Shared Principles of Outdoor Play-Based Learning: A Guide for Educators
In early childhood education, there is little agreement on how to define play, play-based learning, or even the broader purpose of education. Some see play as a tool for liberation and justice, rooted in values like freedom and children’s rights. Others view play as a way to teach skills and knowledge, guided by values like structure and authority. These differences can lead to real challenges—especially when educators with opposing views work side by side or operate within systems that don’t reflect their values.
Rather than seeing this lack of consensus as a problem, we can understand it as a reflection of the complexity of our work. Play is not one fixed idea, and it shouldn't be forced into rigid categories or binaries. Instead of asking whether play is “good” or “bad,” structured or unstructured, educational or recreational, we can approach it as a continuum—a space that holds multiple possibilities at once.
To support this shift in thinking, we need tools that help us navigate uncertainty and make thoughtful decisions in our practice. This is where principles and values come in. Principles offer consistent, movement-level guidance that can help groups make decisions in complex and changing environments. Values, on the other hand, are personal and dynamic. They shape how individuals interpret and act on those principles—and they often only become visible when there is conflict or tension.
The following principles are not meant to prescribe a single way to do outdoor play-based learning. Instead, they offer a shared foundation for educators to reflect, collaborate, and move forward—especially when faced with uncertainty or disagreement. These principles are grounded in research and lived experience, and are meant to support a more inclusive, responsive, and thoughtful approach to outdoor play.
Principle 1: Outdoor Play Exists on a Continuum
Outdoor play-based learning is not a singular approach—it unfolds along a continuum. At one end, children engage in open-ended, unstructured play with high degrees of self-agency. On the other, educators may offer more structured experiences that still center the child’s interests but involve more guidance. Rather than valuing one form of play over another, this principle invites us to recognize that all points on the continuum have value—each offering different opportunities for growth, connection, and creativity.
Principle 2: Outdoor Play Must Be Both Accessible and Contextual
While outdoor play should be universally available, it will never look the same everywhere. Children’s play is deeply influenced by social, cultural, and environmental conditions—everything from climate, neighborhood safety, and local wildlife, to family income, cultural norms, and physical or cognitive differences. As educators, we are called to embrace this diversity rather than push for uniformity. Play may take place on sidewalks or in forests, and each space offers its own possibilities and limitations.
Recognizing and responding to this context is not about lowering expectations—it’s about honoring the realities of children's lives and creating opportunities that are meaningful where they are.
Principle 3: Outdoor Play is a Practice of Freedom and Self-Agency
Play allows children to explore autonomy, make decisions, and act on their own ideas. But freedom, as Glass (2001) notes, is not guaranteed—it must be practiced and protected. Outdoor environments often give children more space—physically and metaphorically—to test their boundaries, try new things, and build trust in themselves.
As educators, this requires a shift in how we see control and responsibility. Fostering self-agency does not mean removing all structure. It means co-creating a culture where children feel empowered to act, and where their choices are met with respect, accountability, and care for the community.
Principle 4: Outdoor Play is Relational
Play is not only about individual discovery—it is also deeply social. In outdoor spaces, children build relationships with one another, with educators, and with the land. These connections are not always easy or harmonious, but they are essential. As Shuffelton (2012) notes, early relationships formed through play lay the groundwork for all future relationships.
Educators who prioritize relational practice see children not just as learners, but as people in community—with rights, emotions, and the ability to shape their environment. This principle asks us to notice how connection and disconnection show up in play, and how we can respond with empathy and curiosity.
Principle 5: Outdoor Play is Dialogic
Play is full of communication—verbal, nonverbal, symbolic, and imaginative. Learning happens not just through what children do, but through how we talk about what they do. Ridgway and Quinones (2012) remind us that the value of play is often found in the complex interactions between children and educators, not just in the activity itself.
Educators in outdoor settings must go beyond enforcing rules or stepping back entirely. They must engage in dialogue that is intentional, reflective, and responsive. Tools like Non-Violent, Compassionate Communication (Rosenberg, 2003) can support this process by helping us tune into feelings, needs, and respectful requests. It is through meaningful dialogue that play deepens, shifts, and finds new direction.
Principle 6: Outdoor Play Involves Navigating Risk
Risk is not an obstacle to be removed—it is an essential part of outdoor play. Children grow when they take risks: climbing, balancing, wandering, negotiating. These experiences help them develop judgment, confidence, and resilience.
Our role is not to eliminate risk but to support children in managing it. As research shows (Tremblay et al., 2015), active outdoor play with risk is vital for healthy development. Risk must be negotiated—not avoided—so that children can stretch their abilities while feeling supported and safe.
Principle 7: Outdoor Play is Messy, Imaginative, and Imperfect
Outdoor play often looks chaotic. It doesn’t follow a tidy plan. It’s full of creativity, unpredictability, and disorder. For adults, this can be uncomfortable. New educators often feel the urge to step in, tidy up, or redirect what seems like disorder.
But imagination thrives in this non-linear, messy space. As Gray (2013) suggests, imagination allows children to step beyond the real world and explore the possible. It helps them make sense of life, express emotions, and practice problem-solving in unique ways. Rather than seeking control, we can practice observing and supporting the process as it unfolds—trusting that meaning is being made, even when it’s not immediately visible.
Why Principles Matter
In a field as complex and evolving as outdoor play-based learning, principles offer a shared language and direction. They help us move away from either/or thinking and toward a more spacious, responsive approach. By working from shared principles while honoring individual values, we create space for collaboration, critical reflection, and growth.
Outdoor play doesn’t need to be defended through one definition or model. It needs to be understood as layered, contextual, and alive—a space where children, educators, and communities can co-create meaning together.
These principles are not the final word—they are an invitation. An invitation to keep exploring, questioning, and building practices that reflect the children we work with, the communities we serve, and the world we hope to shape.
--
Original Source: Power, M. (2024). Playing with Play: Considerations for Embedding Outdoor Play-Based Learning into the Early Years. Trent University.
References:
Glass, R. D. (2001). On Paulo Freire’s Philosophy of Praxis and the Foundations of Liberation Education. Educational researcher, 30(2), 15–25.
Gray, Peter (2013) Definitions of Play. Scholarpedia, 8(7):30578., revision #132587
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Definitions_of_Play
Ridgway, A., & Quinones, G. (2012). How do early childhood students conceptualise play- based curriculum? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(12), 45–56.
Rosenberg, Marshall (2003). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life. Puddledancer Press. ISBN 1-892005-03-4.
Shuffelton, A. B. (2012). Rousseau’s imaginary friend: Childhood, play, and suspicion of the imagination in Emile. Educational theory, 62(3), 305–321. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Tremblay, M. S., Gray, C., Babcock, S., Barnes, J., Bradstreet, C. C., Carr, D., Chabot, G., Choquette, L., Chorney, D., Collyer, C., Herrington, S., Janson, K., Janssen, I., Larouche, R., Pickett, W., Power, M., Sandseter, E. B., Simon, B., & Brussoni, M. (2015). Position Statement on Active Outdoor Play. International journal of environmental research and public health, 12(6), 6475–6505. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120606475
0 comments