Preschool & Primary Education Laboratory of Pedagogical Research & Applications

2020, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp. ΧΧΧ-ΧΧΧ Department of Preschool Education, University of Crete
e-ISSN: 2241-7206 doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/ppej.21988

Let them shine: insights from an outdoor education

initiative for primary school students about an olive
tree collection.
M. Alexandra Abreu Lima
Instituto Nacional de Investigação
Agrária e Veterinária

Abstract. Nowadays, experiential learning and outdoor education are increasingly

relevant due to phenomena of ‘extinction of experience’ (Pyle, 1993), ‘plant blindness’
(Wandersee & Schussler, 2001) and ‘nature deficit childhoods’ (Louv, 2005). This paper
revisits experiential learning and outdoor education concepts and some of their history
development for European and North American contexts. It describes an experiential
learning initiative held in Portugal, during 2019, at an olive tree collection (Olea europaea
L.) aimed to (re)connect primary school students with nature, to support teachers in
hands-on experiences and to demonstrate the potential of an olive tree collection as a
resource for outdoor education. It was structured with outdoor visits to complement
classroom learning and engaged five teachers and 117 students, aged 8-9 years. It
highlights olive tree biodiversity as an important issue due to biodiversity erosion within
agriculture (Linos Nikoloudakis, Katsiotis, & Hagidimitriou, 2014; Mousavi Mariotti,
Regni, Nasini, Bufacchi, Pandolfi, Baldoni, & Proietti, 2017). Survey results showed that
students and teachers found the outdoor visits enriching for the learning process.
Implications for practice are discussed in terms of outdoor education project design for
childhood, a human developmental phase during which the role of provision of
stimulating environmental conditions is crucial to strengthen individual competencies to
make decisions able to accelerate transition for more sustainable societies (UN, 2019).
Keywords: experiential learning; Olea europaea; outdoor education; plant blindness

Introduction

Experiential learning

“Nothing will protect Nature more effectively, our Earth,

than the individual's opportunity to enjoy nature in
childhood, crawl, walk and run surrounded by growing
plants, trees and the variety of animals we still have
around us.” (Jakobsson, 1998, p. 26).
___________________________________
Correspondent Author: M. Alexandra Abreu Lima, INIAV, I.P. - Av. República, Quinta do Marquês,
2780-157 Oeiras, Portugal, e-mail: alexandra.abreu@iniav.pt

e-publisher: National Documentation Centre, National Hellenic Research Foundation

URL: http://ejournals.epublishing.ekt.gr/index.php/education
2 Lima

The drive to discover or explore, understand and use natural resources is considered
to be a basic human trait. However, in western societies, at the end of the twentieth century it
was verified that the young generation was increasingly disconnected from nature due to
phenomena of ‘extinction of experience’ (Pyle, 1993), ‘plant blindness’ (Wandersee &
Schussler, 2001) or ‘nature deficit childhoods’ (Louv, 2005). Since then, experiential learning
in nature received a renewed attention and began to be perceived as an excellent opportunity
to engage young people, both cognitively and physically, with nature and the countryside
(O’Brien & Weldon, 2007).
Later on, in the United Kingdom, the ‘learning outside the classroom manifesto’ (DfES,
2006) arose, which “championed a move beyond the classroom towards more diverse learning
sites, including the outdoors” (Harris 2018, p. 223). This variety of settings in which an
individual engages in learning highlights that youth development occurs across multiple
contexts, which span from “formal education systems (e.g., schools), to informal learning
settings (e.g., museums) and organized or semi-formal activities such as afterschool
programmes” (Akiva 2012 as cited in Russell, Knutson & Crowley2013, p. 261). Therefore, the
huge potential that informal-formal collaboration has in expanding learning opportunities for
children and youth, as well as its current developments and future challenges constitute a
research field that goes beyond the scope of this paper, being discussed by other authors (e.g.
see Bevan, Dillon, Hein, Macdonald, Michalchik, Miller, Root, Rudder, Xanthoudaki, & Yoon,
2010).
In this paper, concepts of ‘Learning through experience’ or ‘Experiential Learning’
follow Stonehouse, Allison & Carr, (2011) perspective which framed it as a theory of education
that “broadly encompasses many contexts”. Within various contexts, the one which uses
natural environment as the locus for learning experientially is considered to be ‘outdoor
education’.

Outdoor education
Although it is not possible to precisely define when outdoor learning emerged,
literature generally describes excursions and field trips as enriching complements to student
education. Among the many definitions of outdoor education, the following classical
definition –“outdoor education is in, about, and for the outdoors” (Donaldson & Donaldson,
1958, p. 17) - was considered to be a comprehensive one, as it included where the learning
process took place, the topic to be taught, and the activity’s purpose.
This classical definition was also cited by Rickinson et al. (2004) for whom the related
concept of ‘outdoor learning’ was considered as a broad and complex one, which touched on
a wide range of educational activities within different natural environment settings. These
authors highlighted that within outdoor education literature there was a plethora of terms,
which while differing in meaning, were used instead of outdoor education. They included,
among others, ‘environmental education’, ‘conservation education’, ‘experiential education’
and ‘environmental interpretation’, being recognized by Andrews (2003 as cited in Borland,
2011) that ‘environmental education’ began to be used interchangeably with the term ‘outdoor
education’.
According to Rickinson et al. (2004), outdoor learning could be seen as a concept and
practice with a range of different foci, outcomes and locations. The foci of outdoor learning, for
example, could include, among other things, ‘learning about nature, as in outdoor ecological
field study’ or ‘learning about society, as in community-based gardening initiatives’. These
authors considered that locations of outdoor learning could encompass, for instance: (i) school
grounds or gardens; (ii) wilderness areas; (iii) rural or city farms; (iv) field study/nature
centres; among others. Acknowledging this variety, these authors framed the literature (not
Outdoor education initiative for primary school students 3

for definitional purposes) using: 1) a three-fold categorisation of outdoor learning activities;

and 2) a four-fold breakdown of their possible learning outcomes.
Therefore, categories of learning activities included: (i) fieldwork and outdoor visits,
(ii) outdoor adventure education; (iii) school grounds and community-based projects.
According to Rickinson et al. (2004), the four-fold breakdown of their possible learning
outcomes included: (i) cognitive impacts (e.g., knowledge and other academic outcomes); (ii)
affective impacts (e.g., attitudes, values, beliefs and self-perceptions); (iii) interpersonal/social
impacts (e.g., communication skills, teamwork); (iv) physical/ behavioural impacts (e.g.,
physical fitness, personal behaviours). For the purposes of this paper, outdoor learning is
explored in terms of the ‘fieldwork and outdoor visits’ category and learning outcomes are
examined in terms of some of the abovementioned impacts (i.e. cognitive; affective; social and
behavioural).
Throughout the world, environmental and outdoor education initiatives have been
developed within different frameworks which are briefly revisited for certain North American
and European countries in the following paragraphs. For the North American context, chosen
countries include USA and Canada, both known to have valued outdoor learning since the
dawn of twentieth century. For the European northern zone context, the United Kingdom and
Scandinavian countries were chosen due to their long tradition of outdoor
recreation/education and mutual influences in this scope. For the European southern zone,
chosen countries include Portugal and Greece, known to share similar Mediterranean climate
type and habitats, amenable to outdoor learning activities.

Brief notes about outdoor and environmental education in certain North American
countries
Within outdoor education literature, John Dewey’s foundational contribution to the
movement of experiential learning (Dewey, 1938) has been studied by several researchers
(e.g., Luff, 2018; Moss & Normore, 2006). For decades, researchers of outdoor learning have
shown that in the USA, field trips and excursions were a great contribution to students
educational development (NASSP, 1941) with multiple benefits, and it was even stated that
“good learning and the outdoors are inseparable” (NASSP, 1957, p. 141). The early twentieth
century was therefore, for both USA and Canada, marked by a “burgeoning interest in nature
study and by official support for conservation” (Marsden, 1998, p. 350).
For the USA context, the value of outdoor education was long recognized and
“frequent field trips were part of the syllabus of progressive schools in the early 1900s”
(Knapp, 1994 as cited in Rubens, 1997, p. 5). For the Canadian context, research in Ontario
done by Borland (2011) evidenced that it was also by the early 1900s that “Agricultural Science
had become a course for many secondary school students, while elementary teachers focused
on nature study and school gardening”. By the 1970s, an increasing number of Canadian
teachers were discovering the value of outdoor education as “a method of learning through
first-hand experience and discovery, and as a method of teaching which uses the real world
as a resource” (Passmore, 1972, p. 23).

Brief notes about outdoor and environmental education in certain European

countries
Within northern European regions, for Scandinavian countries (which include
Denmark, Norway and Sweden) outdoor recreation/education has been referred to as
‘friluftsliv’, literally meaning free/open-air life (e.g. Andkjær 2005; Henderson & Vikander
2007 as cited in Bentsen, Mygind & Randrup, 2009). Based upon studies form several authors,
Bentsen et al. (2009) considered that the Danish development of outdoor recreation/education
4 Lima

could be perceived “as a parallel-history to the European and is especially influenced by

Norwegian, Swedish, British and German thoughts and ideas within sport, recreation and
education”. These kinds of mutual influences and/or historic developments or parallelisms
of outdoor recreation/education among some European countries can be found in literature.
For instance, according to O’Brien & Murray (2006 ascited in Bentsen et al., 2009, p. 39)
traditionally outdoor learning in Britain, included “nature oriented and adventure activities
mainly carried out outside school hours, and the development of Forest Schools in Britain
began in the 1990’s through inspiration from Scandinavia”. Nowadays, Forest school is a
popular form of outdoor learning increasingly practised in primary schools in the United
Kingdom which, according to Kraftl (2013 as cited in Harris, 2018, p. 224), “may be taught
within the framework of mainstream school or as part of more informal or alternative learning
provision”.
For the United Kingdom context, it is known that outdoor education had a long and
rich history and a revision of English literature about it, its impacts and provisions was done
by Rickinson et al. (2004). They stated that, within ‘The nature study movement’, the study of
botany, in particular, was by then considered to be one of the few scientific and outdoor
educational activities appropriate for women, with a pioneer role provided by Lilian Clarke
(Sanders, 2008). According to literature, from 1896 to 1926, she developed innovative teaching
practices in the design and use of school gardens in London, and within her legacy for
contemporary outdoor education/field studies is the promulgation of the use of ‘outdoor
classrooms’. These authors highlighted that besides the ‘Nature Study Movement’ other
initiatives have influenced outdoor education, namely ‘School journeys’ and ‘Field studies’.
Concerning the southern European region, some data are below describe the Greek
and Portuguese contexts. For the Greek context, it is worth mentioning the influence of early
Greek thought and of the philosophers Socrates, Plato and Aristotle concerning experiential
learning, extensively analysed by Stonehouse et al. (2011).
In an overall review of the organization and operation of environmental education
within Greek Schools, Michaelides (2005) analysed and discussed information about the two
main national existing schemes – the formal and the informal (optional)-, for students of
primary and secondary schools. Environmental Education (EE) in Greece was also analysed
by Valavanidis & Vlachogianni (2011, p. 13) who noted that in 1990, a new law “mandated the
integration of environmental education into the educational curricula, and promoted the
cooperation between governmental teacher organizations and nongovernmental agencies
(NGOs) for the expansion of environmental education”. According to these authors, about 56
centres of environmental education were developed in Greece, to promote outdoor activities
and studies about local environmental issues. They highlighted also the contribution of
various NGOs and MEDIES network of educators and schools, to the implementation of
integrated educational programmes. In Greece, the national framework of EE was affected by
the localized effects of the Eurozone debt crisis and the resilience of EE frameworks during
this period has been studied by Yanniris & Garis (2018).
In Portugal, the Environmental Education (EE)/ Education for Sustainable
Development (ESD) initiatives were reviewed by Schmidt, Gil Nave, O'Riordan, & Guerra
(2011). According to these authors, it was by the mid-1980s that EE initiatives grew more
formal with changes in school curricula occurring in 1986. They found that EE/ESD projects
were “predominantly aimed at students in the first stage of basic education (48.4%) and pre-
primary (32.9%) schools, emphasizing a child-oriented trend that persists in EE/ESD in
Portugal” (Schmidt et al., 2011, p. 166). These authors identified a disconnection between
EE/ESD projects and the community, as projects held in schools were kept confined within
school walls, rarely involving the community. More recently, since 2017, a National Strategy
for Environmental Education (ENEA, 2017) constitutes a roadmap with several EE planned
actions for the 2017-2020 period.
Outdoor education initiative for primary school students 5

Outdoor and environmental education about plant biodiversity

Biological diversity or biodiversity is the diversity of life found on earth at all
hierarchical levels from genes, species, and communities to entire ecosystems, encompassing
therefore the complex functions and processes of these systems. The source of the term
‘Biodiversity’ dates back into the National Forum on Bio Diversity, held in Washington, D.C.,
in 1986, under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences and Smithsonian Institution
(National Academy of Sciences, 1988).
The growing recognition that biological diversity is tremendously valuable to present
and future generations, although it keeps being threatened by human activities, led the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to convene the ‘Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts
on Biological Diversity’ in November 1988 to explore the need for an international convention
on biological diversity. Currently, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) keeps
providing a global legal framework for action on biodiversity, bringing together all
stakeholders every two years to the Conference of the Parties (COP). Global and national
efforts to conserve biodiversity are known to be still far from sufficient, and biodiversity loss
is a threat to our environment and societies.
Within the Portuguese National Biodiversity Strategy Action Plan (NBSAP), one of the
10 fundamental strategies listed is precisely aimed to ensure public education, awareness and
sensitization (CBD, 2018). This is particularly relevant for plant biodiversity due to the so-
called ‘plant blindness’ phenomena (Wandersee & Schussler 2001), i.e. people tendency to
neither properly notice nor value plants in their daily lives, the environment and societies.
According to Balding and Williams (2016) the lower preference for, inferior recall of,
and worse visual detection of plants compared with animals (‘zoocentric societies’) is
attributable not only to perceptual factors, but also to cultural factors such as a greater focus
on animals in formal biological education. In their perspective, although plant blindness is
common, it is not inevitable and therefore they consider all measures to communicate about
plant biodiversity and their role in biosphere as a valuable input to counteract this
phenomenon.

Case-study – an olive tree collection: a treasure to maintain and communicate

The olive tree (Olea europaea L.) of the Oleaceae Family has been widely cultivated over
time in traditional or intensive olive groves. Its fruit - olive - and the oil obtained from it - olive
oil - are used for food and gastronomic purposes, being an important part of the so-called
‘Mediterranean Diet’. Worldwide, the favourable ecological zone for olive tree cultivation lies
between latitudes 30 and 45 degrees, both in northern and southern hemispheres, within
Mediterranean climate areas. The Mediterranean olive region stood out with 95% of world
olive oil production (FAO, 2001). Nowadays, it is a region where hundreds of olive varieties
are described and referenced for the production of olive oil and/or table olives.
Many varieties have emerged over millennia as a result of several spontaneous
crossings, various genetic mutations, fruit and seed natural dispersal, as well as the
domestication of many of them, particularly in Mediterranean region. Thus, since ancient
Greek times, olive cultivars arose from vegetative propagation (by cuttings or grafting),
allowing the reproduction of the best genotypes, leading to the current varietal diversity.
Nowadays, olive tree cultivation is experiencing a shift from traditional to modern
groves, planted with only a few varieties, which is a factor leading to genetic erosion of olive
species (Linos, et al., 2014; Mousavi et al., 2017). Given this tendency, olive tree collections are
an essential tool not only for the preservation and certification of their germplasm, but also
for outreach educational initiatives aimed to raise awareness about olive tree biodiversity. The
6 Lima

olive tree collection held at Oeiras (Portugal) was planted for agronomic research purposes
during the 1980-1990s (Leitão, et al., 1986; Leitão, 2001). It has several olive tree specimens
from Portuguese national varieties and from the following other five different Mediterranean
countries: France, Greece, Italy, Morocco and Spain. In this tree collection some of the varieties
include, by country of origin, the following ones: A) Arbequina (Spain); (B) Branquita
(Portugal); (C) Carolea (Greece); (L) Leccino (Italy); (M) Manzanilla (Spain); (PM) Picholine
Marocaine (Morocco) and (P) Picholine (France).

The aim of the study

Nowadays, the young generation’s reduced engagement in the outdoors and
disconnection from nature has resulted in a decrease of their knowledge and conservation
ethic with future negative impacts for whole societies. Therefore, nature interpretation
initiatives aimed to enhance nature exploration by young people which highlight biodiversity
richness are becoming increasingly relevant. The olive tree collection outdoor visits initiatives
had these specific objectives:
1) to increase young people’s interest, curiosity and knowledge about olive tree
biodiversity;
2) to support teachers and educators seeking to create novel hands-on experiences that
simultaneously promote students’ engagement in olive tree plant science and in
biodiversity issue;
3) to demonstrate the potential of an olive tree collection as a useful resource to design
outdoor education projects; providing practical data upon which future initiatives
can be developed.

Methodology

This study was held during the 2019 academic year. It engaged five teachers and a
total of 117 students, aged 8-9 years, from two school communities located near a Research
Institute at Oeiras (Portugal) which has the olive tree collection in its Campus. Schools
teachers accepted an invitation to participate in the olive tree outdoor visit planned activities
that correspond with their school formal learning.
Before outdoor visits, in order to assess students’ knowledge about olive tree species,
a brief questionnaire was sent to enrolled teachers. It included two questions, one to assess
their knowledge about the common name given to the tree which produces olives, and a
second one to assess their knowledge about this tree’s geographic distribution beyond their
own country territory. Teachers asked their students to complete the questionnaires before
the outdoor visit to the olive tree collection which was scheduled to occur in May, to last about
2 hours and was planned to be centred on a playful, multi-sensory approach (Figure 1).
During the outdoor visit students could explore the olive tree collection and read a
two-page worksheet with information about the countries of origin of olive tree varieties and
their corresponding variety names. This worksheet contained also an illustration of Olea
europaea L. from the Iberian Flora book (Tavera, 2012) with drawings of several olive tree
structural organs, able to reveal aspects of its morphology (Figure 1).
Outdoor education initiative for primary school students 7

Figure 1 Students at the olive tree collection outdoor visit during the blooming and early
olive fruit formation phases. The worksheet distributed had an illustration of various olive
tree structural organs.

Students observed different olive tree varieties and became aware of data about their
phytogeography (e.g. countries that hold olive trees around the world both in North and
South hemispheres); propagation methods (e.g. sexually or asexually); among other biological
and agronomic facts (e.g. current challenges concerning olive tree disease resistance or
biodiversity conservation issues). Students were also provided with magnifying glasses so
that they could observe with greater detail organs and morphological structures such as
flowers, leaf veins, among other aspects. Students labelled olive trees with a code number
which matched to a specific variety name / country of origin (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Labelling of olive trees by students.

Results

Pre-visit survey results. Assessment of students' prior knowledge about olive trees.
In order to assess students’ prior knowledge about olive trees, they completed a pre-
visit survey. Questions and answers obtained are shown in Table 1. For the enrolled 5 student
groups, a total of 117 surveys were answered.
To the first question (Q1) of ‘what is the common name of the tree that produces olives’,
79% of the students correctly answered 'olive tree', and 21% of the answers had wrong
designations.
8 Lima

Table 1 Students pre-survey results obtained for Questions 1 and 2

Question Answer
Q1- Do you know the common Correct Incorrect name
name given to the tree which name 25 /117
produces olives? 92/117 (21%)
(79%)
Q2- Do you know if the tree with Yes No
olives grows outside your own 33/117 84/117
country territory? (28%) (72%)
(total number of students = 117)

Concerning the possibility of olive trees growing in other countries besides Portugal,
less than one third of the students (28%) knew that olive tree geographical distribution goes
beyond Portuguese national territory. Among those who knew other geographic locations for
olive tree species distribution, some of the countries referred by students included, among
others: Spain, France, Turkey and Argentina.

Post-visit survey results. Students’ evaluation of outdoor visit

After the outdoor visits, a post-visit survey was completed in classroom by 107
enrolled students. It had two questions, the first one to classify the outdoor visit and a second
one aimed to assess what they had most enjoyed during the outdoor visit. From the 103
complete surveys received, 87 out of 103 answers classified the visit as 'Very Good' (84.5%)
and 16 out of 103 considered it to be 'Good' (15.5%).
To the question about what they had most enjoyed during the outdoor visit, answers
transcribed in the next paragraph, obtained from student groups 1 to 5 (Sg 1 to Sg 5), depict
various aspects, such as a motivation for contact with nature, to learn new things and explore
nature:
‘To see nature’ (Sg 1);
'To see different trees' (Sg 1);
‘It was that whole nature and the tree species’ (Sg1);
‘It was the learning activities we did, but I already knew a little about this, anyhow what really
matters is that I have increased my knowledge about olive trees’ (Sg 2);
‘To know the olive trees which were very beautiful’ (Sg 2);
‘To live with nature’ (Sg 2);
‘To know much more about olive trees and the differences between olive trees from other
countries’ (Sg 2);
‘To know that without the olive trees we couldn’t eat olives at all.’ (Sg 5);
‘To see and know that there are so many different olive trees in various different countries’
(Sg 5).
‘It was to walk in the countryside which is a new experience for me, and to know various
types of olive trees’ (Sg 3);
‘To know the olive trees, and their names. To see the leaves, flowers and olive fruits in
formation’ (Sg 3);
‘To see the olive small fruits at their initial growing phase and see them with the magnifying
glass’ (Sg 4);
‘To discover the olive tree names and see with the magnifying glass their branches’ (Sg 2).
These two last affirmations refer the use of magnifying glass illustrated in Figure 3.
Outdoor education initiative for primary school students 9

Figure 3 a, b - Students observing with magnifying glass various olive tree structural
organs.

Results of teacher outdoor visit assessment.

After the outdoor visits, the engaged 5 teachers completed a brief survey. It had one
question aimed to assess how they evaluated the contribution of outdoor visit to students’
learning process. All of them considered the outdoor visits to be 'very good'. Teacher
assessment of outdoor visits in terms of benefits for their students’ learning process was
summarized in their perspectives and/or suggestions presented in the following transcribed
paragraphs (T1 to T5):
T1- ‘I considered the field activity very interesting, as if it was an outdoor laboratory.
The activity was very well structured, matching the curiosity and interest of enrolled students.
It fostered a perspective of nature conservation and its importance, for this and future
generations. Students’ learning was very positive and meaningful.’
T2 - ‘Students’ direct contact with curricula issues.’

T3 - ‘I enjoyed the outdoor visit, I consider the way it was organised and its contents
as very appropriate to the students’ age group. It was very important to associate the
theoretical explanation with the practice 'in loco', i.e. the students were able to apply, explore
and visualize in practice, in the environment, all the contents explored. A suggestion: for the
next visit it would be interesting to address other plant species that exist on Campus as well
as the animals, since they are contents studied in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd school grades curricula'.

T4 - ‘Contact with different varieties of olive trees.

T5 - ‘The following were the most important: - knowledge about fauna and flora; -
contact with nature; - the natural resources valuation; - environmental awareness; - economic
activities. For future visits a suggestion is to publish a field guide for the outdoor activity,
with description of various topics.’

Discussion

The pre-visit survey results for the first question, which aimed to assess students’
knowledge about the common name given to the olive producing tree, revealed that about
four fifths (4/5) knew it to be an ‘olive tree’ versus one fifth (1/5) who wrongly named it.
Notwithstanding the fact that our sample is a small one (N=117), if we consider the fact that
olive trees are very common trees in the Portuguese landscape, this percentage of wrong
answers may be a sign of students’ estrangement from botany and/or nature issues.
10 Lima

The pre-visit survey results for the second question aimed to assess students’
knowledge about the existence of olive trees beyond Portuguese territory, less than one third
(1/3) of students (28%) knew that olive tree geographical distribution goes beyond Portugal,
versus the vast majority (72%) who did not know this. Among those who knew other
geographic locations for olive tree species distribution, some of them cited Eurasia region (e.g.
Spain, France, Turkey) and South America (e.g. Argentina). Although other world regions
with a Mediterranean climate type (e.g., South Africa, California or Australia) were not
referred by students in this pre-visit survey, it was possible to get them know these facts
during the outdoor visits.
The post-visit survey results for the first question revealed that students considered
outdoor visits as 'Very Good' (84.5%) and 'Good' (15.5%). To the second question, aimed to
assess what they had most enjoyed during the outdoor visit, a brief qualitative analysis reveals
that among these five student groups (Sg1 to Sg5) there was:
1) pleasure to learn about and to be in contact with nature, - e.g.:
1.1. Sg 3: ‘It was to walk in the countryside which is a new experience for me,
and to know various types of olive trees;
1.2. Sg 2: ‘To live with nature’;
1.3. Sg 1: ‘It was that whole nature and the tree species’;
2) a real motivation and curiosity to learn new things and explore nature, e.g.:
2.1. Sg 4: ‘To see the olive small fruits at their initial growing phase and see
them with the magnifying glass’;
2.2. Sg 5: ‘To see and know that there are so many different olive trees in various
distinct countries’
2.3. Sg 2: ‘It was the learning activities we did, but I already knew a little about
this, anyhow what really matters is that I have increased my knowledge about
olive trees’.
All these students’ statements are vivid testimonies of what, for decades, has been
argued by outdoor learning researchers. In fact, outdoor visits for decades have been
considered “a great contribution to students’ educational development” (NASSP, 1941, p. 67),
bringing multiple benefits, and it was even stated that “good learning and the outdoors are
inseparable” (NASSP, 1957, p. 141). Therefore, the outdoor visits to the olive tree collection
proved useful to foster among students a greater curiosity about trees and flora in general,
and a better knowledge in particular about the olive tree species, their varieties and
corresponding geographic origin.
Most students were interested during the visit and found it very good and enriching.
Students observed the olive trees and became aware of various aspects concerning this species
that were previously unknown to them. They also became aware that the worldwide diffusion
of plants; which occurred throughout millennia, maintains a high relevance nowadays within
the current climate change scenarios.
Teachers classified the outdoor visits as very good and interesting, emphasizing their
importance as an enriching complement to classroom teaching.
- T3: ‘I enjoyed the outdoor visit and I consider the way it was organised and its contents as very
appropriate to students’ age group. It was very important to associate the theoretical explanation with
the practice 'in loco', i.e. the students were able to apply, explore and visualize in practice, in the
environment, all the contents explored.’
Teachers survey results also showed that they also positively valued students’ direct contact
with nature and school curricula study issues:
- T1: ‘I considered the field activity very interesting, as if it was an ‘outdoor laboratory’. The
activity was very well structured, matching the curiosity and interest of enrolled students. (…)’
- T2: ‘Students’ direct contact with curricula issues.’
Outdoor education initiative for primary school students 11

These brief teacher statements are in agreement with the long recognition of the value
of outdoor education for learning through “first-hand experience and as a method of teaching
which uses the real world as a resource” (Passmore, 1972, p. 23). Outdoor visit teacher
assessments also revealed them as able to enrich school curricula, bringing positive impacts
for enrolled students, at several levels, beyond the cognitive ones, in agreement with
Rickinson et al. (2004). Suggestions received from teachers will be assessed in order to
improve planned future visits and make them more effective.

Conclusion

This paper adds to the growing literature on the way outdoor learning spaces can be
used and valued as part of the learning processes. Previous studies have repeatedly argued
that young generations in western societies are increasingly estranged from hands-on
experiences in nature (Pyle, 1993) and disconnected from nature (Louv, 2005; O’Brien &
Weldon, 2007). In addition to this, the phenomenon of ‘plant blindness’ identified almost two
decades ago (Wandersee & Schussler, 2001) calls societies to counteract it, because, as Balding
& Williams (2016) stated, although plant blindness is common, it is not inevitable.
This research exemplifies a collaborative learning initiative of outdoor education
about an olive tree collection, addressing three current pressing phenomena- plant blindness,
extinction of experience and nature disconnection. Although this research was limited to one
country (Portugal), its results are potentially useful to school communities in other countries
which have olive tree groves in their landscape, with the aim of promoting direct experience
of nature during childhood, in accordance with other authors (Louv, 2005; Pyle, 1993). The
educational initiative implemented at the olive tree collection had very positive outputs and
is therefore recommended to be continued in the future, taking in account the following
threefold beneficial impacts.
Firstly, this research assessment of students’ prior knowledge about olive trees
revealed the existence of knowledge gaps (e.g. in terms of olive tree nomenclature and
geographical distribution) which were tackled during the outdoor visits, enabling students to
improve their knowledge. Secondly, the majority of enrolled students classified the olive tree
outdoor visits as ‘very good’ (84,5%) and ‘good’ (15,5%), and expressed a true appreciation at
being in direct contact with nature and a deeply motivation and curiosity for learning new
things. Thirdly, all enrolled teachers not only positively valued students’ direct contact with
nature, but also perceived the olive tree collection outdoor visit as an interesting and enriching
complement to classroom teaching, considering it as a truly ‘outdoor laboratory’.
For these reasons, in revealing an olive tree collection at a Portuguese Research
Institute located in their schools surroundings to young students through outdoor visits, , it
was possible not only to provide a complement to their school curricula, but also to provide
an opportunity for them to (re)connect with plants and natural resources, and learn more
about them. Tree collections are therefore useful not only for agricultural research, but also
for experiential learning initiatives. Although a part of young generation, in some western
societies seem to be at risk of becoming unaware of the process of growing plants, and lack
knowledge about the landscape or farming systems where their food comes from, this
scenario can indeed be changed. It is hoped that the results of this paper can be useful to
inform future effective outdoor programme design with olive tree collections (or any other
tree collection or arboreta), as it is time to expose “students to the beauty, wonder, and
excitement of plants” (Uno, 2018, p. 277). In short, it is time to let them shine.
12 Lima

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank all the teachers from enrolled School Communities
(Portugal) for their collaboration and participation in outdoor visits. The author also wishes
to thank the information provided by the researcher F. Leitão concerning the olive tree
collection and the two anonymous reviewers for their feedback that helped improve this
manuscript.

References

Balding, M., & Williams, K.J.H. (2016). Plant blindness and the implications for plant
conservation. Conservation Biology, 30, 1192–1199. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12738
Bevan, B., Dillon, J., Hein, G.E., Macdonald, M., Michalchik, V., Miller, D., Root, D., Rudder, ,
p. L., Xanthoudaki, M., & Yoon, S. (2010). Making science matter: Collaborations between
informal science education organizations and schools. A CAISE inquiry group report.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).
Retrieved from:
https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/MakingScienceMatter.pdf
Bentsen, P., Mygind, E., & Randrup, T.B. (2009). Towards an understanding of udeskole:
education outside the classroom in a Danish context. Education 3-13, 37, 29-44. doi:
10.1080/03004270802291780
Borland, J. (2011). Provoking dialogue: A short history of outdoor education in Ontario.
Pathways: The Ontario Journal of Outdoor Education, 23, 32-33. Retrieved from:
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ962053.pdf
CBD (2018). The convention on biological diversity. Portuguese National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan (NBSAP). Retrieved from: https://www.cbd.int/countries/?country=pt
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, USA: Collier Books.
DfES (2006). Learning outside the classroom manifesto. Nottingham, UK: Department for
Education and Skills.
Donaldson, G.W., & Donaldson, L.E. (1958). Outdoor education a definition. Journal of Health,
Physical Education, Recreation, 29, 17-63. doi: 10.1080/00221473.1958.10630353
ENEA (2017). Estratégia Nacional de Educação Ambiental (in Portuguese). Retrieved from:
https://enea.apambiente.pt/content/enea-2020
FAO (2001). Olive, crop description and climate. Retrieved from: http://www.fao.org/land-
water/databases-and-software/crop-information/olive/en/
Harris, F. (2018). Outdoor learning spaces: The case of forest school. Area, 50, 222–231. doi:
10.1111/area.12360
Jakobsson, T. (1998). Rio, Iceland and the child environmental issues and education in Iceland.
In I.P. Samuelsson (Ed.), Our World? (pp. 17-26). Goteborg, Sweden. Retrieved from:
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED435436
Leitão, F. (2001). Relatório Final do Projeto Valorização do material vegetativo e conservação dos
recursos genéticos da oliveira (Olea europaea L.) em Trás os Montes e Alto Douro. DRAPTM &
U. Évora. Oeiras: INIA-EAN.
Leitão, F. et al. (1986). Descrição de 22 variedades de oliveira cultivadas em Portugal. Lisboa:
M.A.P.A. Retrieved from: http://www.dgadr.gov.pt/mediateca/send/10-
diversos/26-descricao-de-22-variedades-de-oliveira-cultivadas-em-portugal
Outdoor education initiative for primary school students 13

Linos, A., Nikoloudakis, N., Katsiotis, A., & Hagidimitriou, M. (2014). Genetic structure of the
Greek olive germplasm revealed by RAPD, ISSR and SSR markers. Scientia Horticulturae,
175, 33–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.05.034
Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel
Hill, NC, USA: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
Luff, P. (2018). Early childhood education for sustainability: origins and inspirations in the
work of John Dewey. Education 3-13, 46, 447-455. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2018.1445484
Marsden, W.E. (1998). ‘Conservation education’ and the foundations of national prosperity:
comparative perspectives from early twentieth-century North America and Britain.
History of Education, 27, 345-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760980270311
Michaelides, P.G. (2005). Environmental education in the Greek schools. In M. Kassotakis &
G. Flouris (Eds.), Topics and issues in education, (pp. 485-608). Athens, Greece: Atrapos.
Moss, L.J., & Normore, A.H. (2006). An exploratory analysis of John Dewey's writings:
Implications for school leaders. In M.S. Plakhotnik & S.M. Nielsen (Eds.), Proceedings of
the Fifth Annual College of Education Research Conference: Urban and International Education
Section (pp. 82-87). Miami, USA: Florida International University. Retrieved from:
http://coeweb.fiu.edu/research_conference/.
Mousavi, S., Mariotti, R., Regni, L., Nasini, L., Bufacchi, M., Pandolfi, S., Baldoni, L., & Proietti,
P. (2017). The first molecular identification of an olive collection applying standard
simple sequence repeats and novel expressed sequence tag markers. Frontiers in Plant
Science. 8, 1283. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01283
NASSP (1941). Educational trips. The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School
Principals, 25, 67–90. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1177/019263654102510208
NASSP (1957). A Look into the future. The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School
Principals, 41, 141–144. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1177/019263655704122907
National Academy of Sciences (1988). Biodiversity. Washington, DC, USA: The National
Academies Press. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.17226/989.
O’Brien, E., & Weldon, S. (2007). A place where the needs of every child matter: factors
affecting the use of greenspace and woodlands for children and young people.
Countryside Recreation Journal, 15, 6-9.
Passmore, J. (1972). Outdoor education in Canada – 1972. Retrieved from:
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED067256
Pyle, R.M. (1993). The thunder tree: lessons from an urban wildland. Boston, USA: Houghton
Mifflin
Rickinson, M., Dillon, J., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M. Y., Sanders, D., & Benefield, P.
(2004). A review of research on outdoor learning. London: National Foundation for
Educational Research, Shrewsbury and King’s College London.
Rubens, D. (1997). Outdoor education, adventure and learning: A fusion. MSc Thesis: University
of Edinburgh.
Russell, J. L., Knutson, K., & Crowley, K. (2013). Informal learning organizations as part of an
educational ecology: Lessons from collaboration across the formal-informal divide.
Journal of Educational Change, 14, 259–281.
Sanders, D.L. (2008). Balancing the interplay between botanical gardens and schools: the work
of William Hales and Lilian Clarke. Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed
Landscapes, 28, 439-445. doi: 10.1080/14601176.2008.10404730
14 Lima

Schmidt, L., Gil Nave, J., O'Riordan T., & Guerra, J. (2011). Trends and dilemmas facing
environmental education in Portugal: From environmental problem assessment to
citizenship involvement. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 13, 159-177. doi:
10.1080/1523908X.2011.576167
Stonehouse, P., Allison, P., & Carr, D. (2011). Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates: Ancient Greek
perspectives on experiential learning. In T.E Smith & C.E. Knapp (Eds.) Sourcebook of
experiential education: Key thinkers and their contributions (pp. 18-25). London, UK:
Routledge / Taylor & Francis Group.
Tavera, R. (2012). Illustration of the genus Olea. In Castroviejo, S. (Org.) Flora Iberica. Vol. 11.
Gentianaceae-Boraginaceae (p. 138). Madrid, Spain: Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC. Retrieved
from: http://www.floraiberica.es/floraiberica/texto/pdfs/11_133_01_Olea.pdf
Yanniris, C., & Garis, M.K. (2018). Crisis and recovery in environmental education: The Case
of Greece. In G. Reis & J. Scott (Eds.), International perspectives on the theory and practice
of environmental education: A reader. Environmental Discourses in Science Education, vol 3,
117-129. Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
67732-3
U.N. (2019). Independent Group of Scientists appointed by the Secretary-General, Global Sustainable
Development Report 2019: The Future is Now – Science for Achieving Sustainable
Development. New York, USA: United Nations. Retrieved from:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/24797GSDR_report_201
9.pdf
Uno, G.E. (2018). Plant blindness, science illiteracy, and the future of botany. South African
Journal of Botany, 115, 277. doi: 10.1016/j.sajb.2018.02.011
Valavanidis, A., & Vlachogianni, T. (2011). The most important and urgent environmental problems
in Greece in the last decade (2000-2010). Retrieved from:
http://195.134.76.37/scinews/Reports/PDF/Env01.pdf
Wandersee, J.H., & Schussler, E.E. (2001). Toward a theory of plant blindness. Plant Science
Bulletin, 47, 2–9.

Received: 9.12.2019, Revised: 29.1.2020, Approved: 30.1.2020