The benefits and challenges in providing risky play to children

Existing research now supports what Early Childhood Educational Pioneers have known all along- children are stimulated by the natural outdoor environment and when provided with this experience on a regular basis, their self-esteem, confidence, social development and over all wellbeing are enhanced (Knight, 2011).

Despite this, Maynard and Waters (2014) have highlighted that society has created an outdoor environment for children which is controlled and structured, in the form of parks and playgrounds to minimise risk and injury to children during play. Lindon (2011) supports this and suggests that many children are limited to hands on experiences with nature.

Douglas (2003) suggests that this is because professionals often associate risk with danger and choose to provide learning opportunities to the children that present minimal risk. This in conjunction with pressure from parents/ carers and previous mistakes in safeguarding, alongside changes in legislation has resulted in a risk avoidance culture because many practitioners are worried about their own legal safety (Solly, 2015). These have become the main obstacles for those working with children, for not providing risky play to them.



To help overcome this and in the context of safeguarding, those working with children need to find an even balance between risk and safety. They need to provide a unique and challenging environment whilst ensuring the children whom they are responsible for do not come to avoidable harm (Positively Safe: A Practical Guide to Safeguarding, No date).  This is endorsed by The Health and Safety Executive (HSE, 2012) who inform:

“When planning and providing play opportunities, the goal is not to eliminate risk, but to weigh up the risks and benefits. No child will learn about risk if they are wrapped in cotton wool.”

                                                                                                (HSE, para.5 2012)

Practitioners need to be able to distinguish between good risks and bad risks. A good risk has many benefits and the level of harm is minimal. A bad risk has no obvious benefits and the risk of harm is high (Gill, 2007).To be able to do this a knowledge of the benefits of risk in a child’s learning and development is essential.

According to Gill (2007), allowing children to take risks increases their confidence, self-efficacy and resilience. When allowed to participate in adventurous play, children quickly learn to judge their own skills and match them to the demands of the environment (Almon, 2013).These children ask themselves, “how high can I climb?”  or “am I capable of climbing that?” According to Almon (2013) this makes the children become knowledgeable about themselves and their environment and increases their confidence. Children who are confident about taking chances rebound well when they fail at first. This makes them resilient and they will keep trying until they succeed, or avoid a situation if necessary.

Gill (2007) illustrates children who are confident and resilient are more likely to participate in new challenges. This is due to being independent. Independent children engage in more challenging experiences and activities that are beneficial to their development (Charlesworth, 2013). The second stage of Erikson’s Stages of Development, Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt (1923) explains how this autonomy is established by allowing children to take risks,

Also, Voce (2008) illustrates that by providing more ‘risky’ experiences for children their physical development and social and emotional skills will be promoted. On engaging in ‘risky’ activities, areas of development are furthered and well-being is increased through self-esteem (Voce, 2008).  They have to make several decisions, physically, socially and emotionally, to determine the risk: decide the level of risk they want to and are physically capable of taking. Lester and Russell (2013) highlights that when assessing risk, children are prompted to ask questions such as ‘Why and how?’ These questions promote a child’s thinking and also encourage them to engage in further conversations, therefor promoting their language development (Gill, 2007). Lindon (2011) also states that children get satisfaction in learning to do something new and their social and emotional development is furthered. But not only do they gain new physical, social and emotional skills, their self-esteem is boosted when trusted to do something independently or different by an adult (Lindon, 2011).

The Forest School approach is an example of learning that allows children to take positive risks that will promote their holistic development (Knight, 2013). Forest Schools offer an enabling environment with nature (Forest School: a marvellous opportunity to learn, 2005). Enabling environments are an overarching principle of the shape practice should take in an Early Years Setting (Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), 2014). Forest Schools offer hands-on learning experiences in natural environments with natural resources. This type of learning develops confidence, self-esteem, social and physical development, knowledge and understanding and communication (Forest School: a marvellous opportunity to learn, 2005). The controversy in Forest Schools are the risks that they present. This is because it is the natural, outdoor environment that adult’s asses as posing a risk to children (Gill, 2007).

Cummings (2010) suggests that the Forest School philosophy allows a constructivist approach to learning. This allows learning to take place from a child using their own experiences to help form new knowledge (Athey, 19990). A Forest School allows children hands on experiences with their natural world. It allows them to use their own initiative to make decisions, solve problems and take calculated risks (Cummings, 2010).

Knight (2013) emphasise that taking risk and being able to assess risk are essential life skills. A Forest School helps children to acquire these skills. By assessing the risk with the guidance of an adult, the child becomes aware of the hazards posed and their own capability in managing them (Knight, 2013). If the risk is assessed prior and during a forest school activity, it will always be minimal and the outcome of participation beneficial (Constable, 2012).

The research has highlighted the challenges practitioners encounter in providing risky play to children. The difference between good risk taking and bad risk taking has been distinguished to assist practitioners in determining whether an activity is advantageous to the child when balanced against the risk involved. Statements from Working Together to Safeguard Children, 2015 and the Health and Safety Executive, 2012 have been included to support this. The literature emphasises the benefits of allowing children to take risks. It is evident that overall holistic development is promoted. Furthermore, through taking risks, children are acquiring essential life skills (Knight, 2011). Literature has been provided on Forest Schools and the role they play in promoting children’s learning and development. The risks that a Forest School approach include have been listed and analysed against the research of the benefits of risk taking. From this analysis it is evident that the Forest School approach is a valuable learning experience for children. This is also reinforced by educational pioneers including Froebel, the MacMillan sisters and Isaacs whom stressed the importance of outdoor learning in early childhood education and its benefits.

Jade Manley