Debate contribution: Curriculum Mainstreaming and Strategy for Outdoor Learning in Schools
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew McMurray on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew McMurray
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 24 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Committee Business
- Heading
- Curriculum Mainstreaming and Strategy for Outdoor Learning in Schools
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5254014
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I have spent a lifetime in the outdoors. Recently, I reflected on the fact that getting psyched in the outdoors through doing activities such as climbing, mountain biking and mountaineering, in the company of like-minded friends and companions with a shared objective, might not have been the best grounding for a career in front-line Northern Irish politics, but the road less travelled and all that. Outdoor learning provides for inspirational experiences, challenging activities, excitement and fun, all of which contribute to a positive, lifelong educational impact. The Committee Chair is correct to say that outdoor learning is not just a nice thing to do. It is still a very nice thing to do, however. It has been proven that outdoor learning introduces energy into the classroom. Studies have shown that it can improve the academic potential of those who are exposed to it. Many other Members have acknowledged that fact, and it has been academically proven beyond what has been said in the Sunday papers. From anecdotal experience of outdoor education, I believe that it works for those who may not have the traditional academic strengths. Minister, Members and the Committee, do not underestimate the power of the outdoors and associated activities to change how individuals see themselves and how others see them. I have often witnessed a child who is not the most academic or confident in the classroom or who does not perform on the traditional sports pitch come into their own and exude confidence in an outdoor environment when put on the end of a rope to abseil down a cliff, in a wetsuit to jump into a plunge pool or in the forest with a map. It is not just about giving that individual confidence but about their getting acknowledgement from teachers and classmates, who now view them differently because they have a strength that they previously did not know that they possessed. That is the real magic of outdoor education. There are, however, challenges to any such strategy, and the Minister should note them. I am glad to see the will of the Committee to investigate the positive role that outdoor learning can have in formal and informal education settings, but there are a number of points on which the Committee and the Minister may wish to reflect. When we look at the policy, we do not always take into consideration the full range of outdoor learning centres that exist. Statutory, voluntary and private providers all play a role. We need to consider the curriculum topics that are in the syllabus for Key Stages 2, 3 and 4 and that outdoor learning centres already deliver. That learning takes place in formal education settings, but there are also informal, youth-work settings and the accreditations that those guys provide. Protection from further cuts is needed. The Minister previously referred to financial constraints. I appreciate that, as we all do, but, as we have said, outdoor learning should not be curtailed simply by the outdoor spaces that are available to schools. While it is great for outdoor learning to be acknowledged — it should be embedded in the curriculum — in reality, the number of schoolchildren who are exposed to outdoor learning, whether formal or informal, has drastically reduced over the years. The centres at Ardnabannon, Bushmills, Killowen, Killyleagh, Ebbitt and Cabra have been closed over the years, which has taken away the ability to provide an outdoor recreational learning setting. The Committee Chair and other Members have said that Scotland is an exemplar of outdoor learning. I certainly subscribe to that. Scotland and Wales are at different stages of legislating to make outdoor residential learning a requirement, which would be good to see here, given the wonderful outdoors that we have. At the beginning of my contribution, I made a quip about outdoor activities not being a good grounding for front-line Northern Ireland politics. However, the teamwork involved in canoeing, the resilience gained climbing a mountain, the trust required to hold a rope and to be held at the end of a rope all engender partnership working. It is never too late to work on those skills, so, if the Speaker or, indeed, the Minister or any members of the Executive want to take part in a few outdoor workshops to look at the matter, I would be happy to hook up with them to go for a dander or something like that.
736 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.88).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.88 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.69 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.17 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.11 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:52 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.