The Use of Schoolgrounds for the Integration of Environmental and Sustainability Education in Natural and Social Sciences Pedagogy

Abstract

Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) encompasses more than the acquisition of environmental knowledge; it nurtures holistic learner development and empowers learners to understand and respond to human impacts on the environment. Schoolgrounds, when effectively utilised, provide a readily available resource for promoting environmental learning through context-based pedagogy. Yet, a review of the literature reveals a paucity of research in South Africa examining schoolgrounds as enablers of ESE. This study explored the accessibility and use of schoolgrounds to support environment-inclined pedagogy in Grade 7 Natural and Social Sciences at two schools in the Mpumalanga Province. Adopting a qualitative–interpretive paradigm, the study employed a phenomenological case study design, using purposive and convenient sampling to select participants and research sites. The sample comprised 46 participants: 40 learners, 4 teachers, and 2 principals. Data were generated through observations, semi-structured interviews, and survey questionnaires, and were thematically analysed. Findings indicate that while schoolgrounds are accessible to both teachers and learners, their pedagogical use remains limited and largely incidental. The study argues that more deliberate integration of schoolgrounds into teaching practices is needed. It concludes with education policy and pedagogical recommendations aimed at promoting schoolground-based ESE as a vital contributor to sustainability-oriented teaching and learning.

1. Introduction

Indisputably, the implacable emergence of environmental crises inexorably necessitates humanity to undertake concomitantly effective and ongoing creative efforts to offset their burgeoning negative impact, not only for the well-being of future generations but, significantly, also for the holistic biophysical environment. The positive role played by environment-inclined pedagogy in empowering humans with, inter alia, awareness, knowledge, skills, and environmental activism is well documented in the literature (Husamah et al., 2023; Van de Wetering et al., 2022; Varela-Candamio et al., 2018). Notably, since its postulation by Lucas (1972), the tripartite approach, viz, the pedagogy about, in and for the environment, has been widely accepted (Reddy, 2021) and continuously cited and applied as the best approach in ensuring the advancement of environment-inclined pedagogy (Hastürk & Dogan, 2016). The triadic approach to Environmental Education (EE) can be realised by using various strategies, avenues, and platforms. Schoolgrounds are considered one of the viable avenues that can be used to advance environmental learning. It is important to note that owing to an indisputable interface between EE and Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) (Hume & Barry, 2015; Kopnina, 2012), in this discussion the current authors opted to use the construct Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) as a “middle ground” concept. However, in instances where the use of the concept of EE is used.

In the global space where technology is both a boon and bane, with the latter attribute discernible from technology’s ability to impede young people from yearning for and interacting with nature and the former evident from, inter alia, the ease of communication, access to computer games, etcetera, young people are less inclined to interact with nature. Furthermore, in a world that is consistently becoming more unsafe, making it risky for young people to go outdoors and explore nature, schoolgrounds provide youngsters with opportunities for learning through the exploration and appreciation of nature (Harvey et al., 2020). For this reason, the use of schoolgrounds in fostering ESE-inclined pedagogy in various subjects, especially in the Natural and Social Sciences subjects, which cater to direct interaction with nature, provides learners with opportunities for hands-on experiences. Through outdoor pedagogy, the learners can relate the theoretical aspects of environmental concepts to real-life situations within their immediate surroundings. This approach presents teachers with tangible opportunities to help the learners enhance their ability to analyse, synthesise, and evaluate environmental issues critically, which is in line with the aims of sustainability education and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Accordingly, schoolgrounds, which serve as an accessible and cost-effective learning resource, can be used as one of the viable alternatives in the “absence” of possible regular interaction with the natural environment (Atmodiwirjo, 2013). Additionally, if they are used optimally as an element of pedagogical approaches geared towards environmental sustainability, schoolgrounds can provide “educational experiences that allow learners to sustain new ways of being in the world” (Jickling, 2017, p. 17) and thereby foster environmental stewardship in young people. The enhancement of educational experiences referred to by Jickling (2017) promotes environmental awareness and contributes to nurturing sustainability values among learners. This coheres with SDG 15 (Life on Land), which advocates for encouraging the protection, restoration, and sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems. Also, the use of schoolgrounds encourages learners to explore the relationship between society and the environment. By engaging learners in activities such as waste management projects, school gardens, and recycling initiatives, the learners are provided with opportunities to investigate human–environment interactions. Practical projects of this nature present the teacher with innumerable chances to help the learners develop attitudes that may culminate in their inclination towards environmental stewardship, pro-environment values, and responsible citizenship, thus contributing to sustainability practices and realisation of the ideals entailed in SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Furthermore, studies suggest that schoolgrounds present opportunities for learners to gain “freedom” from the confining four walls of the classroom, to learn, play, and, significantly, develop holistically (Ruck, 2022). For example, schoolgrounds provide learners with prospects to be themselves, have fun, act spontaneously, and gain exposure to the social, cultural, and ecological domains of their milieu (Malone & Tranter, 2003). Schoolgrounds also enable the learners to freely explore their surroundings, and they facilitate the ease of play-based learning, which is essential for, inter alia, physical, cognitive, and emotional growth and development. For this reason, if there is to be any meaningful environment-inclined pedagogy, it is essential to enable learners to gain access to and utilise schoolgrounds optimally.

Based on the preceding points, schoolgrounds should be seen as invaluable in enabling environment-inclined pedagogy and can thus be considered empowering for youngsters as future leaders who will have to grapple with a myriad of environmental challenges ravaging Planet Earth. Accordingly, opportunities for learning about the environment within the natural spaces surrounding them and initiating actions that seek to advance the protection of the environment for the benefit of the environment are realisable by exposing learners to place-based pedagogy, with schoolgrounds used as affordances for experiential learning and development (Lee et al., 2020; Meighan & Rubenstein, 2018; Ruck, 2022).

However, despite the significant role and opportunities they yield for learning, the literature suggests that very few studies with a focus on the role of schoolgrounds in fostering environment-inclined pedagogy have been conducted globally. Most of these studies were conducted in Australia, the United States of America, and Europe, with significantly less research emanating from Africa (Dyment & Bell, 2008). Accordingly, the current study was undertaken to contribute to addressing this shortcoming, as it focuses on selected schools in South Africa. The aim of this study was to answer the following question: To what extent do teachers use schoolgrounds to infuse Environmental and Sustainability Education in Grade 7 Natural and Social Sciences classrooms in South Africa? The current researchers chose the specific subjects and grade because, based on the researchers’ experiences and anecdotal observations, relative to other subjects taught in South African schools, these two subjects provide more themes for the integration of environment-inclined pedagogy. Furthermore, Grade 7 is the exit classroom at primary school. For this reason, the researchers deemed it appropriate to investigate whether the learners, at this level of schooling, are exposed to environment-inclined pedagogy in preparation for secondary school education.

2. Theoretical Framework

The current study is underpinned by Gibson’s (1979) Theory of Affordances and Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning Theory (ELT). These two complementary frameworks provide a robust justification for examining the role of schoolgrounds in enabling environment-inclined pedagogy. There is a cornucopia of pertinent justifications for the aptness of the two tenets in this study. However, for the purposes of this discussion, only a few points regarding the selection of these complementary theories in this study are presented.

According to Gibson (1979), “the affordances of the environment are what it offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or ill” (p. 127). In essence, conceived through the Pragnanz lens, and from a pedagogical perspective, affordances can be understood as the opportunities embedded within physical artefacts, resources, or elements of an environment that learners can manipulate to achieve specific educational goals (Rands & Gansemer-Topf, 2017). Importantly, these opportunities are subjective: Different learners may perceive and utilise the same object in distinct ways. As Blin (2016) observes, “affordances are embedded in cultural contexts and emerge in the interactions between active persons, artefacts, and cultural environments. Affordances and actors’ capabilities are also dynamic” (p. 53). For instance, a glass bottle might be seen as a container by one learner and simultaneously as a musical instrument by another.

While the concept of affordances has evolved over time and gained diverse interpretations (Chong & Proctor, 2020), for the purposes of this study, affordances are conceptualised as opportunities embedded in the physical and social features of schoolgrounds that can be leveraged to foster environment-focused pedagogical practices. For example, schoolgrounds designed with plants, water features, or other ecological elements can serve as affordances for implementing the triadic approach to ESE, encompassing pedagogy about, in/through, and for the environment (Reddy, 2021).

In addition, this study draws on Kolb’s (1984) ELT, which emphasises learning through direct engagement with real-world experiences (Bartle, 2015). Experiential learning is characterised by iterative cycles of experiencing, reflecting, thinking, and acting, which lead to meaningful transformations in learners’ cognitive structures. Kolb’s model aligns closely with the Piagetian constructs of assimilation, i.e., the integration of new information into existing cognitive structures and accommodation viz. the modification of cognitive frameworks to incorporate new knowledge (Malik & Behera, 2024). In essence, experiential learning enables active and meaningful engagement with the environment, which can foster cognitive, emotional, and attitudinal development.

The selection of ELT for this study is particularly apt given the transformative potential of ESE, which can enable a holistic development of the learner. An intentional and meaningful integration of environment-inclined pedagogy through schoolgrounds can empower the learners to develop environmental awareness, knowledge, skills, and values, and to engage in actions that reflect pro-environmental attitudes. The triadic approach to ESE—pedagogy about, in/through, and for the environment—provides an ideal framework for promoting experiential learning, as it situates learners in authentic, interactive, and reflective experiences that bridge knowledge acquisition with practical environmental action (Moseley et al., 2020). Consequently, the combination of the Theory of Affordances and Experiential Learning Theory offers a coherent and education-centred lens to explore how schoolgrounds function as pedagogical spaces for environment-focused learning.

3. Research Method

This qualitative phenomenological case study, underpinned by the interpretivist paradigm, was conducted in the Gert Sibande Education District in Bethal Town, located in Mpumalanga Province of South Africa. On the one hand, the phenomenological approach enabled the investigators to obtain insightful information from the perspectives of respondents with lived experiences pertaining to the phenomena under investigation (Odongo & Ntara, 2024; Urcia, 2021). On the other hand, interpretivism empowered the researchers to assign their own interpretation to slanted articulations made by respondents and looked beyond the surface meaning of the enunciations presented by respondents during the enquiry (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017; Pervin & Mokhtar, 2022). The respondents were drawn from two schools, one located in the township, a settlement that was designed during the era of apartheid for Africans only, while the other school was in town, a geographical location that was predominantly inhabited by white people. For ethical reasons, the respective schools are referred to as School X and Y, respectively.

The sample consisted of 46 participants, comprising 20 Grade 7 learners from each school; 4 Grade 7 teachers, namely, one Natural Sciences (NS) and one Social Sciences (SS) teacher from each school; and one principal from each school. Notably, in line with ethical considerations, the interviewees are referred to by pseudonyms. In this regard, the participants from School X are referred to as Maburu (NS Teacher), Daniel (SS Teacher), and Ayoba (School Principal) while School Y was represented by Sarah (NS Teacher), Kolonel (SS Tacher), and Piet (School Principal). Being mindful of the financial costs incurred while conducting research and the need to generate rich data, the researchers purposefully and conveniently selected easily accessible and willing participants to enlist in the study (Nyimbili & Nyimbili, 2024; Thomas, 2022). Data generation was conducted through observations, one-on-one interviews with the teachers and principals, and the administration of survey questionnaires to obtain data from all participants, while data analysis was conducted thematically (Alhojailan, 2012).

The questionnaires were issued to all participants and completed on the same day of the visit by and in the presence of the main data collector, the first author of this paper. This was done to avoid any potential compromise of validity and reliability if the questionnaires were to be completed in the absence of the researcher. The questionnaires enabled the researchers to obtain rich data on the opinions, practices, and perceptions of participants concerning the use of schoolgrounds for environment-inclined pedagogy. The completion of the questionnaires was followed by the observation of the schoolgrounds, with a focus on the layout and design to determine whether there were any features, man-made or natural, that could be used as environmental learning affordances and enablers of experiential learning. Furthermore, lesson observations were conducted with respective teachers, who used their discretions to select the themes (in line with their subject curricula) and dates for the observations of the Natural Sciences and Social Sciences lessons in the respective schools. Owing to time constraints, curricula obligations per school, and financial considerations, only one lesson was observed per subject in each school. For triangulation purposes, the adult participants, i.e., the teachers and principals, were interviewed at the time convenient to them on the school premises.

To ensure trustworthiness and rigour in data collection and analysis, various interdependent strategies pertinent to qualitative research, such as credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability (Noble & Smith, 2015; Stahl & King, 2020), were applied in this study. For example, to ensure credibility, dependability, and confirmability of the findings, methodological triangulation, as discussed in this section, was used (Enworo, 2023). Furthermore, member checking was carried out by research participants and the second author, and the application of audit trails, wherein detailed records of data generation and analysis processes are kept to ensure confirmability and transferability of activities (Korstjens & Moser, 2018), was carried out by both authors in this study.

4. Results

In this section, empirical evidence from the learners, teachers, and principals is presented using tables to clearly illustrate patterns, with narrative descriptions used where appropriate. The themes emerging from the data analysis guided the presentation of the results. Accordingly,

Table 1. The activities conducted on the schoolgrounds in Natural and Social Sciences classes according to the learners.

Activities	School X (Number of Learners)	School Y (Number of Learners)
Identified types of insects	20	20
Identified and sorted types of trash	18	20
Measured objects	18	15
Identified types of clouds	18	16
Grew plants	16	20
Studied soil types	15	20
Observed plants	12	16

summarises learners’ responses regarding activities conducted on schoolgrounds for Natural and Social Sciences classes as affordances for environment-inclined experiential learning:

All four participant teachers corroborated the claims by the learners, as reflected in Table 1 above, in that in their respective questionnaires, the teachers listed the same activities. Accordingly, like the participant learners, the teachers admitted that the schoolgrounds in the schools were used in the teaching of the two subjects for, inter alia, catching and identifying various insects, identifying and sorting various types of trash, studying different types of clouds, growing and observing plants, and examining and learning about different types of soil.

Apart from probing the learners and teachers on the activities conducted on the schoolgrounds, the researchers also explored the participant teachers’ and school principals’ understanding of the concept of ESE by posing the following question: How would you define the concept of environmental education? Accordingly,

Table 2. Participant teachers’ and principals’ conception of EE and its significance in pedagogy.

Participants	Understanding of EE and Its Significance in Pedagogy
Maburu	Environmental education entails “teaching learners about the environment in which they live, and how to improve the environment for future generations.”
Daniel	The kind of education that “increases people’s ability to deal with environmental challenges. They cannot address them without education if they lack the necessary skill.” Daniel provided an example as follows: “learning about animals and their habitats creates empathetic and caring individuals, who ensure the safety of animals in their community.”
Ayoba	The education designed “for learners to know and understand the environment in which they live, and care for the environment to preserve it for the future generation.” She mentioned, “planting trees during the national tree planting day” as an example of environmental education.
Sarah	“It is a means by which we teach learners on how to become environmental change agents by putting their knowledge into practice and solve evolving environmental issues.” Furthermore, she mentioned that “I teach learners about the environmental issues during our lesson in the classroom and ask them to identify environmental problems around them and how they can solve each problem.”
Kolonel	As far as Kolonel was concerned, EE involves “giving learners a tool that they can use to solve environmental issues.”
Piet	To Piet, EE “emphasises addressing problems like climate change, water pollution, the need to preserve biodiversity and poverty reduction in an environmentally sustainable way.”

reflects these participants’ understanding of the concept of EE and the importance of EE in pedagogy. As much as possible, the participants are cited verbatim.

The other aspect that was of interest to the researchers pertains to the views held by participant teachers and principals concerning the schoolgrounds as an affordance of environment-inclined pedagogy. Accordingly, the primary researcher interviewed these participants to investigate whether they viewed the schoolgrounds as enabling environmental learning as well as the extent to which the teachers used these spaces for experiential learning with the view of fostering environment-inclined pedagogy. Furthermore, owing to field dynamics and constraints, the researcher managed to observe just one lesson per school for each of the two subjects, with the view of determining whether the teachers made attempts to integrate environmental learning and, significantly, the extent to which they used schoolgrounds for environmental learning.

Table 3. Teachers’ views on schoolgrounds as an affordance of ESE.

Participants	Enablers of ESE and/or Evidence of ESE Integration	Hindrances of ESE
Maburu	There was evidence of schoolground use. The teacher and the learners collected snails from the schoolgrounds and used Petri dishes in the classroom to study the snails.	The respondent stated that, “mostly we go to the schoolgrounds to collect items and go back to the classroom because the schoolgrounds lack benches to sit on.”
Daniel	There was no evidence solicited during the interviews to suggest that the teacher used the schoolgrounds for environmental education.	The schoolgrounds did not enable environmental learning. The respondent cited the absence of benches, animals, and water ponds as inhibiting factors.
Ayoba	There was no evidence of ESE integration since she did not offer any lessons as a school manager.	There is uncertainty about what should be taught—the curriculum is not clear, and the department of education did not provide teachers with training. She argued that “teachers from my school have gone for coding and robotics workshop and mathematics workshop, but they have never gone for environmental education workshops.”
Sarah	“I have used the schoolgrounds during a lesson to observe the parts of a flower plant. We went to the schoolgrounds, and I showed learners the parts of a flower that we had discussed in the classroom.”	She claimed that when learners are taken to the schoolgrounds for learning, “I spend more time in trying to get the attention of learners when we are in the schoolgrounds.”
Kolonel	Ostensibly, the respondent used the schoolgrounds for demonstrations where necessary. He stated that, “recently I was teaching learners about water absorption and to save time, I collected different types of soils beforehand and put the soil in containers for use during our experiment indoors.”	Kolonel claimed that “learners are more eager to learn, using the computers which are available at school.” Apparently, they preferred to use “google to learn about environmental issues around the world.” Also, the respondent asserted that “sometimes, I am not sure of what I am supposed to do, it would be easier if we are provided with steps and instructions on how exactly teachers are supposed to teach outdoors.”
Piet	There was no evidence of ESE integration since he did not offer any lessons as a school manager.	The respondent cited the following impediments: - Lack of training - Concern about inadequate curriculum coverage The community will think that there is no teaching, and instead that learners are playing outside. He argued, “When learners go to school, they are expected to be seated in the classrooms and not playing outdoors.”

, below, provides a summation of the results gleaned from the field, and these emanate from the deep analysis and the meanings assigned by the authors to the responses provided by the respondents.

In addition to the above details, the lesson presented by Maburu involved the use of schoolgrounds for pedagogical purposes. In this lesson, the teacher, together with her learners, went to the school garden to look for some garden snails, and found some. The external appearance of the snail was briefly discussed. However, a detailed lesson involving closer examination and discussion of the various parts of the snails was conducted in class. Furthermore, the primary investigator also noted interesting comments written on the questionnaires by two learners from School X and one learner from School Y. The following comments were made by Alice and John from School X:

“My schoolground is unattractive, the schoolground is filled with bare patches, I wish there was a pond, more flower beds, benches to sit on and that the grounds were properly maintained.”

(Alice)

“If the schoolgrounds were a class. I would not enjoy being in that class, I wish the patches in the football pitch were filled with lawn.”

(John)

Trish from School Y asserted that,

My schoolground is beautiful. There is more space, there are more trees and vegetation, and the playgrounds are also beautiful. I feel so calm and refreshed when we go out in the schoolgrounds.

The comments made by the learners accurately captured the state of schoolgrounds as observed by the primary investigator.

The investigator examined the schoolgrounds; however, he could not take pictures since he was not granted consent by the respective school managers. He observed that the comments by the three learners were an accurate summation of the appearance of their respective schoolgrounds.

5. Discussion

As indicated in Table 1, the findings suggest that the teachers who participated in this study provided the learners with opportunities for experiential learning using schoolgrounds as affordance of ESE, albeit to a very limited extent. In fact, the primary researcher asked both teachers from School Y informally, as he was thanking them after he was done with data collection, how many hours they spent on the schoolgrounds with the learners. The estimated time for both teachers (put together) spent conducting lessons on the schoolgrounds was approximately 15–20 min for each lesson, and about 8–10 days per year. Based on the interaction with the teachers from School X, it can be inferred that they did not do better than the teachers from School Y with respect to the time spent exposing learners to experiential learning on the schoolgrounds. This contrasts with some studies conducted previously. For example, in their study that partly focused on the amount of time teachers spent conducting environment-inclined pedagogy outside of the classroom, Szczytko et al. (2018) found that, on average, the participant teachers in spent 14 days per annum on the schoolgrounds conducting experiential learning and using the environmental artifacts as affordance for environmental learning. Likewise, in their study, Bentsen and Jensen (2012) found that teachers spent approximately 35 days per year and an average of 3.7 h per week conducting outdoor education using green spaces for environment-inclined experiential learning.

In this study, the schoolground activities that served as affordances for Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) largely involved learners in tasks such as identifying insects and small animals like snails, sorting waste, observing different cloud formations, growing and monitoring plants, and distinguishing between soil types. While both learners and teachers expressed a desire to have access to water ponds as additional opportunities for experiential, environmentally focused learning, none of the participating schools had such facilities. The activities carried out on the schoolgrounds in this study align with findings from earlier research. For example, in a study conducted in Turkey, Akarsu (2025) found that learners were exposed to the observation, touching, and smelling of phenomena such as trees, various plants, soil types, and water, and these activities enabled them to develop a stronger sense of connection with the environment.

Regarding the conceptualisation of Environmental Education (EE), participants (see Table 2) demonstrated a clear understanding of EE and its significance in pedagogy. Their responses reflect diverse yet interconnected conceptualisations, consistent with the objectives of EE as outlined and adopted by the Tbilisi Conference (UNESCO, 1978) and affirmed in subsequent international gatherings on EE and Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). Furthermore, the views expressed by the respondents are also in line with the triadic approach to EE, as highlighted in the introduction of this paper, namely, pedagogy about, in, and for the environment. For instance, respondents identified several key objectives of EE, including the advancement of knowledge about environmental challenges (Ayoba and Piet) and the development of skills necessary to address these challenges (Ayoba, Daniel, and Piet). Notably, two respondents (Ayoba and Piet) described EE in ways that reflect what Robottom (2007) characterises as “distinctively environmental education” (p. 92), namely encouraging learners to engage in pro-environmental action. Similarly, two respondents emphasised EE as a flexible pedagogical approach that can be integrated across disciplines—either comprehensively as pedagogy about, in, and for the environment (Sarah), or more narrowly as teaching about the environment (Maburu). Furthermore, Ayoba and Piet conceptualised EE as education that empowers learners to appreciate the importance of resource sustainability, particularly for the benefit of future generations, as articulated within education for sustainable development (ESD).

The findings regarding the participant teachers’ and principals’ conceptualisation of EE affirm those from previous studies. Owing to the dearth of studies with a focus on the use of schoolgrounds for the infusion of ESE, only a few of the studies related to the conceptualisation of EE by teaches are highlighted. In his study on the teachers’ views of EE and its implementation conducted in South Africa, Tshivhase (2019) found that teachers had the theoretical knowledge that could enable them to infuse EE in pedagogy. Tshivhase (2019) fundamentally confirmed the findings of a study conducted in Kenya with a focus on in-service teachers’ perceptions of EE by Jatzko (2016), which revealed that teachers understood the concept of EE. Likewise, in their study on teachers’ perceptions and approaches to EE, Fru and Ndaba (2023) found that even though teachers do not hold a universal view of EE, they do have a theoretical awareness and understanding of EE and the need for its infusion in pedagogy.

Empirical evidence from this study, as outlined in Table 3, suggests that three (Maburu, Sarah, and Kolonel) out of four participant teachers used, albeit to a very limited extent, the schoolgrounds as affordances for experiential learning to foster ESE. For example, during his visit to School X, the primary researcher observed Maburu and her Grade 7 learners collecting and studying snails. Additionally, she admitted having accessed the schoolgrounds to collect some material and using it for pedagogical purposes in class. Likewise, Sarah admitted having used the schoolgrounds to advance pedagogy about and in the environment to teach the learners about the flower and its various parts. Kolonel also admitted that he used schoolgrounds previously not for experiential learning in the schoolgrounds but, instead, to collect different types of soils for an experiment conducted inside the four walls of the classroom. The interaction with Daniel suggests that he did not use the schoolgrounds because they did not provide affordances such as benches, animals, and water ponds.

The study also identified several hindrances (see Table 3) to the use of schoolgrounds for ESE, which include the following:

• Curricular uncertainty and pressure to complete the prescribed syllabus,
• Lack of training and support in Environmental and Sustainability Education,
• Limited physical affordances in the schoolgrounds, such as benches and water features,
• Reliance on digital resources as an alternative to outdoor learning,
• Community perceptions that learners outdoors might be “playing” rather than learning.

The findings regarding most of the impediments to the implementation of ESE resonate with existing literature. Owing to the paucity of research focusing on impediments to the infusion of ESE by using schoolgrounds, the current authors used available literature to juxtapose the findings of this study with previous research. For example, various scholars found that owing to the demands by education authorities to complete the curriculum programs (Fru & Ndaba, 2023; Patchen et al., 2024; Ruthanam et al., 2021), the lack of training and support from school principals and/or education officials (Ivorra-Catalá et al., 2024; Kimaryo, 2011; Patchen et al., 2024), and the lack of clarity on how and what to integrate to advance environmental learning (Fru & Ndaba, 2023; Ruether, 2018), teachers could not implement ESE. Furthermore, in a study with focus on barriers to the use of the outdoors for ESE integration from the perspective of teachers, Ruether (2018) found that there were teachers whose views aligned with those held by Kolonel, a participant in the current study, that computers can be used for the advancement of ESE instead of the schoolgrounds.

6. Conclusions

The purpose of this case study was to investigate the extent to which schoolgrounds are used to infuse Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) in pedagogy, addressing a notable gap in research within the South African context. The findings indicate that while participant teachers integrated ESE, the extent of implementation was limited. Given the perpetual rise of existing environmental challenges and the emergence of new ones, urgent and coordinated action from multiple stakeholders is essential to mitigate the detrimental impacts of human activity on the environment. Furthermore, meaningful efforts must be made to fast track the infusion of environment-inclined learning in pedagogy.

At the policy level, the South African government—through the Department of Basic Education (DBE)—has demonstrated a commitment to advancing environmental learning by embedding principles of Environmental and Sustainability Education within the National Curriculum Statement (NCS) and the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) documents that guide pedagogy in respective school subjects. In partnership with entities such as the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), Fundisa for Change, and Rhodes University’s Environmental Learning Research Centre (ELRC), the DBE continues to support teacher professional development and curriculum integration initiatives aimed at strengthening ESE in schools. However, as this study reveals, the translation of these policy commitments into classroom practice remains uneven, underscoring the need for enhanced teacher capacity-building and systemic support.

Based on these findings, the researchers recommend the following measures: Pre- and in-service teachers should receive targeted training to effectively integrate ESE in pedagogy, the school curriculum should be revised to embed environmental learning consistently across all levels of education, the South African Department of Basic Education should initiate schoolground-based ESE projects and formally acknowledge and incentivise schools that successfully implement them, and further research of this nature should be conducted to deepen understanding and inform practice.

These interventions have the potential to strengthen the integration of ESE, enhance learner environmental literacy and pro-environmental behaviour, and empower schools as active sites of environmental stewardship. Importantly, the implementation of these measures could contribute to the achievement of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action), thereby fostering sustainability in education and, more broadly, in society.