An emerging line of research suggests that a short walk in a natural setting may be the best way to restore students’ flagging attention. To help students recover from the inevitable fatigue that accompanies the deep attention expected in schools, educators have always built some breaks into the schedule. Now, researchers are suggesting that students may benefit most when those breaks include being allowed to take walks in natural settings, play in nature, study outdoors, and often by simply being close to vegetation during the school day. Around the world, educators are experimenting with new school designs that put natural features in the foreground.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BagotK.L.AllenF.C.L.ToukhsatiS. (2015). Perceived restorativeness of children’s school playground environments: Nature, playground features, and play period experiences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 41, 1–9.
2.
BentsenP.JensenF.MygindE.RandrupT.B. (2010). The extent and dissemination of udeskole in Danish schools. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 9 (3), 235–243.
3.
BermanM.G.JonidesJ.KaplanS. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychological Science, 19 (12), 1207–1212.
4.
BertoR. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 249–259.
5.
BertoR. (2014). The role of nature in coping with psycho-physiological stress: A literature review on restorativeness. Behavioral Sciences, 4 (4), 394–409.
6.
ChawlaL.KeenaK.PevecI.StanleyE. (2014). Green schoolyards as havens from stress and resources for resilience in childhood and adolescence. Health & Place, 28, 1–13.
7.
ChengJ.C.MonroeM.C. (2012). Connection to nature: Children’s affective attitude toward nature. Environment and Behavior, 44 (1), 31–49.
8.
ConwayJ.M.AmelE.L.GerwienD.P. (2009). Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning’s effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 36 (4), 233–245.
9.
EndrenyA.H. (2010). Urban 5th graders conceptions during a place based inquiry unit on watersheds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47 (5), 501–517.
10.
HartigT.EvansG.W.JamnerL.D.DavisD.S.GärlingT. (2003). Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23 (2), 109–123.
11.
JamesW. (1892). Psychology: The briefer course. New York, NY: Holt.
12.
KaplanS. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 169–182
13.
KaplanR.KaplanS. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
14.
MancusoS.RizzitelliS.AzzarelloE. (2006). Influence of green vegetation on children’s capacity of attention: A case study in Florence, Italy. Advances in Horticultural Science, 220–223.
15.
MårtenssonF.BoldemannC.SöderströmM.BlennowM.EnglundJ.E.GrahnP. (2009). Outdoor environmental assessment of attention promoting settings for preschool children. Health & Place, 15 (4), 1149–1157.
16.
MurrayR.RamstetterC.DevoreC.AllisonM.AnconaR.BarnettS.OkamotoJ. (2013). The crucial role of recess in school. Pediatrics, 131 (1), 183–188.
17.
OguU.SchmidtS.R. (2013). The natural playscape project: A real-world study with kindergartners. Young Children, 68 (4), 32.
18.
RussA.PetersS.J.KrasnyM.StedmanR.C. (2015). Development of ecological place meaning in New York City. Journal of Environmental Education, 46 (2), 73–93.
19.
SchutteA.R.TorquatiJ.C.BeattieH.L. (2017). Impact of urban nature on executive functioning in early and middle childhood. Environment and Behavior, 49 (1), 3–30.
20.
SternM.J.PowellR.B.ArdoinN.M. (2008). What difference does it make? Assessing outcomes from participation in a residential environmental education program. Journal of Environmental Education, 39 (4), 31–43.
21.
TaylorA.F.KuoF.E. (2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park. Journal of Attention Disorders, 12, 402–409.
22.
TaylorA.F.KuoF.E.SullivanW.C. (2001). Coping with ADD: The surprising connection to green play settings. Environment and Behavior, 33 (1), 54–77.
23.
TaylorA.F.KuoF.E.SullivanW.C. (2002). Views of nature and self-discipline: Evidence from inner city children. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22 (1), 49–63.
24.
UlrichR.S. (1983). Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In AltmanI.WohlwillJ. (Eds.), Behavior and the natural environment (pp. 85–125). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
25.
Van den BergA.E.WesseliusJ.E.MaasJ.Tanja-DijkstraK. (2016). Green walls for a restorative classroom environment: A controlled evaluation study. Environment and Behavior. (Advance online publication.)
26.
WellsN.M.EvansG.W. (2003). Nearby nature: A buffer of life stress among rural children. Environment and Behavior, 35 (3), 311–330.
27.
WilliamsD.R.DixonP.S. (2013). Impact of garden-based learning on academic outcomes in schools: synthesis of research between 1990 and 2010. Review of Educational Research, 83 (2), 211–235.
28.
ZennerC.Herrnleben-KurzS.WalachH. (2014). Mindfulness-based interventions in schools — a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5.
