Where do children choose to play on the school ground? The influence of green design

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine where children choose to play on a school ground with a diversity of play spaces. We were particularly interested in understanding the influence of the natural/green part of the school ground on children's choice. Using a momentary time sampling direct observation instrument, a total of 23 scans were taken of six pre-determined Target Areas within an Australian primary school over an 11-day period. Separate scans were taken for girls and boys. Results revealed that the green/natural Target Area (a) attracted the highest number of students in total on average (63.78 students/scan) and (b) was the only area that revealed no statistical difference between the mean number of girls and boys. We discuss a number of design and cultural factors that might explain these findings. The results from this study suggest that when children are given a choice about where to play, they are choosing natural areas. As such, green areas of school grounds stand to make an important contribution in providing equitable, inclusive, healthy and inviting play opportunities for children.

Keywords:

• school ground design
• green
• natural elements

Notes

1. We are not suggesting that these terms (i.e., school ground gardening, school ground naturalisation, school ground restoration, school ground improvement, school ground greening) all mean the same thing. Nor are we suggesting that debate about their definitions is not worthy. Such debate is, however, not the main focus of this paper. For a more detailed explanation of the differences between each term, see Houghton (2003).

2. We recognise that the timing of the data collection stands to influence the findings considerably. We collected the data at the Australian school in July (Winter), a month noted for wet chilly days. We collected data only on somewhat fine days (i.e., where the students were allowed to play outside during recess/lunch). We do, however, recognise that our seasonal choice influences the findings (for example, on hot summer days, the cool shady areas of the school ground might be more in demand, whereas this was not an issue in our study).

3. In this paper, we present the results from the observations (SOPLAY) that detail the location of students (by gender) amongst the various Target Areas. Please note that we also collected data on the intensity of physical activity of each student (i.e., sedentary, moderate, vigorous) observed in each Target Area (by gender). These physical activity results are not presented in this paper. We refer readers to Dyment, Bell, and Lucas (2009) for results on intensity of physical activity as a function of Target Area.

4. The total number of students recorded across all Target Areas is less than the total number of students (approximately 400) attending the school. This smaller number of students recorded can be explained by the fact that some students were absent during data collection, some students were away on camps/field trips, and some students chose to play inside.

5. It is worth noting that although attracting the highest number of students, both the green area and the paved sporting courts were also the biggest area in size, which may have influenced student choice.

6. It is important to note that the scope of this study did not allow the time or resources required to measure total size of all Target Areas. However, general observations of Target Area sizes were made in the field notes taken during data collection.

7. Obviously, the play patterns of girls and boys are far more complex than such broad generalisations imply. There are, of course, girls who want to run and play active games and boys who want to engage in quieter activities. It is therefore important not to reinforce simplistic gender stereotypes. Nevertheless, the findings from this study point to the value of offering a diversity of spaces to accommodate a range of active and quiet play activities, irrespective of gender.