Forest schools are a failure.

[Wayne]

It’s been 31 years since the first Forest school opened in the U.K.

This is ample time to see some sort of return on the investment. Are our youths more well rounded resilient individuals?

Are they the epitome of the benefits Forest schools promotes.

I think they are an abject failure. My experience working with young people is they are less resilient than ever. Less articulate and lack even a basic understanding of the world around them.

Our countryside is now seen as one vast playground. Its existence is only there to serve the immediate interests of those wishing to camp and play in the woods.

So rather than simply state that in my opinion Funding for forest schools should be withdrawn and those making a killing running them should be required to pay back the money they have so egregiously extracted from parents and the funding providers. I’d like some counter arguments preferably with some evidence to back up the claims made by these people.

 

[Megatramp]

I didn't know such a thing existed. Sounds like something some of my kids' buddies could benefit from. Most seem to think the great outdoors is Alton Towers!

 

[TeeDee]

It’s been 31 years since the first Forest school opened in the U.K.

This is ample time to see some sort of return on the investment. Are our youths more well rounded resilient individuals?

Are they the epitome of the benefits Forest schools promotes.

I think they are an abject failure. My experience working with young people is they are less resilient than ever. Less articulate and lack even a basic understanding of the world around them.

Our countryside is now seen as one vast playground. Its existence is only there to serve the immediate interests of those wishing to camp and play in the woods.

So rather than simply state that in my opinion Funding for forest schools should be withdrawn and those making a killing running them should be required to pay back the money they have so egregiously extracted from parents and the funding providers. I’d like some counter arguments preferably with some evidence to back up the claims made by these people.

I've no axe to grind in this at all , but was that the intention? to make youths more rounded and resilient individuals?

I always had assumed it was to more gets kids somewhat 're-grounded' in a Green environmental teaching place? I haven't given this much thought before as don't have kids.

 

[TeeDee]

I think they are an abject failure. My experience working with young people is they are less resilient than ever. Less articulate and lack even a basic understanding of the world around them.

Maybe the potential for predicted looming reintroduction of national service /community service will somewhat fill that gap.
It does have Pro's and Con's before we veer off into a very political subject.

 

[Danceswithhelicopters]

Twas ever thus....old men decrying the youth of today...

I'll double-check with my 2 sons, a Doctor and Engineer, climbers, walkers and travellers both, if they lack resilience and are unaware of the world.

 

[Pattree]

Not sure what a “Forest School” is.
My grandchildren visit woodland as part of their primary school education and I can only see benefits in that as it introduces soggy, squishy and smelly nature into what works otherwise appear only in a text book.

I took my children to “forest school” for a couple of hours on some Saturdays. It was fun and informative. I had no understanding that there was any intentional psychological intervention.

Or is forest school something else?

 

[Chainsaw]

If you are asking for evidence of the fact that they work then you should provide similar evidence of the fact that they dont.

I have no skin in this game I could care less how people make their money, there are a lot worse schemes out there which are less well intentioned.

 

[Decacraft]

There was one run close to me, massively funded by the councils and through some charities.
The owner cooked the books, took a payday and dissolved the company, only for it to be opened again a short while later trading under a different name.

The facilities were in a local nature reserve and are now located in the same place but a few hundred yards on a different area of land.

 

[Chris]

To be honest I feel like the outdoors used to be seen more as a playground than it is now. Outdoor access has been increasingly restricted, whereas back in the day kids were outdoors playing all the time, carrying pocket knives and messing around in trees and suchforth.

Nowadays I think it's disrespected because it's seen more as a novelty than a place where we can exist and thrive without the need for our disposable, consumer-obsessed whirlwind of detritus.

Let's also remember that our population is significantly larger than it used to be.

That said, I do think there is an element of lacking resilience, though I don't think that's the fault of kids - it's not them who invented the society that they've been brought up in. It's weird how it's almost seen as unacceptable to be uncomfortable. You feel something is wrong? Well, it's the world that is wrong, not you... let's make everyone else pretend that it's normal rather than help you cope with it.

 

[William_Montgomery]

I think they are an abject failure. My experience working with young people is they are less resilient than ever. Less articulate and lack even a basic understanding of the world around them.

Our countryside is now seen as one vast playground. Its existence is only there to serve the immediate interests of those wishing to camp and play in the woods.

Are you saying they have just failed to live up to expectations? Or that they have actually had a negative impact on the way young people view the countryside/green spaces?

 

[gg012]

My son's special school has a rota of each class doing a term of a whole day a week in forest school. The kids love it and they learn useful skills, from cooking outside to identifying plants and animals. He already spends quite a bit of time outside eating leaves and spotting squirrels with us anyway but for some of the other kids it's the only chance they get to do things like this. I think it's a great concept and would have loved it myself at the time

Sent from underground

 

[gibson 175]

.

 

[Broch]

Whereas I can understand your rant Wayne, I'm not sure we can draw the conclusion you have. We need numbers - how many kids of a suitable age have there been in the last 30 years? how many had the opportunity to attend the schools? How many turned out more resilient by doing so? how many were less resilient or got nothing out of it? How many forest schools have there been? how many have gone bust or failed?

I suspect that only a very small proportion of kids actually attended anything like a forest school so I doubt if we would see any change in general resilience.

Anyway, I think it was only a very few kids showed any interest in the outdoors when I was a kid!

 

[C_Claycomb]

There is another problem, one that hits all such situations where one looks at the outcome of a complex multi-variable situation, and concludes that a mitigating action had no effect.
How do we tell the difference between:

• Forest schools had no effect at all anywhere with anyone.
• Forest schools made a difference but could not entirely overcome the negative effects of mobile phone social media, Covid social isolation, economic stagnation etc etc. The net situation still looks "bad".
• Forest schools made a difference to some, who are sane and quiet enough now that they don't stand out or make news.
• Our own lens that compares now with "back then" has a tint.

I am sure that it would be possible to get some good data on the effectiveness of forest schools, but it would take some serious time and effort to question a statistically significant and suitably broad number of young people.

My personal belief is that young people are moulded by so many factors that hoping that just one good one, however strong, will counteract all the negative ones, is just fantastically optimistic.

Edit to add:
On an individual basis, one good teacher can turn around an individual student, but for good odds of reaching a lot of students, it takes the whole village.

 

[Paul_B]

My kid's school take kid's out a fair bit into local woods I years 3, 4 and n5 possibly 6 my son's year too. Usually with local wildlife group. Just an organised outdoors class. Other times they go sailing, paddleboarding and kayaking in the estuary out front of the village.

I don't think that there's many forest schools up north here, nor do we need them. Living in a national landscape and AONB with the high levels of biodiversity I suspect there's no need for forest schools. Isn't it a London, sw England or urban Middle class thing in the UK?

I'll ask my partner she travelled to London to interview a forest school as part of a piece of research one. I think she had to. She also went to Norway preschool too where every morning they took their kids out all morning. On xc skis when she went in winter!!!

I guess my point is forest schools seem like a gimmick in the UK. In order for an effect I reckon it would have to be routine for all kid's to be taken out into the countryside regularly like Scandinavian countries seem to do apparently.

 

[William_Montgomery]

I can despair as much as the next person when it comes to the direction in which the world is going, especially regarding the younger generations, but, I find when I actually interact with younger kids I don't have to look far to find stoicism, resilience, good manners and a respect for the world they inhabit.
In terms of 'forest schools', I don't know much about how it's run, but I've spoken to a couple of kids that attend and they seem to get a lot from it, primarily a chance to interact with and learn about the natural world.

 

[Hammock_man]

My 3 grandkids all spoke highly of it. Living in an urban conurbation it is the best of a bad job but way, way better then nothing at all.

 

[Lindop_Lad]

I have young cousins who attend a forest school and I've seen the eldest become interested in the outdoors because of it. I think that while limited in what they can teach the kids, it definitely gets them on the path of learning and developing alongside nature.

 

[Wildgoose]

My 5 year old lad attends a forest school session once a week and looks forward to it.
It’s within his regular school, a small section with some trees, log benches and a tarp set up.
It seems they mostly look for insects or find leaves for artwork.
I think it’s just run by a regular teacher though, don’t think they bring anyone in especially for it?

 

[Springchicken]

The 'success' of forest schools is heavily dependent on the drive, commitment and expertise of the individuals running it. There was one set up at the school where I worked which seemed to be much more an exercise in trotting out mantras, wearing wellies and boiler suits and drinking hot chocolate. As I ran the bushcraft activity further up the school, I can say, with a degree of confidence, that the forest school there taught the pupils very little about the natural world and resilience. The teachers who were 'qualified' to lead the school were fine but perhaps lacking in drive or imagination; even they described the formal training as 'limited' and 'proscriptive', due, in part, to the need to have a nationally applied syllabus and set of criteria.

I would say that, though not an out-and-out disaster, the Forest School of my experience has fallen well short of what could have been achieved. Whether that can be extended nationally is, at best, a moot point. Perhaps the Scout movement should be kick-started and be encouraged to return to more of its original, outdoor-based activities and challenges.