Previous Article in Journal
The Involvement in Inquiry-Based Working of Primary Teachers in China: A Large-Scale Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/educsci15121623
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Theorising Universal Design for Learning to Create More Inclusive Outdoor Play Spaces: A Preliminary Review

by
Marion Sturges
1,*,
Tonia Gray
1 and
Carolyn Galbraith
2
1
World Leisure Centre of Excellence, Western Sydney University, Sydney 2751, Australia
2
School of Education, Western Sydney University, Sydney 2751, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(12), 1623; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121623
Submission received: 3 July 2025 / Revised: 14 October 2025 / Accepted: 26 November 2025 / Published: 2 December 2025
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

Outdoor play can be linked to numerous health, cognitive, and social benefits for children. All children must have opportunities to engage in regular outdoor play experiences. Despite this, some children, including those with different abilities, are less likely to participate in outdoor play. Educator-led outdoor play programs, including those in schools and early childhood centres, “bush schools”, and other initiatives, may increase time spent playing outdoors for all children, as learned activities generalise to the home environment. However, effective inclusion in these programs requires practices that are flexible enough to welcome all children, of all abilities. Universal Design for Learning (UDL), a framework designed to support flexible and inclusive learning environments, offers an inclusive approach. UDL provides a tool which has the potential to assist educators in creating flexible learning processes for their students and has been used across a range of curriculum areas. To explore this further and to investigate the use of UDL in educator-led outdoor play programs, the authors undertook a preliminary review of literature that mapped the field and identified 10 relevant studies related to both UDL and outdoor play programs. From this review, three themes were identified: the critical importance of including all children in outdoor play, the potential of UDL to support this inclusion, and the need for specific UDL resources tailored to outdoor play. Finally, we argue that integrating UDL into educator-led outdoor play initiatives may enhance accessibility and participation for children with unique needs. This review suggests an explicit agenda for future research and practice for professionals in the field.

1. Introduction

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework used across many curriculum areas, including outdoor education. Based on the concept of Universal Design (UD), a term coined by the architect Ronald L. Mace, it is used to describe the concept of designing all products and the built environment to be aesthetic and usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of their age or ability (Meyer et al., 2014). UD in architecture focuses on incorporating accessibility for people with disabilities from the beginning, rather than being “retrofitted” later—such as adding a ramp off to the side. In the same way, UDL focuses on incorporating pedagogical practices to enrich student learning and enhance educational success from the initial design.
The aim of UDL is to remove barriers to learning, offer flexibility in curriculum content and assessment, and ensure accessible materials and learning design, with the aim of enhancing the learning experience of all, irrespective of abilities or limitations (Meyer et al., 2014). Learning environments are designed from the outset to proactively consider the variability, strengths, needs, and interests of all students (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST], 2018). Whilst playing in outdoor environments, not all children conform to what is socially construed as the “norm” and divergences or variances should be anticipated. Correspondingly, Elsherif et al. (2025) purported that “neurodiversity is fundamental to the understanding of human behaviour and cognition. However, neurodivergent individuals are often stigmatised, devalued, and objectified” (p. 1). As an inclusive practice, UDL may help educators increase student access to outdoor play and focus on what students can achieve rather than on their differences, diversities, or abilities.
Play, especially outdoor play, is an essential part of children’s development (Brussoni et al., 2022; P. Gray, 2017; T. Gray, 2018; T. Gray et al., 2025a, 2025b, 2025c; Loebach et al., 2021; Sahlberg & Doyle, 2019; Sturges et al., 2023). Outdoor play supports a range of benefits for children; improved sleep, social interaction, physical fitness, and cognitive scores have all been reported by researchers (Mårtensson et al., 2009; Söderström et al., 2013; Wu et al., 2014). Researchers have reported more diverse language in children playing outdoors (Prins et al., 2022), richer creative play (Dankiw et al., 2024), and better access to risky play (P. Gray, 2020; T. Gray et al., 2025b). The right of all children to play has been enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989), which argues that all children should explore and experience nature.
However, not all children have equal access to outdoor play programs and experiences. Children from diverse cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds and with varied physical and cognitive abilities, gender identities, and sexual orientations are less likely to play outdoors (Waite et al., 2023). Barriers may include societal stigma, cost, and cultural and personal differences, with children involved in structured programs being more likely to access outdoor play (Loebach et al., 2021). While research has identified these obstacles, there is a glaring gap in the literature exploring ways to overcome them.
Educator-led outdoor play programs, including programs in schools and early childhood centres, “bush schools”, and other initiatives, may increase time spent playing outdoors for all children, as learned activities generalise to the home environment (Friedman et al., 2022). Appropriately trained teachers and effective teaching practices are essential for authentic inclusion in educator-led settings, including play programs (Kelly et al., 2025; Lloyd, 2018; McGarrigle et al., 2023). Woodcock et al. (2022) found that highly effective teachers were more likely to focus on accessibility and student success rather than on student differences. This led us to ask the following research question: what does literature tell us about UDL and children’s outdoor play programs?
This question supported an exploration of literature that focused on the use of UDL to overcome the barriers to educator-led outdoor play programs. Further, the aim of this paper was to explore children’s outdoor play experiences in relation to learning, develop a discourse about this, and begin to think about how UDL can support access and inclusion for the more than one billion people with disabilities or impairments worldwide. UDL offers an opportunity to empower educators to create inclusive and equitable learning experiences (Meyer et al., 2014). Approaches such as UDL have a vital role in learning and teaching, not only in improving accessibility but also more broadly in creating a holistic student learning experience. In considering the literature, we sought to explore whether UDL may offer a framework for supporting researchers, practitioners, and families who work with diverse cohorts of young people and children to increase access to and success in outdoor play programs.
To investigate the intersection of children’s outdoor play and UDL, we did a rapid preliminary review of current relevant literature related to UDL and outdoor play for all children. Ten papers were unearthed from our initial search; from these, three emergent themes were identified. Broadly, these focused on the importance of inclusion, the role of UDL, and the need for appropriate resourcing. In the next section, we set the scene for these themes by discussing the broad research context around children’s outdoor play experiences and UDL, then outline the methodology used to conduct the literature review. We then present and discuss our findings. Gaps in literature and future research needs are also interwoven throughout the paper. In undertaking this, our review provides an agenda for future research and practice for professionals in the field.

2. Research Context

The concepts of children’s play and inclusion lie within the context of children’s rights. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989) has influenced policy and practice across the world, ensuring that a child’s right to play, and a child’s right to participate, regardless of the child’s diversity of background, are supported (Sturges, in press). Research on children’s play has also evolved from studies in developmental psychology, where early researchers such as Vygotsky emphasised the necessity of play for a child’s development (Saracho, 2023). Outdoor play has been shown to be equally essential for development due to the broad range of benefits it provides for a child’s physical and mental health (Brussoni et al., 2022; Eager et al., 2025; T. Gray et al., 2025a, 2025b; Little & Wyver, 2008; Mårtensson et al., 2009; Söderström et al., 2013; Wu et al., 2014). The benefits of outdoor play are important for all children, including those who have been traditionally excluded from outdoor play settings, such as girls, children with disabilities, children from culturally diverse backgrounds, and children from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds (Loebach et al., 2021; Waite et al., 2023).

2.1. Universal Design for Learning

UDL, as noted above, originated from an architectural movement concerned with designing for inclusion from the beginning rather than building in adaptations retrospectively (Sewell et al., 2022). In the same way, UDL is a framework for creating inclusive programs for everyone, rather than planning for an assumed norm. It has been used across a range of curriculum areas in Australia to create flexible learning environments (Capp, 2016) and in North America and Europe to support student-to-student learning (Katz, 2015), inclusion in physical education classes (Grenier et al., 2017; Lieberman, 2017; Lieberman & Grenier, 2019), and participation in a preschool motor skills class (Taunton et al., 2017). UDL consists of three broad principles: multiple means of engagement (i.e., providing multiple ways for children to engage with learning); multiple means of representation, (i.e., providing alternative means of communicating with children); and multiple means of action and expression (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST], 2018; Meyer et al., 2014).
UDL aligns with a transformative paradigm that empowers educators to create inclusive and equitable learning experiences (Meyer et al., 2014). UDL can be used in research to address inequities and encourage reflection around change, has been used to explore outdoor education (Meerts-Brandsma et al., 2020), children’s play (Adamson et al., 2021), inclusive education (Saleem et al., 2024), and is appropriate for use in evaluation research as a way of making injustices visible (Mertens, 2025). Grounded in principles that promote individual learning, UDL offers support to both educators and students. Practically, UDL offers opportunities for identifying potential environmental obstacles, providing meaningful choices, and supporting diverse learners (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST], 2018). This ensures that there are many different opportunities for children to act, communicate, and demonstrate their expertise (Kelly et al., 2022). UDL is not about changing the curriculum for one child or aiming at a mythical middle; instead, it provides multiple options that embrace the diversity of all the participants (Haugen, 2019), fulfilling the spirit of the United Nations goal of quality education for all (United Nations, 2021).
Attitudes of Australian teachers towards UDL, including physical education teachers, are broadly positive (Chen et al., 2023), and UDL has been incorporated successfully into physical education internationally (Grenier et al., 2018; Lieberman et al., 2020). From a North American perspective, Loeffler (2024) suggested that promoting UDL pedagogy could provide a way of increasing access to the outdoors for a broader range of students as it highlights the need for educators to change their ways of thinking rather than changing the student. One study exploring teacher efficacy found that those focusing on individual success and accessibility were more successful than those focusing on differences (Woodcock et al., 2022), and another exploring the effect of UDL training on student teachers found that it significantly increased their skills in valuing diversity (Rusconi & Squillaci, 2023).
There have been limited studies exploring UDL in relation to children’s play. Ruffino et al. (2006) developed a “universal design for play” tool to explore access to children’s toys. Moore et al. (2023), who reviewed the evidence on UD and children’s playgrounds, suggested that a “universal design for play”, which would involve more than just physical access, could be helpful for educators. Lynch et al. (2018), examining policy and UD in relation to play, argued that little data have been collected on play internationally and that policies lack an understanding of UD. Current manufactured playground equipment may not be accessible to all children due to their age or ability, and equipment provided in lower socioeconomic areas may be less inviting than that provided to children in wealthier areas (Buck et al., 2019). Incorporating natural spaces may be more effective in increasing accessibility due to the multiple possibilities of such spaces (Dankiw et al., 2024).

2.2. Outdoor Play

Outdoor play can be defined as play on outdoor playground equipment, playing freely in natural settings, and participating in educator-led outdoor play programs; it can include playing alone, with family members, or with other children (T. Gray et al., 2025b, 2025c; Little & Stapleton, 2023; Sturges et al., 2023). However, our study specifically focuses on educator-led outdoor play programs; these are referred to by various names, including forest school, bush school, nature school, or udeskole. They may be run within existing early childhood centres and schools or may be standalone programs. Educator-led play programs may benefit children by giving them time and space to play, teaching children and families specific outdoor skills (such as coping with weather, snakes, or water hazards), and increasing the amount of time spent outdoors overall (de Chavez et al., 2024; Trapasso et al., 2018). In Australia, access to these programs is inconsistent, with many children unable to participate in outdoor play programs (Frances et al., 2024).
Our search of the literature did not yield any research that specifically focused on access for children with disabilities to educator-led nature play programs in Australia. However, research on outdoor play has reported that Australian children from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to play outside (Meyer et al., 2014). Similarly, Rhodes (2023) found that girls and those from urban areas are less likely to play outdoors. International research has found that children with disabilities are less likely to play outdoors (van Engelen et al., 2021). However, when nature programs and educators are able to adapt to include everyone, children from diverse backgrounds are seen to thrive (Friedman et al., 2022).

3. Methodology

To address the research question and aims, the authors chose to undertake a literature review as a methodological approach. This approach can be useful for exploring the breadth and depth of emerging areas of research, along with future directions and gaps in the literature (Munn et al., 2018). In this review, keyword searches in Google Scholar were followed by citation searches to capture as many relevant results as possible. Searches that include the following words were included in the initial review of the literature: “outdoor play”, “nature play”, “universal design”, “universal design for learning”, “UDL”, “inclusion”, “diversity”, and “disability”. Papers in English that explored outdoor play and UDL were included; papers focusing simply on playground design or indoor play were excluded. Discussion papers were included along with research published in scholarly journals. Papers published before 2010 were excluded as the team wanted to review literature published within the last 15 years. A decision was made to include grey literature to ensure that all relevant projects were included in the study. The initial inclusion and exclusion criteria are shown in Table 1.
The initial keyword search identified 189 papers. Subsequently, 103 papers were excluded as they related solely to playground design and were therefore irrelevant or duplicates. A further 78 were excluded as they did not relate to outdoor play and UDL. Two more papers were located using citation searches, resulting in a final set of 10 papers. The screening process is presented in Figure 1.
The authors read each paper thoroughly to distinguish key ideas, methodologies, and gaps in the literature. We used a constant comparative method to refine our ideas. A constant comparative analysis involves revisiting the literature with repeated and close reading of it to look for recurring concepts and themes (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003; Thomas, 2009). Once this was completed, we used thematic mapping to identify repeated patterns of ideas and generate emergent themes (Thomas, 2009).

4. Results

Of the 10 papers located, most were published in the last 5 years. This suggests that research into UDL and outdoor play is in its infancy (Kelly et al., 2022). No experimental literature focusing specifically on outdoor play and UDL was located; however, a diverse range of scholarly literature, including discussions, interviews, and surveys, was found. The list of the final papers identified is presented in Table 2.

5. Findings

Three themes were identified from this literature: the importance of including all children in outdoor play, the potential of UDL to support inclusion, and the need for specific UDL resources tailored to outdoor play.

5.1. The Importance of Including All Children in Outdoor Play

Inclusion of all children in play is an essential human right. Therefore, outdoor play should be accessible to all. The importance of inclusion is a common theme in research that explores UDL and outdoor play. For example, Kelly et al. (2022), in a review paper, stated that “inclusion is an ever-present and evolving principle, as our societies and cultures go through rapid change. UDL might be one approach to ensure that all learners in schools can benefit from and enjoy full participation in outdoor learning to meet curriculum goals” (p. 86).
Dalki (2023) explored the UDL framework in an education project for parents of children with disabilities, using examples of UDL in a range of outdoor activities at a play program. In a subsequent survey, parents felt strongly that more support on a community level was needed for their children to be included in outdoor play. Fronzek (2023) interviewed nine teachers in outdoor play programs in Sweden, Denmark, and Ireland and found strong support for inclusion, with benefits cited including increased wellbeing and learning. Murphy (2023), who interviewed five teachers in a forest school program, reported that the teachers found inclusion in outdoor play especially important, benefiting students with and without diverse needs.
The importance of sustaining inclusion in outdoor play to practitioners is reflected in the publication of three different research-to-practice papers focusing on this issue. Harte (2013) argued that supporting the successful inclusion of all students also increases engagement for all students, with UDL as one possible framework for successful inclusive practice. Pikus et al. (2024) reviewed the evidence on the benefits of access to nature for all, including increased nature connectedness. Haugen (2019) suggested that including children from diverse backgrounds in outdoor play would provide opportunities not found within the indoor classroom, such as ways to interact using large movements and loud voices.

5.2. The Potential of UDL to Support Inclusion

Danniels and Pyle (2023), who explored inclusion in both outdoor and indoor play, reported that the use of teaching strategies inspired by UDL training successfully assisted teachers with including children. They provided examples of successful inclusive practices, including the use of multiple means of representation, such as visual supports, and multiple means of engagement, such as offering individual or small-group discussions. Kelly et al. (2022) considered that an understanding of UDL could assist educators to provide flexible possibilities so that all children can access the outdoors. They discussed the ways UDL could assist teachers with planning for student engagement and promote student persistence and self-regulation, including, for example, being aware of the exciting possibilities of a new outdoor space and its ability to provoke uncertainty. This could increase student engagement, although these authors warned that it could also lead to a decrease in student self-regulation without support. Against this backdrop, Haugen (2019) posited that UDL assists in the removal of bias and avoids making assumptions about the perceived abilities and interests of participants. She suggested that play areas with fewer possibilities lead to less access and therefore to assumptions about children’s abilities. Importantly, Haugen (2019) argued that the profession could rise to a new level of maturity and that “bringing together the UDL framework with research-based principles for implementing nature-based outdoor classrooms helps us move much closer to supporting children of all abilities to be a part of things—and thrive—outdoors” (p. 12).
Bonnin (2024) suggested that UDL could assist educators with bias about disability in general—for example, some environmental educators thought “accessible” walking paths meant concrete walks for wheelchairs—and could provide broader opportunities for students to engage in different environments. Likewise, in a review of Irish forest schools, Murphy (2023) posited that UDL may increase access for all children and suggested that these concepts could be easily incorporated into existing forest school models. Correspondingly, Lieberman et al. (2020) argued that, until recently, not enough had been done to translate knowledge of UDL to teacher practitioners in physical education and other more dynamic movement fields and that this was an important future priority.

5.3. The Need for Specific UDL Resources Tailored to Outdoor Play

Bonnin (2024), who explored children’s inclusion in nature-based activities, found that while all organisations wanted to become more inclusive, they were overwhelmed by the many possible ways to improve. Kelly et al. (2022) suggested that while resources exist to support UDL across many curriculum areas, further resources specific to outdoor play could support educators; they proposed that working groups to create outdoor play and UDL resources could be helpful. Danniels and Pyle (2023) identified many strategies related to UDL that are already in use by educators; however, Pikus et al. (2024) considered it essential to explicitly include multimodal strategies in planning to ensure successful inclusion. Fronzek (2023) reported that the need for more knowledge and resources was a common theme in her interviews with educators in forest school programs in Ireland.

6. Discussion

The literature focusing on educator-led outdoor play and UDL, while limited, suggests that UDL may be an effective framework for creating more inclusive outdoor play spaces for children. Integrating UDL into educator-led outdoor play initiatives may enhance accessibility and participation for children with unique needs (Danniels & Pyle, 2023, p. 284). Further, the implementation of UDL has the potential to support teachers in preparing inclusive activities, removing bias, and increasing the expectation of including all children in outdoor play (Kelly et al., 2022). However, we maintain that further observation, discussion, and experimental research are essential to fully explore the possibilities of UDL and outdoor play.
As noted by Kelly et al. (2022), the use of UDL in outdoor learning is “a potentially rich theme which needs further research evidence and stories from practice” (p. 86). Educational resources may originate from policies, new research, and examples from other educators. Khomsi et al. (2024) argued that a lack of collaboration between researchers and policymakers can reduce the efficacy of policies, increase conflict between different stakeholders, and slow down necessary progress; they suggested that effective communication could increase collaboration and address the needs of stakeholders. This need for a coordinated response was also raised by Aylward and Mitten (2022), who argued that collaboration is warranted to increase inclusion in the field of outdoor learning. The need for further research into effective practices and frameworks, as well as deep and frank discussion, was echoed by Kelly et al. (2022), who called for a community of practice in UDL to open up possibilities for educational settings and those who work within them. Those in the field are already requesting more resources (Fronzek, 2023), which can only come through observing and listening to those who have effective inclusive outdoor play programs.
Remarkably, there is a dearth of studies comparing UDL to other inclusion practices in outdoor play. One of the criticisms of UDL is the lack of experimental evidence available for its efficacy (Boysen, 2021; Zhang et al., 2024). Roski et al. (2021) lauded the aims of UDL but bemoaned the lack of research around it, arguing that most studies focused on only one part of UDL, such as offering multiple representations, rather than the framework’s underlying principles. Further rigorous research is necessary, particularly as recent meta-analyses have found that the few studies conducted have shown benefits for both teachers and students (Almeqdad et al., 2023; King-Sears et al., 2023). Alongside this, some practices within UDL have been explored by researchers. These include the importance of high expectations for student success; multiple ways of communication, including visual supports; and thorough planning by educators (Hopper, 2017).
These themes have also been nominally explored in relation to outdoor play and include the importance of high-quality experiences (White, 2013), inclusive excursions (Dahl et al., 2018), autonomous learning (Baker et al., 2023), and appropriate goals and planning (Brussoni et al., 2022). This exploration of aspects of practices used within UDL has shown promising results, further supporting the argument for rigorous research that is more closely focused on UDL principles. This paper, with the identification of three themes from the literature, contributes to these discourses.
The prospect of a cohesive, interconnected, and inclusive approach to educator-led outdoor play is a priority. By allowing children to engage in outdoor play within authentic, place-based settings, we amplify the potential of outdoor learning and, as a natural corollary, effectively enrich children’s lives (Kelly et al., 2022). Additionally, with the growing concerns around diversity in our educational institutions, this paper has argued that the application of UDL principles may promote inclusion in outdoor play. Finally, we argue that utilising UDL principles in the planning and provision of outdoor play experiences ensures that all students have the opportunity to thrive and succeed.
In response to the above themes and to offer a practical application, we have developed a matrix to illustrate how UDL principles can align with and inform outdoor play programs (Table 3). This exemplar highlights the ways in which UDL’s three core principles—multiple means of engagement, multiple means of representation, and multiple means of action and expression—can be enacted across different aspects of design, access, and support within outdoor learning environments.

7. Limitations of the Study

All studies have limitations. The authors acknowledge that the limited number of articles may inhibit the generalisability of our findings. We also note that given that research in this area is still in its early stages, our conclusions remain cautious and grounded in the available evidence explored above. Expanding the search strategy to include additional databases, non-English studies with English abstracts, and a broader range of keywords or synonyms may have potentially yielded further studies; however, a decision was made to exclude these studies at this stage to ensure that the aims of the study were met. A comprehensive roadmap or checklist that combines UDL and outdoor play is beyond the scope of the present paper; however, we recognise that this will be useful for future research and practice.

8. Conclusions

This preliminary review of the literature provides an agenda for future research and practice for those in the field. Inclusion is a constantly evolving principle that reflects the dynamic changes witnessed in society and culture. UDL may serve as an effective strategy to ensure that all children can fully engage in outdoor play or learning experiences while assisting to achieve optimal growth and development. Providing an inclusive environment for all children is important in the field of outdoor play. UDL is a framework that has been effective in other settings and may also assist educators in fully including all children, including those from diverse backgrounds. At present, as our findings show, research is in its infancy, with little high-quality peer-reviewed literature available. However, the 10 papers found in this scoping review show that despite scarce research in this area, there is an interest in increasing inclusion in outdoor play. The review also revealed that UDL is a known inclusive practice that can assist educators. Similarly, scholars are cognisant that further research and resources would be helpful to advance the field for academe, families, and practitioners.
Finally, the review suggests that establishing a community of practice would considerably enhance the current knowledge and understanding in the field and could create valuable opportunities for professional learning amongst outdoor play practitioners. Such an initiative would also benefit both the initial and ongoing professional development of teachers.
Future research should include rigorous experimental design to examine whether UDL improves access to outdoor play for all and to compare UDL to other inclusive practices. An examination of resources, including those most effective at supporting educators utilising UDL, is also warranted. Finally, collaboration between educators, researchers, and policymakers could assist in moving from theory to practice in UDL. All children have the right to access outdoor play, and UDL may be one way to support them in this important quest.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.S.; Methodology, M.S., T.G. and C.G.; Resource search, C.G.; Validation, M.S., T.G. and C.G.; Formal analysis, M.S., T.G. and C.G.; Data curation, C.G., M.S. and T.G.; Writing—original draft preparation, C.G. and M.S.; Writing—review and editing, M.S., T.G. and C.G.; Supervision, M.S. and T.G.; Project administration, M.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Adamson, G. S., Rouse, E., & Emmett, S. (2021). Recalling childhood: Transformative learning about the value of play through active participation. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 42(4), 362–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Almeqdad, Q. I., Alodat, A. M., Alquraan, M. F., Mohaidat, M. A., & Al-Makhzoomy, A. K. (2023). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2218191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Aylward, T., & Mitten, D. (2022). Celebrating diversity and inclusion in the outdoors. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 25, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Baker, S. T., Le Courtois, S., & Eberhart, J. (2023). Making space for children’s agency with playful learning. International Journal of Early Years Education, 31(2), 372–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bonnin, P. (2024). Identifying and removing barriers to accessibility in environmental education and outdoor recreation (School of Education and Leadership Student Capstone Projects, 1025). Hamline University School of Education. Available online: https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_cp/1025 (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  6. Boysen, G. A. (2021). Lessons (not) learned: The troublng similarities between learning styles and universal design for learning. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 10(2), 207–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Brussoni, M., Han, C. S., Lin, Y., Jacob, J., Munday, F., Zeni, M., Walters, M., & Oberle, E. (2022). Evaluation of the web-based Outside Play-ECE intervention to influence early childhood educators’ attitudes and supportive behaviors toward outdoor play: Randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(6), e36826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Buck, C., Bolbos, A., & Schneider, S. (2019). Do poorer children have poorer playgrounds? A geographically weighted analysis of attractiveness, cleanliness, and safety of playgrounds in affluent and deprived urban neighborhoods. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 16(6), 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Capp, M. (2016). Is your planning inclusive? The Universal Design for Learning framework for an Australian context. Australian Educational Leader, 38(4), 44–46. [Google Scholar]
  10. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2. Available online: https://udlguidelines.cast.org (accessed on 5 May 2025).
  11. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. Available online: https://udlguidelines.cast.org (accessed on 6 August 2025).
  12. Chen, H., Evans, D., & Luu, B. (2023). Moving towards inclusive education: Secondary school teacher attitudes towards Universal Design for Learning in Australia. Australasian Journal of Special and Inclusive Education, 47(1), 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dahl, L., Standal, O. F., & Moe, V. F. (2018). Norwegian teachers’ safety strategies for Friluftsliv excursions: Implications for inclusive education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 19(3), 256–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dalki, T. (2023). Increasing access to outdoor play for families of children with disabilities [Doctoral thesis, St Catherine University]. CORE. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/works/148972548/?t=307ff5f030c4ef78360ad8866682621b-148972548 (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  15. Dankiw, K. A., Kumar, S., Baldock, K. L., & Tsiros, M. D. (2024). Do children play differently in nature play compared to manufactured play spaces? A quantitative descriptive study. International Journal of Early Childhood, 56(3), 535–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Danniels, E., & Pyle, A. (2023). Teacher perspectives and approaches toward promoting inclusion in play-based learning for children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 21(3), 288–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. de Chavez, A. C., Seims, A. L., Dickerson, J., Dharni, N., & McEachan, R. R. (2024). Unlocking the forest: An ethnographic evaluation of Forest Schools on developmental outcomes for 3-year-olds unaccustomed to woodland spaces. Welcome Open Research, 9, 519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2003). Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  19. Eager, D., Gray, T., Little, H., Robbe, F., & Sharwood, L. (2025). Risky play isn’t a dirty word: A tool to measure benefit-risk in outdoor playgrounds and educational settings. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(6), 940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Elsherif, M. M., Middleton, S. L., Phan, J. M., Azevedo, F., Iley, B., Grose-Hodge, M., Tyler, S. L., Kapp, S. K., Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, A., Grafton-Clarke, D., Yeung, S. K., Shaw, J. J., Hartmann, H., & Dokovova, M. (2025). Bridging neurodiversity and open scholarship: How shared values can guide best practices for research integrity, social justice, and principled education. [Unpublished manuscript]. [CrossRef]
  21. Frances, L., Quinn, F., Elliott, S., & Bird, J. (2024). Outdoor learning across the early years in Australia: Inconsistencies, challenges, and recommendations. The Australian Educational Researcher, 51(5), 2141–2159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Friedman, S., Gibson, J., Jones, C., & Hughes, C. (2022). “A new adventure”: A case study of autistic children at Forest School. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 24(2), 202–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Fronzek, M. (2023). “It was like that they were more equal outside.” Teachers’ perception of experiences, benefits and challenges of inclusive outdoor education [Master’s thesis, Linköping University]. DiVA portal. Available online: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1787111&dswid=-640 (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  24. Gray, P. (2017). What exactly is play, and why is it such a powerful vehicle for learning? Topics in Language Disorders, 37(3), 217–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Gray, P. (2020). Risky play: Why children love and need it. In J. Loebach, S. Little, A. Cox, & P. Eubanks Owens (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of designing public spaces for young people (pp. 39–51). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gray, T. (2018). Outdoor learning: Not new, just newly important. Curriculum Perspectives, 38(2), 145–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gray, T., Dallat, C., & Jackson, P. (2025a). Pendulum swings: Developing a healthy risk appetite for outdoor play, adventurous learning, and child brain development. In T. Gray, M. Sturges, & J. Barnes (Eds.), Risk and outdoor play: Listening and responding to international voices: Part 1 (pp. 37–56). Springer Nature. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gray, T., Sturges, M., & Barnes, J. (Eds.). (2025b). Outdoor risky play: A wildly successful and growing movement across the globe. In Risk and outdoor play: Listening and responding to international voices: Part 1 (pp. 1–19). Springer Nature Singapore. [Google Scholar]
  29. Gray, T., Sturges, M., & Barnes, J. (Eds.). (2025c). Risk and outdoor play: Listening and responding to international voices: Part 1. Springer Nature. Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/9789819654543 (accessed on 6 August 2025).
  30. Grenier, M., Fitch, N., & Young, J. C. (2018). Using the climbing wall to promote full access through Universal Design. Palaestra, 32(4), 41–46. [Google Scholar]
  31. Grenier, M., Miller, N., & Black, K. (2017). Applying Universal Design for Learning and the inclusion of spectrum for students with severe disabilities in general physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 88(6), 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Harte, H. A. (2013). Universal design and outdoor learning. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 41(3), 18–22. [Google Scholar]
  33. Haugen, K. (2019). Bringing the benefits of nature to all children. The Active Learner, Highscope’s Journal for Early Educators, Spring, 12–13. Available online: https://highscope.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/HSActiveLearner_2019Spring_sample.pdf (accessed on 28 April 2025).
  34. Hopper, R. (2017). Special educational needs and disability and learning outside the classroom. In S. Waite (Ed.), Children learning outside the classroom from birth to eleven (2nd ed., pp. 118–130). SAGE Publications Ltd. [Google Scholar]
  35. Katz, J. (2015). Implementing the three block model of Universal Design for Learning: Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy, stress, and job satisfaction in inclusive classrooms K-12. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(1), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kelly, O., Buckley, K., Lieberman, L. J., & Arndt, K. (2022). Universal Design for Learning—A framework for inclusion in outdoor learning. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 25(1), 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kelly, O., Whelan, J., & Coulter, M. (2025). A pedagogy of outdoor learning in the primary school—Insights from outdoor educators in Ireland (pp. 1–19). Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Khomsi, K., Bouzghiba, H., Mendyl, A., Al-Delaimy, A. K., Dahri, A., Saad-Hussein, A., Balaw, G., El Marouani, I., Sekmoudi, I., Adarbaz, M., Khanjani, N., & Abbas, N. (2024). Bridging research policy gaps: An integrated approach. Environmental Epidemiology, 8(1), e281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. King-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., Mergen, R. L., Owen, L. S., & Strimel, M. (2023). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lieberman, L. J. (2017). The need for Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 88(3), 5–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Lieberman, L. J., & Grenier, M. (2019). Infusing Universal Design for Learning into physical education professional preparation programs. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 90(6), 3–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Lieberman, L. J., Grenier, M., Brian, A., & Arndt, K. (2020). Universal Design for Learning in physical education. Human Kinetics, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  43. Little, H., & Stapleton, M. (2023). Exploring toddlers’ rituals of “belonging” through risky play in the outdoor environment. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 24(3), 281–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Little, H., & Wyver, S. (2008). Outdoor play: Does avoiding the risks reduce the benefits? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 33(2), 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lloyd, A. (2018). Outdoor learning in primary schools: Predominately female ground. In T. Gray, & D. Mitten (Eds.), The Palgrave international handbook of women and outdoor learning (pp. 637–648). Springer Nature. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Loebach, J., Sanches, M., Jaffe, J., & Elton-Marshall, T. (2021). Paving the way for outdoor play: Examining socio-environmental barriers to community-based outdoor play. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(7), 3617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Loeffler, T. A. (2024). Universal Design as a framework to increase diversity, inclusion, equity and belonging in Canadian outdoor learning. In S. Priest, S. Ritchie, & D. Scott (Eds.), Outdoor learning in Canada. Laurentian University. Available online: https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/olic/ (accessed on 28 April 2025).
  48. Lynch, H., Moore, A., & Prellwitz, M. (2018). From policy to play provision: Universal Design and the challenges of inclusive play. Children, Youth and Environments, 28(2), 12–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mårtensson, F., Boldemann, C., Söderström, M., Blennow, M., Englund, J. E., & Grahn, P. (2009). Outdoor environmental assessment of attention promoting settings for preschool children. Health & Place, 15(4), 1149–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. McGarrigle, L., Beamish, W., & Hay, S. (2023). Measuring teacher efficacy to build capacity for implementing inclusive practices in an Australian primary school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(7), 771–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Meerts-Brandsma, L., Sibthorp, J., & Rochelle, S. (2020). Using transformative learning theory to understand outdoor adventure education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 20(4), 81–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mertens, D. M. (2025). Research opportunities to contribute to increased justice using a transformative approach. Methods in Psychology, 12, 100182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  54. Moore, A., Boyle, B., & Lynch, H. (2023). Designing for inclusion in public playgrounds: A scoping review of definitions, and utilization of universal design. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 18(8), 1453–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Murphy, M. C. (2023). “Sowing the seed”: A bio-ecological exploratory case study of the forest school approach to learning and teaching in the Irish primary school curriculum [Doctoral thesis, Mary Immaculate College]. MIRR—Mary Immaculate Research Repository. Available online: https://www.dspace.mic.ul.ie/handle/10395/3124 (accessed on 28 April 2025).
  57. Pikus, A. E., Etchison, H. M., Gerde, H. K., & Bingham, G. E. (2024). Nature for all: Utilizing the Universal Design framework to incorporate nature-based learning within an early childhood inclusive classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 57(5), 338–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Prins, J., van der Wilt, F., van Santen, S., van der Veen, C., & Hovinga, D. (2022). The importance of play in natural environments for children’s language development: An explorative study in early childhood education. International Journal of Early Years Education, 31(2), 450–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Rhodes, A. (2023). Australian families—How we play. RCH Child National Health Poll (Poll report, Poll 28). Available online: https://rchpoll.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/NCHP28-Poll-report-A4_FA.pdf (accessed on 28 April 2025).
  60. Roski, M., Walkowiak, M., & Nehring, A. (2021). Universal Design for Learning: The more, the better? Education Sciences, 11(4), 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ruffino, A. G., Mistrett, S. G., Tomita, M., & Hajare, P. (2006). The universal design for play tool: Establishing validity and reliability. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 25–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rusconi, L., & Squillaci, M. (2023). Effects of a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) training course on the development of teachers’ competences: A systematic review. Education Sciences, 13(5), 466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Sahlberg, P., & Doyle, W. (2019). Let the children play. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  64. Saleem, A., Kazmi, A. B., & Javed, M. A. F. (2024). From research to reality: Implementing transformative learning in inclusive education. Journal of Development and Social Sciences, 5(4), 566–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Saracho, O. N. (2023). Theories of child development and their impact on early childhood education and care. Early Childhood Education Journal, 51(1), 15–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sewell, A., Kennett, A., & Pugh, V. (2022). Universal Design for Learning as a theory of inclusive practice for use by educational psychologists. Educational Psychology in Practice, 38(4), 364–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Söderström, M., Boldemann, C., Sahlin, U., Mårtensson, F., Raustorp, A., & Blennow, M. (2013). The quality of the outdoor environment influences children’s health: A cross-sectional study of preschools. Acta Paediatrica, 102(1), 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sturges, M. (in press). “You can see lots of good things in the climbing tree”: Listening to children’s views of their outdoor space. In T. Gray, M. Sturges, & J. Barnes (Eds.), Risk and outdoor play: Listening and responding to collective voices part 2. Springer Nature.
  69. Sturges, M., Gray, T., Barnes, J., & Lloyd, A. (2023). Parents and caregivers’ perspectives on the benefits of a high-risk outdoor play space. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 26(3), 359–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Taunton, S. A., Brian, A., & True, L. (2017). Universally designed motor skill intervention for children with and without disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 29(6), 941–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Thomas, G. (2009). How to do your research project. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  72. Trapasso, E., Knowles, Z., Boddy, L., Newson, L., Sayers, J., & Austin, C. (2018). Exploring gender differences within forest schools as a physical activity intervention. Children, 5(10), 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. United Nations. (1989). Conventions on the rights of the child. Available online: https://www.unicef.org/child-rights-convention (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  74. United Nations. (2021). Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal4 (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  75. van Engelen, L., Ebbers, M., Boonzaaijer, M., Bolster, E. A. M., van der Put, E. A. H., & Bloemen, M. A. T. (2021). Barriers, facilitators and solutions for active inclusive play for children with a physical disability in the Netherlands: A qualitative study. BMC Pediatrics, 21, 369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Waite, S., Husain, F., Scandone, B., Forsyth, E., & Piggott, H. (2023). “It’s not for people like (them)”: Structural and cultural barriers to children and young people engaging with nature outside schooling. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 23(1), 54–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. White, J. (2013). Playing and learning outdoors: Making provision for high quality experiences in the outdoor environment with children 3–7. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  78. Woodcock, S., Sharma, U., Subban, P., & Hitches, E. (2022). Teacher self-efficacy and inclusive education practices: Rethinking teachers’ engagement with inclusive practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 117, 103802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wu, C., McNeely, E., Cedeno-Laurent, J., Pan, W., Adamkiewicz, G., Dominici, F., & Spengler, J. (2014). Linking student performance in Massachusetts elementary schools with the “greenness” of school surroundings using remote sensing. PLoS ONE, 9(10), 108548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zhang, L., Carter, R. A., Jr., Greene, J. A., & Bernacki, M. (2024). Unraveling challenges with the implementation of Universal Design for Learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Education 15 01623 g001
Figure 1. Process of screening for papers.
Figure 1. Process of screening for papers.
Education 15 01623 g001
Table 1. Initial inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Table 1. Initial inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Inclusion CriteriaExclusion Criteria
Key words were includedNo key words
Written in EnglishNot written in English
Published after 2010Published prior to 2010
Explored outdoor play and UDL Focused on playground design or indoor play
Grey literature
Table 2. UDL and outdoor play literature.
Table 2. UDL and outdoor play literature.
Year AuthorType of LiteratureMethodology
2024BonninThesisSurvey
2023Dalki ThesisSurvey
2023Danniels & PyleResearchInterviews
2023FronzekThesisInterviews
2013HarteDiscussion paperResearch-to-practice information
2019HaugenDiscussion paperResearch-to-practice information
2022Kelly et al.Review paperReview
2023MurphyThesisReview
2024Pikus et al.Discussion paperResearch-to-practice information
Table 3. UDL and outdoor play programs matrix. Adapted from (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST], 2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. Retrieved from https://Udlguidelines.Cast.Org (accessed on 6 August 2025).
Table 3. UDL and outdoor play programs matrix. Adapted from (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST], 2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. Retrieved from https://Udlguidelines.Cast.Org (accessed on 6 August 2025).
Design
Options		Multiple Means of EngagementMultiple Means of RepresentationMultiple Means of Action and Expression
AccessWelcoming interests and identities: Natural environments provide a variety of ways to engage through the senses, and educators can offer choices in materials and experiences.
Example: water-based and leaf-based pouring activities		Perception: Natural environments provide information in a number of ways.
Example: pointing out the way the skies show the weather or the trees show the seasons		Interaction: Natural environments can allow for a variation in responses to sensory experiences.
Example: honouring different perceptions of the temperature, textures, and colours in natural settings
SupportSustaining effort and persistence: Ensuring physical access to different areas and experiences, as well as appropriate risk, increases the sense of challenge.
Example: bush paths that are flat for those using mobility equipment but include side-by-side logs for those ready for balancing		Language and symbols: Using a range of languages to increase understanding.
Example: using home languages and Indigenous languages where appropriate in songs and stories		Expression and communication: Natural environments can encourage responses by provoking wonder and joy.
Example: providing alternative ways for children to react to beautiful flowers through pointing, verbalising, or using visual supports
Executive FunctionEmotional capacity: Offering activities that are a mix of individual, side-by-side, and group challenges.
Example: a choice of using manual drills on a large log or individual branches		Building knowledge: Traditional and modern knowledge about the landscape can be shared through stories, art, and song.
Example: singing traditional songs about birds and animals		Strategy development: Meaningful goals added to activities in natural environments.
Example: any form of communicative intent may be a goal, whether it be glances or words
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sturges, M.; Gray, T.; Galbraith, C. Theorising Universal Design for Learning to Create More Inclusive Outdoor Play Spaces: A Preliminary Review. Educ. Sci. 2025, 15, 1623. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121623

AMA Style

Sturges M, Gray T, Galbraith C. Theorising Universal Design for Learning to Create More Inclusive Outdoor Play Spaces: A Preliminary Review. Education Sciences. 2025; 15(12):1623. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121623

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sturges, Marion, Tonia Gray, and Carolyn Galbraith. 2025. "Theorising Universal Design for Learning to Create More Inclusive Outdoor Play Spaces: A Preliminary Review" Education Sciences 15, no. 12: 1623. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121623

APA Style

Sturges, M., Gray, T., & Galbraith, C. (2025). Theorising Universal Design for Learning to Create More Inclusive Outdoor Play Spaces: A Preliminary Review. Education Sciences, 15(12), 1623. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121623

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop