Outdoor education in formal curriculum: concept analysis

Outdoor education (OE) is increasingly recognized for its contribution to experiential and place-responsive learning. However, its boundaries and position within formal curricula remain ambiguous. This study aimed to clarify how formal outdoor education is defined, applied, and theorized across contemporary educational research.

The concept analysis was done to identify the defining attributes, antecedents, and consequences of formal OE, and to propose a conceptual structure that informs curriculum design, teacher practice, and policy development.

Following Walker and Avant’s eight-step method, a systematic search was conducted across ERIC, Web of Science, Scopus, Springer, and EBSCOhost databases. The search included peer-reviewed studies published in English between 2021 and 2025 using combinations of keywords such as outdoor education, outdoor learning, and formal curriculum. From 1,590 initial results, 80 articles met inclusion criteria, and 25 were retained after screening and duplication removal. Thematic analysis was integrated into the concept analysis framework to extract and synthesize attributes, cases, antecedents, consequences, and empirical referents through researcher consensus.

Seven thematic dimensions emerged: (1) conceptual and curricular ambiguity; (2) place and environment as learning anchors; (3) transdisciplinary pedagogy; (4) teacher agency and professional support; (5) learner outcomes and hidden impacts; (6) barriers and enablers such as time, resources, and leadership; and (7) policy and systemic context. These dimensions represent the defining attributes, antecedents, and consequences of formal outdoor education, forming the basis for a conceptual structure that connects theory and practice. Together, they illustrate that while outdoor education is widely valued and practiced, its integration into formal curricula remains fragmented and heavily dependent on local conditions and teacher initiative.

Findings reveal that OE functions both as content and pedagogy but lacks a coherent curricular identity. Clarifying this duality can strengthen theoretical consistency, ensure equitable access, and support the sustainable integration of outdoor learning within formal education systems.