‘Broad support’ for right to week-long residential

MSPs’ call for evidence on proposed legislation reveals widespread support for a right to residential outdoor education – though some experts have raised concerns
6th November 2024, 1:32pm

Share

‘Broad support’ for right to week-long residential

https://www.tes.com/magazine/news/general/broad-support-right-week-long-residential-outdoor-education
‘Broad support’ for right to week-long residential, finds survey

Every pupil should have the right to attend five days of residential outdoor education during their time in school, according to the vast majority of respondents to a survey conducted by a Holyrood committee.

More than 90 per cent of respondents to the poll agreed, or partially agreed, that this right to residential outdoor education should be guaranteed.

Scottish Conservative MSP and former teacher Liz Smith is proposing that all pupils should have the right to at least one week of residential outdoor education, and that this should be enshrined in law.

An analysis of the survey results acknowledges the limitations of the question that was asked, not allowing for differentiation between levels of support, but adds: “Nevertheless, the results show broad support for the aim of the legislation among those that responded to the committee’s call for views.”

In the call for views on the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill, from the Scottish Parliament’s Education, Children and Young People Committee, 94 per cent of those who responded agreed or partially agreed with the plans.

The committee received 271 responses to its consultation, with 260 answering the question of whether they backed the bill.

However, supporters of the bill also voiced their reservations.

Professor Greg Mannion, a senior lecturer in education at the University of Stirling, has been giving evidence on the bill to the committee today.

In his written submission, he offers at least partial backing to the bill. But he makes it clear that outdoor residential education is just one form of outdoor learning, and that other kinds of experiences can be just as powerful and beneficial, if not more so.

His concern is that the focus on residential provision “privileges residential and implicitly a more adventurous form of learning to the potential neglect of the provision of teacher-led outdoor educational experience in local areas and nearby nature”.

He argues that “regular, local outdoor learning” has scope to promote mental and physical health “more than a one-off, five-day residential trip”.

Should residential outdoor education take priority?

Professor Mannion concludes that “any funding to support residential or non-residential outdoor provision would be welcome”. However, there are risks in “positioning residential provision as a gold standard” if, simultaneously, teachers are having to search around for funding and CPD for other projects that are needed “at a time of nature and climate emergency”.

Dr Roger Scrutton, a research fellow in outdoor education at the University of Edinburgh, has also been giving evidence today.

In his written submission, he talks up the impact of the school residential, saying: “The residential nature of the experience is a key element in the effectiveness of the learning, knowledge and understanding taken away by the pupils.”

However, Dr Scrutton also says that “the outdoor-learning experience contributes even more to achievement and attainment if it is embedded in the work of the class over the course of the school year”.

Some organisations, while supporting the general thrust of the bill, have also flagged concerns.

Education directors’ body ADES asks if the bill has been “fully costed for all that would be required to make this work”.

The EIS teaching union questions the impact that the change would have on teachers’ terms and conditions.

Currently teachers volunteer to go on excursions and trips, but if pupils were to be entitled to a trip such arrangements would have to be formalised, the EIS says. Any changes in teachers’ terms and conditions would need to be considered by the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers.

Primary school leaders’ body AHDS was one of 15 organisations or individuals that did not back the bill in responding to the survey. It says that if the estimated £34 million required for the entitlement were to become available, “AHDS would argue for every penny to be spent on better supporting pupils with additional support needs”.

For the latest in Scottish education delivered directly to your inbox, sign up for Tes’ The Week in Scotland newsletter

Want to keep reading for free?

Register with Tes and you can read two free articles every month plus you'll have access to our range of award-winning newsletters.

Keep reading for just £1 per month

You've reached your limit of free articles this month. Subscribe for £1 per month for three months and get:

  • Unlimited access to all Tes magazine content
  • Exclusive subscriber-only stories
  • Award-winning email newsletters

topics in this article

Recent
Most read
Most shared