Pedagogically Dormant Greenery in Urban Primary School Grounds: Access Constraints and Children’s Plant-Related Knowledge

Global urbanization has deeply affected children’s daily contact with nature [1, 2], causing an “extinction of experiences” [3] relevant to children’s relationships with plants. Studies have shown that children may have limited knowledge of common plant species in their surroundings [4, 5].

Children’s plant-related knowledge is acquired through formal learning, and experiential understanding is developed through repeated observation and interaction with living organisms [6, 7]. Children lacking regular access to biodiverse environments during formative developmental periods may fail to develop observational skills and ecological concepts [8, 9].

In urban environments, school grounds represent an important setting for children’s daily contact with greenery and living organisms [10, 11]. School ground greenery has been associated with enhanced physical activity [12], attention restoration [13], creative play [14], and overall well-being [15].

However, existing research predominantly focuses on greenery without attention to design characteristics and their educational implications [16]. Research on plant blindness highlighted that the tendency to overlook plants through aesthetic rather than biological characteristics leads to a knowledge-experience disconnect [17, 18].

Meaningful plant-related knowledge requires the capacity to observe and understand ecological phenomena in real context [19]. Place-based education theory [7] and experiential learning framework [20] indicate that local greenery could serve as an educational resource if children’s attention and interaction with plants are supported.

In school grounds, accessibility may therefore play an important role in determining whether greenery becomes an object of observation and exploration or remains a visual element of the environment. Visual access, physical proximity, and opportunities to interact with plants represent distinct dimensions of children’s experience that should not be considered equivalent [7, 20]. Greenery that is visible and appreciated by children may provide limited opportunities for direct engagement when access is constrained. This distinction is particularly relevant to the design of Algerian school grounds.

Understanding children’s perceptions of school-ground greenery and their reported access to greenery can provide useful insights for the design of educational outdoor environments [21]. The present article focuses on how children perceive school-ground greenery, what plant-related knowledge they report, and how accessibility shapes their plant-related learning.

1.1 Objectives

Through a case study of an urban primary school in Algiers, Algeria, this article aims to understand the conditions under which school-ground greenery remains pedagogically dormant despite children’s daily exposure to it. It investigates the aspects of greenery that children perceive and value, the plant-related knowledge they develop through everyday exposure, and the ways in which accessibility configurations enable or constrain informal plant-related learning. Subsequently, it provides design insights for effective outdoor learning environments in Algeria (Figure 1).

1.png

Figure 1. Conceptual and methodological workflow of the paper

This paper employs a case study approach to investigate children’s plant-related knowledge, perceptions of school ground greenery, and reported accessibility. Given the exploratory nature of this study, a descriptive mixed-method case study design was adopted to combine descriptive analysis of questionnaire responses with thematic coding of open-ended responses [41]. Children’s perspectives were prioritized as primary data sources, consistent with established methodological frameworks for research with children [42, 43].

3.1 Case study context

The Research was conducted in a public primary school in southeastern Algiers, Algeria; an urban context characterized by rapid urbanization pressures. The case study school follows a standardized Algerian public primary school design model governed by national ministry of education construction guidelines [44], making it relevant to the study of comparable school-ground environments in Algeria and other urban contexts facing similar spatial constraints. The school presents two distinct spatial configurations: an accessible zone (the main school yard) and an inaccessible natural zone (fenced green area), a distinction that guided the selection of the case study and enabled the comparison of children’s perceptions and interactions across different levels of accessibility.

The school has one main entrance leading directly to the main school yard (1) and a second entrance, reserved for maintenance staff, providing direct access to the fenced green zone (2 and 3), which is off-limits to pupils. The classroom buildings (4) have multiple entrances opening onto the main school yard (Figure 2).

2.png

Figure 2. Spatial configuration and green areas of the case study

The school grounds were organized into two distinct zones with different levels of accessibility:

The main schoolyard (label 1 in Figure 2), covering approximately 800 m², consisted of a paved yard fully accessible to pupils. Vegetation within this area covers approximately 70 m² of horizontal projected area, corresponding to about 9% of the total main courtyard area. It included canopy trees of different sizes, ranging from approximately 3 to 5 m in height with an estimated canopy cover of 47 m² (Figures 3 and 4), as well as potted ornamental plants such as roses, shrubs, flowering plants, and climbing plants located near the classrooms (Figure 4).

The greenery was distributed across multiple small, fragmented zones with no physical barriers or protection (Figure 2). It is located directly adjacent to classroom exits and within an area used for pupil activities, making it part of the activity spaces rather than a separate green area located at a measurable distance from them (Figure 2, Figure 4). This area serves as the main space for recess, gathering before entering classrooms, physical education (PE), and occasional school events.

A fenced, non-accessible zone (labels 2 and 3 in Figure 2), adjacent to the main courtyard and covering the back of the classrooms building, covers approximately 610 m² of unpaved ground (Figure 2), separated from the main school ground by a fence 120 cm high supported with wooden stakes (Figure 3). Children had continuous visual access to these areas; they were not permitted to enter. The area contains mature trees planted near the school’s boundary wall, away from the fence delimiting the main school yard, as well as scattered shrubs and spontaneous seasonal plants with variable appearance. Access to this area was not permitted; therefore, the greenery within it could not be measured.

3.png

Figure 3. Heights of the fence separating the main school ground from the restricted green area

Overall, the school grounds included different vegetation configurations and levels of accessibility; the main school ground provided direct access to vegetation within the pupils’ daily activity areas (Figure 4), whereas the fenced zone was visually accessible but physically restricted (Table 1).

4.png

Figure 4. Greenery size near the classrooms (Children’s faces blurred for privacy)

Table 1. Spatial distribution, accessibility, and characteristics of greenery in the school ground

The areas of the school grounds and the horizontal projected area of the greenery were estimated using Google Earth satellite imagery. Canopy cover was estimated from the visible horizontal projection of tree crowns in the satellite imagery.

3.2 Participants

The study involved 60 pupils aged 10 to 11 years from fifth grade, the final year of the Algerian primary education cycle. This age group was specifically selected as fifth-grade children have accumulated the longest period of exposure to the school grounds within the primary cycle, providing them with extensive experience of the outdoor environment. The Participants were recruited from 03 fifth-grade classes, with participation based on school administration authorization, parental consent, and children’s verbal assent prior to data collection.

3.3 Ethical considerations

The research was carried out in a public primary school with verbal permission from the Directorate of Education of Algiers East, the public authority responsible for administering and supervising primary schools, and the school administration.

An exemption from ethical review was granted by the Architecture and Environment Laboratory (LAE), Polytechnic School of Architecture and Urbanism of Algiers (EPAU), following a formal request submitted after data collection. The corresponding certificate was issued on 16 September 2026 (Reference No. 12/LAE/2026).

Verbal parental/guardian consent and children’s verbal assent were obtained through the school administration prior to participation. Participation was voluntary, and children could withdraw from the study at any time without providing a reason and without any consequences.

No personally identifying information was collected. Questionnaire data were anonymized, and photographs containing children were anonymized by blurring all identifiable facial features and other potentially recognizable details.

The anonymized research data are stored on a password-protected computer and are accessible only to the researcher.

The anonymized research data are stored on a password-protected computer accessible only to the researcher. They will be retained securely for five years after the doctoral defense associated with this research and will then be permanently deleted.

3.4 Data collection

3.4.1 Questionnaire design and content

The questionnaire was designed to examine children’s perceptions of school ground greenery, their plant-related knowledge and its sources, and their access to and interaction with vegetation. It included five sections addressing:

A- overall perception and emotional responses to the school ground.

B- perceptions of greenery and preferred places.

C- visual and physical access to greenery and permitted interactions.

D- plant-related knowledge and its sources, including classroom and outdoor learning.

E- formal and informal use of vegetation during school activities.

The questionnaire primarily consisted of closed-ended questions with three to five response options, together with a limited number of open-ended questions. The present article specifically analyzed the open-ended question concerning what children had learned about vegetation.

3.4.2 Language and cognitive adaptation

The questionnaire was written in Arabic, the children’s native language, and the wording was simplified to match the linguistic and cognitive abilities of the participants aged 10-11 years. Particular attention was given to question clarity and ease of comprehension. The English version of the questionnaire is provided in the Appendix (Table A1). A pilot version of the questionnaire was tested with a small group of children to assess question clarity and completion time, and minor adjustments were made before the main data collection.

3.4.3 Data collection procedure

Data collection took place in April 2025 during the spring season. The questionnaire was administered in class, after morning recess, by the pupil’s teacher, and each child completed the questionnaire individually. The administration procedure allowed the children to provide their responses independently while remaining within the regular school setting. The researchers were not present during the administration; therefore, the exact time required to complete the questionnaire was not recorded.

3.5 Data analysis

Given the exploratory nature of this paper and its single-case study design, data analysis relied on descriptive statistics (frequencies) and thematic coding of qualitative responses rather than inferential statistical testing. This approach was considered appropriate for identifying patterns in children’s experiences, perceptions, and plant-related knowledge [41, 45].

The coding of the open-ended responses employed a deductive coding framework distinguishing five levels of plant awareness (0–4): Level 0, no plant awareness; Level 1, aesthetic awareness, with greenery described in general positive terms such as “pretty” or “nice”; Level 2, sensory differentiation, including characteristics such as shade, color variety, and scent; Level 3, functional awareness, including recognition of plant function such as shade provision or oxygen production; and Level 4, ecological understanding, including recognition of relationships, adaptations, or ecological processes, rarely observed in this age group. The coding categories were defined a priori, based on the theoretical framework and the objectives of the study.

The coding decisions were subsequently compared, and no coding disagreements were recorded. Where a response contained distinct statements reflecting more than one level of plant awareness, all relevant levels were assigned. The operational definitions, coding rules, and illustrative examples for each level are provided in Table 2. The complete coding book is available in the Appendix (Table A2).

Table 2. Coding framework used to classify children’s plant awareness (Q14; N = 60)

Descriptive cross-tabulations were performed to examine patterns between reported access to school ground greenery and children’s general perception of the school ground, as well as between reported access and levels of plant-related knowledge. Given the descriptive nature of the analysis and the uneven distribution of some response categories, these cross-tabulations were interpreted descriptively, and no inferential statistical tests were applied.

The findings reveal a contrast between children’s reported knowledge of plant-related concepts and their ability to recognize specific plants on the school grounds. While children expressed a generally positive perception of school-ground greenery and reported high visual access to it, opportunities for direct interaction with greenery were more restricted. The discussion therefore focuses on the relationship between formal and experience-based plant-related knowledge and the role of accessibility in shaping children’s opportunities to observe and interact with school ground greenery.

5.1 The knowledge-experience disconnect

The responses to the question about what children had learned in the school ground revealed a contrast between knowledge expressed through general plant-related concepts and responses referring to specific plants or directly observable characteristics. A total of 34 codes across Levels 3 and 4 reflected children’s recall of formal plant-related concepts like photosynthesis, oxygen production, and plant needs. By comparison, only 5 reported specific plant names; other responses referred to characteristics that could be directly noticed in the school grounds, including color, shade, and scent (Table 3). The plant-related knowledge reported by the children was generally abstract biological concepts, consistent with topics commonly addressed through formal science learning [6, 7]. Children's ability to recall such concepts suggests that formal science education functions effectively at the level of concept transmission as reported by children. By contrast, responses based on direct observation tended to refer to immediately perceptible characteristics of the greenery present in school grounds, such as differences in flower color, the shade provided by trees, or the presence of pleasant smells. This contrast suggests that the abstract knowledge expressed by children was not necessarily linked to direct, observational engagement with the specific greenery present in their own school grounds [18, 24].

Children spend recess outdoors regularly, pass plants multiple times daily, and reported high visual access overall (58 of 60 children). From an experiential learning perspective, these conditions would, in principle, be expected to support informal observational learning [20]. Yet in this case, greenery appeared to function primarily as environmental backdrop, present, pleasant, and emotionally supportive, rather than as an object of attention or investigation. Plants may have remained perceptually backgrounded despite physical prominence [18], becoming “experientially invisible” through familiarity without examination [2].

The occasional outdoor lessons children reported (47 of 60) represent a partial bridge between formal and experiential learning, but children’s descriptions suggested these sessions functioned primarily to illustrate predetermined concepts rather than facilitate discovery.

Place-based education theory distinguishes between “teaching outdoors” and “teaching from place” [7]: the first brings classroom content outside for illustration, while the second begins with local observable phenomena and builds concepts from observation. The outdoor lessons described by children appear to be closer to the first approach.

Genuine place-based learning would instead begin with children’s own observations, “Which plants change first in spring? Which flowers do insects visit?”, and introduce concepts such as photosynthesis as explanations for noticed patterns. This approach would connect abstract knowledge to observable reality rather than maintaining their parallel existence [37, 46, 47].

5.2 Accessibility and the “display-case” pattern

Descriptive findings indicated that most children reported high visual access to greenery, while direct physical interaction has been reported as limited. This combination is described here as a possible “display case” pattern: greenery that is visually available but offers limited opportunities for close, multisensory engagement [26, 27]. In this case study, the fenced wild zone illustrates the display case: a group of children described it as one of their most appreciated areas for visual and olfactory engagement, yet they could not enter to examine its vegetation closely.

Motivations for access restrictions discussed in the literature include protecting vegetation from damage, managing safety risks, and maintaining aesthetic standards [39, 40]. However, these restrictions may reduce opportunities for engagement with greenery [16, 39]. Table 5 presents the distribution of coded plant-related knowledge across reported physical access categories. In this sample, responses from children reporting easy access appeared across all five levels, whereas responses from children reporting difficult or restricted access appeared only at levels 0 and 1. Similarly, children reporting easy access were predominantly among those who described the school ground as nice, while more ordinary perceptions were relatively more frequent among those reporting more limited access (Table 4).

It should be noted that restrictions described above were reported exclusively from the children’s perspective.

5.3 Functional diversity, ground-level accessibility, and spatial distribution

Children demonstrate awareness of functional distinctions among plants, for example, “some plants give shade, others are for decoration”; reflecting a basic form of ecological categorization even without botanical precision [22, 24]. These propositions suggest that for young learners, functional and sensory characteristics (growth forms, sensory properties, seasonal patterns) may be more perceived and more relevant for learning than species richness as such. This is consistent with the theoretical proposition that the educational value of plant diversity depends on children’s ability to perceive, distinguish, and approach greenery rather than on the number of species present alone [23].

Children also explicitly articulated the absence of ground-level vegetation as a limitation: “no grass to sit in,” pointing to what may be one of the more educationally relevant gaps identified in this article. The existing canopy trees and potted ornamentals tend to position botanical features beyond children’s comfortable examination reach. Ground-level plants (grasses, herbs, low shrubs) would position leaves, flowers, textures, and associated insects closer for observation and tactile interaction that build observational competencies [28, 48].

The fragmented distribution of greenery, reported by 57 of the 60 children, was another notable feature of this case study. The presence of several small green zones appears to provide varied settings that children use differently across the school day, including shaded areas for rest and visually or sensorially distinctive areas for observation.

Children used multiple trees distributed in the school ground as a play structure, making them navigate between fragmented vegetated zones. Moving between these areas may increase the frequency of children’s encounters with vegetation, although the present study did not measure repeated contact or changes in familiarity over time.

Distributed patches also create natural comparison opportunities: noticing that the tree near the classroom differs from trees in the playground, observing that different zones bloom at different times.

These patterns, while requiring further verification, suggest that spatial fragmentation of greenery in school grounds, despite ecological restoration literature preference for habitat consolidation, might not necessarily work against its pedagogical function; educational and ecological objectives may both be optimized through distribution rather than concentration planting [12, 49].

5.4 Design implications

In this case study, children’s reports raise the possibility that greenery designed primarily for visual amenity, maintenance, or safety may offer fewer opportunities for direct plant engagement than greenery designed with educational interaction purposes.

Building on the patterns described above, together with the literature reviewed, several design directions can be proposed to help reconnect school-ground greenery with children’s opportunities for direct, observational learning. These are presented as proposals derived from the findings and the literature.

Graduated access. Rather than a uniform prohibition on touching plants, a tiered approach could be considered: full-interaction zones with robust, child-safe species explicitly selected for handling; guided-access areas for supervised investigation, for instance during science lessons; and protected zones reserved for plants that are genuinely fragile or hazardous. Such an approach could maintain stewardship objectives while creating more opportunities for plant diversity to function educationally [48, 50].

Plant selection criteria. educational landscape could select species according to multiple criteria beyond ornamental value and maintenance efficiency, including urban stress tolerance (e.g., drought, compaction, heat) combined with visibly adaptive traits; safe physical interaction (non-toxic, manageable, robust under handling); sensory distinctiveness (varied textures, scents, color across seasons); staggered flowering and fruiting to make seasonal cycles visible year-round; and accessible scale, favoring ground-level species enabling close examination without adult mediation [28, 48].

Learning infrastructure. Pedagogical activation of existing greenery could be supported through child-friendly plant labels providing species names and observable characteristics; seasonal observation actions directing children’s attention to current plant features; designated interaction zones with explicit permission to touch, smell, and collect; and teacher resources connecting school ground greenery to science curriculum content [47]. These additions could help transform passive vegetation into active curriculum.

Equally important are institutional changes: shifting from comprehensive touch prohibition to graduated access policies; accepting naturalistic rather than manicured maintenance standards in designed wild zones; and providing teachers with botanical training and outdoor illustration [38].