Children are given the freedom to move around spontaneously in a natural environment, having more choice of how they spend their time. Although Forest School is often seen to be a more structured form of outdoor play, children’s imaginations are able to flourish, creating a more unique and meaningful learning experience. Rousseau believed freedom to be one of the best forms of child development of his time, stating that ‘the only habit the child should be allowed is that of having no habits…reverse the usual procedure and you will almost always do right’ (Pound, 2005). His idea of freedom was to run around in the outdoors even in the coldest winters. Although Rousseau didn’t put his theory into practise, he believed that government should work to establish and maintain freedom for the public. Other theorists also took knowledge from his work, and began putting it into practise.
Education specialists Margaret McMillan and Susan Isaac’s believed whole heartedly in the nurturing environment of the outdoors and the importance that this had on children’s holistic development, so much so that in the twentieth century they each developed nursery gardens to provide children with space they felt children best learn and thrive (Davy, 2012). McMillan focussed primarily on health and wellbeing of children, understanding that fresh air and exercise were key elements in improving children’s wellbeing. As an expert in early years, and crediting Frobel’s work she believed that children performed poorly at school due to their lack of readiness to learn. She understood that whilst children were in the open air nursery, there were no stressors such as exams, no real structure just lots of time to play freely in open spaces, be at one with the elements and most of all explore their natural surroundings (Pound, 2005). Alongside this, there is emerging evidence that suggests sedentary behaviour in the early years has a strong correlation with children becoming overweight and obese as well as a lower cognitive development thus suggesting the benefits of outdoor learning spaces for children is beneficial (NHS, 2010, cited in EYE, 2015).
Backing this up further, in 2007 the World Health Organisation highlighted the importance of showing an early influence on children’s health and social wellbeing stating that ‘investment in early childhood is the most powerful investment a country can make, with returns over the life course many times the amount of the original investment’ (Cited in EYE, Baston-Pitt, 2015). For children with a lack of free outdoor space there has been research suggesting a ‘nature deficit disorder’ may be seen in some children resulting in a lack of using senses, difficulty in paying attention and poor physical and emotional wellness (Louv, cited in Lester and Maudsley, 2007).
Isaacs believed in the importance of free play between children, but also that their emotional needs were also extremely important for positive child development. Through gentle guidance children were capable of making sense of their own world. One of Isaacs’s books commented on how it was more important to stimulate curiosity rather than teach from a curriculum (Pound, 2005). The forest school approach utilises a child centred, child initiated and play based approach (Leather, 2013). Questions are raised however around why forest school leaders need to be specifically trained to accommodate this type of child led play? Is it becoming a commercialised commodity? Is forest school the same as outdoor play?