The increased presence of technology in our daily lives means that youth across the United States are spending less time learning in nature. As a result, federal agencies worked with partners to develop programs that promote EE curricula for youth. One such initiative is the Children's Forest—created by the U.S. Forest Service—that works with partners to develop EE programming for students in grades K-12. However, few studies have evaluated these collaborative programs so little is known about their efficacy. To address this gap, Children's Forest Northwest (CFNW) developed an evaluation strategy to measure whether the program was reaching its goals. While the CFNW evaluation measured student perceptions and academic performance, this study focused only on adult stakeholder perceptions. This research evaluated how parents of 4th grade students, 4th grade teachers, and K-5 school administrators perceived the EE programming offered through CFNW.
Located in the pacific northwest, CFNW develops EE programs that promote youth interactions with the natural environment. CFNW has four priorities: 1) provide more nature-based opportunities; 2) apply STEM education; 3) improve students' mental and physical health through outdoor activity; and 4) promote leadership. The researchers elected to focus on adult stakeholders of 4th grade students because 4th grade classrooms reported the highest use of CFNW EE programs.
The research occurred at the “user school,” a K-5 primary school that regularly implemented CFNW EE programming. At the time of this study, 96 children were enrolled in the 4th grade. Research participants included all three 4th grade teachers, both school administrators (principal and vice principal), and eight parents. The researchers conducted, recorded, and transcribed interviews with each participant. The interview included questions regarding the parents' general perception of the CFNW program and if their child ever talked to them about environmental issues such as conservation or climate change. Once completed, the researchers analyzed the data to identify common themes.
Overall, findings suggested that adult stakeholders acknowledged general benefits of the CFNW EE programming. However, many felt that the benefits were greater for students from low-income backgrounds than for students from mid-to-high income families. Some of the benefits identified in this study included increased access to nature, particularly for children with disabilities or from low-income families, and increased focus and knowledge retention.
One theme that emerged was that stakeholders believed students benefited from the CFNW programming. Programming benefits fell into three categories: 1) it provided opportunities for youth to experience nature, 2) the outdoor experiences complemented classroom learning and bolstered retention, and 3) students' interaction with nature increased their ability to focus on the task at hand.
Another theme was related to the values of the CFNW program and had 2 sub-themes: 1) how CFNW impacted families, and 2) how the program was valued differently based on socioeconomic backgrounds. Many parents stated that the program had little impact because they already encouraged their children to explore the outdoors sustainably. The majority of participants felt that CFNW was valuable and should be included in school curriculum; however, stakeholders mentioned that students from low-income families would benefit more than students whose families were middle-to-high income. They reasoned that well-off families can afford to take time off work and spend the money on an outdoor-focused trip while low income families are unable to provide this opportunity for their children. Therefore, students and families from low income backgrounds would likely value the program the most.
The authors mentioned the small sample size of 13 adult stakeholders as a limitation, indicating that stakeholders from other schools may hold varying perceptions of EE programming. The authors had sent letters and emails to encourage parental participation, but they were unsuccessful in increasing participation numbers. In addition, the study only focused on the perceptions of adults from one school, also limiting the generalizability of the results. Practitioners should use caution when assuming the results would be similar at other schools that implement EE programs. In addition, all the participants identified as white, indicating a lack of racial and socioeconomic diversity in the study. Programs with more diverse demographic compositions may have different results.
To improve EE programming efficacy, the authors recommend ensuring that the outdoor experiences complement what the students learn in the classroom. Many of the stakeholders highlighted that the students' interaction with nature improved their critical thinking skills and allowed them to reflect upon what they learned previously. Programs similar to CFNW should evaluate the curriculum's efficacy to ensure the program is reaching its goals. The authors advise practitioners to consider how EE programs affect students from different socioeconomic backgrounds and create EE curricula that meets the needs of diverse students.
The Bottom Line
<p>This study evaluated the Children's Forest Northwest (CFNW), and EE program created by the U.S. Forest Service. The authors evaluated how adult stakeholders, including 4th grade parents, teachers, and school administrators, perceived the EE programming offered through CFNW. These stakeholders perceived that the program benefited students by improving access to nature, bolstering critical thinking, supporting knowledge retention, and boosting focus in students. However, many stakeholders mentioned that students from low-income families benefited more from CFNW than students from middle-to-high income families. The authors encouraged practitioners to assess EE curriculum in schools by engaging with stakeholders and to consider the diversity of students when creating EE programs. Evaluation of the curriculum's efficacy is important to ensure the EE program is reaching its goals.</p>
Research Partner