional
developmentmaterials in England:Both a bonus and onus for schools.Journalof In-
Service Education 34, no. 3: 311–25.
Passy, R., and S. Waite. 2011. School gardens and Forest Schools. In Children learning outside
the classroom from birth to eleven, ed. S. Waite, 162–75. London: Sage.
Passy, R., M. Morris, and F. Reed. 2010. Impact of school gardening on learning: final report
submitted to the RoyalHorticulturalSociety.Available at:http://apps.rhs.org.uk/school
gardening/uploads/documents/Impact_of_school_gardening_on_learning_821.pdf.
Pring, R. 2001. Managing the professions: The case of the teachers. Political Quarterly 72, no.
3: 278–321.
Rea, T., and S. Waite. 2009. Editorial: International perspectives on outdoor and experiential
learning. Education 3-13 37, no. 1: 1–4.
Richards, D. n.d. From carrots to cassava.Available at: http://www.risc.org.uk/files/
carrots2cassava_lo.pdf.
Rickinson, M., J. Dillon, K. Teamey, M. Morris, M. Young Choi, D. Sanders, and P. Benefield.
2004. A review of research on outdoor learning. Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council.
Royal HorticulturalSociety.2010.Gardening in schools:A vital tool for children’s learning.
Available at:http://apps.rhs.org.uk/schoolgardening/uploads/documents/RHS-Gardening-
in-Schools-Aug10_852.pdf.
Solvason,C. 2005.Investigatingspecialistschool ethos . . . ordo you mean culture?
Educational Studies 31, no. 1: 84–94.
Taylor, C., S. Power, and G. Rees. 2010. Out of school learning: The uneven distribution of
school provision and local authority support. British Educational Research Journal 36, no.
6: 1017–36.
Waite, S. 2010. Losing our way? The downward path for outdoor learning for children aged 2–
11 years. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 10, no. 2: 111–26.
Waite,S., V. Carrington,and R. Passy.2005.Evaluation ofExcellence and Enjoyment:
Learning and teaching in theprimary years.Final report.University of Plymouth:
Unpublished report for the Primary National Strategy.
Waite,S., and N. Pratt. 2011.Theoreticalperspectives on learning outside the classroom:
Relationships between learning and place. In Children learning outside the classroom from
birth to eleven, ed. S. Waite, 1–18. London: Sage.
R. Passy38
Downloaded by [198.91.36.79] at 23:10 21 January 2015