See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301352227

Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

Article · April 2016

DOI: 10.17860/efd.80851

CITATIONS READS

14 12,678

1 author:

Simge Yilmaz-Uysal
Mersin University
19 PUBLICATIONS   55 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

PhD Thesis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Simge Yilmaz-Uysal on 02 March 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi - Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education

“Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2016; 12(1): 423-437”

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17860/efd.80851

Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early

Childhood Education

Okul Öncesi Eğitimde Dış Mekanlar ve Dış Mekan

Aktiviteleri

Simge YILMAZ*

Abstract: There has been several research about the benefits of outdoor activities on preschool children’s
development and learning. However, there is a lack of implementation regarding the results of the related
research in early childhood settings. The purpose of this study is to investigate related literature
considering what these shortcomings are, how they can be compensated and to analyze National Early
Childhood Curriculum in Turkey in terms of outdoor play environments and outdoor activities. In order to
reach these aims, this study indicates the types of outdoor play environments in terms of the opportunities
that they offer for children’s playing, the effects of such different environments on children’s play
preferences, and the barriers against children’s experiences outdoors. Moreover, it is clear that most of the
studies investigating outdoor play environments in Turkey are conducted in in the field of landscape
architecture rather than early childhood education field. The results showed that outdoor play
environments are investigated regarding the physical characteristics of the environment and there is lack
of emphasis on the impacts of outdoor play environments and activities on children’s development and
learning. Therefore, this study also aims to give information about how outdoors can be used as learning
settings and how outdoor activities can support children’s development and learning. Lastly, the results
indicated that Turkish Ministry of National Education, Early Childhood Education Curriculum doesn’t
emphasize the value of outdoor play environments and outdoor activities; therefore teachers have the
responsibility on their shoulders to compensate this deficiency.
Keywords: Outdoor environment, outdoor activities, early childhood education

Öz: Dış mekan ve dış mekan aktivitelerinin okul öncesi dönem çocuklarının bütünsel gelişim ve
öğrenmesi üzerinde olumlu etkileri olduğu ile ilgili çok sayıda bilimsel araştırma bulunmaktadır. Ancak
bu çalışmaların sonuçlarının okul öncesi eğitim ortamlarına aktarılmasında eksiklikler görülmektedir. Bu
çalışmanın amacı, bu eksikliklerin neler olduğu ve nasıl giderilebileceği ile ilgili yazın taramasını
incelemek ve Türk Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Okul Öncesi Müfredatını, konu dahilinde incelemektir.
Belirlenen hedefler doğrultusunda bu çalışmada, dış mekanların çocuklara oyun oynama fırsatları
sunmaları açısından hangi gruplarda toplandığı, bu gruplamaların çocukların oyun tercihleri üzerindeki
etkileri ve çocukların dış mekan deneyimleri kazanmaları önündeki engeller belirtilmiştir. Bununla
birlikte, konu ile ilgili yapılan yazın taramasında, Türkiye’de açık oyun alanlarının, okul öncesi eğitim
alanından ziyade peyzaj mimarlığı alanında araştırıldığı görülmektedir. Bu çalışmaların sonuçları, açık
oyun alanlarının, çoğunlukla yalnızca fiziksel özellikler açısından ele alındığını ve dış mekan
aktivitelerinin çocukların gelişim ve öğrenmesine ne derece katkıda bulunduğu konusundaki eksiklikleri
ortaya konmuştur. Bu nedenle, bu çalışmanın bir diğer amacı da Türkiye’de açık oyun alanlarının eğitim
ortamları olarak nasıl kullanılabileceği ve bu alanlarda yapılan aktivitelerin çocukların gelişim ve
öğrenmesine nasıl katkıda bulunabileceği ile ilgili bilgiler vermektir. Son olarak, bu eksikliğin Türkiye
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Okul Öncesi müfredatında dahi görüldüğü vurgulanarak, öğretmenlere bu eksiği
kapatmak konusunda büyük sorumluluk düştüğü belirtilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Dış mekanlar, dış mekan aktiviteleri, okul öncesi eğitim

The importance of outdoor environment and outdoor activities for preschool children in
early childhood education
The early years tremendously facilitate children’s learning and development through the help of
a wide array of opportunities for children to play, investigate, and discover the world around

* Research Assistant, Middle East Technical Universtiy (METU), Educational Faculty, Ankara-Türkiye,
e-posta:[email protected]

Gönderi Tarihi: 10.02.2016 - Kabul Tarihi: 07.04.2016

Yılmaz

them. Outdoor environment with its natural unrestricted spaces offers those opportunities by
particularly providing space to move and play for children to develop different kinds of their
skills (Bilton, 2002; Rivkin, 1995).
To gather the background information about the positive influence of outdoor
environment and activities on children’s learning and development, the valuable ideas of the
pioneers of early childhood education like Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel, and Dewey could be
investigated (Wolfgang, 2004). Rousseau regarded nature as more valuable than formal
schooling for children’s learning. In fact, he believed that it is important not only to nurture
children’s cognitive development, but also to promote their physical welfare. However, his
ideas could not be implemented in practical educational settings; thus other philosophers built
upon new ideas to his views (Graves, Gargiulo, & Sluder, 1996). For example, Pestalozzi
supported the idea that children’s own endeavors to learn from nature are not sufficient for
gaining necessary skills; therefore teachers should introduce natural objects that give children
opportunity for sensory experiences (Wellhousen, 2002).
Similar to Pestalozzi, Froebel regarded play as the best learning method for young
children and he highlighted that all kinds of outdoor activities should be considered at least as
valuable as indoor activities. Since there is no original source to practically confirm Froebel’s
views, the effects of his ideas on educational practice begun to diminish at the beginning of 20 th
century (Tovey, 2013). In essence, the progressive education approach supporting child-
centered curriculum surfaced rather than more teacher-center approaches of that time
(Wellhousen, 2002). As a pioneer of progressive education Dewey considered that children’s
intrinsic motivation to make physical exercises built more than school-like activities on their
learning and development (Dewey, 1889).
Today, there is substantial scientific evidence related to contribution of outdoor
environment and outdoor activities to young children’s learning as well as development in early
childhood education literature (Wolfgang, 2004). Most of the researchers expressed their ideas
about why they considered outdoor environment as so valuable for young children’s whole
development including gross and fine motor skills, intellectual skills, social skills as well as
sensory skills since they believed that the whole development of children could be well
supported in outdoors as long as they are appropriately adopted for children (Davies, 1996;
Haas, 1996; Henniger, 1993; Louv, 2005). For instance, Davies (1996) indicated that outdoor
activities, naturally, offer children a chance to do exercise by using their fine and gross muscles
and mostly require being active within the environment. Parallel to that idea, Fjortoft and Sageie
(2000) stated that the environment including natural elements provides many opportunities for
children to develop their motor skills, such as coordination, balance and agility as well as
protect children from childhood obesity (Bundy, Luckett, Tranter, Naughton, Wyver, Ragen, &
Spies; 2009; Moore, 1997). Similarly, Chakravarthi, Schilling, Hestenes and McOmber (2007)
asserted that even if an outdoor environment just includes grass as a natural element, it will be
sufficient to promote children’s physical skills.
Not only does outdoor environment nurtures children’s physical development, but also
helps their cognitive development to flourish. To demonstrate, Ouvry, (2003) and Rivkin (2000)
highlighted that outdoor environment develops children’s observation skills by letting them
follow whatever is going on in the surroundings including behavior of animals, change in
weather conditions, or progress of construction. Gleitman and Liberman (1995) also emphasized
the crucial role of outdoor environment on children’s intellectual development if they possess
varied equipment stimulating creativity and imagination of young children.
In addition to the positive effects of outdoor environment on children’s psychomotor
and cognitive domains, outdoor environment is also beneficial as to fostering children’s socio-
emotional skills. Rivkin (2000) stressed that children have many opportunities to get to know
different people or animals while playing outdoors. Furthermore, children also have a chance to
experience all types of play with their peers and compare their behaviors with each other
through those experiences (Creasey, Jarvis & Berk, 1998). Moreover, they could improve their

424
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

communication and empathy skills by means of interacting with their peers during outdoor
activities (Hartle, 1994; Richardson, 2007).
By considering the value given for the outdoor environment through the centuries and
also contributions to developmental areas of children, it would not be surprising to conclude that
outdoors might be superior to indoors since this type of environment has more flexible and
useful conditions for variety of activities for children, including both inappropriate and
allowable activities in indoor settings (Parsons, 2011; Rivkin, 2000; Talbot & Frost, 1989).

Types of playgrounds
After discussing the countless benefits of outdoor environments on children’s learning and
whole development, it should be made clear where outdoors are. Outdoor environments have
been separated into three groups by the researchers considering the facilities they provide for
children to play and explore (Frost & Klein, 1979). Those groups are called traditional
playgrounds, contemporary playgrounds, and adventure playgrounds (Johnson, Christie, &
Yawkey, 1999; Parnell & Ketterson, 1980). The first and the most common type of the
playgrounds, traditional playgrounds, consist of mostly stationary and large metal equipment
such as slides, swings, and jungle gyms (Frost & Klein, 1979; Johnson, Christie, & Yawkey,
1999). On the other hand, the second type of the playgrounds, namely contemporary
playgrounds, consists of alternatively manufactured surfaces which are different form than
metal ones and generally would include a sand box, wheeled vehicles, or play houses. The last
type of playgrounds called adventure playgrounds comprise of natural features giving
opportunities to children to explore available materials in their surroundings to use them for
construction and deconstruction (Frost, 1992).
Reviewing the literature related to those three types of playgrounds, many studies have
revealed that children’s play choices are affected by the structures of playgrounds. For example,
Frost and Strickland (1985) investigated 138 preschool children’s preferences for equipment in
playgrounds and established that children mostly engaged in playing with portable, complex,
and manipulative play materials rather than fixed ones. In parallel to that research, Campbell
and Frost (1985) studied preschool children and investigated their material choice during free
play. The results indicated that children mostly spent their time with creative loose materials
rather than large and stationary equipment during their free play due to the nature of the
equipment. Similar to those results, but considered from different viewpoint, Berry (1993 in
Walsh, 1993) conducted a research by focusing on the duration of children’s preferences for
static structures in 7 early childhood education centers in Australia. The results of the study
showed that children were not willing to spend more time with fixed materials. In fact, they
spent merely 4 minutes on the average with static equipment unless communication with the
teacher was provided or additional creative play equipment was offered. In addition, Barbour’s
study (1999) convinced us to understand why children do not prefer traditional areas as a first
choice. In essence, he found out that traditional playgrounds increase competition between
children since they do not encourage collaborative play among children.
Some other studies have extended the ideas regarding why children’s play preferences
have demonstrated more inclination towards environment having creative and open-ended
equipment rather than non-manipulative fixed materials. Researchers expressed the reason of
the changing preferences of the children's playgrounds by emphasizing their decreasing level of
engagement to nature. For instance, Louv (2005) stressed the idea that today, the increasing
number of children are spending very little amount of time in outdoor environment so they have
been detached from the nature. In a similar way, Anggard (2010) and Greenman (2005)
underlined the necessity of integrating the natural world into children’s education in early years
due to increasing disengagement from the nature.
Aforementioned studies in the literature call close attention to benefits of outdoor
experiences for children’s development as well as to the importance of playgrounds
characteristics on children’s play choices. Nevertheless, ultimate importance of outdoor

425
Yılmaz

activities and outdoor environment to all aspects of children’s development and learning are not
efficiently highlighted in the literature on early childhood education. In essence, while literature
on early childhood education is quite rich with regard to importance of indoor environment and
indoor activities providing variety of sources for early childhood educators to investigate any
issues related to indoor activities, most of those sources provide only brief information about
outdoor environment and activities (Henniger, 1993).
The importance of outdoor activities was neglected even by the National Association for
the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) which is the world’s largest early childhood
education association. Indeed, although the NAEYC highlighted the key role of indoor play
with regard to developmentally appropriate programs supporting children’s whole development,
outdoor experiences are almost totally ignored with only few pages in the program (Bredekamp,
1987) allocated for them. In addition to that scientific evidence, in practice, most preschool
teachers devoted themselves to preparation of indoor activities during their professional life and
ignored the value of spending a period of time outdoors within their daily schedules
(Chakravarthi, 2009).
Examining the literature, reasons of dearth of sources and ignored value of outdoor
environment as well as activities convince us that there are barriers to children’s outdoor
experiences. One of the reasons of that particular deprivation of children from outdoor
experiences was related to parents and their concerns about safety of their children in outdoors
(Pyle, 2002) as well as their limited time for going outside with their children (Wilson, 1996).
Clements (2004) studied eight hundred and thirty mothers to investigate their own early
experiences in outdoor environment as well as the outdoor experiences of their children at
present. When comparing the status of outdoor experiences of children with their mothers’, it is
clear that due to parental safety concerns, children have fewer opportunities to experience
outdoors today than their mothers did as they young. Similarly, White (2004) conducted a study
with mothers of children between three and twelve years old and aimed to investigate the reason
why they restrict their children’s outdoor experiences. The researcher found out that mothers
retain their children from outdoor facilities due to crime and safety concerns. In parallel to this
research, an increasing number of studies (Herrington & Studtmann, 1998; Moore & Wong,
1997; Pyle, 2002) established that children’s time spent in outdoor environment, particularly in
their neighborhoods, is restricted by the fear of strangers unless the children are under the
supervision of adults. In addition to parental safety concerns, another barrier to children’s
outdoor experiences is related to teachers’ safety concerns. Considering this concern,
Chakravarthi (2009) and Bundy et al., (2009) stated that teachers ‘safety concerns override their
teaching concerns during outdoor play time.
Restrictions to children’s outdoor activities are not only related to adults’ safety concern
but also arise from the focus of the programs of the early childhood education centers. It is vital
to make outdoor activities an indispensable part of daily routine in early childhood programs
rather than perceiving those activities as a break time or a chance to communicate with others
for teachers (Frost, 1994). Furthermore, Pate, McIver, Dowda, Brown, and Addy (2008)
supported that idea and indicated that planning outdoor activities for children depends on the
implemented program in an early childhood education center. Basically, if the center gives
importance to sedentary activities for children that are mostly appropriate for indoor
environment, the time children spend in outdoor settings will automatically decrease.
In addition to safety concern and the focus of early childhood education programs, one
more inevitable factor affecting the time children can spend outdoors is related to the weather.
According to Chakravarthi et al., (2007), the amount of time teachers spend with children in
outdoor settings varies depending on the weather. She indicated that teachers do not prepare
outdoor activities as regular activity since they consider the weather conditions while planning
the outdoor activities; in fact, only if the weather is nice, they prefer to implement those
activities. Maynard and Waters (2007) also conducted a study with preschool teachers from four
different schools. The researchers found out that teachers do not perceive outdoor activities as a
part of their daily schedule. In fact, teachers’ reports showed that if they allow children to

426
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

experience outdoors on a rainy day, they know that parents will react negatively to those
experiences since they do not want to see their children’s clothes wet and dirty. Therefore,
weather conditions and possible parental reactions may prevent teachers to implement outdoor
activities throughout their daily schedule. There is similar perceptions in Turkish context that
outdoor activities are perceived as the reason to go out to the school garden in good weathers
instead of perceived as activities practiced out-of-doors by the teachers (Alat, Akgümüş, &
Cavali, 2012). This perception among teachers should be changed and teachers should be
informed about all weather conditions offer different kinds of opportunities to experience with
children in case children wear appropriately and be safe. Moreover, outdoor activities should be
a part of the curriculum instead of playing outdoors freely only in good weathers.

The essential characteristics of outdoor environment in an early childhood education settings

Since among all obstacles to outdoor activities, adult’s safety concerns overwhelmingly surpass
others in the literature, there exist some standards, as cornerstones providing licensing
requirements at a minimum level, implemented by most states in the USA to maintain the
quality of early care and education in terms of safety issues (Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 1998).
Those standards might be listed as the consumer product safety commission handbook on public
playground safety (Consumer Product Safety Commission, 1997), Environment Rating Scale
(Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 1998), tiered quality strategies, and the criteria of Developmentally
Appropriate Practice’s for children’s outdoor environment (NAEYC, 1997). As an example,
developmentally appropriate practices defined by NAEYC (1997), outdoor environment should
offer children an opportunity to move freely and loudly, to promote their physical development,
and to explore natural environment. Moreover, outdoor environment should protect children
from variety of hazards and should provide variety of activities in fresh air supporting different
developmental areas of children (NAEYC, 1997). Like NAEYC (1997) standards, all of
standards mentioned above commonly and preponderantly concentrated on protection of
children from physical harm. Since all those endeavors of determining standards did not go
beyond just the safety issues to reduce children’s injuries in outdoor environment, the necessity
of designing qualified outdoor environments for young children come into prominence
(McGinnis, 2003).
Focusing just safety issues surfaced the necessity of designing qualified outdoor
environments. As a pioneer, Frost (1992) introduced a new word ‘playscape’ to describe
different play environments. He strictly emphasized the value of natural elements in terms of the
quality of the outdoor environment since he believed that natural elements are open-ended, so
they offer children more variety of learning experiences than other types of materials. However,
he was also aware of the limitation of those materials to just some particular group of materials,
such as sand, balls, or tricycles (Frost, 1992). In the same manner, White and Stoecklin (1998)
described ideal outdoor environment by emphasizing the importance of unstructured
experiences with the elements of the nature rather than structured experiences. Then, many
other researchers also gave high priority to natural elements in outdoors for young children. For
instance, Henniger (1994) and Wardle (1994) indicated that the most important part of
children’s outdoor environment is loose articles which include changeable and creative
construction materials such as sand, water, rope, bricks, or lumber. Many researchers (Debord,
Hestenes, Moore, Cosco & McGinnis, 2002; Pfouts & Schultz, 2003; Widler, 2001) also
pointed out that loose materials are extremely beneficial to children’s outdoor environment
since they are very affordable, available and effective learning materials for children’s
development and learning. In contrast to those ideas, Sutterby and Thronton (2005) accepted
stationary equipment, such as swings, slides, and balance platforms as indispensable and the
most crucial parts of outdoor environment for children since those equipment help children to
reveal their intrinsic willingness to move.
Different from just indicating the required materials in outdoor environment for
children, Shell (1994) stressed that the most important task is to create opportunities for young
children rather than just selecting manufactured and close-ended structures from the catalogues

427
Yılmaz

to prepare qualified outdoor environment for children. In a similar way, many researchers
underlined the necessity of appropriate and different level of risk as well as different degrees of
challenge for children through their outdoor experiences in outdoor environment (Gleave, 2008;
Little, 2010; Sandseter, 2009; Sutterby & Frost, 2002). Furthermore, Wardle (1994) highlighted
the necessity of developmentally appropriate experiences, without any safety concerns as well
as focusing on the goals and objectives of outdoor activities in the curriculum. Different from
others, Frost, Wortham, and Reifel (2008) stated that a quality outdoor environment should
enrich children’s experiences and provide them with an opportunity to play at their own pace
and within a social group.
A comprehensive review of the literature brought to light four essential characteristics
of children’s outdoor environment and activities. These points were summarized by
Wellhousen’s (2002) and Henniger’s (1994) as follows: the outdoor environments should (1)
provide many opportunities for children to take risks to the extent which is acceptable under
safe and well-supervised conditions; (2) offer challenging situations for children consistent with
their developmental level and interests; (3) have variety of materials and space for children to
use in all kinds of play; and (4) include manipulative materials and provide choices for children
to move some parts of the materials.
To sum up, considering all above aspects of quality are provided, it would be easy to
maximize children’s learning in outdoor environments.

Examining the National Early Childhood Education Curriculum (2013) in Turkey in terms
of outdoor activities
Before examining the Turkish Ministry of National Education, Early Childhood Education
Curriculum (MONE, 2006) in terms of outdoor activities, it would be better to draw a picture of
current but contradictory status of outdoor environment and outdoor activities in Turkey.
Investigating outdoor environment as well as outdoor activities is not so widespread
among the researchers from the field of early childhood education in Turkey. In fact, there are
limited studies (Alat, Akgümüş & Cavali, 2012; Artar, Demir & Çok, 1998; Bağlı, 1996; Olgan
& Kahriman-Öztürk, 2011; Sevimli-Çelik, Kirazcı & İnce, 2011) investigating the
characteristics of children’s playgrounds, behaviors of children within outdoor environment, and
the significant contribution of outdoor activities on children’s development and learning. For
instance, Olgan and Kahriman-Öztürk (2011) conducted a research to examine the current
condition of playgrounds in terms of playground environment and their equipment in 34 public
and private preschools in Ankara. The results of their study addressed that there was no
difference between public and private preschools with regard to their playground environment
and materials; in fact both types of preschools had traditional playgrounds disrupting children’s
play experiences with just similar materials such as swings and climbing bars rather than
focusing on the features of playgrounds or playground equipment. From different perspective,
Bağlı (1996) investigated the level of social interaction among 71 preschool children while
playing different equipment and materials in playgrounds. Her result revealed that children’s
behaviors in playgrounds were mostly affected by the arrangement of the playgrounds.
Moreover, Sevimli-Çelik, Kirazcı, and İnce (2011) indicated the insufficiency of outdoor
environment for children to practice movement activities in 8 preschools in Ankara. Lastly,
Alat, Akgümüş, and Cavali (2012) investigated 25 preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices
about outdoor play. According to the results, although the early childhood educators have
positive thoughts and attitudes regarding the importance of outdoor activities on children’s
development and learning, they indicated that some factors, such as insufficient physical
conditions, lack of safety at school gardens, crowded classes, inappropriate weather conditions,
and lack of parental permission prevent them to practice such activities outdoors.
In contrast to the studies in early childhood education field, investigating children’s
playgrounds concentrated on their different aspects is insistently popular among the researchers
from the field of landscape architectures. For the most part, research has focused on the issues
(1) the qualities of children’s playgrounds in terms of safety of playgrounds’ arrangement and

428
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

the equipment they have (Açık, Gülbayrak & Turaci-Çelik, 2004; Akkulah, 2008; Cihangiroğlu,
1994; Özgüç, 1998; Üskün, Kişioğlu, Altay, Çıkınlar & Kocakaya, 2008; Yılmaz & Bulut,
2007), and (2) the quantity of children’s playgrounds (Tekkaya, 2001; Yılmaz & Bulut, 2003).
Although they are many in number, most of the studies in the field of landscape architecture are
limited with just investigating the physical characteristics, particularly emphasizing the safety
concern, of the outdoor environments as far away from considering educational goals and
objectives for young children.
As a result, it could be addressed that there is a clear-cut neglect to explore children’s
outdoor environments and the impacts of outdoor activities on their development and learning in
the context of early childhood education. Therefore, it would be make more sense to examine
the national early childhood education curriculum in Turkey in terms of children’s outdoor
activities to confirm the above picture.
Examining National Early Childhood Curriculum we could see that there are some goals to
support children’s physical developments for three different age groups (36-48 months, 48-60
months, and 60-72 months children). For each goal, there are some indicators that children are
expected to gain through the outdoor activities. In particular, there are some explanations in the
curriculum as a guideline for teachers to consider while preparing different activities for
children. Goals which are directly related to nurture children’s physical development are 1st, 2nd,
3rd, and the 4th goals in the MONE curriculum (pp.32-33). For instance, one of the goals is “to
be able to do displacement” and some objectives to be well-supported in outdoor for this goal
are “to walk/run according to the directions”, “to jump from the specific height”, and “to roll
through a specific distance” (p.32). As an explanation for this goal and indicators, the MONE
curriculum is flexible and enables teachers to create their own activities while considering age
appropriateness. However, it includes only the standards for the height/depth of an obstacle that
teachers should consider while preparing activities for children. Thus, teachers have to be
knowledgeable and conscious about preparing a safe environment to prevent possible injuries of
their children.
The 2nd goal to nurture children’s physical development is “to be able to perform
specific movements that require balance” and as example indicators for this goal, the MONE
curriculum includes “ability to move different weights from one place to another”, “ability to do
different kinds of balance movements individually or in paired” (p.32). As an explanation for
this objective, the curriculum gives advices to teachers in terms of the appropriateness of width,
height, and length of balance board for creating a safe environment for children.
The 3rd goal to support children’s physical development is “object control”. The
curriculum includes several indicators of this goal such as “controlling objects individually or
collaboratively”, “rolling a small ball on the ground” and “holding, moving, pulling, and
pushing of objects” (p.32). The explanation for this objective is mainly related to controlling the
small objects such as balloon, sea ball, scarf, and ribbon as well as to be able to start and to keep
going on, and to control the movement.
The 4th goal to promote children’s physical development is “to be able to do small
motor activities” (p.33). The indicators of this goal include gathering objects, pouring the
objects from one pot to another, and gathering objects to create new shapes (p.33). Nevertheless,
although the 4th goal and the objectives are appropriate to support children’s motor skills
outdoors, and the indicators under that goal refer to support children’s physical development,
the MONE curriculum does not provide any specific guidance as to how to practice them
outdoors.
In addition to the goals and objectives related to physical development of children, there
are other goals and objectives for different domains in which children gain though outdoor
activities. For instance, in socio-emotional domain, the objectives of “to be able to take
responsibilities” (p.29) and “protecting aesthetical values” (p.30) could be supported in outdoor
environment. Children could be responsible to take care of an animal or a plant as well as to
protect beautiful things in their environment. They should also learn to assure sustainable life by
using resources (e.g., soil, water, energy, and food) effectively (p.29). Moreover, children

429
Yılmaz

should be given different kinds of opportunities to express their ideas regarding to protect
beautiful things and to arrange both natural and man-made environment around them (p.30).
In addition, outdoor environment might be invaluable to nurture some objectives in
cognitive domain. To illustrate, “to be able to observe the various features of the objects or
entities” (p.20) might be the objective that children could gain through the sensory experiences
in outdoor environment. Children’s self-care skills such as “to be able to apply cleaning
routines” (p. 41) could even be fostered in outdoor environment. In fact, children could be
aware of cleaning their hands or arms after messy outdoor activities.
After reviewing the goals and indicators in terms of outdoor activities, the next part that
is examined in the MONE curriculum is of the principles of the early childhood education. In
this part, the curriculum indicates that the facilities of the school and the environment should be
considered as much as children’s interests while preparing educational activities for children.
However, it specifically refers neither indoor and outdoor environment nor outdoor play.
The next part I reviewed in MONE curriculum is “The Importance of Early Childhood
Period”. The curriculum highlights the importance of enriched and stimulating environment for
children’s learning and development. However, the MONE curriculum is insufficient as to
highlight the importance and richness of outdoor which provides opportunity to implement
different kinds of activities. In fact, outdoor environment provides wide range of opportunities
for children to develop their observation, exploration, or discovery skills through the help of
sensory experiences (White, 2008). Moreover, those kinds of environments stimulate children’s
curiosity and give many chances for them to ask as well as respond the questions within the
environment result in strengthening the communication skills of children (White & Stoecklin,
1998).
The heading of “The Importance of Teachers” also investigated in terms of teacher’s
preparations of outdoor teaching as well as their arrangements of outdoor environment for
teaching. The curriculum emphasizes the significance of process rather than product during
play, investigation and unstructured activities (p.13). In addition, the significance of the
arrangement of the environment for children’s learning is emphasized in this part of the MONE
curriculum. The curriculum also supports the idea that teachers should let children to discover
their immediate environment in accordance with the goals and indicators of the curriculum.
The heading of “The Essential Characteristics of the Curriculum” is another part that is
analyzed considering outdoor activities and outdoor learning in the MONE curriculum. This
part includes different sub-titles that can be associated with outdoor learning. In essence, the
MONE curriculum indicates that early childhood program is so flexible that it can be adapted to
changing characteristics of the physical environment. It lets teachers to enrich children’s
learning processes by arranging the environment and the materials however they would like to
do. Nevertheless, the MONE curriculum does not include optimal characteristics of outdoor
environment and outdoor play materials as a guide for teachers.
The MONE curriculum indicates that the program should support children’s whole
development. It also includes the idea that educational plans should be prepared in a balance by
including the goals and indicators from all developmental domains, both active/passive and
indoor/outdoor activities. Nevertheless, the curriculum gives almost no information about the
notion of the crucial role of children’s connection with nature for their development. Therefore,
teachers might suffer from lack of understanding of the value of natural outdoor environment
for children’s development and learning and may not be aware of how to prepare outdoor
activities by using the materials in their immediate environment.
This part also emphasizes that the MONE is a play-based curriculum. In fact, it
highlights that children not only learn but also discover their environment through play (p.15).
One of the important points here is that the educational programs should be prepared by
considering the importance of play to reach educational goals and indicators. However, there is
no example or information for teachers about how they should practice play activities with
young children. I believe that this part might be enriched as far as importance of play for
children’s development and learning is concerned. There might be two subtitles as “play

430
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

indoors” and “play outdoors” devised under the general heading. As an example, teachers might
be informed that children’s need to move could be met during outdoor activities since they
could master their gross motor skills through using gross muscles in outdoors. Moreover, the
MONE curriculum could be further improved if there are concrete well-planed examples of both
structured/semi-structured outdoor activities and unstructured outdoor experiences for teachers
to practice with children.
In addition to aforementioned parts, the importance of developing children’s creativity
is emphasized through goals and indicators rather than included in separate part the MONE
curriculum (p.16). The curriculum addresses that teachers should be creative to reach the goals
and indicators in an effective way. However, there is no emphasis regarding the relationship
between outdoor activities and creativity in the MONE curriculum. Since outdoor environment
is one of the best environments to nurture children’s creativity (Fjortoft, 2001, 2004) it
would be better to include the significant role of outdoor play to support children’s creativity
and the ways how teachers can flourish children’s creativity outdoors.
Lastly, the MONE curriculum supports the idea that educational programs should be
planned considering children’s daily living experiences since such experiences helps to enrich
learning process. The curriculum also supports the idea that it is a good and economic way to
use the opportunities of the immediate surrounding as source for children’s learning. At this
point, teachers have a key role to recognize children’s daily experiences well and the
opportunities in their immediate environment while they preparing educational plans.
In addition to the MONE curriculum book, there are two more books prepared in
accordance with the main curriculum book for parents (OBADER) and teachers to support
children’s learning. The OBADER has almost no outdoor activity suggestions for parents to
practice with their children. In essence, some sessions that can be model for parents within
orientation programs at the beginning of the semester only gives general information about
outdoor play. This book also includes the benefits of toys including natural materials (i.e., sand,
clay, and mud) which children can play outdoors. It states that these natural materials provide
children to have experiences outdoors, to know their immediate environment, and to support
their imagination (p.54). Lastly, this book gives general information about the importance of
field trips for children’s learning. However, I think there are countless acquisitions of children
during field trips that the OBADER would focus on. For instance, it should give some examples
of trips to historical buildings, museums, or factories. It would be better to inform parents in
terms of the benefits and contributions of visits to different out-of-doors environments where
children could be offered various opportunities to ask questions if they are curious about
something within a particular area (Helm & Katz, 2001).
When the book including different kinds of integrated activities for teachers to practice
in their educational settings is analyzed, there are six different structured or semi-structured
outdoor activities (11th, 15th, 20th, 23th, 27th, and 31th activities, p.32-72) examples. In essence,
these activities are integrated activities associated with science, art, music, play, language,
science, and mathematics domains.
To sum up, after examining the whole curriculum and aforementioned two supportive
books, now it is better easy to understand the connection between the scarce of the studies about
outdoor environment and outdoor activities and the value given for them in the literature; since,
in general, the MONE curriculum and the books for parents and teachers provide insufficient
information about children’s outdoor activities and the characteristics of qualified outdoor
environment. In essence, the information provided in all aspects of outdoor environment and
outdoor activities in these books is too general. Most importantly, the importance of natural
elements outdoors is not highlighted as creative and necessary to enhance children’s whole
development. However, although teachers are free to select developmentally appropriate
practices for their specific age group of children based on the goals and objectives in the MONE
curriculum, all outdoor practices in early childhood settings are based on their initiative due to
lack of determined minimal standards for outdoor environment to be implemented as guidelines

431
Yılmaz

for teachers. As a result, there are too many responsibilities on the teachers’ shoulders as long as
the teacher is willing to enable children to get maximum benefits through outdoor experiences.
Therefore, teachers should be more conscious and informed about the benefits of outdoor
activities and the qualified outdoor environment for children and they should actively involve
children’s play outdoors unlike the common perspective which is only supervising or guiding
children’s behaviors (Ihmeideh & Al-Qaryouti, 2016; McClintic and Petty (2015). Similarly,
parents have also responsibilities to support children’s development and learning outdoors by
extending limited information about the importance of outdoor activities in the OBADER book
and recognizing how to practice such information with their young children.

References
Açık, Y., Gülbayrak, C. & Turaci-Çelik, G. (2004). Investigation of the level of safety and
appropriateness of playgrounds in Elazığ city in Turkey. International Journal of
Health Research, 14 (1), 75-82.
Akkulah, A. T. (2008). The research of safety standards in children’s playgrounds and its
application in Nenehatun Park. Retrieved November 8, 2012 from
http//www.belgeler,com/blg/jw2/oyun-alanları-guvenlık-standartlarının-arastırılması-
ve-nenehatun-parkı-ornegınde-ırdelenmesı-the-research-of-safety-standards-in-children-
s-playgrounds-and-it-s-application-in-nenehatun-park.
Alat, Z., Akgümüş, Ö., & Cavali, D. (2012). Okul öncesi eğitimde açık hava etkinliklerine
yönelik öğretmen tutum ve uygulamaları (Teachers’ views and practices towards
outdoor activities in early childhood education). Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi
Dergisi, 8 (3), 47-62.
Anggard, E. (2010). Making use of “nature” in an outdoor preschool: Classroom, home, and
fairyland. Children, Youth and Environments, 20 (1), 4-25.
Artar, M., Demir, T. Ş. & Çok, F. (1998). Ankara’da açık alanlarda çocuk oyunları (Children’s
outdoor play in Ankara). Eğitim ve Bilim, 107, 23-27.
Bağlı, M. T. (1996). 5 ve 7 yaş kız ve erkek çocukların çocuk bahçelerindeki oyun araçlarında
gözlemlenen sosyal etkileşimleri (5 and 7 years old children’s social interactions in
playgorunds). Unpublished master thesis. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler
Enstitüsü.
Barbour, A. (1999). The impact of playground design on the play behaviors of children with
differing levels of physical competence. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 14 (1),
75-98.
Bilton, H. (2002). Outdoor play in the early years. London: David Fulton.
Bredekamp, S. (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs
serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: National Association for
the Education of Young Children.
Bundy, A., Luckett, T., Tranter, P., Naughton, G., Wyver, S., Ragen, J., & Spies, G. (2009). The
risk is that there is “no risk”: A simple innovative intervention to increase children’s
activity levels. International Journal of Early Years Education, 17 (1), 33-45.
Campbell, S., & Frost, J. L. (1985). The effects of playground type on the cognitive and social
play behavior of grade two children. In: J. L. Frost, & S. Sunderlin (Eds.), When
children play: Proceedings of the International Conference on Play and Play
Environments. Association for Childhood Education International.
Chakravarthi, S. (2009). Preschool teachers' beliefs and practices of outdoor play and outdoor
environments. Unpublished PhD thesis, Greensboro: University of North Carolina.
Chakravarthi, S., Schilling, T., Hestenes, L., & McOmber K. (2007). Investigating factors of
outdoor play that impact preschoolers’ physical activity levels. Poster symposium
presentation at the Biennial Conference for the Society for Research in Child
Development, Boston, MA.
Cihangiroğlu, C. (1994). Çocuk oyun alanlarındaki oyun aletlerinde uyulması gereken kriterler
üzerine bir araştırma (Investigating essential criteria of children’s playground

432
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

equipment). Unpublished master thesis. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri

Enstitüsü.
Clements, R. (2004). An investigation of the status of outdoor play. Contemporary Issues in
Early Childhood, 5 (1), 68-80.
Creasey, G. L., Jarvis, P. A., & Berk, L. (1998). Play and social competence. In O. N. Saracho,
& B. Spodek (Eds.). Multiple perspectives on play in early childhood education. (pp.
116-143). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Davies, M. (1996). Outdoors: An important context for young children’s development. Early
Child Development and Care, 115, 37-49.
DeBord, K., Hestenes, L.L, Moore, R.C., Cosco, N., & McGinnis, J.R. (2002). Paying attention
to the outdoor environment is as important as preparing the indoor environment. Young
Children, 57 (3), 32-34.
Dewey, J. (1889). Experience and nature. LaSalle, IL: Open Court.
Fjortoft, I. (2001). The natural environment as a playground for children: The impact of outdoor
play activities in pre-primary school children, Early Childhood Education Journal, 29
(2), 111-117.
Fjortoft, I. (2004) Landscape as playscape: The effects of natural environments on children’s
play and motor development, Children, Youth and Environments, 14(2), 21-44.
Fjortoft, I. & Sageie, J. (2000). The natural environment as a playground for ehildren:
Landscape description and analyses of a natural playscape. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 48 (1), 83-97.
Frost, J. L. (1992). Play and playspaces. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishing.
Frost, J. L. (1994). Making the most of outdoor play. Scholastic Early Childhood Today, 23, 47-
54.
Frost, J. L., & Klein, B. (1979). Children’s play and playgrounds. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Frost, J.L., & Strickland, E. (1985). Equipment choices of young children during free play. In J.
L. Frost & S. Sunderlin, (Eds.), When Children Play: Proceedings of the International
Conference on Play and Play Environments. Association for Childhood Education
International.
Frost, J., Wortham, S., & Reifel, S. (2008). Play and child development. NJ: Merrill Prentice
Hall.
Gleave, J. (2008). Risk and play: A literature review. Retrieved November 9, 2012 from
http://www.playday.org.uk/PDF/Risk-and-play-a-literature-review.pdf
Gleitman, L., & Liberman, M. (1995). An invitation to cognitive science: Language. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Graves, S.B., Gargiulo, R.M., & Sluder, L.C. (1996). Young children: An introduction to early
childhood education. Minneapolis/St.Paul: West.
Greenman, J. (2005). Outdoor learning environments: Caring spaces, learning places
children’s environment that work. WA: Exchange Press.
Haas, M. (1996). “Children in the junkyard.” Childhood Education, 72 (6), 345-351.
Harms, T., Clifford, R.M., & Cryer, D. (1998). Early childhood environment rating scale
revised edition. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hartle, L. (1994). Outdoor play: A window on social-cognitive development. Dimensions of
Early Childhood, 23, 27-31.
Helm, J. H. & Katz, L. G. (2001). Young investigators: The project approach in the early years.
New York: Teachers Collage Press and Washington, DC: National Association for the
Education of Young Children.
Henniger, M. L. (1993). Enriching the outdoor play experience. Childhood Education, 70 (2),
87-91.
Henniger, M. L. (1994). Planning for outdoor play. Young Children, 49, 10-15.
Herrington, S., & Studtmann, K. (1998). Lanscape interventions: New directions for the design
of children’s outdoor play environments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 42, 191-205.

433
Yılmaz

Ihmeideh, F. M., & Al-Qaryouti, I. A. (2016). Exploring kindergarten teachers’ views and roles
regarding children’s outdoor play environments in Oman. Early Years, 36 (1), 81-96.
Johnson, J. E., Christie, J. F., & Yawkey, T. D. (1999). Play and early childhood development.
Addison Wesley: Longman.
Little, H. (2010). Risk, challenge, and safety in outdoor play: Pedagogical and regulatory
tension. Asia-Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 4 (1), 3-24.
Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving out children from nature-deficit disorder.
Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
McClintic, S., & Petty, K. (2015). Exploring early childhood teachers’ beliefs and practices
about preschool outdoor play: A qualitative study. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher
Education 36 (1), 24-43.
McGinnis, J. (2003). Adventure playgrounds and outdoor safety issues. Child Care Information
Exchange, 150, 46-50.
Moore, R. C. (1997). The need for nature: a childhood right. Social Justice, 24(3), 203-218.
Moore, R. C., & Wong, H. (1997). Natural learning: Rediscovering nature’s way of teaching.
Berkeley, CA: MIG Communications.
Maynard, T., & Waters, J. (2007). Learning in the outdoor environment: A missed opportunity?
Early Years, 27 (3), 255-265.
Ministry of National Education (MONE), (2006). 36-72 aylık çocuklar için okul öncesi egitim
programı ve okul öncesi egitim kurumları yönetmeligi, “The curricula and regulation
for early childhood education”. İstanbul: Morpa Kültür Yayınları.
National Association for the Education of Young Children, (1997). Developmentally
appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through
age 8. Washington DC: NAEYC.
Olgan, R., & Kahriman-Öztürk, D. (2011). An investigation in the playgrounds of public and
private preschools in Ankara. Education & Science, 36 (161), 85-97.
Ouvry, M. (2003). Exercising muscles and minds: outdoor play and the early years curriculum.
London: National Early Years Network.
Özgüç, İ.M. (1998). Oyun bahçelerinde tasarım ilkeleri (Desegin elements of playgrounds).
Peyzaj Mimarlığı Dergisi, 5, 15-16.
Parnell, K., & Ketterson P. (1980). What should a playground offer? The Elementary School
Journal, 80 (5), 232-238.
Parsons, A. (2011). Young children and nature: Outdoor play and development, experiences
fostering environmental consciousness, and the implications on playground design,
Unpublished master thesis. Blacksburg, Virginia: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University.
Pate, R., McIver, K., Dowda, M., Brown, W., & Addy, C. (2008). Directly observer physically
activity levels in preschool children. Journal of School Health, 78 (8), 438-444.
Pfouts, D.K., & Schultz, R.A. (2003, Winter). The benefits of outdoor learning centers for
young gifted learners. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 26, 56-64.
Pyle, R.M. (2002). Eden in a vacant lot: kids and species in the neighborhood of life.
Cambridge, USA: MIT Press.
Richardson, G.R. (2007). The great outdoors. Education Review, 20 (1), 92-99.
Rivkin, M. (1995). The great outdoors: Restoring children's right to play outside. Washington,
DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Rivkin, M.S. (2000). Outdoor experiences for young children. Washington, DC: National
Association for the Education of Young Children.
Sandseter, E. B. H. (2009). Affordance for risky play in preschool: The importance of features
in the play environment. Early Childhood Education, 36 (5), 439-446.
Sutterby, J.A., & Frost, J.L. (2002). Making playgrounds fit for children and children fit for
playgrounds. Young Children, 57 (3), 36-41.

434
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

Sevimli-Çelik, S., Kirazcı, S., & İnce, L. (2011). Preschool movement education in Turkey:
Perceptions of preschool administrators and parents. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 39, 323-333.
Shell, E.R. (1994). Kids don’t need equipment, they need opportunity. Smithsonian, 25 (4), 79-
86.
Sutterby, J.A., & Thornton, C.D. (2005). It doesn’t just happen! Essential contributions from
playgrounds. Young Children, 60 (3), 26-33.
Talbot, J., & Frost, J. (1989). Magical playscapes. Childhood Education, 66 (1), 11-19.
Tekkaya, E. (2001). Tasarlanmış çocuk hakları: Ankara çocuk oyun alanları (Planned children’s
rights: Children’s playgrounds in Ankara). Millî Eğitim Dergisi. Retrieved November 9,
2012 from http://dhgm.meb.gov.tr/yayimlar/dergiler/Milli_Egitim_Dergisi/151/
tekkaya.htm
Tovey, H. (2013). Bringing the Frobel Approach to your Early Years Practice. USA and
Canada: Routledge.
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. (1997). Handbook for public playground safety.
Washington, DC: Author.
Üskün, E., Kişioğlu, A.N., Altay, T., Çıkınlar, R., & Kocakaya, A. (2008). Assessment of the
current status of playground safety in the midwestern region of Turkey: An effort to
provide a safe environment for children. The Turkish Journal of Pediatrics, 50, 559-
565.
Walsh, P. (1993). Fixed equipment: A time for change. Australian Journal of Early
Childhood, 18 (2), 23-29.
Wardle, F. (1994). Viewpoint: Playgrounds. Day Care and Early Education, 22 (2). 38-40.
Wellhousen, K. (2002). Outdoor play every day: Innovative concepts for early childhood.
Albany, NY: Delmar.
White, R. (2004). Young children's relationship with nature: Its importance to children's
development and the earth's future. Retrieved November 8, 2012 from
http://www.whitehutchinson.com/children/articles/childrennature.shtml
White, J. (2008). Playing and learning outdoors. Oxon: Routledge.
White, R., & Stoecklin, V. (1998). Children's outdoor play & learning environments: Returning
to nature. Retrieved January 5, 2013 from https://www.whitehutchinson.com/children
/articles/outdoor.shtml
Widler, T. (2001). Take the classroom outdoors. Texas Child Care, 24 (4), 2-7.
Wilson, R. (1996). Developing an environmental outdoor play space. Young Children, 51 (6),
56-61.
Wolfgang, C. H. (2004). Child guidance through play: Teaching positive social behaviors.
Boston: Pearson Education.
Yılmaz S., & Bulut Z. (2003). The place and importance of playgrounds in urban areas: The
sample of Erzurum. Journal of National Education, 158, 63-73.
Yılmaz S., & Bulut Z. (2007). Analysis of users’ characteristics of three different playgrounds
in districts with different socio-economical conditions. Building and Environment, 42
(10), 3455-3460.

Uzun Öz
Dış mekânların ve dış mekân aktivitelerinin çocukların gelişim ve öğrenmesine katkısı, okul
öncesi eğitimin öncülerinden Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel ve Dewey zamanından günümüze
kadar birçok araştırmacı tarafından vurgulanmıştır. Bahsedilen filozofların konunun önemi ile
ilgili fikirleri geçmişte eğitim mekânlarına aktarılamamasına rağmen, günümüzde okul öncesi
eğitimde dış mekânların ve dış mekân aktivitelerinin çocukların gelişim ve öğrenmesine katkısı
bilimsel olarak birçok araştırmacı tarafından araştırılmıştır. Bu araştırmacıların birçoğu
çocukların gelişimine uygun olarak hazırlanan dış mekânların ve bu mekânlardaki
deneyimlerinin çocukların motor, bilişsel, sosyal/duygusal ve duyuşsal gelişimine katkı
sağladığını ortaya koymuştur.

435
Yılmaz

Çocukların gelişim ve öğrenmesine çok sayıda katkısı olan ‘dış mekânlar’ bazı
araştırmacılar tarafından çeşitli özellikleri bakımından birbirinden ayrılarak üç grupta
toplanmıştır. Bu gruplar, geleneksel/klasik oyun alanları, modern/çağdaş oyun alanları ve
macera oyun alanları şeklinde oluşturulmuştur. Geleneksel/klasik oyun alanları genellikle
sallanmak, kaymak ve tırmanmak gibi fiziksel aktivitelere olanak sağlayan, sabit ve geniş metal
malzemelerden oluşan oyun alanlarıdır. Modern/çağdaş oyun alanları ise, metal malzemelere
alternatif olarak, kum havuzu, tekerlekli araçlar, ya da oyun evleri gibi alan ya da oyuncakları
barındıran oyun alanlarıdır. Son olarak, macera oyun alanları, doğal yapısı ve doğaya özgü
malzemeleri barındırması bakımından çocuklara araştırma yapmak, inşa etmek veya yeniden
inşa etmek gibi olanaklar sağlayan oyun alanlarıdır.
Yapılan araştırmalar, farklı yapıdaki oyun alanlarının çocukların oyun tercihlerinde
farklılık yarattığını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Örneğin, birçok araştırmacı çocukların sabit
malzemelerden çok hareket ettirebilecekleri, yaratıcı ve açık uçlu malzemeler içeren oyun
alanlarını tercih ettiklerini göstermektedir. Sabit malzemelere sahip olan oyun alanlarının
çocuklar tarafından tercih edilmeme sebeplerinden bazıları, çocuklar arasında rekabete sebep
olması ve çocuklara birlikte/işbirlikçi oyun oynama fırsatı sunmaması olarak belirtilmiştir. Bazı
araştırmacılar ise çocukların bu tercihlerinin nedenini günümüzde çocuklarla birlikte doğada
geçirilen zamanın çok kısıtlı olması ve çocukların doğadan kopuk olarak yetişmeleri ile
açıklamıştır.
Yukarıda bahsedildiği gibi çocukların dış mekândaki yaşantılarının onların gelişim ve
öğrenmesine katkılarının belirgin olmasına karşın, dış mekânların fiziksel özelliklerine ve dış
mekân aktivitelerine okul öncesi eğitimde yeteri kadar önem verilmemektedir. Okul öncesi
eğitim alanında yazın taraması yapıldığında, çocuklara iç mekânlarda sağlanan imkânların ve
aktivitelerin öneminin, dış mekânlarda sağlananlara göre daha fazla araştırıldığı görülmektedir.
Dış mekânlarla ilgili yapılan çalışmaların daha sınırlı olması, dış mekânların ve dış mekân
aktivitelerinin yeteri kadar önemsenmemesi, çocukların dış mekân deneyimlerini engelleyen
faktörlerin varlığını pekiştirici niteliktedir. Özellikle, ebeveynlerin güvenlik konusundaki
kaygıları ve çocukları ile birlikte dış mekânlarda geçirdikleri zamanın kısıtlı olması, çocukların
bu tarz deneyimleri kazanmasını engelleyen faktörlerin başında gelmektedir. Ebeveynlerin,
çocuklarının güvenliği konusundaki kaygılarına ek olarak, öğretmenlerin de bu konudaki
endişeleri yazında vurgulanmaktadır. Hatta öğretmenlerin, dış mekânlarda çocukların güvenliği
konusundaki endişeleri, eğitim ve öğretim konusundaki endişelerinin önüne geçmektedir. Anne-
baba ve öğretmenlerin güvenlik ile ilgili kaygılarına ek olarak, okul öncesi eğitim kurumlarının
benimsedikleri eğitim yaklaşımları da çocukların dış mekân deneyimlerini kısıtlayan etkenler
arasında yer almaktadır. Örneğin, bir okul öncesi kurumunun daha çok iç mekânlarda yapılan
hareketsiz deneyimlere ağırlık veren bir yaklaşımı benimsemesi, eğitim sürecinde çocukların dış
mekânlarda geçireceği zamanı otomatik olarak düşürecektir. Bununla birlikte, hava koşulları da
çocukların dış mekân deneyimlerini etkileyen faktörlerden sayılmaktadır. Okul öncesi eğitim
kurumlarında, öğretmenler günlük planlarındaki etkinliklerini, hava koşullarını dikkate alarak
hazırlamaktadır. Öğretmenler, çocukların dış mekân deneyimleri kazanmasına sadece güzel
havalarda olanak sağlamaktadırlar. Bu da, eğitim kurumlarındaki dış mekân aktivitelerinin,
çocukların günlük rutinleri arasına girmesini engelleyen faktörlerden biri olmuştur.
Türkiye’de okul öncesi eğitimde dış mekânların ve dış mekân aktivitelerinin
günümüzdeki durumu incelendiğinde, araştırma sonuçları genel olarak okul öncesi eğitim
kurumlarının dış mekânlarında benzer materyallerin (salıncak, tırmanma çubukları vb.) yer
aldığı, geleneksel oyun alanlarından ibaret olduğunu ve bu alanların çocukların fiziksel
gelişimini dahi yeterli şekilde desteklemediğini göstermektedir.
Türkiye’de çocukların oyun alanlarını incelemek, okul öncesi eğitim alanındaki
uzmanlardan çok, peyzaj mimarlığı alanındaki araştırmacılar arasında yaygınlaşmıştır. Bu
araştırmalar sayıca fazla olmasına rağmen, araştırmacıların yoğunlaştığı konular çocukların
oyun alanlarının fiziksel özellikler açısından incelenmesi ile sınırlı kalmıştır. Bu incelemelerde,
daha çok oyun alanlarının güvenliği, materyal seçimi ve materyallerin oyun alanı içerisindeki
yerleşimi gibi konulara ağırlık verilmiştir. Sonuç olarak bu durum, Türkiye’de oyun alanlarının

436
 Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities in Early Childhood Education

çocukların gelişim ve öğrenmesi üzerindeki etkilerinin araştırılmasının eksikliğini

göstermektedir.
Türk milli eğitim bakanlığı okul öncesi eğitim müfredatı, dış mekânlar ve dış mekân
aktiviteleri açısından incelendiğinde, bu alanlarda olması gereken özelliklerin ve yapılabilecek
etkinliklerin çocukların gelişimi ve eğitimindeki öneminin, çok sınırlı bir şekilde ele alındığını
ortaya koymaktadır. Müfredatta çocukların oyun alanlarında yaratıcı materyallere yer verilmesi
gerekliliği, bazı yaratıcı materyal örnekleri ile birlikte yer alırken, dış mekân ve dış mekân
aktiviteleri ile ilgili çok genel ifadeler yer almaktadır. Özellikle, oyun alanlarının doğal bir
ortam olması ve doğal materyaller içermesinin çocukların yaratıcılığı ve öğrenmesi üzerine
olumlu etkisinin ihmal edildiği göze çarpmaktadır. Bu genel ifade ve ihmal de, okul öncesi
eğitim kurumlarında çalışan öğretmenlere dış mekânların çocukların gelişimi ve eğitimi
konusunda etkili olarak nasıl kullanılabileceğine dair maksimum sorumluluk yüklenmesine yol
açmıştır.

437

View publication stats