Attempts to mitigate perceived risk result in education and leisure opportunities that are highly structured and supervised for students with disabilitiesThe focus of this qualitative study was on the relationship between the way in which young people with disabilities are conceptualized and the way in which the green spaces they access are perceived. This study was conducted over a period of a year in a special educational needs secondary school in the UK with the researcher attending the school two to four days per week.
In addition to serving students with mild to moderate learning impairments, the school also has a partially integrated ASD (Autistic Spectrum Disorder) unit on site. The catchment area for this school includes some of the most economically marginalized areas of the community.
Data were collected through a wide range of research activities engaging both students and staff. While these data collection activities included observations and interviews, a variety of ‘creative’ and ‘active’ approaches were also used, such as video diaries, map making, drawing, games and drama. The final set of data included perceptions of the students with disabilities, the green spaces, and approaches to managing risk and danger. These perceptions reflected the thinking and observations of the students, staff, and the researcher herself. All the students who participated in the production of data had some level of verbal communication, with many being able to communicate fluently both through speaking and writing.
Findings indicated that the students’ experiences were heavily influenced by their status as being disabled. Their interactions and use of green spaces clearly reflected their perceived inability to engage appropriately in these spaces. Staff regularly maintained close proximity to the young people and did not permit independent exploration of the environment. Time was structured around activities with clear boundaries and objectives, with students being given very little opportunities to interact with outdoor spaces on their own terms. While the staff viewed restrictions as attempts to minimize the dangers of activities in outdoor spaces, such restrictions clearly placed limits on student choice.
While green spaces were often used as a place for teaching and learning, the environment itself tended to be a backdrop to planned activities rather than the focus of the activities. When the therapeutic value of the natural environment was noted, it was more so by students than staff.
The term “taskscapes” is used in reference to the practice of restricting students from independent and individualized interactions with natural spaces and focusing, instead, on specific task-orientated outcomes. This “taskscapes” approach, the author suggests, is likely to have detrimental effects for the students’ environmental experience and on their relationship with nature.
The Bottom Line