Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education

ISSN: 1090-1027 (Print) 1745-5642 (Online) Journal homepage: http://tandfonline.com/loi/ujec20

Exploring Early Childhood Teachers Beliefs

and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play: A
Qualitative Study

Sandra McClintic & Karen Petty

To cite this article: Sandra McClintic & Karen Petty (2015) Exploring Early Childhood Teachers
Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play: A Qualitative Study, Journal of Early
Childhood Teacher Education, 36:1, 24-43, DOI: 10.1080/10901027.2014.997844

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2014.997844

Published online: 03 Feb 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5642

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ujec20

Download by: [Ngoc-Linh Nguyen] Date: 17 May 2017, At: 04:31

Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 36:2443, 2015
Copyright National Association of Early Childhood Teacher Educators
ISSN: 1090-1027 print / 1745-5642 online
DOI: 10.1080/10901027.2014.997844

Exploring Early Childhood Teachers Beliefs and

Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play:
A Qualitative Study

SANDRA MCCLINTIC AND KAREN PETTY

Department of Family Sciences, Texas Womans University, Denton, Texas, USA

This qualitative case study explored how early childhood teachers beliefs and practices
influence the function of preschool outdoor play. Teachers believed that supervision was
paramount. They perceived that the physical design of the outdoor environment posed
limitations for planning, preparation, and implementation. Teachers recollections of
their own childhood outdoor activities provided a shared value of freedom during play.
Yet, during outdoor play teachers displayed an adherence to rules or a philosophy-re-
ality conflict (Hatch & Freeman, 1988, p. 158). Teachers believed that outdoor play
is important to the development of young children; however, minimal knowledge of
outdoor play and motivation to promote it was not evident.

Outdoor play at home and at school is essential for healthy child development (Frost &
Norquist, 2007; Garrick, 2004; Louv, 2008; Rivkin, 1998); however, the increased time
in child care because of increased demands on working parents limits outdoor play at
home (Little & Wyver, 2008; Nedovic & Morrissey, 2013). In addition to less time spent in
outdoor play at home, more time at home is spent viewing screens (e.g., television, com-
puters, video games, phones, tablets; Children and Nature Network & IUCN Commission
on Education and Communication, 2012; Clements, 2004; Fjortoft, 2004; Rivkin, 2000)
or with other structured activities (e.g., homework, dance classes, soccer, and tee-ball;
Clements, 2004; Little & Wyver, 2008). The expanded time spent in child care amplifies
the importance of outdoor play as it may be the only opportunity a child has to experience
the outdoor setting. Child care programs have become the most vital environment outside
the home for young children (Cosco, 2007; Nedovic & Morrissey, 2013). The outdoor envi-
ronment provides a multi-sensory, movement-based, holistic and stimulating experience
that is well-suited for young children (White, 2011, p. 7).
More and more children are spending a larger portion of their time in child care or
early childhood programs. Approximately 60% of children, birth to age 5, participate in
nonparental care with 56% attending center-based care (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2013). Children in nonparental care programs spend, on average, 35 hours a
week in the care of someone other than their parents (Child Care Aware of America, 2013).
With less time spent outdoors at home, children need the opportunity to be outdoors in early
care programs. The decision to play outdoors and the implementation of outdoor activities
is usually the responsibility of the classroom teacher.

Received 2 December 2013; accepted 7 September 2014.

Address correspondence to Sandra McClintic, Department of Family Sciences, Texas Womans
University, P.O. Box 425769, Denton, TX 76204-5769, USA. E-mail: smcclintic@twu.edu
24
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 25

This research contains the views of preschool teachers as they examined the functions
of the preschool outdoor play environment. The research questions that informed this study
are: (a) How do early childhood teachers describe their beliefs and perceptions of out-
door play practices in a preschool environment? and (b) How do early childhood teachers
facilitate outdoor play in their preschool environment?

The times I felt I learned the most during my childhood were the times I
explored and played on my own. With this in mind, I allow the children to
play freely during outdoor time. (Nicole, preschool teacher)

I mainly focus on keeping them safe. If they stand on the seesaw, I tell them
to sit down. I always make sure they bring the shovels back down to the other
side of the playground where they are supposed to be. I am mainly telling them
what they should be doing. It is hard to keep them all in line all the time. They
know if someone is on the tricycle that they have to wait their turn. Sometimes
you have to remind them to wait their turn. (Jana, preschool teacher)

These two quotes from this study reveal tensions of the teachers responses of outdoor
play reported in this article. Many teachers are not fully aware of the potential uses and
benefits of outdoor environments and their belief systems about nature, play, education,
and physical activity which may influence the outdoor experience of the children in his
or her charge (Blanchet-Cohen & Elliot, 2011; Fjortoft & Sageie, 2000). The teachers
own childhood and adulthood experiences with the outdoors and with physical activities
all contribute to their beliefs about the contexts of outdoor play environments (Blanchet-
Cohen & Elliot, 2011; Chawla, 1999; Francis, 1995). Teachers interviewed in this study all
believed that outdoor play was essential and remembered as young children having long
periods of time outdoors with freedom to be adventurous and creative; however, teachers
behaviors often prohibited childrens play.

Conceptual Framework
Two theoretical perspectives informed this study: the qualitative case study (Merriam, 1998;
Patton, 2002; Yin, 2009) and activity theory (Goncu, Tuermer, Jain, & Johnson, 1999;
Nardi, 1996; Robbins & Stetsenko, 2002). Activity theory is sustained by intentions and
meaning in a particular community and/or individuals. A thick description of meaning and
intentions provides a clearer and broader picture of behavior (Hatch, 2002). This case study
described in rich detail the teachers own scheme of outdoor play and how that impacted
the outdoor play environment at this particular preschool program.
The case study is described as being particularistic, descriptive, and heuristic
(Merriam, 1998, p. 29)particularistic because the case study centers on a particular event,
program, situation, or phenomenon; descriptive because the end product will provide a
thick description of the phenomenon; and heuristic in that the case study will enlighten
the understanding of the phenomenon. How or why questions are well-suited for case
study research in that they focus on a contemporary phenomenon with a real-life context
and the researcher has little control over the events (Yin, 2009). This case study used how
research questions to collect data, at one early childhood center, to examine the operation of
the outdoor play environment focusing on teachers practices and beliefs. Figure 1 outlines
the steps of the case study.
26 S. McClintic and K. Petty

Case Study Methodology Analysis

Descriptive Purpose Interviews Typological

Model
Linear-analytic Structure Journals Case Study
Reflexivity Report
Bounded Single Program Observations
Peer
Theoretical Framework: Member Debriefer
Activity Theory Checking

Figure 1. Case study model.

Vygotskys (1978) sociocultural theory maintains that social experiences influence the
approaches to thinking and understanding (Berk & Winsler, 1995). Vygotsky believed that
human activity should be explained by human intention which later became known as
activity theory (Hatch, 1995). Individual actions as well as their culturally defined per-
spectives serve as the basis for the behaviors. Motivation or intention is fundamental to this
theory.
Vygotsky, and later his colleagues and followers, A. N. Leontev, and A. R. Luria
are responsible for the development of the cultural-historical activity theory (Robbins &
Stetsenko, 2002). Many of the key components of the activity theory emerged in Leontevs
work. Leontevs theory draws attention to the significance of the community which in turn
influences the activities of children and adults. His theory also provides a conceptualization
of childrens play as an activity where children strive to be adult-like in real-life action
(Goncu, Tuermer, Jain, & Johnson, 1999). Vygotskys and Leontevs cultural-historical
activity theory (Robbins & Stetsenko, 2002) was utilized to explore the intentions of these
early childhood teachers as well as their cultural and educational beliefs and how they influ-
enced their behaviors in relation to their outdoor play practices. This case study uncovered
the motivation and intent of the preschool teachers decision-making in the outdoor play
environment.
The interpretive nature of activity theory seeks to find connections between the local
setting and the broader culture and history. Prominent developmental theorists agree that
childrens play is a universal activity and it promotes development. Individuals participate
in activities thus learning how to use the tools of the culture. This conceptual framework
also included an understanding of how economics influence the availability and type of play
activities for children. The framework identified the beliefs of different communities value
of play and how that value is expressed to children. The economic base of the surrounding
community affected the programming at this early childhood center and the outdoor play
environment. The principles of Leontevs activity framework enabled an understanding
of the specific occurrence of this activity in a given community (Goncu, et al., 1999,
p. 158). An activity that entails the church decision makers, the educators, and the culture of
the community which impacted the early childhood centers culture, activities, and beliefs
related to their outdoor environment.

Early Childhood Teachers and Outdoor Play: Literature Review

Development of Teacher Beliefs

Teachers construct and reconstruct their knowledge as they develop personally and profes-
sionally (Wood & Bennett, 2000). According to Spodek, [t]eachers actions and classroom
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 27

decisions are driven by their perceptions and beliefs (1988, p. 13). In addition, teacher
knowledge includes the teachers personal stock of information, skills, experiences, beliefs
and memories and the assumption that sets of knowledge of different aspects of their work
combine to become a theory or ideology (p. 637). Teachers have a curriculum construct
system that is based on the results of different experiences and the interpretation of events.
These constructs help to determine what actions take place in the classroom (Hamilton,
2006; Spodek, 1988). Through these constructs the early childhood teacher plans, develops,
and executes his or her outdoor play practices. Much of the decision-making opportunities
of early childhood teachers are rooted in their personal practical knowledge rather than
the knowledge of learning and child development theories (Anning, 1988; Baum & King,
2006; Hamilton, 2006; Spodek, 1988; Wood & Bennett, 2000). These implicit beliefs are
often unconsciously held assumptions about children, classrooms, and content to be taught.
Teacher beliefs about people, objects, and events affect their planning, interactions,
and decisions (Fang, 1996). Beliefs may be a key determinant of teacher behavior in the
classroom (Fang, 1996; Isenberg, 1990; Kagan, 1992; Pajares, 1992).
In order to make outdoor time a pleasurable learning experience, the environment must
be appropriate and supported by teachers (Brown et al., 2009; Dowdell, Gray, & Malone,
2011; Wilson, 2008). Childhood experiences with outdoor environments, mainly natural,
are significant life experiences that play a major role in adult perceptions and behavior
(Chawla, 1998; Sebba, 1991; Thompson, Aspinall, & Montarzino, 2008). Recalling their
favorite childhood places, most adults will state it was outdoors (Chawla, 1999; Louv,
2008). Most often the outdoor experience involved nature (trees, streams, sand, rocks, and
woods). Even in urban settings adults recalled playing with twigs, seeds, leaves, etc. The
garden memories of youth directly shape adult images and attitudes about the outdoors
(Chawla, 1998; Francis, 1995). It is important to be aware of the significance of childhood
outdoor experiences and how they relate to individual development and outdoor behav-
iors (Chawla, 1999, 2007). Each person constructs their reality as a result of experiences
and how they interpret those experiences. The teachers beliefs of the outdoor environment
influence their actions and behaviors in the outdoor play environment.

Teachers Outdoor Practices

The environment is the basis of early childhood curriculum, as planning and preparing
the environment is like setting the bait (VanArsdell, 1994, p. 89). The outdoor environ-
ment provides more opportunities with a greater variety of play activities than what occurs
indoors (Bilton, 2010; Dighe, 1993; Frost & Norquist, 2007; Garrick, 2004; Henniger,
1993; Maynard & Waters, 2007; Wardle, 1997; White, 2011). However, a strong practice
prevails in education that the outdoor setting requires less teacher attention than the indoor
setting, and that during outdoor play teachers are allowed to take a break and only provide
safety supervision while children run off excess energy (Brown et al., 2009; Davies, 1997;
Dowdell et al., 2011). According to Kernan (2010), children enjoyed most the outdoor
areas where adults were relaxed and enjoyed being with the children. The full potential of
outdoor environments for childrens development is not always fully understood by many
teachers and often is not held as a priority (Brown et al., 2009; Davies, 1996; Maynard
& Waters, 2007). Teachers also give less time and attention to assessing outdoor play and
learning activities compared with indoor activities (Wellhousen, 2002).
Recognizing that the outdoor play area is part of the early childhood classroom is
a first step in understanding the powerful value of outdoor play (Maxwell, Mitchell, &
Evans, 2008; Perry, 2003; Thomas & Harding, 2011). According to White, the outdoor
28 S. McClintic and K. Petty

environment should be recognized as having equal status with the indoors as a place of
learning and development (2011, p. 7). Teachers who provide space, time, materials, and
a range of learning experiences for children create the link to effective outdoor learning
opportunities (Bilton, 2010; Blachet-Cohen & Elliot, 2011; White, 2011). Critical to the
promotion of the outdoors is a positive, enjoyable experience extended by the teachers
genuine interest and enthusiasm (Kernan, 2010; Waller, 2011). Children need to experi-
ence the spontaneity, freedom, excitement, and fun that the outdoor play environment can
provide (Maynard & Waters, 2007).
The outdoors offers children freedom to do things that they cannot do indoors, to be
messy, to make noise, and to enjoy vigorous activity. Children can connect with the natu-
ral world outdoors, with plants and animals, and natural objects and materials where they
can develop their naturalistic intelligence (Gardner, 1999). Outdoors supports creativity by
providing whole-body multisensory experiences that afford opportunities to experiment,
and make connections between objects and events (Fjortoft, 2004; White, 2011). Outdoor
play enhances childrens relationships with other children and adults (Frost, 1992; Wilson,
2008).

Advantages Over Indoor Play

Children are naturally drawn to the outdoors and want to be there, thus providing a won-
derful opportunity for learning (Bilton, 2002). If given the choice, children will choose
to be outdoors at least 50% of their waking time (Hendricks, 2001). Outdoor play offers
unique possibilities for learning and development. Objectives for outdoor play for young
children include cognitive, creative, physical and social-emotional outcomes occurring in
an integrated fashion in either self-directed play or guided play (Bilton, 2010; Cullen, 1993;
Frost & Norquist, 2007). According to Bilton (2010), being outdoors is of mind and body
benefit (p. 11).
Socially, children are not as inhibited outdoors and they are more assertive, concentrate
longer, and benefit from a higher level of learning outdoors (Bilton, 2010; Henniger 1993;
Tovey, 2007; White, 2011). Friendships are developed and negotiated in the freedom of out-
door play (Casey, 2007; Warden, 2011). Through chasing, running, and playing superhero,
boys build friendships (White, 2011). According to Thomas and Harding (2011) chil-
dren will cooperate and collaborate on tasks presented in the outdoors (e.g., construction,
gardening, and dramatic play).
Outdoor play is good for childrens general health. More than 25% of U.S. preschool
children are overweight; physical outdoor activity is not only a preventive measure for
excessive weight it is also important for young childrens social and psychological develop-
ment (Ward, 2010). Higher activity levels are permissible outdoors with rough-and-tumble
play, which is associated with self-control and collaborative play (Frost, 1992; Thomas &
Harding, 2011; Tovey, 2007). In addition, physical play outdoors provides development and
refinement of locomotor skills (Little & Wyver, 2008) and increases blood flow to the brain
that benefits brain activity along with development of fine motor skills (Thomas & Harding,
2011). Not only do children prefer to spend time outdoors, but an absence of opportunities
to be outdoors affects the well-being of children. Children who play outdoors in all kinds
of weather have fewer days of sickness and allergic reactions than children who are indoors
most of the day (Hendricks, 2001).
Cognitively, childrens outdoor learning is linked to making observations, investi-
gations, and hypotheses (Thomas & Harding, 2011). The sensory experience of being
outdoors encourages greater observation and sparks curiosity and questioning of the
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 29

surrounding promoting cognitive learning (Thomas & Harding, 2011). Pretend or dra-
matic play, a higher order play behavior (Maxwell et al., 2008), provides an important
connection to performance on cognitive tasks including language and scholastic achieve-
ment. Language is more complex as children experiment with humor, rhyme, negotiation
and outdoors girls are more assertive in their play while boys engage in more make-believe
play (Santer, Griffiths, & Goodall, 2007). More space for movement and activity helps girls
to be more assertive and boys are more apt to pretend because make-believe play is not
relegated to one area such as the indoor classrooms house/home center.
Emotionally, childrens learning is supported by the sensory experience of the out-
doors (Tovey, 2007). Children can touch, feel, smell, see, hear, and respond emotionally.
The freedom of outdoors encourages children to express their feelings (Magraw, 2011).
Outdoors children are more apt to take risks and to self-manage their behaviors (Thomas &
Harding, 2011). The emotional benefits of interacting with nature include reduced stress,
healthy sense of well-being, and increased attention span (Louv, 2008; Wells, 2000; Wells
& Evans, 2003). Scholars who prescribe to the biophilia hypothesis declare that humans are
evolutionarily connected to the world of nature (Verbeek & de Waal, 2002; Wilson, 2008).
This connection of humans to nature also provides physiological and emotional benefits
(Verbeek & de Waal, 2002). Louv (2008) states in his best-selling book, Last Child in
the Woods: Saving Our Children From Nature-Deficit Disorder, Healing the broken bond
between our young and nature is in our self-interestnot only because aesthetics or justice
demands it, but also because our mental, physical, and spiritual health depend upon it and
so does the health of the earth (p. 3).
Even during inclement weather children enjoy outdoor play. Outdoor play is critical
for many developmental tasks and without direct outdoor experiences it is unlikely that
children will have an understanding of the natural world and how to sustain it (Bilton,
2010; Garrick, 2004; Louv, 2008; Tovey, 2007). Developing a relationship with the outdoor
world fosters the understanding of interconnectedness between man and nature, and the
importance of sustainability (Blanchet-Cohen & Elliot, 2011; Thomas & Harding, 2011).
Children need time in nature in order to learn to appreciate their place in the world. Young
children need assistance from adults in order to access outdoor opportunities.
Outdoor play at home and school is essential for healthy child development (Frost
& Norquist, 2007; Garrick, 2004; Rivkin, 1998). The increased time spent in early care
amplifies the importance of outdoor play as it may be the only opportunity a child has to
experience the outdoor setting. The early childhood teacher is a major factor in the utiliza-
tion of outdoor play space and activities. If outdoor play is not valued by teachers, then
children will spend less time outdoors and/or teachers will not be motivated to interact or
to support their play (Blachet-Cohen & Elliot, 2011; Chawla, 2009; Dowdell et al., 2011).
Therefore, this study investigated the mechanics and functions of outdoor play and how the
outdoor play environment was utilized.

Physical Attributes of the Outdoor Environment

According to Greenman (2007), the outdoor environment should have places for humans,
places for creative and constructive play, and places for environmental play. Frost and
Norquist (2007) perceive the outdoor play environment as an integrated learning environ-
ment of playgrounds, gardens, and natural habitats. Playground equipment that involves
climbing, swinging, and upper body activity is extremely important for preschoolers
(Bilton, 2010). Gardens (butterfly, vegetable, herb, grass, wetlands, and greenhouses),
natural spaces, and animal habitats (Wilson, Kilmer, & Knauerhase, 1996) provide outdoor
30 S. McClintic and K. Petty

classrooms where children are motivated to learn through play and instinctive curiosity
(Dighe, 1993; Nimmo & Hallet, 2008; Rivkin, 1995). Playgrounds should stimulate play
and foster learning opportunities about nature.
Developing a master plan for the outdoor environment should be a combined effort by
teachers, administrators, parents, board members, and contributors, along with specialists
in the areas of architecture, child development, and playground construction (Frost, 1992).
Children should also take active roles in planning and in the ongoing construction (Murray,
2011).
Outdoor play should involve elements of physical play, constructive play, social play,
sociodramatic play, and games with rules (Bilton, 2010; Hendricks, 2001; Henniger, 1993).
According to Frost (1997), preschool children generally engage in gross-motor play, con-
struction play, and make-believe play, and consequently, preschool playgrounds should be
equipped and zoned for these types of play. Physical play is encouraged by tricycle paths,
swings and climbing equipment, and large areas of grass and hills. Constructive play is
encouraged through sand and water play, with areas for art, blocks, woodwork, wheeled
toys, and lots of loose parts of various materials (cloth, blocks, boards, sticks, boxes, etc.)
and a variety of tools. Sociodramatic play involves play houses or other structures, along
with prop boxes for themed-play or other loose parts (McGinnis, 2002) that encourage chil-
drens imaginations to transform or adapt to make meaning of the activity. This is an ideal
place to capture the culture of a region. Social play is encouraged through physical, con-
structive and sociodramatic play. Dramatic play should be available every day, influenced
by different props/materials in different areas (e.g., under a tree, on a platform, or a nature
area; Bilton, 2010; Wilson, 2008). Games with rules are encouraged by open grassy areas
such as follow-the-leader, obstacle courses, and games with balls.
The outdoor learning environment is organized around space, equipment, and materi-
als or loose parts. Critical to outdoor play is the element of space. Space offers different
levels and perspectives while encouraging children to work on a larger, more active scale in
collaboration (Richardson, 2006). Outdoor play space offers a wider range of light effects,
temperature changes, and air movement. Vertical elements such as fences, equipment, and
play structures on playgrounds are places where children are naturally drawn to that provide
a sense of comfort (Hendricks, 2001).
Present-day playgrounds often have limited space and need to be carefully planned
for a range of play (Moore & Marcus, 2008). Most states recommend that approximately
75 feet of space be allocated for each child in the outdoor play area (Thompson, Hudson &
Olsen, 2007). Space considerations include usage patterns (number of children per sched-
uled time, age of groupings), space arrangement of equipment, storage buildings, and layout
of natural and creative elements.
Playground equipment is but part of the larger outdoor play space. Play structures,
when well designed, are wonderful elements on a playgroundthey just shouldnt be the
only thing the children have to play with (Hendricks, 2001, p. 139). Adequate provisions
should be made for equipment with movement, i.e., swings, climbing structures, and slides.
Play equipment/structures and their adjoining safety zones should not occupy more than
25% of the total open outdoor space (Hendricks, 2001). Children need a balance of natural
areas and built structure/equipment areas. According to Bilton (2010), loose parts must be
present in order for young children to utilize fixed equipment.

Loose parts. Materials referred to as loose parts, or transportables, are necessary for
high-quality play experiences (Bilton, 2010; Frost, 1989). Simon Nicholson, the creator of
the loose parts theory, stated that childrens creativity and ability to discover are directly
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 31

proportional to the number and kinds of variables available in the environment (1971,
p. 30). Loose parts may be manufactured or natural materials (Frost, 1997) or recyclable
objects (Clements, 2004). Manufactured items (boxes, blocks, cloth, tools, toys, dramatic
play props) and natural items (bark, seeds, stones, leaves, vines, etc.) provide flexibility,
novelty, and adaptability that extend play (Wellhousen, 2002; Wilson, 2008).
There is great play potential when loose parts are added to the outdoor play envi-
ronment (Maxwell et al., 2008). Brain development is driven by the use of hands and
loose parts encourages the children to use their hands (White, 2011). Children will choose
equipment/materials based on the amount of movement the equipment/material can pro-
vide. Loose parts offer children of different ages the opportunities to use the same materials
differently. For example, 3-year-olds may build large corral-like enclosures while 4-year-
olds using the same blocks may build towers. Fixed equipment affords less novelty. Loose
parts encourage exercise play of moving, lifting, stacking, and dramatic play (Maxwell
et al., 2008).
Storage for loose parts is an absolute requirement and the location is crucial (Frost,
1992; Murray, 2011). If teachers and children must carry loose parts to the outdoor environ-
ment each day, it is doubtful that a wide range of play activities will be available. According
to Frost (1992), several storage structures, each serving a particular area of the playground,
best accommodate the use of the loose parts. The richness and quality of play are heav-
ily influenced by the type and variety of equipment and materials that are available in the
outdoor environment (Frost, 1992; Wilson, 2008).

Research Methods
This article is based on a qualitative case study with multiple cases which consisted of
teachers beliefs and practices at one bounded system or site. In the qualitative case study
approach, the analysis process entails collecting, organizing, and analyzing data. The case
study method (Yin, 2009) utilizes well-defined boundaries, and this particular case study
was a nonprofit early childhood center where the phenomena of outdoor play were exam-
ined. This single-program study had 11 participants, 10 teachers, and a center director with
a principal focus on the outdoor environment. The centers staff comprised 10 females and
one male, with years of early childhood experience ranging from 30 years to 1 year. The
educational status of the staff included two with masters degrees; five with bachelors
degrees; two with associate degrees; one with a Child Development Credential (CDA), and
one with some college hours. The centers director had a masters degree in early childhood
education.

Outdoor Playground Setting: A Verbal Portrait

The research site is an early childhood center for ages 18 months to 5 years, located in
an urban, upper-middle-class neighborhood in a southern state. The center is located on a
tree-lined side street off a major thoroughfare close to a major metropolitan city. The center
serves primarily dual-income families where approximately 75 children typically spend a
full day (8 a.m. to 5 p.m.).
The early childhood centers building and the church building had recently under-
gone new construction. The church building was expanded and the center was relocated
to the back of the church property. According to Hendricks (2001), during the design pro-
cess many playground spaces are afterthoughts or SLAPspaces left-over after planning
(p. 107). The center and the playground were originally located on the street side of the
32 S. McClintic and K. Petty

church building. The centers large playground offered mature trees for shade and was
surrounded by a see-through, chain-link fence. After being remodeled, the center and the
playground were relocated to the back of the property, adjacent to the alley and parking lot.
This relocation affected teachers perceptions of the outdoor play area such as having less
play area, loss of large trees for shade, and less approachability for parents. The long, nar-
row playground (20 1/2 ft. by 135 ft.) had minimal shade. The playground was surrounded
by a 12-foot-high wooden fence, requested by a local home owners association in order
to provide more privacy for the homes on the other side of the alley. The center director
indicated that the narrow play area offered few options for play equipment. The school
board decided on large, stationary structures built down the center of the play area. The
structures included a tricycle track with two drive-through tunnels, a playhouse, and a car
structure attached to a tunnel with a sandbox area on the far side of the structure. A large
concrete slab in a far corner of the playground provided an area to store movable, plastic
equipment.
During the relocation of the center and the playground many issues came to light that
had repercussions for the outdoor play area and how the teachers felt about those changes.
Actions by various entities effected the outdoor environment. The board of education faced
issues surrounding the schools identity as it shifted from child care only services: commu-
nity neighbors complaints about the close proximity of the playground and state and local
regulatory agency policies regarding shade on the playground. As demonstrated by activity
theory the outdoor play environment was impacted by economics, individuals, groups, and
the larger community. See Figures 2 and 3.

Data Collection Procedures

In qualitative case studies, multiple assurances or confirmations supporting the gathered
data are needed (Stake, 1995) such as the process of triangulation, which was ensured
by using multiple sources of data over multiple points in time (Fontana & Frey, 2003).
Several data sources were used that included an interview with the center director to reveal

Figure 2. Location of the centers playground.

 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 33

Figure 3. The playground play structures.

the early childhood program philosophy and expectation for outdoor play, researchers
documentation of the unoccupied outdoor environment, observations of child/teacher inter-
actions using five guided questions, teacher interviews during two separate sessions with
each teacher, teachers answers to journal questions, opportunities for member checking the
results of the collected data for accuracy, and peer debriefing by a noninvolved professional
peer reviewing typologies, themes, and interpretations of the data.
Interviews. The teacher interviews were audiotaped during two, face-to-face,
30-minute interview sessions with each teacher. During the first interview the teachers were
asked six questions about their background such as education and employment history, out-
door play schedules, kinds of outdoor activities, and inclement weather activities. During
the second interview seven questions were asked related to the purpose of childrens out-
door play, the relationship between outdoor play and learning, importance of outdoor play,
barriers to outdoor play, and the ideal outdoor environment. After the second interview
session it was established how they would like to receive the follow-up journal questions,
either by e-mail or a hard copy mailed to them.
Researchers observation documentation and photographs. The outdoor environment
was observed with a primary focus on the physical layout and condition of the area with-
out the presence of children or teachers. Afterwards, photographs were taken. Subsequent
observations included only the interactions of children and teachers in the outdoor envi-
ronment. Predetermined questions guided the researchers observations: (a) What activities
(spontaneous or planned) are teachers and students (individual and group) engaged in?; (b)
What equipment is used?; (c) What are the loose parts?; (d) What roles (indirect coordina-
tion or direct intervention) do teachers attain?; and (e) What facilitative roles do teachers
pursue?
Teachers journal writings. Ten journal questions provided a more in-depth reflection
related to their experiences in the outdoor environment. Teachers responded and reflected
upon two different questions each week for 5 weeks through the use of predetermined
questions about outdoor play preparation. The journal prompts pertained to planning and
34 S. McClintic and K. Petty

preparing for outdoor play, teacher education opportunities, teacher roles, teacher memories
of childhood outdoor play, and present-day outdoor experiences.

Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted using a typological model (Figure 4) which divided the data
set into predetermined categories (Hatch, 2002). Research questions were used to determine
the categories of teacher beliefs, perceptions, and facilitation of outdoor play. The data was
read and entries marked that related to the categories/typologies. The data set was read in
its entirety for each of the three typologies, with the researcher focused on one typology
at a time, e.g., beliefs: outdoor play is important. Next, the marked entries were read and
the main ideas were recorded on summary sheets. The summary sheets were utilized to
determine the typology themes and subthemes, e.g., health benefits. Teachers interview
excerpts were selected to support the themes and subthemes. Relationships and patterns
provided additional details in developing a case description. The final steps of the typology
model included writing one-sentence summaries with selection of data excerpts for sup-
port although typological statements do not imply generalizability. The analysis included
reflections on the themes, the participants, and the researcher.

Findings
This case study, or unit of analysis, is based on early childhood teachers beliefs and prac-
tices of outdoor play at an urban center. Understanding the teachers beliefs and practices
through diverse sources contributed to a thick, layered, and nested description of the case
study (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003). Typological analysis model provided a vehicle in which
to construct a case study and the predetermined typologies were derived from the research

Typological Analysis Model

Identify typologies

Mark data related to typology

Record main ideas on summary

Search for themes

Code entries for themes

Determine relationships among themes

Write one-sentence generalizations

Select data excerpts to support generalization

Figure 4. Typological analysis model.

 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 35

questions. Typological analysis is an appropriate strategy for a study with fairly obvious
typologies and/or categories that appear to be logical to the researcher. The typologies
were derived from the research questions such as teacher beliefs, teacher practices, and
teacher experiences. Initially, all field note entries from questionnaires, interviews, obser-
vations, and journals were read, marked, and recorded by the typologies (main ideas) on a
summary sheet. Each reading focused on only one category at a time, with the researcher
constantly asking if the information is related to that specific typology.
The second step in the typology analysis involved processing the topic summary sheets
and writing summaries for each typology. Coded summary sheets helped with identifying
and manipulating the selected data (Hatch, 2002). The third step in the analysis was to
search for patterns, relationships, or themes within the typologies.
Next, the marked data were read again in order to integrate elements into the themes.
At this point in the analysis, the researcher decided whether or not the categories are justi-
fied by the data. Data that runs counter to the findings must also be explained. Themes were
written as generalizations/summaries or special kinds of statements that express relation-
ships found in particular contexts under investigation (Hatch, 2002, p. 159). At this point
in the analysis, the participants had the opportunity to member check the results before the
findings were finalized. The case study report included descriptive teacher responses about
their outdoor play beliefs and practices and cross-participant analysis of the typologies
related to outdoor environment phenomena.
The first research question in this study was, How do early childhood teachers
describe their beliefs and perceptions of outdoor play practices in a preschool environ-
ment? This research question had two parts, the first relating to teachers beliefs about
outdoor play practices, and the second relating to the teachers perceptions of outdoor play
practices. Table 1 lists the themes and subthemes for research question 1.
The second research question for this study was, How do early childhood teachers
facilitate outdoor play in their preschool environment? This research question identified
the following themes and subthemes in Table 2.
The researcher concluded that the importance of outdoor play and the necessity
of supervision are key themes of the early childhood teachers beliefs about out-
door play. A third theme, the ideal outdoor environment, was also identified from the
data. Teachers perceptions about outdoor play included the theme of outdoor play
opportunities afforded children on the playground. Additional teachers perceptions
included barriers to outdoor play and teacher preparation and planning for the outdoor
environment.
Final stages of the typological analysis model included construction of one-sentence
statements which helped to provide closure to the analysis. The early childhood teachers
at the center believed that supervision is paramount during childrens outdoor play. The
following generalization statements, quotes from the early childhood teachers interviews,
and the researchers analysis of observation notes were utilized to describe the case study.

The Early Childhood Teachers at the Center Believed That Supervision Is Paramount
During Childrens Outdoor Play
The teachers viewed their primary responsibility outdoors as keeping the children safe and
providing guidance, yet allowing children to play without teacher intrusion. The primary
teacher role on the playground was described by Matt as, Watchdog! My main job is
maintaining the safety of the children when they are on the playground because that is
where all the accidents happen. Nicole added that fostering cooperative play and facilitat-
ing groups of children as they interact with one another is a secondary role. Play without
36 S. McClintic and K. Petty

Table 1
Themes and Subthemes of Research Question 1

Themes Subthemes
Beliefs:
1. Outdoor play is important a. Health benefits
b. Explore a different environment
c. Socialization
d. Length of time
2. Supervisionprimary a. Safety of children
responsibility outdoors b. Guidance
c. Play without teacher intrusion
3. Ideal outdoor environment

Perceptions:
1. Outdoor play opportunities a. Sandbox
b. Playhouse
c. Tricycle track
d. Interactions with other age groups
2. Barriers a. Weather
b. Parents
c. Community
d. Space
e. Lack of equipment
f. Teachers indolence
3. Preparation and planning a. Decision on proper clothing
b. Hygiene considerations
c. Determine equipment use
4. Teachers memories of childhood a. Played all day
outdoor play b. Physical play with siblings and neighborhood
children
c. Activities with and without equipment
d. Imagination and its influence on teaching

teacher intrusion was also captured in the following statements. The time I (Bernice) felt
I learned the most, during my childhood, were the times I explored and played on my own.
With this in mind, I allow the children to play freely. And, I (Paige) try not to infringe
upon that creativity with my students by giving them teacher-directed scenarios on the
playground.

The Teachers Perceived That the Physical Space of the Outdoor Environment Posed
Many Limitations to Their Planning, Preparation, and Implementation in That
Environment
Teachers perceived that outdoor play opportunities were limited due to the physical space
(approximately 20 ft 135 ft) and the fixed equipment outdoors. Teachers who remem-
bered the original outdoor playground struggled with the limitations of the new playground
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 37

Table 2
Themes and Subthemes of Research Question 2

Themes
1. Supervision
2. Limited teacher/child interactions
3. Planning and preparation
Subthemes
a. Enforce rules
b. Indoors and outdoors
a. Space prohibits activities/materials
b. Allows children to use their imagination and
creativity
a. Space issues
b. Lack of storage
c. Use gym in inclement weather
d. Teacher roles indoors and outdoors
e. Minimal training for outdoor play

that was SLAPspaces left-over after planning (Hendricks, 2001, p. 107). The long,
narrow playground with fixed play structures situated down the length of the outdoor space
formed viewing obstructions for the teachers. The presence of the obstructions enforced the
teachers need to be vigilant supervisors. The demand of the supervisory role precluded any
thoughts of planning for different activities or changing or adding to the outdoor environ-
ment. Paige remarked, Supervision is huge; because of the obstructions there are not a lot
of opportunities to interact with the children. The playground is very long and narrow so
if I want to play a game we usually move into the gym where there is more room to play,
stated Nicole. Whether or not materials from the classroom are taken outside was left to
the discretion of individual teachers. The teachers perceived that planning for outdoor play
activities was the same as planning for indoor classroom activities, using small groups.
However, due to the supervisory role that must take place outdoors, small-group activi-
ties were viewed as prohibitive. Matt explained, I am often working with small groups
on art projects, cognitive activities, games, etc., and to do that on the playground would
result in a lack of overall supervision. Teachers agreed that they had the opportunity to
implement different activities on the playground but various factors, including planning,
outdoor storage, and indifference contribute to their desistance of such practices.

Teachers Have a Philosophy-Reality Variance Between Their Desire for the Children to
Experience the Same Sense of Free Play That They Had When They Were Young
Children and Their Objective to Have Children Follow Rules and Guidelines in the
Outdoor Environment
All of the teachers spoke enthusiastically of their own early childhood outdoor play memo-
ries. They spoke of their freedom, in terms of time, space, and choice. Freedom to explore,
and to be creative was a self-directed decision. Recalling their own memories of early
childhood outdoor play, teachers often referred to using their imaginations: I used my
imagination a lot, I had so much fun . . . inventing, being adventurous and creative,
and I remember the creative outdoor play scenarios. Even though teachers could con-
nect to their childhood outdoor play memories and proclaimed the virtues of freedom,
creativity, and imagination, their reality was to supervise young children. The directives
38 S. McClintic and K. Petty

spoken by many of the teachers during childrens outdoor play and the enforcement of rules
that prohibited children from taking loose parts to other parts of the playground restricted
imagination and creativity.

The Teachers Believed That Outdoor Play Is Important to the Development of Young
Children But Lack Knowledge and Motivation That Would Promote the Development of
Their Outdoor Play Environment
Teachers had some understanding of the benefits of outdoor play, i.e., health, socialization,
and extended time to develop play. However, the teachers viewed the indoor classroom as
the learning place, and the outdoor environment was a place to purge excess energy in order
to prepare for the indoor classroom. The teachers full awareness of the outdoor learning
potential and any incentive to promote the development of their outdoor play environment
was limited. Teachers struggled to fully appreciate the potential of their outdoor environ-
ment. As one teacher (Jan) clearly stated, I am more of a teacher [indoors]. Teaching the
children inside is my main focus.
It is important to note that the centers early childhood teachers had a philosophy-
reality conflict (Hatch & Freeman, 1988, p. 158). Teachers adhered to a philosophy that
children should have freedom during outdoor play and be encouraged to explore and
use their imaginations in their outdoor environment. However, the reality of the play-
grounds limited physical space, coupled with the teachers necessity to keep children
safe, prohibited children from freely exploring their environment. Teachers also had a
philosophy-reality conflict (Hatch & Freeman, 1988) that involved childrens freedom
to play and the teachers desire for organization on the playground and rule enforce-
ment. Minimal knowledge and skills of outdoor play environments, coupled with teachers
perceptions that indoor classroom learning is more important than outdoor learning, con-
tributed to an inequity between teachers memories of outdoor play and their practices as
teachers. I like to keep things where things are supposed to be kept, like the toys in the
sandbox, dishes in the house, explained Debbie.

Implications
Exploring the early childhood teachers beliefs and practices about preschool outdoor play
at this early childhood center provided a meaning-making opportunity. This case study was
designed in order to uncover the beliefs and practices that influence meanings and decisions
concerning childrens outdoor play environments. Outdoor environments have implications
for teachers, administrators, community, and governmental agencies.
Teachers are critical to making the outdoor environment a dynamic place that meets the
needs and interests of young children. In addition to promoting safety, teacher responsibil-
ities include planning outdoor activities, interacting with children to scaffold learning, and
promoting positive social interactions. Administrators and directors can also play a large
part in offering access to additional education opportunities. Possible topics for teacher
education revealed in the case study analysis included:
a. Teacher education that demonstrates the differences between elements in a playground
and elements of an outdoor play environment. The outdoor environment should allow
for both free and structured play.
b. Value and implement loose parts in the outdoor environment.
c. Recognize teachers facilitative roles in the outdoor environment. Offer education that
includes scaffolding teachers knowledge of facilitative roles; increases interactions with
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 39

young children and reduces playing directives; and increases positive communication
during play while decreasing the amount of directive behaviors.
Early childhood professionals have the opportunity and a responsibility to reframe the
importance of outdoor play. Through development of high-quality outdoor environments
that demonstrate equal significance in the early childhood curriculum, early childhood pro-
fessionals can demonstrate to families and their communities the benefits and great value of
outdoor play. Parents of young children look to the early childhood professionals as experts
in early child care and education. Parent education related to outdoor play would not only
benefit parents, but also children, schools, and communities.
Each early childhood programs outdoor environment is unique. Distinctive to each
program are the stakeholders, funding concern, available physical space, and the programs
philosophy and vision. Early childhood professionals are needed to become outdoor play
advocates who are needed to promote the importance and benefits of the outdoor environ-
ment. To that end more research is needed to explore how early care teachers as well as
center directors and child care proprietors in other areas/regions and in profit/nonprofit
programs perceive the outdoor environment and its utilization within the total curriculum.
Multiple case study comparisons could result in further analysis to extend the knowledge
base of outdoor play environments. Another important, but often overlooked, aspect of
outdoor play is the application of loose parts (manufactured, recyclables, and natural).
Qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed methods research could be conducted to delve into
the relationship of loose parts and childrens activity level.

Conclusion
Outdoor play is important to a childs development, yet less time is spent outdoors than in
previous generations. More people and less space, dangers in neighborhoods, more struc-
tured activities, parents work schedules, and increased use of technology all contribute to
less time spent outdoors. Less time for children to experience the great outdoors at home
magnifies the importance and need for outdoor play at school or the child care center.
Exploring teachers beliefs, perceptions, and their facilitation practices during childrens
outdoor play was intended to provide awareness of how this particular group of teachers
related to the context. Teachers at this center believed that their ultimate role on the play-
ground was to supervise childrens play. The role of supervision along with limited physical
space posed limitations to their planning, preparation, and implementation in the out-
door environment. Teachers voiced that outdoor play is important and that children should
experience a sense of free play that they had enjoyed as children, yet they demonstrated
strict rule-following or a philosophy-reality conflict (Hatch & Freeman, 1988, p. 158).
Teachers viewed the indoor classroom as the learning place which indicated a lack of
understanding of the benefits and learning potential in outdoor play. Understanding the
full teacher experience as it relates to outdoor play can contribute and expand the teaching
professions comprehension of the significance of outdoor play for young children.

References
Anning, A. (1988). Teachers theories about childrens learning. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Teachers
professional learning (pp. 128145). London, England: Falmer Press.
Baum, A. C., & King, M. A. (2006). Creating a climate of self-awareness in early child-
hood teacher preparation programs. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33, 217222.
doi:10.1007/s10643-005-0050-2
40 S. McClintic and K. Petty

Berk, L. E., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding childrens learning: Vygotsky and early childhood
education. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Bilton, H. (2002). Outdoor play in the early years: Management and innovation (2nd ed.). London,
England: David Fulton.
Bilton, H. (2010). Outdoor learning in the early years: Management and innovation (3rd ed.).
London, England: Routledge.
Blanchet-Cohen, N., & Elliot, E. (2011). Young children and educators engagement and learning
outdoors: A basis for rights-based programming. Early Education and Development, 22, 757777.
doi:10.1080/10409289.2011.596460
Brown, W. H., Pfeiffer, K. A., McIver, K. L., & Dowda, M., Addy, L., & Pate, R. R. (2009).Social
and environmental factors associated with preschoolers nonsedentary physical activity. Child
Development, 80, 4558.
Casey, T. (2007). Environments for outdoor play: A practical guide to making space for children.
London, England: Sage.
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant life experiences revisited: A review of research on sources of
environmental sensitivity [Electronic version]. Journal of Environmental Education, 29(3), 1122.
Chawla, L. (1999). Life paths into effective environmental action [Electronic version]. Journal of
Environmental Education, 31(1), 1527.
Chawla, L. (2007). Childhood experiences associated with care for the natural world: A theoretical
framework for empirical results. Children, Youth and Environments, 17(4), 144170.
Chawla, L. (2009). Growing up green: Becoming an agent of care for the natural world. The Journal
of Developmental Processes, 4(1), 623.
Child Care Aware of America. (2013). We can do better: Child Care Aware of Americas ranking
of state child care center regulations and oversight: 2013 update. Retrieved from http://www.
naccrra.org/sites/default/files/default_site_pages/2013/wcdb_executive_summary_040813.pdf
Children and Nature Network & IUCN Commission on Education and Communication. (2012).
Children and nature worldwide: An exploration of childrens experiences of the outdoors and
nature with associated risks and benefits. Minneapolis, MN: Author. Retrieved from http://www.
childrenandnature.org/downloads/CECCNNWorldwideResearch.pdf
Clements, R. (2004). An investigation of the status of outdoor play. Contemporary Issues in Early
Childhood Education. International On-Line Journal, 5(1), 6890.
Cosco, N. G. (2007). Environmental interventions for healthy development of young children in the
outdoors. In C. Ward-Thompson & P. Travlou (Eds.), Open space people space (pp. 125135).
London, England: Taylor and Francis.
Cullen, J. (1993). Preschool childrens use and perceptions of outdoor play areas. Early Child
Development and Care, 89, 4556.
Davies, M. (1996). Outdoors: An important context for young childrens development. Early Child
Development and Care, 115, 3749.
Davies, M. (1997). The teachers role in outdoor play: Preschool teachers beliefs and practices. In
M. Fleer (Ed.), Australian research in early childhood education (Vol. 1, pp. 1020). Canberra,
Australia: Australian Early Childhood Association, Inc.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln Y. S. (Eds.). (2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Dighe, J. (1993). Children and the earth. Young Children, 48(3), 5863.
Dowdell, K., Gray, T., & Malone, K. (2011). Nature and its influence on childrens outdoor play.
Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 15(2), 2435.
Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1),
4765.
Fjortoft, I. (2004). Landscape as playscape: The effects of natural environments on childrens play
and motor development. Children, Youth and Environments, 14(2), 2144.
Fjrtoft, I., & Sageie, J. (2000). The natural environment as a playground for children: Landscape
description and analyses of a natural playscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 48, 8397.
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 41

Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2003). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In
N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (2nd ed., pp.
61106). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Francis, M. (1995). Childhoods garden: Memory and meaning of gardens. Childrens Environments,
12(2), 116.
Frost, J. L. (1989). Play environments for young children in the USA: 18001990. Young Children,
43(5), 1928.
Frost, J. L. (1992). Play and playscapes. Albany, NY: Delmar.
Frost, J. L. (1997). Playgrounds. Parks and Recreation, 32(4), 5460.
Frost, J. L., & Norquist, T. (2007, May). The importance of play. Recreation Management, 8(5).
Retrieved from http://www.recmanagement-digital.com/recmanagement/200705/?pg=78
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reformed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York, NY:
Basic Books.
Garrick, R. (2004). Playing outdoors in the early years. London, England: Continuum.
Goncu, A., Tuermer, U., Jain, J., & Johnson, D. (1999). Childrens play as cultural activity. In A.
Goncu (Ed.), Childrens engagement in the world (pp. 148170). Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Greenman, J. (2007). Caring spaces, learning places: Childrens environments that work.
Hamilton, L. (2006). Implicit theories of ability: Teacher constructs and classroom consequences.
Scottish Educational Review, 38, 201212.
Hatch, J. A. (Ed.). (1995). Qualitative research in early childhood settings. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany, NY: State University
of New York.
Hatch, J. A., & Freeman, E. B. (1988). Kindergarten philosophies and practices: Perspectives of
teachers, principals, and supervisors. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 3, 151166.
Hendricks, B. E. (2001). Designing for play. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
Henniger, M. L. (1993). Enriching the outdoor play experience. Childhood Education, 70(2), 8790.
Isenberg, J. P. (1990). Teachers; thinking and beliefs and classroom practices. Childhood Education,
66(5), 322327.
Kagan, D. M. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 27(1),
6590.
Kernan, M. (2010). Space and place as a source of belonging and participation in urban environments:
Considering the role of early childhood education and care settings. European Early Childhood
Education Research Journal, 18(2), 199213.
Little, H., & Wyver, S. (2008). Outdoor play: Does avoiding the risks reduce the benefits? Australian
Journal of Early Childhood, 33(2), 3340.
Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: Saving our children form nature-deficit disorder. Chapel
Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.
Magraw, L. (2011). Following childrens interest: Children led experiences that are meaningful and
worthwhile. In J. White (Ed.), Outdoor provision in the early years (pp. 2334). London, England:
Sage.
Maxwell, L. E., Mitchell, M. R., & Evans, G. W. (2008). Effects of play equipment and loose parts
on preschool childrens outdoor play behavior: An observational study and design intervention.
Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2), 3663.
Maynard, T., & Waters, J. (2007). Learning in the outdoor environment: A missed opportunity? Early
Years, 27, 255265.
McGinnis, J. R. (2002). Enriching the outdoor environment. Young Children, 57(3), 2830.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in education. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Moore, R. C., & Marcus, C. C. (2008). Healthy planet, healthy children: Designing nature into the
daily spaces of childhood. In S. R. Kellert, J. Heerwagon, & M. Mador (Eds.), Biophilic design:
The theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
42 S. McClintic and K. Petty

Murray, M. (2011). Taking an active part: Everyday participation and effective consultation. In J.
White (Ed.), Outdoor provision in the early years (pp.105113). London, England: Sage.
Nardi, B. A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Early childhood program participation: From
the National Household Education Surveys Program 2012. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/
pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2013029
Nedovic, S., & Morrissey, A. (2013). Calm active and focused: Childrens responses to an organic
outdoor learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 16, 281295.
Nicholson, S. (1971). How not to cheat children: The theory of loose parts. Landscape Architecture,
62, 3034.
Nimmo, J., & Hallett, B. (2008). Childhood in the garden: A place to encounter natural and social
diversity. Young Children, 63(1), 3238.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct.
Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307332.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Perry, J. P. (2003). Making sense of outdoor pretend play. Young Children, 58(3), 2630.
Richardson, G. R. (2006). Creating a space to grow: Developing your enabling environment outdoors.
London, England: David Fulton.
Rivkin, M. S. (1995). The great outdoors: Restoring childrens right to play outside. Washington,
DC: NAEYC.
Rivkin, M. S. (1998). Happy play in grassy places: The importance of the outdoor environment in
Deweys educational ideal. Early Childhood Education Journal, 25(3), 199202.
Rivkin, M. S. (2000). Outdoor experiences for young children. ERIC Digest. Charleston, WV: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 448013)
Robbins, D., & Stetsenko, A. (Eds.). (2002). Voices within Vygotskys non-classical psychology: Past,
present, future. New York, NY: Nova Science.
Santer, J., Griffiths, C., & Goodall, D. (2007). Free play in early childhood: A literature review.
London, England: National Childrens Bureau.
Sebba, R. (1991). The landscapes of childhood. Environment and Behavior, 23(4), 395422.
Spodek, B. (1988). The implicit theories of early childhood teachers. Early Child Development and
Care, 38, 1332.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thomas, F., & Harding, S. (2011). The role of play: Play outdoors as the medium and mechanism for
well-being, learning and development. In J. White (Ed.), Outdoor provision in the early years (pp.
1222). London, England: Sage.
Thompson, C. W., Aspinall, P., & Montarzino, A. (2008). The childhood factor: Adult visits to green
places and the significance of childhood experience. Environment and Behavior, 40(1), 111143.
Thompson, D., Hudson, S. D., & Olsen, H. M. (2007). S.A.F.E. play areas: Creation, maintenance,
and renovation. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Tovey, H. (2007). Playing outdoors: Spaces and places, risk and challenge. Berkshire, England:
McGraw Hill.
VanArsdell, M. (1994). Preparing early childhood teachers for careers in learning. In S. G. Goffin, &
D. E. Day (Eds.), New perspectives in early childhood teacher education: Bringing practitioners
into the debate (pp. 8694). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Verbeek, P., & de Waal, B. M. (2002). The primate relationship with nature: Biophilia as a general
design. In P. H. Kahn & S. R. Kellert, Children and nature: Psychological, sociocultural, and
evolutionary investigations (pp. 127). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 Beliefs and Practices About Preschool Outdoor Play 43

Waller, T. (2011). Adults are essential: The role of adults outdoors. In J. White (Ed.), Outdoor
provision in the early years (pp. 3544). London, England: Sage.
Ward, D. S. (2010). Physical activity in young children: The role of child care. Medicine & Science
in Sports & Exercise. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181ce9f85
Warden, C. (2011). Offering rich experiences: Contexts for play, exploration and talk. In J. White
(Ed.), Outdoor provision in the early years (pp. 6875). London, England: Sage.
Wardle, F. (1997). Outdoor play: Designing, building, and remodeling playgrounds for young
children. Early Childhood News, 9(2), 3640.
Wellhousen, K. (2002). Outdoor play every day: Innovative play concepts for early childhood.
Albany, NY: Delmar.
Wells, N. M. (2000). At home with nature: Effects of greenness on childrens cognitive functioning.
Environment and Behavior, 32(6), 775795.
Wells, N. M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Nearby nature: A buffer of life stress among rural children.
Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 311330.
White, J. (2011). Capturing the difference: The special nature of the outdoors. In J. White (Ed.),
Outdoor provision in the early years (pp. 4556). London, England: Sage.
Wilson, R. (2008). Nature and young children: Encouraging creative play and learning in natural
environments. New York, NY: Routledge.
Wilson, R. A., Kilmer, S. J., & Knauerhase, V. (1996). Developing an environmental outdoor play
space. Young Children, 51(6), 5661.
Wood, E., & Bennett, N. (2000). Changing theories, changing practice: Exploring early childhood
teachers professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 635647.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.