The emerging trend to use vertical school designs in cities raises concerns about access to natureIn response to increasing population and the lack of vacant space, some cities in Australia are turning to vertical (high-rise) school designs. This paper addresses several related concerns: (1) How will “vertical schooling” (VS) impact students’ access to nature? (2) How can vertical schools meet the requirements of outdoor education and education for sustainability?
Implications of the VS design for students, teachers, and the environment remain unknown. What is known is that research provides strong evidence of the importance of contact with nature for children’s development and learning. Also known is the fact that the VS design means that children will not have access to natural play spaces and expansive yards at their schools. Opportunities for green exercise and outdoor physical activity will thus be greatly curtailed. How VS will impact students’ access to, understandings of, and relationships with nature is also of concern.
Some early childhood settings, already located in high-rise buildings, have introduced potted plants and plastic turf to simulate a natural environment. As noted by the authors, this “simulated nature is manifestly inadequate and does little to replicate the opportunities for discovery, observation of natural processes or sensory engagement of genuine outdoor green spaces.” At times, nearby community parks and gardens may serve as substitutes for school playgrounds. This arrangement not only provides opportunities for outdoor play and engagement with nature, but also engages children in their communities, which can promote a sense of belonging. Access to these community spaces, however, isn’t assured. Risk aversion and litigation concerns often serve as barriers to the use of community spaces.
Even though the Australian Government recently mandated Education for Sustainability (EfS) across all curricular areas, approximately 80% of 5000 survey respondents indicated that teachers are either unaware of EfS or do not understand it. Only 2% of the teachers who say they implement EfS actually meet the related professional standards for instruction in this area. An emphasis on standardized testing in other areas of the curriculum contributes to why EfS isn’t adequately addressed. Rather than trying to “do more” to address this concern, the authors advocate a strategy focusing on “doing things differently.” The emerging trend in VS makes alternative approaches even more important. Just what this means for children and other stakeholders is still to be determined. Curriculum researchers are encouraged to find new ways of looking at such ideas as nature in VS.
The Bottom Line