Table 3.
Reported outcomes of studies on regular school- and curriculum-based outdoor education programmes.
| Source | Outcomes on Learning Dimensions | Outcomes on Social Dimensions | Additional Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mygind [4] | PA significant higher during outdoor classes compared to indoor classes (p < 0.001, 2000/2001); no significant differences in PA between outdoor classes and indoor classes including 2 PE lessons (p = 0.52, 2002); significant −level: 0.05 | ||
| Mygind [7] | higher preferences for learning in the outdoor setting compared to indoor setting; significant differences in three out of 14 statements | significant more positive social relations in the outdoor setting compared to the indoor setting (p < 0.001); significance-level: 0.05 | significant higher perceived PA in the outdoor setting (p < 0.01); significant −level: 0.05 |
| Dettweiler et al. [23] | long-term educational overseas expedition can lead to symptoms of a reverse culture shock; similar readjustment problems and development of coping strategies for all the participants, shown in a U-curve model; the longer the students had time to readjust, the more positive they report on perceived programme effects, shown as a linear function; no differences between cruises and gender | ||
| Hartmeyer et al. [6] | identification of six important conditions for the improvement of social relations: play, interaction, participation and pupil-centred tasks—important for positive social relations during udeskole; co-operation and engagement—consequences of improved social relations in subsequent years | ||
| Martin et al. [28] | IG: significant decrease in 5 CEVS domains: courage (p < 0.006); temperance (p = 0.084); acceptance (p = 0.014); compassion (p = 0.109); humility (p = 0.009); CG: significant decrease in courage (p = 0.169) and increase in temperance (p = 0.389); acceptance (p = 0.553); compassion (p = 0.796); humility (p = 0.553); significance-level: 0.1 | ||
| Santelmann et al. [29] | improved understanding of decision-making on farm and forest enterprises; insights into the global interconnectedness and ecodynamic drivers of agricultural markets | ||
| Moeed et al. [31] | year 10 students: improved horticulture skills (85% improved grade with 13%); year 9 students: strong level of commitment to develop knowledge and skills | former students: long term effects of the programme concerning positive environmental behaviour: growing own vegetables, participating in community-based planting programmes, taking own students outdoors within environmental projects, cleaning the Himalayas | |
| Gustafsson et al. [5] | overall positive, but not significant effect on mental health in the IG (p > 0.1); significant decrease in mental health problems for boys in IG compared to CG (p < 0.001); no significant differences for girls; significance-level: 0.1 | ||
| Bowker et al. [34] | gardening experience has a positive impact on curriculum learning: indication of direct association between gardening activities and improved learning | overall sense of pride, excitement and high self-esteem; gardening experience had a positive impact on students’ general school experience: indication of direct association between gardening activities and self-esteem | |
| Sharpe [31] | strong contextualised learning opportunities for children in Maths, English and Science; learning is perceived as fun through imaginative and creative learning opportunities; transfer from the indoor and outdoor classroom to real-life situations | building of trusting relationships and educationally-focused symbiotic relationships; growth in self-confidence; experience to take active responsibility for the environment | |
| Fiskum et al. [33] | gender differences: boys more often grasped affordances specific to the outdoor environment and used own creativity; girls more often grasped affordances not specific to the outdoor environment and used attached objects especially designed for them; girls more often regulate their action in the outdoor setting | ||
| Wistoft [27] | students developed a desire to learn through participation in the programme; they learned through enjoyment and experiences, they perceived learning as fun | students developed social competencies through participation in the programme | |
| Ernst et al. [30] | significant higher reading + writing scores for IG compared to CG (p = 0.03); positive significant increase in science process, problem-solving, technology skills, skills in working and communication for IG compared to CG (p < 0.01); students in the IG became more interested in school and learning fostered by outdoor learning | positive significant difference in students' attitudes towards the prairie wetlands environment for IG compared to CG (p = 0.02); IG students improved their classroom behaviour and prompted a sense of belonging |
Note: IG: intervention group; CG: control group, PA: physical activity; sig: significant; PE: physical education.