Physical and sensory dimensions of school gardens may reduce barriers to participation and engagementThis study drew upon data from an international gardening project to consider how the inclusion policies of four different countries enabled and constrained the extent to which school gardens could be inclusive learning environments. Implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic, this international exchange project linked school garden sites in Portugal, Spain, Greece, and Slovenia using digital technologies with the goal of promoting diversity, sustainability, and citizenship across Europe. During the course of the project, the researchers noticed how each site approached student inclusion differently. This prompted them to ask two research questions: (1) How do policy approaches facilitate or hinder students’ access to schooling through school gardens, particularly for those who face barriers to learning and participation? What possibilities and challenges arise from using school gardens to promote diversity and participation in learning environments? They developed an exploratory qualitative study to consider the possibilities and limitations of using school gardens to support more inclusive learning.
The study design combined content analysis of educational policy documents and the analysis of 16 learning activities and curricular reports collected from the school garden programs of the four countries. To analyze the policy documents, the research team classified each country’s inclusion policies according to the European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education’s three-part framework: one-track, two-track, and multi-track education. To evaluate the inclusivity of the curricular materials and reports, they classified each document in accordance with another research-based model of inclusive garden-based learning environments. The study was particularly interested in opportunities for a small percentage of study participants who faced barriers to learning and participation (BLP), a broad classification that was not limited to specific demographics or students identified with physical or cognitive disabilities. Participants included 35 teachers and 331 students (age 8-15) from Portugal, Spain, Greece, and Slovenia.
The study concluded that each site’s distinctive approach to inclusion followed from its distinctive national or regional policy context. All sites made efforts to include students. However, the school garden sites were more inclusive in countries that mandated a single curricular track for all students: Spain and Portugal. The Portuguese site, in particular, was most successful in integrating students with barriers to participation due to its progressive educational policies that explicitly prioritize inclusion. The authors focused on critical moments at this site where 8 youth who experienced barriers to learning and participation shared in person garden experiences with their online classmates, which increased their self-esteem and self-perception. The study also deduced that the physical and sensory dimensions of school gardens reduced barriers to students’ participation and engagement in learning. Their overarching finding was that online-mediated, garden-based learning both increased and improved social interactions between peers and adults and between participants in other countries. Teacher anecdotes also suggested that the school garden programs fostered stronger connections to the natural environment, developed motor skills, and promoted teamwork, diversity, and intercultural exchange. However, the project focused more on policy analysis and knowledge sharing, not monitoring academic or health outcomes of garden-based learning.
Based on these exploratory findings, the study concluded that school gardens have the potential to unite learners from diverse backgrounds and to break down some traditional barriers to learning and participation in schools. However, educational policies work to limit and constrain the extent to which school gardens might be enriched, inclusive learning environments.
The Bottom Line