Perceptions of Continued Resilience Development in Nature Preschool Alumni A PLAN B PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Melanie Rose Kroll IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION Dr. Danny Frank Dr. Elizabeth Boileau Dr. Jodie Riek December 2024 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA This is to certify that I have examined this copy of a Plan B Master's Thesis by Melanie Rose Kroll and have foW1d that it is complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the final examining committee have been made. Dr. Danny Frank Nmne of Faculty Adviser Date • ture of Faculty Adviser University of Minnesota © Melanie Rose Kroll 2024 i Acknowledgements This research project would not have been possible without the time, energy, and perspective of the study participants. Thank you to the parents for dedicating their time and for sharing such rich insights, and to the kids, whose perspectives constantly illuminate new ways we can learn to grow in our care for our human and more-than-human friends. Thank you to the Guide who invited me into the forest, encouraged me to explore this topic, and who was so generous with their time, knowledge, and community. Thank you to my committee members, Dr. Danny Frank, Dr. Elizabeth Boileau, and Dr. Jodie Riek, whose expertise on early childhood, experiential learning, and quality research design guided me through this project. I’d especially like to thank my advisor, Dr. Danny Frank, whose endless patience, encouragement, and insight kept me motivated. Thank you for your mentorship, perspective, and the countless meetings in coffee shops to help me refocus and believe in my ability to see this project through. I would like to thank my MEEd cohort, faculty, and professors, from whom I learned so much about how to be a good environmental educator and a generally Good Human. Your passion and curiosity are contagious, and I learned something from each of you. Thank you also to my friends for laughter, support, campfires, beach days, and walk-and-talks that fill my soul up. I am beyond grateful. I would also like to thank my family who offered understanding, advice, and motivation at every stage of this process; you get it. Thank you for guiding me. A special thank you to Grandpa Kurt and Grandma Nancy, who drove me to Duluth when I embarked on this journey in the Northwoods and helped me make it home. A final acknowledgement to my grandpa, Kurt Walther, who recently passed, who always shared his inquisitive mind and love for nature. Thank you for teaching me about wildflowers, writing, oak trees, and so many other things. See you in the forest ii Abstract This study explored the perceptions of educators, parents, and children who attended a nature-based preschool in Minnesota on how resilience continues to develop in youth as they enter middle childhood. Parents explored what attributes associated with resilience their children demonstrate, ways these are encouraged outside the nature-based school, and reflected on what role nature may play in their family. Youth participants reflected on the resources they used when faced with challenging or adverse experiences. Through thematic analysis, common traits identified by parents include confidence, leadership, empathy, self- regulation, and problem solving. Youth demonstrated a familiarity with place, reliance on self- regulation tools, and trust in their family, friends, and more-than-human companions. The Lead Guide identified programmatic features which instilled a sense of security, belonging, and independence among preschoolers and centered connections to the more-than-human world. Examined together, the perceptions of participants highlight the role of connection, safety, and independent exploration as factors which promote resilience within youth. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... i Abstract....................................................................................................................................... ii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1 ................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Background of Study .............................................................................................................. 1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 2 Research Questions ............................................................................................................... 4 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................. 4 Significance ............................................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 2 ................................................................................................................................... 7 Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 7 Resilience ............................................................................................................................... 7 An Integrated Resilience Model .............................................................................................. 9 Resilience and Executive Function ........................................................................................15 Benefits of Nature Exposure ..................................................................................................17 Child Development ................................................................................................................18 Place-based Education ..........................................................................................................20 Nature-based Preschools ......................................................................................................21 Chapter 3 ..................................................................................................................................23 Methodology .............................................................................................................................23 Purpose of Study ...................................................................................................................23 Research Questions ..............................................................................................................23 Strategy of Inquiry .................................................................................................................24 Case Study Background ........................................................................................................24 Methodological Fit .................................................................................................................24 Setting ...................................................................................................................................25 Participants ...........................................................................................................................27 Researcher’s Role .................................................................................................................29 Data Collection Procedures ...................................................................................................30 Limitations and Delimitations .................................................................................................32 Protocol .................................................................................................................................33 Credibility ..............................................................................................................................38 iv Transferability ........................................................................................................................38 Dependability.........................................................................................................................38 Confirmability .........................................................................................................................39 Thematic Analysis .................................................................................................................39 Chapter 4 ..................................................................................................................................41 Results ......................................................................................................................................41 Emerging Themes .................................................................................................................41 Parent Interview and Focus Groups ......................................................................................43 Draw, Write, Tell Results .......................................................................................................49 Interview with Nature School Guide .......................................................................................55 Emergent Themes .................................................................................................................58 Sensory Benefits ...................................................................................................................59 Safety ....................................................................................................................................59 Rooted in Community ............................................................................................................61 Chapter 5 ..................................................................................................................................63 Discussion ................................................................................................................................63 Teacher and Caregiver Perceptions ......................................................................................63 Factors Identified as Influential ..............................................................................................64 Continued Utilization of Resilience-related Skills and Attitudes ..............................................65 Significance and Areas for Future Research .........................................................................66 References ...............................................................................................................................72 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................82 Appendix A – Recruitment Materials .........................................................................................82 Recruitment Email .................................................................................................................82 Recruitment Survey ...............................................................................................................83 Appendix B - Consent Forms ....................................................................................................87 Appendix C – Participant Background Survey ...........................................................................94 Appendix D – Participant Questions ..........................................................................................95 Focus Group Questions .........................................................................................................95 Interview Questions ...............................................................................................................96 Draw, Write, Tell Questions ...................................................................................................96 Appendix E - Thematic Analysis Plot .........................................................................................97 Appendix F - Results: Children’s Draw, Write, Tell Responses .................................................98 Responses to Question 1: What does the nature preschool mean to you? ............................98 v Responses to Question 2: What do you do when you are dealing with a stressful situation? (Draw a picture of what helps you feel better when you are stressed or dealing with a scary/hard/difficult situation? These could be actions you take, or people, places, or things that help you.) ...................................................................................................................... 107 vi List of Tables Table 1. Participant Overview ...................................................................................................27 Table 2. Participant Ties to Nature Preschool and Other Outdoor Programs .............................28 Table 3. Table on Focus Group and Interview Attendance ........................................................31 Table 4. Phases of Thematic Analysis ......................................................................................39 Table 5. Primary Attributes Observed by Parents ......................................................................44 Table 6. Comparison of Resilience Factors Shortlist and Nature Preschool Features ...............68 vii List of Figures Figure 1. Integrated Resilience Model Developed by Wadi et al. (2020) ...................................10 Figure 2. Table of Thematic findings for Resilience Domains from Wadi et al. (2020) ...............14 Figure 3. Emerging Themes from Participant Data ....................................................................43 Figure 4. Draw, Write, Tell Art Depicting Nature Preschool .......................................................50 Figure 5. Draw, Write, Tell Art Highlights Participant Familiarity with Place and Nature School .51 Figure 6. Draw, Write, Tell Art “I find my family” when Faced with Stress ..................................53 Figure 7. Draw, Write, Tell Art “I take deep breaths or ask for help” ..........................................53 Figure 8. Draw, Write, Tell Art “Jump on the rocks” ...................................................................54 Figure 9. A visualization of the coding process to help correlate examples with themes ...........97 Figure 10. Q1: Playing with Friends on the Swing .....................................................................98 Figure 11. Q1: Features of the Outdoor Classroom ...................................................................99 Figure 12. Q1: Love of the Forest............................................................................................ 100 Figure 13. Q1: Mud Kitchen Fun ............................................................................................. 100 Figure 14. Q1: Path through the Forest ................................................................................... 101 Figure 15. Q1: Preschool means Fun On the Swing ............................................................... 102 Figure 16. Q1: Nature Preschool means…Friends, Trees, Heart, Rollercoaster...................... 103 Figure 17. Q1: Drawing of child standing in trees .................................................................... 104 Figure 18. Q1: Playing Tag with Friends ................................................................................. 105 Figure 19. Q1: Boy standing in the Forest ............................................................................... 106 Figure 20. Q2: “I find my family” .............................................................................................. 107 Figure 21. Q2: “I take deep breaths or ask for help” ................................................................ 108 Figure 22. Q2: “Jump on the rocks” ......................................................................................... 109 Figure 23. Q2: “I ask the Guide for help” ................................................................................. 109 Figure 24. Q2: “Hug my dog” ................................................................................................... 110 Figure 25. Q2: Deep breaths in the forest ............................................................................... 111 Figure 26. Q2: Playing with Dog and Building with Legos ....................................................... 112 1 Chapter 1 Introduction Background of Study Resilience has been a subject of study across disciplines for more than five decades as practitioners and researchers have strived to understand the factors which promote resilience, protect against adversity, and how these can be cultivated in real-time. Resilience has been studied within medicine (Tamura et al., 2021; Wadi et al., 2020), ecology (Peterson et al., 1998; Pimm, 1984), as well as within psychology, public health, and other social science fields (Gartland et al., 2019; Levine, 2003; Luthar et al., 2000; Masten, 2001; Masten, 2011; Mestre et al., 2017). Despite the breadth of literature on resilience, Mestre et al. noted in their 2017 study on adolescent emotional regulation and resilience, that there is a continued need for qualitative and longitudinal research to fill in gaps within the literature related to the nature of these effects and how they affect individuals later in life. There has been a growing body of research on the positive effects of spending time in nature including benefits to attention (Kaplan, 1995; Basu et al., 2019), stress reduction (Ulrich et al., 1991), physical well-being, and emotional well-being. In addition to this, nature-based preschools have been growing in popularity across the United States since the first official nature-based school was established in 1966 (Natural Start Alliance, 2016). There have been studies on the effects of nature-based preschools on child development, academic success, social emotional learning, as well as resilience. Studies have found that participation in nature- based preschools promotes resilience in children through the development of promotive and protective attributes, such as self-regulation (Ernst et al., 2019). Evidence also indicates that children who attend nature-based preschools centered on child-directed, play-based learning meet or exceed academic standards once they enter grade school (Burgess and Ernst, 2019; Cordiano et al., 2019). 2 Despite the increasing presence of nature-based preschools, children in primary school often have limited access to green spaces or opportunities for free play. According to the State Policy Database (Minnesota Department of Education, 2013), only nine states have codified policies requiring recess, and these policies do not necessarily stipulate access to outdoor spaces. The “Recess Moves!” toolkit developed as a guide in Minnesota suggests at least 20 minutes of recess, preferably outdoors (Minnesota Department of Education, 2013). Within Minnesota, the amount of nature access can vary greatly. Some schools have access to school forests, while others are limited in their green space and allotted time outdoors. Given these varying degrees of natureness within primary school settings, there may be limited opportunities for youth to engage with nature the way they did while attending a nature-based preschool. This leads to questions such as how do these families continue to connect to nature, access the benefits of nature connectedness, and continue to promote resilience as children enter non- nature-based programs? What beliefs, skills, and behaviors do they carry forward and what do children and parents identify as additional factors which support their child’s development of resilience? Purpose The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore parent and youth perceptions regarding what attributes that support psychological resilience were cultivated in a nature-based preschool setting, and how these may have continued to develop as children entered middle childhood years. The study was designed to give participants an opportunity to explore the topic of resilience from a strengths-based lens and to share their perceptions of supportive resources and skills in their own words. Past resilience research, as well as research within environmental education, has provided evidence that time in nature promotes resilience (Ernst et al., 2019; Gray, 2019; Ingulli & Lindbloom, 2013; Tillmann et al., 2018;). This may be due to the psychological benefits of time in nature, including reduced stress (Ulrich et al., 1991), attention restoration (Kaplan & 3 Kaplan, 1989 in Kaplan,1995), and the development of attributes associated with stronger psychological resilience. These include features such as executive function, emotional regulation, social skills, self-esteem, and a sense of connection (to other people, as well as the more-than-human world). The significance of early childhood experiences on future health and well-being is a well- studied phenomenon (Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, n.d.). From the numerous studies which examine the correlation between adverse childhood experiences (ACE) and poorer health outcomes or mental illness (Petruccelli et al., 2019) to studies exploring positive childhood experiences (PCE) which are demonstrated to lead to resilience against future stress, early childhood is an area of extensive study due to the rapid development occurring during this period (Bethell et al., 2019; Crouch et al., 2021; Han et al., 2023). Middle childhood, by comparison, has been referred to as the “forgotten years” by past researchers (Mah & Ford-Jones, 2012), as much of the existing research focuses on early childhood or adolescence. Middle childhood is roughly considered to be between ages six and twelve years old (Mah & Ford-Jones, 2012). Gartland et al. (2019) stated that there is limited research on ways to support resilience during middle childhood years. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) states that children in early adolescence may be beginning to develop a greater sense of self and identity separate from their family unit (Center for Disease Control, 2021; Malik & Marwaha, 2024). This study focused on the perceptions of both students and their caregivers to examine how participation in a nature preschool program impacts psychological resilience. Therefore, this case study aimed to add to research on middle childhood, while examining the continuing role of nature in psychological resilience. Researcher Positionality Statement My personal, professional, and academic experiences inform the methods I use to conduct research and the lens through which I view information. I received my Bachelor of Science in Psychology from Michigan State University in 2019, with a focus on community psychology and 4 bioethics. My professional background has taken me between environmental and sustainability- related fields and behavioral health-related fields. My primary area of focus is on improving mental health and well-being through building connections to community and the more-than- human world. I feel passionate that connection to and care for the environment is a necessary part of wellness. This belief system informs the lens that I carried with me into this research. Research Questions This study was created to illuminate answers to the following questions: 1. What are teachers’ and caregivers’ perceptions of the effects of a nature-based preschool on a child’s psychological resilience? 2. What factors do children, teachers, and caregivers identify as influential in the continued promotion of psychological resilience? 3. How do children continue to utilize skills and attitudes taught through nature preschool experiences to cope with adversity in middle childhood? Definition of Terms Psychological Resilience Psychological resilience can broadly be defined as “positive adaptation in the face of risk and adversity” (Masten, 2011 in Wortsman et al., 2024, p. 2). Resilience consists of a set of processes, internal attributes, and external factors which allow an individual to “bounce back” even when faced with challenging experiences (Masten, 2018). Nature-based Preschool According to the Natural Start Alliance (n.d.), nature-based education centers nature and natural elements in its educational curriculum. Nature is viewed as a co-teacher within nature- based preschools. Nature-based education can be summarized as “learning in nature, about nature, and for nature” (Natural Start Alliance, n.d.). Nature-based preschools prioritize time outside, child-directed, play-based learning, place-based education, social and emotional development, and connection with nature. Nature-based preschool programs are oriented to 5 early childhood, typically enrolling children three to five years old. Middle Childhood Middle Childhood is generally considered to be between six and twelve years old (Mah & Ford-Jones, 2012). Adversity Adversity is often defined as suffering or discomfort from a difficult or potentially traumatic event (Sisto et al., 2019). In some contexts, adversity is characterized through Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) which can include witnessing or experiencing abuse and neglect, divorce, family members with mental illness, chemical dependency, or incarceration. ACE categories do not encompass all of the potentially traumatic events that a child or adult may experience. Within this study, adversity was broadened to include any potentially challenging, difficult or upsetting experience that a youth-participant or their family may have experienced, regardless of whether it may have been to the magnitude of potentially traumatic. Perception This study largely focused on the perceptions of participants, and it is important to understand what this means in context. In general, perception refers to the process of receiving sensory input and interpreting this information based on personal knowledge and experience (OpenStax & Learning, n.d.). For this study, perception referred to the observation and interpretation of behaviors and experiences shared by adult and youth participants. Resourceful Resourceful was defined as “being able to find appropriate solutions from available resources to deal with adversity” (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). Control Control was defined as “being composed and controlled under stressful adversity” (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). Growth 6 Growth was defined as “being able to keep growing and bouncing back stronger from adversity” (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). Involvement Involvement was defined as “being committed to deal with the adversity” (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). More-than-human The more-than-human world refers to the living and non-living beings in the environment, such as humans, animals, trees, rocks, water, and much more (Peters, 2024). This includes humans but always extends beyond humanity alone. Place-based Education Place-based education is an experiential pedagogy which centers learning through engagement within the local community and the environment (Sobel, 2008; Yemini et al., 2023). Significance This study aims to contribute to the existing body of literature on the relationship between nature-based education and resilience and to explore how this is perceived and experienced by students and families as they go into middle childhood. The study was designed to center the perceptions of participants and get accounts from children themselves on what resources they lean on in the face of discomfort and challenges, as well as the ongoing significance of connection to place and the more-than-human world. Its significance to this field of study is the combination of these features: focus on children in middle childhood and centering the perceptions of youth and parents. 7 Chapter 2 Literature Review Resilience Resilience was once considered to be a static and individualized trait. Some researchers believed individuals who led successful lives or experienced positive health outcomes despite facing adversity as children were extraordinary or invulnerable (Luthar et al., 2000; Masten, 2001). Even when access to resources, genetics, and personality were considered as possible factors in why some individuals flourish despite adversity or others suffer more greatly, resilience was often discussed as though it could not be changed once established. However, definitions and applications of resilience have shifted in the last few decades, with more researchers appearing to take a systemic lens to resilience, focusing on the interplay of multiple variables and emphasizing the role of external factors that can support or hinder the development of resilience (Miljevic-Ridicki et al., 2017). Resilience is now understood to be a complex attribute, impacted by the dynamics between physiology, psychology, and socio- ecological factors (e.g. access to social and economic resources, culture, family dynamics) (Miljevic-Ridicki et al., 2017, p. 2). Resilience research has been conducted across disciplines including urban planning, medicine, psychology, education, and ecology. Within these different contexts, there are variations in how resilience is operationalized, defined, and whether it is assessed on micro (individual) or macro (social or community) levels. Within urban planning and ecology the study of resilience has been examined under a socio-ecological lens, with studies which examined the impact of policy, environmental factors, and social support on resilience in communities and ecosystems (Adger, 2000; Holling, 1973; le Polain de Waroux et al., 2024; Masten, 2011). In contrast, resilience research within medicine and psychology historically focused on individual or familial strengths and vulnerabilities, although these perspectives also adopted an ecological lens over time (Gartland et al., 2019; Henderson et al., 2016; Levine, 2003; Masten, 2011) . 8 Resilience has also been broken down into different components: physical resilience or emotional/psychological resilience and the factors which promote either types of resilience may be biological, environmental, or personal (Miljevic-Ridicki et al., 2017). In a systematic review of research on resilience in development, Matsen (2001) describes resilience, not as an extraordinary trait that only exists in certain children, but rather as a collection of resources, processes, and traits which support adaptation in the face of adversity. Matsen (2001) referenced two studies, conducted by Luthar (1991) and Matsen, et al. (1999, 2001) which examined both high- and low-adversity groups of youth and their levels of “competence”. Matsen et al. (1999) (as cited in Matsen, 2001) indicated an overlap in psychosocial resources for resilient (high adversity, high competence) youth and their peers who had high competence and low adversity. Meanwhile, youth identified as “maladaptive” (high adversity, low competence) lacked these resources. The number of youth who were identified with low competence and low adversity was negligible, which further highlights the significance of resources in promoting competence and resilience. The psychosocial resources highlighted within these two studies were categorized as parenting quality, socioeconomic status, intellectual functioning, and positive self-concept. Matsen (2001) concluded that “maladaptive profiles emerge when adversity is high and protective resources are weak” (p. 233). Resilience has come to be understood as a collection of phenomena which are influenced by a variety of internal and external factors. Miljevic-Ridicki et al. (2017) conducted a mixed-methods study with teachers, caregivers, and children of a kindergarten to examine their concepts of resilience, which found a difference in how teachers and caregivers assess children’s resilience. Teacher assessment was focused more broadly on the context of classroom dynamics, mastery, and self-advocacy, while parents focused on their individual child’s social and emotional competence, well-being, and growth. They also typically perceived their children to have a higher level of resilience than 9 teachers. The present study focused on psychological resilience, defined here as “positive adaptation in the face of risk and adversity” (Masten, 2011 in Wortsman et al., 2024, p. 2), which evidence suggests has long term impacts on physical, mental, and social wellbeing (Zimmerman, 2013). An Integrated Resilience Model Following a meta-synthesis of 21 Resilience scales, Wadi et al. (2020) proposed an integrated model for resilience which described the construct as a combination of traits, processes, and outcomes, which are changeable, dependent on both internal and external resources. Their integrated model for resilience is discussed in the context of an organization and for supporting healthcare professionals. However, all the tools used to develop it apply to individuals and their themes are relevant on an individual level. To develop this model, the researchers analyzed 21 existing scales which evaluated resilience and identified specific constructs within the tool. These tools were designed for people across fields and age groups from 12 years-of-age to adulthood. In their thematic analysis, researchers identified attributes which fit within four broader themes: control, involvement, growth, and resourceful. In the context of this study, the Integrated Resilience Model (Figure 1) was used as a guiding framework to build instruments and guide questions. This model was selected because of its basis on numerous other resilience scales and the clarity with which it categorized different aspects of resilience. The integrated resilience model puts these four traits in the context of internal and external conditions and present and future states. Internal conditions are factors which can be affected by an individual or organization, while external conditions are things outside an organization or individual, which are influential but often outside their control. A present state refers to the current setting, while the future state refers to future settings. These constructs are connected to these contexts in varying ways. 10 Figure 1. Integrated Resilience Model Developed by Wadi et al. (2020) Control Wadi et al. (2020) defined control as “being composed and controlled under stressful adversity” (p. 14) and indicated that it is influenced by the present state and internal conditions. This was the most common theme across each of the scales and included attributes such as an internal locus of control, self-esteem, humor, emotional regulation, interpersonal warmth and insight, and composure. Wadi et al. (2020) indicated that the theme “control” is influenced by internal conditions, which in reference to an individual refers to the cognitive, emotional, and physical resources of an individual and their internal experiences. The attributes under control, such as emotional regulation may act as protective mechanisms when faced with adversity (Mestre eta l., 2017). Mestre et al. (2017) conducted a study on suburban adolescents examining the relationship between emotional regulation and resilience and found that emotional regulation ability (ERA) had a significant positive relationship to resilience. While ERA of adolescents were not fully developed, results indicated 11 that a higher ERA score was associated with greater resilience, and ERA was found to be a protective mechanism in the face of adversity, improving an adolescent’s perception of their ability to adapt to stressful experiences based on their ability to manage and regulate their emotions (Mestre et al., 2017). The type of interaction between these attributes and resilience may vary depending on context or the specific attribute itself. Self-esteem, for instance, has been indicated as a protective factor of resilience in some studies, while others implicate resilience as a promoting factor of self-esteem (Liu et al., 2021). Growth Growth is defined as “being able to keep growing and bouncing back stronger from adversity” (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). This is very similar to early definitions of resilience itself (Masten, 2018), demonstrating how this integrated model broadens the construct of resilience. This theme is influenced by internal conditions, but bound to the future state, as growth is an ongoing process. Attributes associated with growth were empowerment, strengthening effect of stress, goals/goal setting and aspiration, vision, and coping and adaptation. Research conducted with adolescents has found that specific, adaptive coping skills are positively and significantly associated with increased resilience. Positive coping skills and positive reappraisal are both associated with resilience (Folkman and Moskowitz (2000) in Mestre et al., 2017). Mestre et al. (2017) found a significant positive correlation between coping skills such as positive refocusing and refocus on planning. Coping skills such as positive reappraisal was also found to be correlated with perceived resilience (Mestre et al., 2017) and this is further validated by the meta-synthesis conducted by Wadi et al. (2020), which found confident optimism and positive acceptance of change to be attributes shared across themes. These themes may be interdependent, with skills in one theme facilitating the use of skills in another. Cognitive flexibility, a core process of executive function, facilitates the use of cognitive reappraisal (Malooley et al., (2013), in Shields et al., 2017). In a study which examined the relationship between executive function under stress and health outcomes, Shields et al. 12 (2020) found that perceptions of the level of stressfulness appeared to mediate the relationship between stress and health outcomes. This could provide further support for the roles of confident optimism and positive reappraisal in promoting resilience. The ability to positively reappraise or take an optimistic view of difficult situations could be connected to lower perceptions of level of stressfulness. The attribute identified as the “strengthening effect of stress” appears similar to the concept of eustress, or “good stress”. O’Sullivan (2011) defines eustress as “the process of responding positively to stress as well as the positive outcome of this process” (in Mesurado et al., 2016). Eustress is utilized in adventure education and wilderness therapy contexts to promote self-efficacy and resilience (Kraft & Cornelius-White, 2020; Merenda, 2021). Eustress differs from adversity because it indicates a level of stress which promotes positive and productive performance, up to an optimal level (Le Fevre et al. 2003, p. 729 in O’Sullivan, 2011). Researchers such as Le Fevre view eustress as connected to perception or interpretation of stressful events. Again, this appears to relate to some of the shared attributes identified by Wadi et al. (2020) including positive optimism and self-efficacy. If individuals have a positive view of stressors and they have the internal resources to cope with this stress, it can be viewed more as a positive challenge which enhances performance. Resourceful Researchers described the theme resourceful as “being able to find appropriate solutions from available resources to deal with adversity (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). This theme is influenced by external conditions and is bound to the future state. While there are several internal conditions which may influence resourcefulness, it is dependent on available resources for an individual or organization to practice this. Some attributes exclusive to resourceful included personal competence and strength, creativity, problem solving, social resources and support, and novelty seeking. Involvement 13 Involvement is defined as “being committed to deal with the adversity” (Wadi et al., 2020, p. 14). The researchers determined that this theme existed in the context of the present state and was influenced by external conditions. Attributes exclusive to this theme include commitment, perseverance, tenacity, and structured style/personal structure. However, the way that involvement is defined shares similarities with the construct of grit, which can be defined as “passion and perseverance for long-term goals that drives individuals to work through challenges, including failure and adversity, over a sustained period of time” (Duckworth et al., 2007, in Whitfield & Wilby, 2021). Grit is sometimes described as an independent construct from resilience (rather than a contributing factor), related to psychological endurance. Passion, motivation, and interest are key components of grit (Biggs et al., 2023). Shared Attributes While each theme included attributes considered exclusive to that theme, there were 19 attributes which were shared between themes (Wadi et al., 2020). These included attributes such as confidence, self-efficacy, confident optimism, initiative, self-control, positive future and orientation, social competence, challenge, and positive acceptance of change (See Figure 2). 14 Figure 2. Table of Thematic findings for Resilience Domains from Wadi et al. (2020) Indeed, many of these attributes have been extensively considered and studied within resilience literature. In a pilot study conducted by Ernst and Burcak (2019), teachers and parents reported significant growth in children’s self-regulation and initiative after completing an academic year at a nature-based preschool. Additionally, the construct of self-efficacy was positively associated with greater levels of sustained engagement (Rodrıguez-Sanchez, Salanova, Cifre, and Schaufeli, 2011 in Mesurado et al., 2016). Self-efficacy has been tied to hope and eustress experiences, as well. There is also considerable overlap between attributes and skills associated with executive functioning. 15 Resilience and Executive Function Literature on resilience has often examined the role of executive function (Afek et al., 2021; Shields et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2019). Many of the themes identified in Wadi’s Integrated Resilience Model have attributes associated with executive functioning skills, such as self-control, emotional regulation, perseverance, and goal setting. Executive functioning is a set of cognitive processes required to achieve tasks which require sustained attention and planning (Diamond, 2013). There are three core primary processes to executive functioning: inhibition, working memory, and cognitive flexibility (Diamond, 2013). These core processes are interdependent, requiring appropriate function and skill in one process to effectively execute another process. Inhibitory control skills include directed attention, self-control, and emotional regulation; inhibitory control allows people to be intentional with their choices rather than reactive to impulses. Inhibitory control can influence working memory because of the need for directing attention and filtering out irrelevant stimuli. Working memory refers to one’s ability to work with information that is no longer presently available. There are two content areas of working memory: verbal and visual-spatial (Diamond 2013). Good working memory is likewise required for inhibitory control because a person must be able to hold and evaluate relevant information while filtering out irrelevant information to achieve tasks. Cognitive flexibility, the latest of these core executive functioning processes to develop, is dependent on both effective working memory and inhibitory control (Diamond, 2013). Cognitive flexibility is what allows people to change perspectives spatially, interpersonally, and intellectually; cognitive flexibility is the core of creative thinking. These cognitive processes align with traits of self-regulation, emotional regulation, creativity, problem solving, and goal setting outlined by Wad et al. (2020). Executive functioning has been studied across contexts for its significant role in promoting resilience. Wells (2021) proposed a mediator-moderator model of resilience, building from the models previously developed by Masten (Masten 2014, in Wells 2021). As Wells outlined this model, they 16 illustrated the significance of executive functioning when faced with risk or adversity. Each of the studies examined by Wells found that executive function and cognitive ability reduced (moderated) the impact of risks to health and wellbeing such as socioeconomic status, family risk factors, social challenges, and emotional distress (Flouri et al., 2014; Bridger & Daly, 2017 in Wells, 2021). Wells also referred to longitudinal studies which found cognitive ability and traits associated with executive functioning (self -control, problem-solving skills, emotional regulation, and planfulness) to moderate the relationship between risk factors and adaptive or maladaptive outcomes (Matsen, 2014 in Wells, 2021). Research indicates that stress and adversity may inhibit executive function skills (Alexander et al., 2007; Holmes & Wellman, 2009, in Shields et al., 2017). However, it is the executive function skills displayed under acute or chronic stress which relate to better stress- related health outcomes and lower perceptions of stress-severity (Shields et al., 2017). Given the significance of executive function processes in supporting resilience, health, and well-being, it is important to identify means to strengthen executive function skills to improve maintenance when faced with stress, such as transitioning to a new school environment. Zhang et al. (2019) conducted a study with Chinese adolescents which examined the relationship between executive functioning, resilience, and school adjustment. Their findings indicated a positive correlation between the three factors. Researchers such as Wells (2021) have found, resilience plays a “mediating” role between stressful life events and positive or negative outcomes. This means that levels of resilience could provide an explanation for why some individuals experience more success than others, despite facing stressful or adverse experiences. The study conducted by Zhang also found that executive functioning also serves as a mediator of resilience. Higher levels of executive functioning skills are associated with more developed resilience (Zhang et al., 2019). When stressful life events threaten the development and maintenance of executive functioning skills, this may reduce overall resilience to adversity. 17 Benefits of Nature Exposure There is a breadth of research on the psychological benefits of exposure to nature in a variety of doses, settings, and levels of engagement. Two prominent theories that examine the benefits of time in nature are Stress Reduction Theory (Ulrich, 1991) and Attention Restoration Theory (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989). These theories are especially relevant because resilience studies have highlighted the benefits of stress reduction and executive functioning (which attention is one piece of) as key pieces of psychological resilience. Stress Reduction Theory Stress Reduction Theory was proposed by Ulrich (1991), who posits that natural environments reduce the psychological and physiological impacts of stress. A study was conducted comparing stress recovery in urban and natural environments and found that natural settings were more restorative both based on physiological data and self-report data (Ulrich et al., 1991). Additional research has also supported these findings, suggesting that exposure to nature following a stressful event aids in recovery and improves mental well-being. (Marselle et al., 2019). Attention Restoration Theory Attention restoration theory (ART) was first proposed by Kaplan and Kaplan in 1989, who provided one possible pathway to explain the benefits of nature. Attention restoration theory suggests that time in natural spaces reduces mental fatigue and improves directed attention (Jiang et al., 2021). For an environment to be considered restorative, it typically includes four primary features: being away, extent, fascination, and compatibility (Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989; S. Kaplan and Talbot, 1983 in Jiang et al., 2021). A restorative environment captures a person’s attention, immerses them in the setting, produces a sense of “soft fascination”, and is something the person can connect to in some way (Jiang et al., 2021). The concept of “soft fascination” is key in ART, as it is the effortless interest and attention which 18 relieves a person’s mental fatigue, allowing their brain to rest without demanding directed attention. Researchers note that built environments may also be restorative in nature, but Kaplan and Kaplan posit that natural environments provide a peak restorative experience (Herzog et al. 2010; Kaplan and Berman 2010; Kaplan and Kaplan 1989 in Ohly et al., 2016). A meta-analysis of 31 studies revealed some mixed results in this debate, with approximately two-thirds of the reviewed studies providing evidence that the natural environment does indeed improve attention and memory in certain tasks more so than non-natural restorative environments (Ohly et al., 2016). While further research is needed to continue exploring this topic, evidence supports the idea that a restorative natural environment can improve attention and reduce mental fatigue. Child Development There are studies which suggest that resilience may be cultivated more easily at certain developmental periods, such as during preschool years (Masten & Barnes, 2018), as well as during late adolescence and early adulthood (Masten, 2015 in Masten and Barnes, 2018). During preschool years, children show great neuroplasticity and this is a key period for them to develop executive function (EF) skills (Zelazo, Blair, and Willoughby, 2016 and Zelazo and Carlson, 2012 in Masten and Barnes, 2018). Resilience development can be facilitated through interventions designed to increase executive function skills (Zelazo, Blair, and Willoughby,2 016 and Zelazo and Carlson, 2012 in Masten and Barnes, 2018). and build distress tolerance (sometimes called stress inoculation in animal studies) through limited exposure to adversity (Lyons and Parker, 2007 and Parker and Maestripieri, 2011 in Masten and Barnes, 2018, p. 7). Ernst et al. (2019) conducted a study examining resilience among nature-based, mixed, and non-nature-based preschool children. For this study, they utilized the Devereux Early Childhood Assessment for Preschoolers, Second Edition (LeBuffe & Naglieri, 2012 in Ernst et al., 2019) which was designed to assess initiative, self-regulation and attachment, which are protective factors associated with resilience. These protective factors can be tied into the four 19 themes outlined in the Integrated Resilience Model developed by Wadi et al., (2020), where initiative may be connected to “resourceful” and “involvement”, self-regulation may tie to “control”, and attachment/relationships may tie to “control” as well as cover many of the attributes identified as common across each theme. The findings of the study indicated that nature preschools support children’s social emotional development and self-regulation in both school and home settings. These results were significant beyond those of quality, non-nature preschools that also utilized methods such as play-based learning. Ernst et al. (2019) outlined how the greater level of independence given to children in nature-based preschool settings, including permitting play further from teachers within established boundaries, leads to more reliance on themselves and their peers for problem solving and greater creativity in play. Chawla (2015) completed a review of the benefits of nature exposure to children indicated in previous research. Within this review, Chawla adapted Nussbaum’s (2011) “Ten Central Capabilities”, originally developed to categorize what abilities contribute human flourishing, to be applied within a child development context. Chawla then applied findings from the existing body of literature on the benefits of nature access to this modified framework. Benefits included physical well-being due to improved motor coordination and balance, more physical activity, and vitamin D production. They also highlighted emotional well-being through the development of place attachments, cooperative social play, and connection to nature. Chawla also highlighted other aspects of cognitive development such as improved self- regulation and directed attention, creative thinking, and resourcefulness (Chawla, 2015). Chawla also addressed the significance of children’s special places during middle childhood years based Cobb’s (1959) theory that children during middle childhood need a “place to discover a self” which was applied by David Sobel in his work examining children’s place- making practices. Access to nature and the creation of independent “special places” may be a fundamental part of development in both early and middle childhood. 20 Place-based Education Place based education is a locally focused, experiential education pedagogy (Yemini et al., 2023). There are five primary characteristics identified within place-based education (Smith, 2002 within Temini et al., 2023) including specific, problem/solution-focused basis of learning, students create knowledge (McInerney et al., 2011; Smith, 2002; Wattchow & Brown, 2011 in Yemini et al., 2023)., students are encouraged to become active participants in their community, teachers become guides while students direct learning (Beames & Ross, 2010; Lieberman & Hoody, 1998; Smith, 2002; Smith, 2007; Wattchow & Brown, 2011 in Yemini et al., 2023), and scaffold learning from local contexts to global trends (Gruenewald, 2003 in Yemini et al., 2023). A broadly accepted framework of place-based education identifies four dimensions of place which include the biophysical (environmental context), psychological, socio-cultural, and political-economical (Ardoin, 2006; Ardoin et al., 2012 in Yemini et al., 2023), which outline what aspects of place may be the subject of study. Meanwhile, a recent framework connected to the one developed by Ardoin is focused on four different dimensions of learning were identified as learning in place, study of the place, learning from the place, and learning for the sake of the place (Granit-Dgani, 2021 in Yemini et al., 2023). David Sobel outlines seven nature-based education design principles for educators to use when creating lessons and programs. These principles include Adventure, Fantasy and Imagination, Animal Allies, Maps and Paths, Special Places, Small Worlds, and Hunting and Gathering (Sobel, 2008). As previously noted, children’s connection to place and the creation of “special places” are key aspects of their development and well-being. Sobel outlines special places increase in importance as children enter middle childhood and begin to develop a sense of self outside of family identity. Sobel describes childhood special places almost as though they are a refuge from the world and a place where children are free to explore, grow, and observe independently. Research exploring how children relate to place highlighted how it can cultivate emotional wellbeing through attachment or connection to place and through the agency these 21 independent places provide (Moore et al., 2021). Researchers posit that the agency children possess in special places cultivates self-efficacy and confidence due to their abilities to direct their play within the environment. They also suggest that children’s attachment to a place contributes to their ability to feel at ease in that setting, as they become familiar and comfortable with their environment (Moore et al., 2021). Nature-based Preschools Nature-based preschools often follow a set of guidelines to inform their best practices regarding built and natural environmental features, pedagogy, and curriculum. The Natural Start Alliance provides an overview of these guidelines. For their curriculum and teaching, they encourage “fostering both whole-child development and environmental literacy” (Natural Start Alliance, n.d.). They encourage emergent, play-based curriculum, seasonal and place-based learning opportunities, and viewing teachers as co-learners alongside children. They also support children’s independence by providing guidance and opportunities for children to build conflict-resolution skills, safety evaluation skills, and including children in assessments and documenting their own progress as they grow, to name a few (Natural Start Alliance, n.d.) Nature-based preschools may vary in their level of “nature-ness” and Ernst et al. (2021) developed a rubric to evaluate the amount of this nature-ness within preschools, which differentiated features between nature-based, blended, and traditional preschools. In nature- based preschools, instructional focus included developing nature connection, sense of place and respect for nature, as well as Kindergarten preparation. Nature-based schools are also more likely to focus on child-directed nature play, respect for nature and others, independent/child-led conflict-resolution, and feature a combination of natural settings and built (but natural-focused) play spaces, compared to traditional preschools. These features of nature- based preschools may contribute to the promotion of resilience by encouraging healthy social emotional development in youth. 22 As described in this literature review, resilience is a dynamic process and many factors play a role in the development of resilience among youth, as well as how they navigate future challenges and adversity. Nature has been shown to play a role in children’s development, including the promotion of resilience and its related attributes. This study examines the potential role of nature-based preschools in this process, as well as the lasting impacts participation may have on children and their families. 23 Chapter 3 Methodology This section will provide an explanation of the design of this study, the methods for data collection, and the strengths and limitations of this process. This study was designed to center participant perception and to add to the existing body of knowledge on resilience in development, within the context of a nature-based program. The methodology section will provide information on why the selected design and collection methods were the best fit given the context and resources of this study. Although true replication is not feasible for single case studies, relevant participant information, recruitment methods, nature program background, and the methods used for analysis will also be detailed within this section. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study was to explore teacher, caregiver, and student perceptions of how psychological resilience continues to develop in alumni of a nature-based preschool. Additionally, the aim was to explore the ways in which nature may play a role in supporting traits associated with resilience, if it continued to be utilized by alumni and their families after graduating from the preschool program. Research Questions This study sought to answer the following research questions: 1. What are teachers’ and caregivers’ perceptions of the effects of a nature-based preschool on a child’s psychological resilience? 2. What factors do children, teachers, and caregivers identify as influential in the continued promotion of psychological resilience? 3. How might children continue to utilize skills and attitudes taught through nature preschool experiences to cope with adversity in middle childhood? 24 Strategy of Inquiry The research questions were examined through a single case qualitative study. A single case study may use a variety of methods but will focus on one subject, which may be a program, group, organization, or individual (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In this case, the subject was a single nature-based preschool located in Minnesota, which has been operating for over ten years and has a strong network of alumni families. Participants were former students and their parents, as well as the lead guide and founder of the school (identified as the Guide). The study explored research questions through interviews, focus groups, and Draw, Write, Tell activities with participants. The Draw, Write, Tell method was modified for use with youth participants between the ages of six and twelve years old, which roughly constitutes middle childhood years (CDC, 2021; Mah & Ford-Jones, 2012). Case Study Background Case studies have been conducted across disciplines, including psychology, public health, and anthropology (Creswell, 2013). Case studies are used to explore a topic in depth, to gain a breadth of perspectives and are often beneficial early in the study of a topic. They are often used to investigate or address a specific challenge to one “case” or multiple cases. Creswell (2013) notes that while some researchers view case studies solely as a subject of study (the case that is being studied using a variety of possible research methods), other researchers view it as a methodology wherein a single case, or multiple cases, are studied from multiple perspectives. This may include focus groups, interviews, reviews of artifacts, and more. Case study research may be quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods depending on the research question and capacity. This study utilized a qualitative approach in order to explore the topic and center the voices and experiences of participants. Methodological Fit There is a growing body of research which examines how access to and engagement with nature improves physical and mental well-being and promotes resilience (Ingulli & 25 Lindbloom, 2013; Marselle et al., 2019; Wells, 2021). Additionally, research indicates that psychological resilience can be promoted early in life through participation in nature-based preschools and free play (Ernst et al., 2021; Ernst et al., 2019). However, limited research could be found which examined how the skills and attitudes promoted through nature-based preschools continue to develop once youth have graduated from the program. It was important to the researcher to seek multiple perspectives on this topic to gain a better understanding of how it impacts students and their caregivers. Due to the exploratory nature of this topic and the complexity of the perspectives of various participant groups (teachers, caregivers, and students), these questions were examined through a case study. This allowed an in-depth examination of the topic and provided opportunities to explore perceptions around psychological resilience from multiple perspectives. Setting The nature-based preschool examined in this study was selected due to its local significance as one of the first nature-based preschools within the community. This program was established in 2011, providing over a decade of former students and parents as potential research participants. Much of the research conducted on nature-based preschools examined current impacts, but there is limited follow-up on any long-lasting influences from this experience with students and caregivers post-graduation. Additionally, this nature-based preschool prioritizes accessibility and inclusion in its program design and teacher facilitation of learning. The preschool featured maintained trails that could be traversed by wheelchairs or walkers and the lead teacher utilizes sign language in all interactions with children. The school strives to prioritize diversity in race, socioeconomic status, and diversity and offers needs-based scholarships. Although it is beyond the scope of this study, to explore in depth, these priorities were significant because diversity, equity, and inclusion are especially important in outdoor spaces due to a history of explicit and implicit exclusion of people of color and people with disabilities (Armstrong & Greene, 2022; Groulx et 26 al., 2022). Preschool and childcare are an economic burden on families, with families devoting an average of 13% of their income to childcare fees, or an estimated $930 per month (U.S. Department of Treasury, 2024). Nature-based schools also require appropriate equipment and gear to spend time outdoors in all weather, which may be cost-prohibitive for some families. The school within this study provides rain and snow suits for children attending the nature preschool, relieving some potential burden of accessing the outdoors. The cost of attending this school is equivalent to that of other high-quality preschool programs within the region. As previously described, the nature preschool within this study has a high degree of nature-ness within the rubric outlined by Ernst (2021). Children spend the majority of the day outside, even napping outside in hammocks or a yurt. The school implements place-based education through the experiential learning opportunities that arise from guided lessons and independent exploration. Children are taught at this nature school to think of “nature as relatives” and the more-than-human world is viewed as a relative to get to know and understand (Lead Guide, personal conversation, July 12, 2024), which is a concept tied to Indigenous values, including the Anishinaabe people local to this region (MacNeill, 2020 in Niigaaniin & MacNeill, 2022; Shawanda, 2023). The nature preschool utilizes child-directed learning and free play as the primary educational model (Lead Guide, personal conversation, July 12, 2024). The preschool adopts an emergent curriculum and encourages child-directed play throughout the day, while the preschool Guide provides scaffolding as needed to support learning, problem-solving, and the development of new skills (Nature Program Guide, personal conversation, October 28, 2024). Children are empowered to problem-solve independently and ask friends for help, although a Guide is always available to engage when needed. Research suggests that child-directed free play supports children’s development in several areas, including executive function, social and emotional development, and academic readiness (Kausar et al., 2024; Ramani, 2012). These benefits are increased further in areas such as language acquisition when adults are available 27 to scaffold play (Wasik & Jacobi-Vessels, 2017). The nature-based preschool was selected as the site of this research project for its values of inclusivity, connections to years of alumni families to recruit for participation, and evidence-based programming. Participants This study focused on alumni of a nature-based preschool program located in a midsize Minnesota city, with a population of about 280,000 when including the greater metro area This nature-based preschool has been in operation since 2011 and has alumni who are now aged between five and fifteen years old. This study focused on alumni in middle childhood, from six to twelve years of age, although one participant was slightly older (fourteen). The age group was limited due to the differences between children and adolescents across developmental stages (Children & Collins, 1984). Middle childhood has been referred to as the “forgotten years” by past researchers (Mah & Ford-Jones, 2012), as much of the existing research focuses on early childhood or adolescence. Gartland et al. (2019) stated that there is limited research on ways to support resilience within middle childhood years. Therefore, this case study aimed to add to research on middle childhood, while examining the continuing role of nature in psychological resilience. Table 1. Participant Overview Participant Overview Total Families 9 Number of Adult Participants 10 Number of Youth Participants 11 Nature Program Attendance Survey A brief survey (see Appendix C) was distributed to focus group and interview participants to gather information regarding their child’s age, time spent attending the nature preschool, and if they have attended further nature-based programming such as school forests or summer 28 camps. This was to gather additional information about how the child and family engage with nature and outdoor-focused programs once they enter grade school. The majority of participants had children who attended the nature preschool between 2021 and 2023, although there were families with slightly older children who attended between 2012 and 2014 as well as between 2015 and 2017 and 2018 and 2020. Three families had preschool-age children who were currently enrolled at the preschool. Two families reported that their children continued to attend a nature-focused community school. Four families reported that their children attended a nature-based or science-focused summer camp. One family reported their child attended an after school nature club twice a week. Four families reported that their children did not attend any other nature-based camps, clubs, or schools, although one of these families indicated that their child attended the nature school’s summer camp one year. Table 2. Participant Ties to Nature Preschool and Other Outdoor Programs School Years Attended Current Children Enrolled Other Nature School/Camp Experiences 2012-2014 No Summer Camp Community School 2015 - 2017 2018 - 2020 Yes Science Summer Camp 2021 - 2022 Yes Summer Camp 2021 - 2022 No None 2021 - 2023 No After School Nature Club 2021 - 2023 No None 2020 - 2021 Summer 2022 No None 2021 Yes None 2021 - 2023 No Summer Camp Community School 29 Researcher’s Role It is important to address how my experience, potential biases, and relationship to the research topic may have influenced my role as the researcher in this qualitative study. Outside of the academic world, my connection to the topic of resilience and nature existed indirectly through personal and professional experiences, which showed me how nature experiences can be used to improve mindfulness, emotional regulation, self-efficacy, and physical activity. I have experience as a behavioral health case manager, where my primary duties included providing psychoeducation and teaching coping skills, guiding activities, and working with diverse populations. While I do not have significant experience in group facilitation, I have training and experience in navigating difficult topics, redirecting discussions effectively, and maintaining emotional safety. I connected with the founder and guide of this Nature Preschool in my first year of the graduate program as a teaching assistant. The purpose of the visit was to conduct a site observation of children at different local nature preschools to conduct observations and discuss nature-based pedagogies. I found the model, teaching philosophy, and setting of this nature preschool to be unique and I requested to participate in more observational visits and stayed in contact with the Lead Guide. I reached out to this nature preschool to discuss my research interests and determine if they would be an appropriate fit, potentially beneficial to the program, and if the families may be open and available to participate. This nature preschool had input on the fit of the research questions and facilitated communication with alumni families. They helped distribute virtual surveys to gather participant interest and availability prior to data collection. In December of 2023, I was invited to attend a solstice celebration which included current and alumni families. I was able to observe the celebration, gaining a sense of the community and begin building rapport with a few parents of current attendees. While the research will be conducted with alumni families, seeing the groups interact as a whole could influence my lens as a researcher and is worth noting. Through my observations prior to beginning this study, I 30 have developed a sense of the closeness of this nature preschool community, observed parent and child interactions, and learned about the interests of parents and the Guide. Data Collection Procedures A primary goal of this study was to gather a range of perspectives from program participants and their parents. For this reason, data collection for this study included interviews and focus groups with parents, as well as an art activity modeled after the Draw, Write, Tell method for youth alumni. The Draw, Write, Tell activity gave youth the option to draw a response to questions and either write their explanation or verbally share it with the researcher. Following data collection from alumni families, an interview with the Guide was conducted to gather insight on their professional observations, their guiding pedagogy, and to reflect on the anonymous results from participants. Parents discussed their children’s behaviors related to the four primary themes Control, Resourceful, Growth, and Involvement (Wadi et al., 2020). The researcher provided information on the attributes within each category and provided a copy of the table for reference. Focus Groups and Interviews Focus groups included two to four participants and were recorded using a university audio recorder. Focus group sizes were smaller than anticipated due to the time of year for data collection and participant availability. Interviews were also conducted with parent-participants to achieve a higher participation rate. Focus groups and interviews were semi-structured with open-ended questions, allowing participants to address topics that may not be initially covered in the guiding questions. A copy of the guiding questions for the focus groups and interviews may be referenced in Appendix D. All data collection occurred at the nature preschool after hours. This allowed for some flexibility with parents, providing a safe space for youth to play while their parents continued the interview or focus group discussions. It also was a familiar and accessible space that was believed to be the easiest for participants to access. 31 Table 3. Table on Focus Group and Interview Attendance Data Collection Type Number of Participants Focus Group 3 Adults (2 Families), 4 Youth Interview 1 Adult, 1 Youth Focus Group 2 Adults (2 Families), 2 Youth Interview 1 Adult, 1 Youth Focus Group 3 Adults (2 Families), 3 Youth Strengths One strength of utilizing focus groups was the efficiency in gathering qualitative data from participants (Robson and McCarten, 2011, p. 299). Due to the scope and time constraints of this project, gathering input from participants in an efficient manner was important. Focus groups provided an opportunity for rich feedback from participants, due to their ability to connect with other parents and discuss their experiences. Caregivers were able to build off the stories or thoughts of other participants, which led to more detailed responses. It also provided time for participants to reflect thoughtfully on constructs that required more time for them to craft a response. Both focus groups and interviews allowed participants to put their reflections into their own words (Robson and McCarten, 2011, p. 299). The semi-structured nature of the focus group and interviews also allowed participants to share stories and examples, providing opportunities for new insights to come out that went beyond the initial questions. Many of the participants were familiar with one another. They all had at least a small amount of rapport built, even if their children did not attend the nature preschool during the same years, which made stimulating discussions easier. Focus groups and interviews were conducted in person on this nature preschool grounds, which was a familiar and accessible place for all potential participants, adults and youth. 32 Limitations and Delimitations There were three primary limitations within this focus group and interview design. First, the information gathered from focus groups and interviews cannot be considered generalizable. The participants within this study only represent their own perceptions and experiences and cannot be considered representative of the broader nature-preschool population due to convenience sampling, the small sample size, and the semi-structured nature of the discussions. Participants discussed their perceptions and experiences and, while a thematic analysis has been conducted, there still may be other alumni families with experiences and observations contradictory or not represented within the focus groups and interviews (Robson and McCarten, 2011, p. 302). Second, many of the participants were quite familiar with each other. Adult participants were parents of children who attended this nature preschool at similar times and the school maintains a tight-knit community of alumni families. While Krueger and Casey (2000) warned against having focus groups participants who are familiar with one another (Robson and McCarten, 2011, p. 300), this was impossible to ensure in this case study due to the small participant pool and the close-knit community. Furthermore, caregivers’ continued connection to other alumni- parents became a significant part of the analysis for this study. Community cohesion and support have been linked to resilience and life satisfaction (Gartland et al., 2019), which suggests that the closeness of current and alumni families may contribute to a sense of community and belonging, which is one feature of resilience. This will be discussed further in the results and discussion sections. The third major limitation of this design was the small sample size of this single-case study. No other nature-based or non-nature-based groups were recruited for this study. This was due to the feasibility and timeline of recruitment. The results of this study, while they may add to the broader body of knowledge regarding continued resilience development, are not generalizable and themes identified are based on the perceptions of alumni from one program. Further studies 33 would be recommended to gather more understanding of how or why these themes emerged in context. Protocol 1. Recruitment a. A digital survey was distributed by the Guide of this nature preschool to gather potential interest and availability for focus groups as part of a research project. Potential participants were informed that the topics were related to resilience and nature preschools. b. Interested participants responded via a Google Poll to select dates and times that would best fit their schedule. The researcher sent emails to interested participants to further coordinate specific focus groups and interviews. c. Recruitment began in late May of 2024. Focus groups, Interviews, and Draw, Write, Tell activities were conducted through the month of June. d. Consent was obtained from participants at the time of data collection for both adult and child participants. Even when parental consent was provided for youth participants, they only participated in the Draw, Write, Tell activity if they assented themselves. e. Consent forms were kept in a secure location upon signing and digitized for long term storage in accordance with university data privacy protocol. 2. Focus Groups and Interviews a. Focus groups were conducted with two to four participants. While some researchers recommend a quantity of six to ten participants (Adler et al., 2019), these focus groups were open to a smaller group size in anticipation of caregiver schedules and availability. A valuable and in-depth discussion still arose from these smaller groups, as well as the interviews conducted. 3. Contingency Plans 34 a. Due to the limited availability of potential participants, interviews were conducted to supplement the focus groups which did occur. Focus group size was reduced from four-to-eight to two-to-four to accommodate schedules. 4. Focus Group and Interview Time Commitment a. Focus groups and Interviews were thirty to fifty minutes long. This was to accommodate participant schedules and due to the lower number of participants in each focus group. 5. Recording and Transcription a. Consent to be recorded was included in the consent forms (See Appendix B), signed by participants. Verbal consent was also obtained by the researcher before proceeding. Any questions were discussed and the process was outlined to ensure informed consent. b. After consent was received by parents, verbal child assent was obtained by the researcher. Children were informed that participation was their choice and the number of prompts they responded to was up to them. Clarification was provided by the research and youth participants’ parents as needed. c. A university recording device was used to record interviews. This device was cleared of recordings once transcribed. d. The researcher took notes at significant points of interest within the focus group, noting the times for reference. e. Transcription was completed by Otter.AI, an online transcription service, and validated by the researcher. f. Any identifiers were changed in transcription before analysis began to protect anonymity. 6. Location a. Focus groups were conducted on site at the nature preschool outside. 35 Potential Risks and Mitigation There was limited risk in the focus group and interviews. It is generally recommended that participants not know one another due to the potential for biased responses as a result of participant desire to present in the best possible light to their peers (Bergen & Labonté, 2020; Creswell, 2013; Teufel-Shone & Williams, 2010). Due to their connection as parents of former and current nature school attendees, most participants knew each other. However, questions were structured predominantly from a strengths-based lens and the familiarity between participants appeared to stimulate discussion due to shared experiences and philosophies. There was the potential for participant emotional discomfort due to reflecting on adverse, challenging, or stressful experiences regarding their children. The strengths-based orientation of the questions was designed to encourage examination of supportive internal and external resources, rather than the adverse experiences themselves. The primary topics of these focus groups were on perceptions on how their youth have continued to practice specific skills associated with resilience, their community, and what role nature continues to play in their family life or the life of their child. Reflections on challenges were brief and the facilitator directed the questions toward strengths-based approaches and what external resources (community, family support, recreation, etc.) appeared to alleviate distress in youth if they did not yet have internal resources to independently manage challenges. Although preparations were taken, these concerns did not appear to be an issue during these small focus groups and interviews. Caregiver Focus Group and Interview Questions The focus group questions were informed by the four dimensions from the Integrated Resilience Model (Wadi et al., 2020). During the analysis of these questions, executive function was also considered, as it has a large overlap with many of the attributes identified by Wadi et al. (2020). Executive function skills could be tied implicitly into both defined dimensions, as well as through the “shared traits” category that Wadi et al. (2020) include in the model. The aim of 36 these questions was to develop a picture of where alumni youth appear to thrive or need additional support and if themes around nature and community serve as supports. (See Appendix D). Guide Interview The only teacher interview was with the Lead Guide of this nature preschool. This was a semi-structured interview to hear their observations of student dynamics, explore the pedagogies used at this nature preschool, and discuss their insights on the impact on enrollee families. The guide was provided with a Table 2 handout to review some attributes and skills associated with the constructs examined within the interview (See Appendix D for Interview Materials). This interview took approximately sixty minutes, with a brief introduction to the process and receiving consent before the recording began. Draw, Write, Tell The Draw, Write, Tell method was used with youth participants. Creative processing allows children more time to think about their answers and make them more comfortable in exploring the topics at hand (Gauntlett, 2004 in Angell et al., 2015). The Draw, Write, Tell method has been used often in health research, but is an effective research method across fields conducting research with youth. This method centers children’s voices in research, allowing them to use creative outlets to explore a question and describe their art in their own words. This was the guiding method for engaging youth participants, although it was adapted based on youth’s comfort with sharing feedback verbally or in writing. Youth were able to choose if they answered one or both questions asked. An approved moderator was present for the first Draw, Write, Tell activity to assist with facilitation while the researcher conducted the focus group. This moderator obtained verbal assent, provided instruction and clarification, and gave children the options of verbal, written, or both responses to the prompts in accordance with researcher instructions and protocol. The Draw, Write, Tell data collection was conducted concurrently with the parent focus 37 groups and interviews in order to limit the time commitment of participants overall. Youth participants were able to choose when they participated in the Draw, Write, Tell activity and were provided additional art materials or games to use if they completed their activity before the focus group or interview was completed. Youth were also able to go play within the outdoor classroom with caregiver permission. The Draw, Write, Tell activity provided data in the form of art created by the youth participants and verbal (audio recorded and transcribed) or written (if the youth did not want to verbally share) descriptions on what the art piece represented. Two topics were addressed through this method with youth participants. 1. What does this nature preschool mean to you? This question was left intentionally broad to allow children to create their own meaning. Does it represent community, safety, nature, play? What sticks out to kids after they leave this nature preschool? The researcher was available if children had any clarifying questions, but none were posed for this question. 2. What do you do when you are dealing with a stressful situation? (Draw a picture of what helps you feel better when you are stressed or dealing with a scary/hard/difficult situation? These could be actions you take, or people, places, or things that help you.) This question was designed to encourage youth to examine what resources they use when they are faced with adversity. This prompt was not designed to prime them to think of a specific situation or type of struggle, as what is considered an adversity to one person may not be to another. As previously discussed, the definition used for adversity within this study was left intentionally vague to allow for individual perceptions to be taken into consideration. Parents and the researcher were both available to provide clarification and support as needed. Data Analysis Procedures The qualitative data collected from each focus group, interview, and youth activity was analyzed using thematic analysis methods appropriate for case studies. The thematic analysis 38 was guided by criteria proposed by Lincoln and Guba (1985) to establish trustworthiness in qualitative analysis. The criteria include credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability (Nowell et al., 2017). Credibility Credibility refers to the accurate representation of the data, which can be recognized by other researchers or readers (Nowell et al., 2017). The primary means to establish credibility within this case study was triangulation. Input was collected from the lead teacher, alumni parents/caregivers, and alumni youth through focus groups, interviews, and Draw, Write, Tell activities. Transferability In the context of case studies, transferability refers to case-to-case transfer (Tobin & Begley, 2004 in Nowell et al., 2017) rather than true generalizability. A detailed description of the case being studied and the methods used to conduct the focus groups and interviews has been provided to promote transferability. Providing clear details on the present case allows other nature-based preschools to determine how appropriate it is to apply the findings of this study based on their perceived similarities or differences in programs. Dependability Dependability refers to the logic and clarity of the research process (Nowell et al., 2017). Koch (1994) proposed one way to demonstrate dependability is to audit the research process, which means that another researcher can readily follow the logic and decision-making process (Nowell et al., 2017). If another researcher is able to follow this logic and is supplied with the same data and context, they should be able to draw similar conclusions (Koch, 1994 in Nowell et al., 2017). To support dependability within this study, the research protocol and methods were clearly outlined, with rationale provided for the questions drawn, setting used, and participants selected. Any modifications to the Draw, Write, Tell collection methods were noted, and an explanation has been provided. Materials used in the focus group and interview can be 39 found in Appendix D, and examples from the thematic analysis may be found in Appendix E. Confirmability When credibility, transferability, and dependability are all established, confirmability follows (Guba and Lincoln, 1989, in Nowell et al., 2017). The researcher must demonstrate how their findings and conclusions are derived from the data, providing clear rationale, theoretical soundness, and replicable methods (Nowell et al., 2017). To achieve confirmability, the researcher provided clear descriptions of the methods used for data collection and subsequent qualitative analysis, and theoretical foundations to provide additional support for the conclusions and further questions drawn from the findings. Thematic Analysis Typically, thematic analysis involves six steps, outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006). Nowell et al., (2017) provided additional tips to establish trustworthiness at each stage of thematic analysis and these will be used to guide the data analysis in the present study. Prior to beginning the analysis, focus groups and interview recordings were transcribed using Otter.AI. Key quotes were highlighted for reference in the results and discussion. Once the recordings were transcribed, they were read through to check for errors. The table below outlines the phases which were utilized. Table 4. Phases of Thematic Analysis Phase Description 1. Data familiarization Conducted initial read through of the transcripts and materials. No explicit search for themes. Documentation of initial reflective and theoretical thoughts for record purposes (Nowell et al., 2017) 2. Generate initial codes Reviewed and developed initial codes. Take notes and begin drawing connections within and across data sources. 40 Utilized peer debriefing and/or researcher triangulation. Journaled and documented rationale for codes (Nowell et al., 2017) 3. Search for themes Identified themes and began the development of a diagram or map of themes (Kiger & Varpio, 2020). 4. Review themes Triangulated themes and reviewed with thesis chair to ensure accuracy. 5. Define and name themes Documented the rationale and review process for the defined themes and identified connections and divergences. 6. Produce final report Triangulated data from all gathered and assessed sources, identified overlapping themes, reviewed, and assessed disparities. The thematic analysis was done for both the focus group results and the art and feedback retrieved from youth participants in the Draw, Write, Tell activity. The flexibility of these methods allowed participants to highlight topics which were salient and meaningful to them. The results outlined in the following section represent common themes drawn from this analysis of reported perceptions of teacher, parent, and youth participants related to psychological resilience, as well as additional themes based on observations from the researcher. 41 Chapter 4 Results This section outlines the results from the parent focus groups and interviews, youth participant Draw, Write, Tell activity, and the interview with the founder and lead teacher (Guide) of the nature-based preschool. Audio recordings were transcribed using Otter.ai and reviewed for accuracy. The analysis involved listening to audio clips and reading transcripts multiple times to establish familiarity, develop thematic codes, and eventually create overarching themes in each section. Parent focus groups and interviews were reviewed as entire discussions rather than on the basis of each individual question. This was done due to the interconnected nature of the constructs discussed. Many of the attributes highlighted by participants were correlated with multiple themes within the Integrated Resilience Model outlined by Wadi et al. (2020), identified in Figure 1 under the “Shared Attributes” column. Similarly, the analysis of the interview with the Guide was also reviewed for themes as a whole, rather than searching for themes in each individual question. Since youth participants had only two questions to answer and these addressed separate topics, their responses were analyzed for themes based on individual questions. Key examples and participant quotes were selected which highlighted identified themes. Participant Review Eight alumni families participated in this study, consisting of ten adult participants and eleven youth participants. Youth participants chose whether to complete one or both of the prompts asked and chose how they provided feedback. There were nine responses to the first question and eight responses to the second question. Emerging Themes A combination of inductive and deductive coding was utilized to identify the emerging themes from the data. Caregiver participants were able to reference a list of the resilience themes and attributes identified in the Integrated Resilience Model (Wadi et al., 2020), but the 42 initial deductive coding was done without reference to this list by the researcher in order to search for additional themes. As the data collection continued, the researcher utilized inductive coding to deepen the connections to the themes and attributes identified within the Integrated Resilience Model (Wadi et al., 2020), as well as to search for more evidence of the emerging themes from initial rounds of review and coding. The table below highlights several of the themes which emerged through the thematic analysis process. Caregiver-identified strengths include attributes explicitly highlighted by participants through direct statements and examples interpreted by the researcher. Trust and security for example were identified primarily through examples and stories. For instance, not every parent stated, “my child trusts their instincts” or their friends, but instead provided a story which illustrates these attributes. Examples that parents provided of their children trusting their instincts included recognizing when they need to “take a break” and demonstrating an awareness of their internal experiences, trust in their ability to tackle new challenges, and trust in their ability to learn new things. One parent observed that their children don’t know to question their ability to do something until a friend challenges them, then the children are able to reflect and ultimately reassure themselves of their abilities to overcome challenges. Another parent provided a simple example to illustrate their child’s trust in their peers. The child had requested help with taking off their winter boots at home, and their parent asked, “How do you take off your boots at school?” They responded, “I ask a friend for help.” 43 Figure 3. Emerging Themes from Participant Data Parent Interview and Focus Groups “They’re outdoor kids” A combination of interviews and focus groups were utilized to gather information from parent-participants within this study. This allowed for a greater number of participants overall, due to scheduling constraints. Both the focus groups and the interviews included the same guiding questions and were conducted in a semi-structured style. Participants were allowed to skip any questions they did not feel comfortable answering and both participants and the interviewer were able to steer the discussion to topic areas which felt significant to the purpose of the study. 44 During most of the interviews, parents and children were together so that supervision could be provided. During one focus group, one of the Guides from the nature preschool assisted in facilitation of the Draw, Write, Tell activity and provided additional support. Typically, children were asked to complete the Draw, Write, Tell activity concurrently, although there was not a set start or end time for them. Children would take a moment to ask their parents’ permission to play in various areas of the nature school grounds, as well as at the playground next to the site. Some parents consulted the children in answering interview questions to gauge how their perception aligned with their child’s. Most families were represented by one parent for the focus group or interview, but two of the families had two parents present. The base questions for parent participants focused specifically on the primary themes from the Integrated Resilience Model (Wadi et al., 2020) which were Control, Growth, Resourceful, and Involvement. A list of example attributes was provided or read aloud to help provide examples of behaviors which may fall under these categories and parent participants were given an operational definition of them as well. Parents primarily explored the themes by focusing on these attributes and highlighting ones that they have seen their child demonstrate when faced with challenges and new experiences. The table below outlines the most prevalent attributes identified by parents, drawn from the thematic analysis (See Table 5). Table 5. Primary Attributes Observed by Parents Primary Attributes Observed by Parents Confidence Leadership Empathy/Helpfulness Self-Regulation Creativity Problem Solving Skills Communication Emotional Awareness/Regulation Humor Independence 45 Parents typically reflected on these themes through sharing stories, providing examples of times their children demonstrated attributes associated with the theme. Often within the stories shared by parents, several of the themes were visible at once. All of the participants within this study indicated through discussions that youth participation in the nature-based preschool increased attributes associated with resilience, especially related to confidence, problem-solving, self-regulation, and social competence. One parent reflected that their child increased in confidence through the two years they attended the nature-based preschool, from being very hesitant and risk averse to a confident explorer, socially and physically, “...by the time she left [the nature preschool], she was kind of jumping in, whether that was talking to friends or jumping off a tree branch.” Confidence and Creative Problem-Solving “I’ve never heard her say ‘I can’t’” One family described their daughter applying control, involvement, and growth as she worked to improve her math skills, “...she set the goal at the beginning of the year, and then she did, and she dug in, and she did it…and now she loves it.” Their daughter identified and set the goal for herself, communicated with her parents and teachers, and committed herself to it until she succeeded. Her parents shared that they identified attributes she utilized to meet these goals not just from their own observations, but from feedback from teachers and other staff members at her school as well. They note perseverance, emotional regulation, and confidence as key pieces that enabled her to tackle academic challenges and meet her goals. Another parent also reflected on the challenges of adjusting to the academics of grade school and observed the ways their daughter perseveres and uses her internal and external resources in order to cope with difficulty feelings or new challenges. The parent explained, “[Reading] has been a little bit of a challenge this year...There’s one worksheet that we have that gets sent home every week…and we get kind of frustrated.” The parent participant observed that after taking a break and getting support in reframing the worksheet, their daughter 46 was, “able to do it and be more…proud of herself and still being able to work through [the worksheet].” There may be differing levels of independence in problem-solving and facing academic challenges, but parents continue to observe perseverance, emotional regulation, and confidence. One pair of parents observed confidence in both their daughter and son, not only for academic-based challenges, but for social and physical goals as well. One parent highlighted the significance of child-led “unregulated play” that is emphasized in the nature-based preschool and attributed some of their children’s imagination, creativity, and approach to “interpersonal conflicts” to the child-directed, play-based learning approach that is prevalent in nature-based learning. They discussed the impact of the peer leadership found within this nature preschool, which encourages children in their second year to support and mentor the incoming group of students. The integration of mixed ages within the same group paired with the foundation of child-directed play, and the “helpers and healers” culture all come together to create opportunities for students to demonstrate and teach new skills and supporting their friends in problem-solving and adopting the values of the program. Peer leadership model, which is closely tied to the school culture of becoming “helpers and healers” empowered youth to provide assistance, support, and guidance to their peers within the nature preschool, and the parents highlighted these features of the nature preschool as key influences on their children’s development of empathy and leadership within their peer groups. Emotional Awareness and Regulation Parents reported that the children’s kindergarten teachers also played a key role in their continued development of emotional awareness and regulation. They described kindergarten teachers who create sensory spaces where children can independently go if they need a break. Parents believed this reinforced and deepened the self-awareness and self-regulation skills that were promoted through the nature-based preschool. One parent explained that they believed the development of this awareness of emotions and how they feel in the body was built through 47 parenting at home, support at the nature-based preschool, and through the social emotional learning focus in Kindergarten. The teacher here…I think was very aware of recognizing those feelings. I would also say her kindergarten teacher has also been very helpful at talking a lot about different feelings and how to regulate them. So, it’s been interesting to see that grow…now that she’s six…I’ve done a little bit of that too…being able to talk about feelings and how to manage them and recognize that they’re there This parent further elaborated that their child’s kindergarten teacher had created several spaces, “for children who need to have a hard moment and step away.” They expressed that the opportunities for children to independently seek a regulating space empowered them to practice and further develop their self-awareness and emotional regulation skills. Parent participants repeatedly shared that their children were effective communicators, able to identify and express their emotions, including if they were feeling overwhelmed, frustrated, or scared. Several parents observed that their children will request a break to self- regulate before revisiting a challenging task or situation. One parent noted that their daughter would say, “‘I’m having a really hard moment right now and I need some space,’” attributing this skill to the nature-based preschool guide, her kindergarten teacher, while reinforcing the behavior at home. The parent went on to reflect on how their daughter’s self-regulation and advocacy sometimes provides a cue to them as well to take a step back to self-regulate, even as an adult. Parents observed that the requests for breaks or a step back are used as tools to self-regulate and process a challenge internally before deciding to approach the issue once more. Some youth may need a longer period to reflect and discuss than others, but parents of nearly all the children observed a general perseverance to continue after the kids have emotionally regulated and reflected independently. 48 Empathetic Leadership “Mom, you can’t do this. That’s not kind to Mother Earth.” In addition to emotional awareness and regulation, parents also observed leadership behaviors among their children. Many participants provided at least one example of one of their alumni children acting as a leader or mediator within friend groups. They note that their children are concerned with helping their friends solve problems, correct their own social mistakes when they realize them, and they will diffuse tense situations with empathy, communication, and humor. One participant observed their daughter demonstrate self-awareness, empathy, and leadership by taking accountability when they realized they had overstepped with their friends. This parent described how her daughter independently has sought support from the school counselor to resolve conflicts with her friends and also demonstrated insight into her behaviors and how to make amends. The parent described a conversation with their daughter about leadership compared to “bossiness” and how to identify the difference, but be confident in leadership skills. Their daughter reflected after this conversation and decided, “I think I’ve been bossing around [my friend]. I’m going talk to her and I’m not going to do that anymore.” She identified her mistakes, brainstormed a solution, and committed to practicing new behaviors to be a good friend. Some parents observed that their children reinforce values they’ve learned at the nature school home with them, sometimes even correcting their parents’ actions or words. One mother noted that her daughter will sometimes tell her, “Mom, you can’t do this. That’s not kind to Mother Earth” and noted that there are many moments where her daughter demonstrates both empathy and critical thinking skills which lead her to pause, reflect, and express her ideas to her mother. 49 Draw, Write, Tell Results The Draw, Write, Tell activity included two prompts from which children could draw their answers. They were able to choose which prompts to answer and what mediums they used to create their art. Once children completed their drawings, they either wrote what the drawings depicted themselves, told the facilitator what they drew, or both. If children mentioned a feature or detail with context which was unclear to the researcher, clarification questions were asked. At times, parents assisted in asking follow-up questions to young children. To develop themes related to each question, the researcher primarily utilized the children’s own description of what was in the drawing and what this meant to them. However, the researcher also noted common visual elements across drawings, such as trees and a swing. After sharing these drawings with teachers of the nature school, further common threads were identified as the Guide and another teacher both recognized symbols in the drawings, and these informed the researcher on youth participants’ sense of place and connection to the forest. Prompt 1: Create a piece of art that answers: What does the nature preschool mean to you? The first prompt was intended to explore what stood out to youth about the nature preschool. It was left intentionally vague to allow youth to take their own interpretation. Some youth participants created art pieces with features that represented different areas of the nature preschool (ex: the mud kitchen, the swing), while others incorporated activities they enjoy (“playing tag with my friends”), or a combination of the two aspects. Common elements of drawings were trees, friends, the swing, and the mud kitchen in the outdoor classroom. 50 Figure 4. Draw, Write, Tell Art Depicting Nature Preschool This picture (Figure 4) was selected because it highlights the common themes that were depicted and discussed in children’s responses to this question. Children reported connection to the nature school landscape through their familiarity with place, their affinity for the school (a place of fun, friendship, and exploration) and this is well-illustrated in drawings like this one where the artist-participant included themselves in the picture. She literally stands in the tree, part of the environment and ties it together with a heart at the top of the tree to illustrate her feelings. At the time of drawing, it was not clarified why she was standing in the tree - if this was meant to depict her climbing a tree at school or if she simply decided she wanted to be in the tree for the drawing. This particular drawing also illustrates the participant’s familiarity with different features of the outdoor school. The fern represents the name of one area, while the water represents another. Other drawings also highlighted other features and locations within the nature school. Three participants depicted the mud kitchen, which was a primary feature of 51 the outdoor classroom section, three included swings, and most drawings included trees. Children often included themselves and their friends interacting with the nature preschool environment - jumping on rocks, playing with the mud kitchen, or standing among the trees. Figure 5. Draw, Write, Tell Art Highlights Participant Familiarity with Place and Nature School Figure 5 pictured (above) highlights how children incorporated multiple elements of the nature school landscape within their drawings. Parents and Guides were both able to identify features depicted in these drawings, especially the swing and the mud kitchen elements within the outdoor classroom. More abstract elements earned recognition as well, however, demonstrating a group understanding of the symbols and meaning of different places within the school. The ability and desire to know a place extends beyond the kids themselves and to their 52 parents, who needed to know the place names and features their children requested to visit during focus groups when they had completed their drawing activity. Prompt 2: What do you do when you are dealing with a stressful situation? (Draw a picture of what helps you feel better when you are stressed or dealing with a scary/hard/difficult situation? These could be actions you take, or people, places, or things that help you.) The second prompt was intended to explore what resources youth identify as helpful when they are facing challenges. Resources could be external elements such as friends, family, teachers, or more-than-human relatives or internal elements such as coping skills they use to manage stress. Youth participants shared that when they were dealing with challenges, the external resources they used included asking the outdoor preschool guide for help, seeking out family, or hugging their pets to help themselves feel better. The internal resources they utilized included taking deep breaths, taking a break (seeking distraction), or playing outside. External Resources The external resources that youth most often identified in the face of stress were asking for help and seeking connection with family or more-than-human companions (dogs). Figure 6 highlights a youth participant’s drawing of her family, which the facilitator helped label after discussing the illustration. Internal Resources Several youths identified what could be considered “internal resources” to cope with challenges and adversity. These internal resources included taking deep breaths or finding a distraction such as playing outside. Figure 7 depicts an illustration of one youth-participants exhaling and she writes, “When I am a stressful situation I take deep breaths or ask for help”. 53 Figure 6. Draw, Write, Tell Art “I find my family” when Faced with Stress Figure 7. Draw, Write, Tell Art “I take deep breaths or ask for help” 54 Figure 8. Draw, Write, Tell Art “Jump on the rocks” The participant who illustrated the picture above (Figure 8), explained that when they are faced with difficult experiences, they like to jump on the rocks that are at the nature preschool because, “It makes me excited”. The above drawings were highlighted because they illustrate the combination of resources used to help children cope with stress or challenges. A relatively young participant highlighted that they rely on their family supports to cope with stress while an older participant, also within middle childhood years, referenced a self-regulation technique to cope with stress. Another child in early middle childhood referenced using play to distract themselves from challenges and an ability to redirect their energy and emotion to regulate to make them “excited”. Multiple participants indicated that they would play with or pet their family dog in order to self-soothe. Seeking connection in this way could be seen as both an internal and external resource. Youth must take the independent initiative to soothe using a companion animal but are receiving warmth and connection from this experience to help provide comfort or distraction. 55 Across the ages, youth referenced the use of both internal and external resources to cope with stress or adversity. These results align with the perceptions of their parent participants. Interview with Nature School Guide The last interview conducted for this study was with the founder and Lead Guide of the nature-based preschool. The researcher and Lead Guide met in person on site to discuss the emerging themes from the previous interviews and focus groups and to review the Draw, Write, Tell activities. During the interview with the Lead Guide, we reviewed the drawings from the youth participants and discussed the emerging themes from the interviews and focus groups with parent participants. The interview took place on site at the nature school, while the Guide was overseeing a small group of alumni youth attending the summer nature camp. Together we observed the children and discussed the questions prepared and others that came up organically throughout observation, discussion, and reflection on the current emerging themes. Periodically, children would come to the Guide to inform them of what area they would be playing in now, ask clarifying questions about what was allowed, and to report if other youth were not following rules. One child came up and shared that some of the other kids were not leaving many raspberries behind for the preschool-age campers who were in a different area of the forest with another Guide. The Lead Guide advised the child to remind their friends of “honorable harvest” and said, “One or two, just a few” to help remember their shared values for picking berries and respecting others in their nature school community. While discussing the confidence, empathy, and self-regulation of the youth observed by the parents and the Lead Guide, we explored some of the practices that the Guide believed contributed to this development. The Lead Guide emphasized empowerment in several areas of their teaching style. They encourage a community of “Helpers and Healers” with the children, instilling a culture of empathy, resourcefulness, and support. The Helpers and Healers value coincides with a reverse hierarchy for problem solving. Children are encouraged to seek (and 56 offer) help from other children before seeking an adult or Guide for help. The Lead Guide explained that, in addition to teaching empathy, this is also intended to prepare children for elementary school, where the student-to-teacher ratio is much greater. The hope is that if children demonstrate problem-solving skills for smaller situations, that when they face a hardship that needs adult intervention, teachers and staff may have more capacity to provide assistance. Helpers and Healers – Peer Leadership The Lead Guide also explained how the “Helpers and Healers” culture encourages peer modeling of tackling new challenges, problem-solving, and helping others. This nature school includes a mixed age group of children, and youth typically attend for two years. This means that when children enter the nature program at three years old, they are the youngest group and can learn from their older peers who have already been attending for a year. The Guide explains how they are able to observe their older peers face and eventually overcome developmentally appropriate emotional and physical challenges. As the school year progresses, their older peers are also encouraged to act as mentors (helpers) to the incoming group, offering support and guidance, whether it’s explaining the expectations for how to interact with the more-than-human world or helping take off boots in the winter. As youth become more familiar with the routine and expectations of the nature school, they continue to develop their social emotional skills and sometimes step into their own helper and healer roles. In the next year of attendance, the younger group becomes the older and can adopt their own role of mentoring and supporting an incoming group of preschoolers. The significance of this mixed age group, the helpers and healers mentality, and this encouragement of independent and peer- supported problem solving was also observed by the parents and noted within interviews and focus groups as a significant feature of the program. Empowered Reframing 57 Another way that the Guide encouraged children to approach challenges was reframing their language and mindset. Children are encouraged to try new things and solve developmentally appropriate problems on their own. If they experience frustration and barriers in the process, they are encouraged to try again, reframe their mindset, and ask for help from a peer before asking for help from a guide. When they express frustration or a belief that they “can’t” do something, the Guide encourages them to shift their language to a more empowering choice. “I can’t” is encouraged to become, “I’m learning”; “I’m practicing”; “This is hard”. Shifting from the finality of an “I can’t” statement encourages children to keep preserving, recognize their resources, and think of solutions. The Guide utilized an example of children experiencing frustration while zipping up a coat. Youth within this nature school range between ages three and five years old, which leads to a range of developmental abilities. Younger children may experience a greater deal of frustration when faced with the challenge of zipping a coat. The Guide will provide support as appropriate, but first encourage them to try again and reframe the developing skill as “I’m practicing”. From there, if a child continues to struggle, they can look to their friends to model the skill or assist in beginning the task so that it is easier for them to complete it. If their peers are unable to help their friends complete the task, then together they can seek assistance from a guide. The Lead Guide explains this approach is multipurpose, intended to instill perseverance, independence, and trust in peers. Storytelling The Guide also utilized storytelling as a tool for social-emotional learning and behavioral development. They described working with a child who was resistant to wearing seasonally appropriate clothing by co-creating a social story together. The Lead Guide wrote and illustrated a story alongside the child, giving them opportunities for input in creating the storyline and coloring in illustrations. They included themselves and the child as main characters in the story and used this narrative to help them understand the reason for wearing long clothes in the summer to protect from bugs outside. After participating in this activity with the Guide, the story 58 was brought home and the parents shared that they no longer struggled to get their child to wear appropriate clothing to keep the bugs off. Emergent Themes In addition to the specific attributes of resilience that were explicitly explored within the focus groups, interviews, and Draw, Write, Tell activities, there were themes which emerged across each round of data collection. These themes included reflections on adversity, the sensory benefits of natural spaces for both children and adults, and the necessary foundation of safety and security to create a space to grow resilience-related skills and behaviors. Adversity Both youth and adult participants were encouraged to think about adversity as personally challenging or uncomfortable experiences, even if they were not “potentially traumatic.” As addressed in the definitions at the beginning of this paper, this deviates from definitions of adversity typically utilized within education and social sciences (Levine, 2003; Masten, 2011). A few parent-participants within this study acknowledged that they did not feel their child and family had experienced much “adversity”, this broader definition allowed for a general examination of the strengths and needs of youth when facing situations perceived as challenging by their parents or by them. It allowed the individual strengths of the children and the internal and external resources identified as helpful by youth and parents to be highlighted. Participants in this study were not asked to share specifics of adverse or challenging experiences their child has faced, but rather to focus on the skills and attributes that their child demonstrated when facing challenges. This meant that some parent participants shared specific challenging experiences their children faced, while others listed specific traits or behavior they observed, and still others focused primarily on strengths they observed across contexts (such as leadership and mediator skills among friends). A few adult participants reflected that their children had not faced much stressful adversity, recognizing their privilege as a family across socioeconomic, educational, and other 59 social domains. However, given the age of the youth within this study, all children would have been at least two years old at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. This common thread itself may be considered an exposure to adversity. Several families were impacted by the Covid- 19 pandemic and noted that the ability for their children to attend the nature-based school during pandemic restrictions provided a buffer for both them and their youth. Due to the school day taking place entirely outside, one parent noted that it provided a safe and consistent space where they could continue to socialize and grow, while reducing risks. The outdoor setting enabled preschool age children to continue to develop their social skills and view the world through a different lens during a time period that was uncertain and scary even for their adult caretakers. Sensory Benefits A common observation from parent participants that extended beyond the resilience themes was the sensory experience and connection to the forest where the school was located. Parents noted that traditional preschool or elementary school settings may be a lot more stimulating in terms of sensory input. They may have bright colors, toys that make loud noises, and the confinement to a single room can lead to a higher volume level overall. The outdoor classroom, in contrast, has a lower level of sight, sound, and smell sensory stimulation. Children may hear animal calls, yell and play with each other, make noise with natural materials, and even hear an occasional vehicle or plane, but there is not a constant high volume. The colors of the forest change with the season, but the brightest thing in the woods are the red jackets worn by the children to protect them from the elements. The benefits of the forest extend beyond the children’s experiences during the school day, but to how the parents feel as well. One parent observed that they could feel their own nervous systems regulate as they came to pick up their child after a stressful workday. Safety “It’s become such a safe space and a representation of community” 60 While safety and security were not explicitly discussed with all parent participants, it arose as an additional theme through the researcher’s behavioral observations, the Guide interview, and a few parent interviews. Several parents allowed their children to explore and play independently while the focus group or interview took place. They appeared relaxed, calm, and trusted that their child would be safe in the forest, even if they were out of sight. One parent participant reflected that, even though their child now attends grade school, they still come back to the nature preschool area for recreation such as riding bikes, “Even just last weekend, we came here with our daughter and rode bikes in the parking lot. It’s just become such a safe space and a representation of community.” The children themselves demonstrated a familiarity with the place, asking permission to visit specific areas of the forest (e.g.: the outdoor classroom, the grove, the pond) to play. Their parents were familiar with the landscape and understood what each place name meant. A few parents allowed their kids to travel outside of eyeline, and at times earshot. Although it was not specifically discussed, it is possible that this leniency was due to their familiarity with the place and their understanding of their children’s competence in exploring it. Youth are given opportunities within the nature-based preschool to become familiar with their physical and mental limits within the outdoor classroom. In one caregiver discussion, the researcher and a parent explored the benefits of the nature-based program and a nature-based summer camp their child attended separately. While discussing the challenges of navigating nature-based programs and ensuring safety with large numbers of students, with activities such as playing sticks, their child joined into the conversation: Youth participant: “I know I wouldn’t [hit someone with a stick]…the teacher would teach me is to not swing it around…and make sure you hold it like this! You don’t hold it like this, you hold it like this.” Researcher: How do you keep yourself aware when you’re in the forest and you’re really excited?” 61 Youth participant: “I usually just take a deep breath.” By the time they enter middle childhood, they have demonstrated an understanding of how to be safe within this specific outdoor space. Beyond these behavioral observations, some parents explicitly stated that they felt a sense of calm coming to the forest, as addressed in the theme of sensory benefits. The Guide also emphasized the importance of safety as a foundation of the program. They will let families know that risky play is allowed at the school, acknowledging that children are allowed to climb trees, play with sticks, throw snow, and more. This is practiced with intention and boundaries, while teaching youth to assess risk and their current abilities. It cultivates a sense of trust in themselves as they build skills and familiarity with their environment. They are taught to become aware of the environment as this builds their ability to make safe choices. The Guide also emphasizes the role of emotional safety and connection. They describe the school, “A place of peace…where everyone feels loved, safe, and happy” and go on to describe that this does not mean a lack of challenge of discomfort, but a foundation of comfort. The cultivation of a community helps create this peace. Children, parent, and teacher participants within this study all indicated trust in community in one way or another, as children can rely on their peers, parents, teachers, and more-than-human friends to provide support. Rooted in Community This case study could potentially be viewed as an example of positive/effective resilience development. While families and children varied in their doses of adverse experiences, they all described community supports which are positively associated with resilience development. Matsen and Barnes (2018) highlighted a shortlist of common resilience factors which include skilled parenting, routines, self-regulation, close relationships, belonging, meaning making, and connections to well-functioning communities, among others (p. 6). The nature preschool in this study highlighted the importance of community. A few parent participants shared observations 62 on the role of inclusivity and diverse abilities in the program. The outdoor program accommodates children who are deaf and hard of hearing, as well as those with mobility limitations, or who use medical devices such as tracheostomy tubes. The accommodations provided in this program normalize diversity related to support needs and instills values of inclusion and respect in all the children. Some parents shared observations that inclusivity and social awareness were demonstrated by their children in settings beyond the nature preschool. Not only do parents of current students develop friendships, but these also appear to be maintained through their alumni years. The preschool hosts numerous events throughout the year which encourage alumni families to return and reconnect - with each other and the forest. The Guide uses the phrase “rooted in community” to describe how they teach children connection not only to each other, but to the land as well. They are taught to be curious about the of the school, where they learn and play. Children are taught to view nature as relatives, a common thread in Anishinaabe culture (MacNeill, 2020 in Niigaaniin & MacNeill, 2022; Shawanda, 2023), deepening not only their sense of place but their concept of community as well. They come to know the forest, how it changes through the seasons, and how they can care and be cared for in this special place. 63 Chapter 5 Discussion This study set out to answer the following three questions: 1. What are teachers’ and caregivers’ perceptions of the effects of a nature-based preschool on a child’s psychological resilience? 2. What factors do children, teachers, and caregivers identify as influential in the continued promotion of psychological resilience? 3. How might children continue to utilize skills and attitudes taught through nature preschool experiences to cope with adversity in middle childhood? Data collected from the focus groups, interviews, and Draw, Write, Tell activity supported existing research that suggests nature-based programs facilitate the development of resilience- associated attributes. The results from this study suggest that children continue to develop resilience upon graduation from a nature-based program and this is facilitated by the support of the nature-preschool community, grade schoolteachers, and through continued opportunities to practice resilience-related skills such as creative problem-solving. This discussion will reflect on the results of the data collected within this study, what these mean for the research questions, and highlight areas for future research. Teacher and Caregiver Perceptions 1. What are teachers’ and caregivers’ perceptions of the effects of a nature-based preschool on a child’s psychological resilience? All of the participants within this study reported perceptions that participation in the nature preschool increased children’s attributes associated with resilience, especially confidence, problem-solving, self-regulation, and social awareness. Parents provided clear examples of ways their children demonstrated these attributes during their time in the program, as well as ways they continued to practice and further develop these skills as they grew. They drew connections between various features of the nature-based program and the promotion of 64 resilience attributes. They affiliated the development of confidence to the opportunities to independently solve problems and participate in self-directed or “risky” play. A few parents and the Lead Guide both connected the leadership skills and empathy demonstrated by the youth to the mentorship “helpers and healers” culture of the program. They also provided examples of how self-efficacy develops through both independent perseverance and reliable support from peers in the face of new challenges. In consideration of nature itself, participants observed how calming the outdoor space could be and reflected on the significance of connecting to the more-than-human world. Children not only demonstrated empathy for their peers, but they showed meaningful knowledge of the more-than-human world around them and extended empathy here as well. Factors Identified as Influential 2. What factors do children, teachers, and caregivers identify as influential in the continued promotion of psychological resilience? Many of the aspects highlighted by participants within this study do not have to be, and in fact are not, exclusive to outdoor-based programs. They instead highlight a way of relating to children, community, and the more-than-human world in a way that is empowering, empathetic, and secure. The safety cultivated within the nature preschool lays the groundwork for all of the other resilience-promoting aspects to be implemented. As children become familiar with place, they begin to feel safe and connected to each other and the environment. Within this safe and familiar setting, centering child-directed play creates opportunities for independent problem solving, which enables them to strengthen these skills and build a sense of confidence. The benefits of this programming may be compounded by the connection to nature, which all participants also recognized as a means to find connection, emotional regulation (or stress reduction). However, future research which examines this more in-depth and explores how both nature and non-nature programs may implement similar programming may be worthwhile. 65 The primary influences on the continued promotion of resilience appeared to be parents, grade school teachers, and ongoing connections to peers from the nature-based preschool. One parent noted that two children who attended the nature preschool on different schedules bonded over their mutual interests when they met in grade school. Other parents shared how their children’s kindergarten teachers supported further emotional awareness and regulation through sensory spaces within the classroom. Youth reported the use of external supports like adults, friends, and family pets, as well as internal resources such as self-regulation through taking deep breaths, calming down on the swings, or jumping on the rocks. While parents perceived their youth as primarily independent problem solvers, the responses from youth indicated a combination of self-regulation skills and trust in their support systems. Youth appeared to be well-resourced to handle difficulties and demonstrated knowledge of what these resources were for them. Continued Utilization of Resilience-related Skills and Attitudes 3. How might children continue to utilize skills and attitudes taught through nature preschool experiences to cope with adversity in middle childhood? Question three was explored through each aspect of data collection, but primarily through the Draw, Write, Tell youth activities and the caregiver interviews and focus groups. Caregivers reported perceptions that their children developed confidence, leadership, creative problem-solving, and other skills while attending the nature-based preschool and they shared examples of how they believed their children continued to demonstrate these attributes in during middle childhood years. Through continued encouragement at home, in grade school settings, relationships with other alumni peers, and through their own continued development, youth appeared to continue to demonstrate several resilience-related attributes and skills. Parents provided examples of their children acting as mediators within their peer group, referencing “quiet leadership” skills and the ability to use humor and empathy to resolve conflicts. Parents also reflected on their children’s confidence and dedication to facing 66 challenges with perseverance, trust in themselves, and a sense of connection with their peers. The Lead Guide observed a deep sense of justice and empathy among both current and alumni students still connected to the nature preschool community. This was illustrated during the interview with the guide, when a summer camp student approached to report that other students weren’t leaving raspberries for the preschool campers. Meanwhile, the youth participants themselves illustrated the ways that they utilize resilience-related skills in their Draw, Write, Tell responses. Through their participation in this activity, youth demonstrated an awareness of internal and external resources that are available to them when they are faced with stress or adversity. Although this does not verify their regular use of these attributes and skills, the knowledge, understanding, and familiarity with them suggests that they are still salient within their minds. The prompts within the Draw, Write, Tell activity were left intentionally broad so that youth could independently identify what is meaningful to them in overcoming challenges. Youth highlighted trust in their support system (family, friends, dog), self-regulation (breathing, distractions, taking a break), and comfort within nature (going outside, drawings including trees). The data collected from caregiver and Lead Guide interviews and focus groups indicates that such features were taught and cultivated within the nature-based preschool. It is likely that they were also reinforced outside of the nature program through family connections, grade school, and the nature-preschool alumni community. Significance and Areas for Future Research Several aspects of the nature-based preschool that were identified by parents and the Lead Guide indicate avenues for further research and application in other nature and non- nature-based preschools alike. The data collected in this study support the notion that the design of this nature school cultivated a sense of community and belonging for both parents and children, creating a safe place for children to explore, connect to their peers, and deepen their sense of place and connection to the more-than-human world. Early childhood is a key 67 developmental period due to the rapid growth and learning occurring at this age (Bethell et al., 2019; Crouch et al., 2021; Han et al., 2023). The skills that children develop in early childhood lay the groundwork for their continued development into middle childhood where they develop even more social skills, critical thinking, and self-regulation (Mah & Ford-Jones, 2012). Such attributes act as protective and promotive factors for resilience (Masten & Barnes, 2018) and contribute to the themes of Control, Involvement, Growth, and Resourceful outlined in the Integrated Resilience Model (Wadi et al., 2020). The significance of the findings within this study is not simply its support of the existing body of literature on resilience and nature connectedness, but the aspects of the nature-based program that were highlighted by participants. Masten and Barnes (2018) proposed a shortlist of protective and promotive factors of resilience in their research and several of these factors are visible within the nature-based preschool. Selections from this shortlist of protective and promotive factors of resilience are identified in Table 6 (below), with examples of ways that the nature-based preschool may demonstrate or support these factors based on the data collected within this study. 68 Table 6. Comparison of Resilience Factors Shortlist and Nature Preschool Features Masten and Barnes (2018) Promotive and Protective Factors Shortlist (Partial) Features Identified within Nature Based Preschool Caring family, sensitive caregiving • Family reports care and sensitivity • Nature program guides demonstrate care and sensitivity Active Coping, Mastery • Children demonstrate competence and confidence • Children receive opportunities to develop skills through Risky Play Collaborative problem-solving, family flexibility • Children are taught to solve problems together in the nature preschool • Children seek support from friends and family Routines and Rituals • Lead Guide emphasizes consistency in daily routine with children Engagement in a well-functioning school • Nature-based program is considered a high-quality program in its region • Children report a sense of place- attachment • Parent participants report continued connection Connections with well-functioning communities • Network of alumni families which stay connected • Nature-based preschool hosts community events annually with current and former families The Lead Guide emphasized the intention with which they structured their nature preschool so that they could cultivate safety, community, and instill an enduring connection to nature. While children participated in self-directed learning and free play, the Guide provided scaffolding as they developed new skills, and ensured there was a reliable routine throughout the day. This served to instill a sense of security within children, which was then further reinforced through the shared culture of becoming helpers and healers. The Lead Guide also hosted an orientation for caregivers and provided materials as needed to help them navigate challenges at home and learn about new concepts themselves. 69 The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions around resilience and center the voices of families and youth who participate in nature-based programs. Future research could be strengthened with a larger sample size and utilizing a multiple-case study design. The qualitative data shared by participants could also be further examined through quantitative means such as surveys. There are several surveys designed to explore resilience and its associated attributes within youth. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach or facilitating a quantitative study to explore the same topic could serve to further validate the qualitative data, while reaching a greater number of participants efficiently. Future studies could also involve grade school teachers to explore their perceptions on the skill development and resilience of children who attended nature-based preschool programs once they enter Kindergarten and grade school. Indigenous Practices Future research could also explore the use of indigenous practices and beliefs within the nature-based preschool to examine how these influence children’s connection to the more-than- human world, social-emotional development, and resilience-related attributes. The “nature as relative” construct utilized within the nature-based preschool is similar to indigenous perspectives and practices (MacNeill, 2020 in Niigaaniin & MacNeill, 2022; Shawanda, 2023). The nature-based program within this study also incorporated lessons on Anishinaabe words and traditions into their curriculum and available resources. The guides of this nature program strive to encourage multicultural learning and embracing the social and cultural backgrounds of their students, providing opportunities for children and their families to share knowledge and practices. Nature-based preschools and place-based education may connect to Indigenous practices through land acknowledgements, learning about subsistence practices, opportunities to learn indigenous words, and extending their practices to land-based education practices such as acknowledging “nature as relatives”. Land-based education centers decolonization and 70 Indigenous pedagogy and incorporates values such as Indigenous Self Determination, Health and Wellbeing, and Environmental Stewardship, among others (McDonald, 2023). Existing research has also examined how Indigenous knowledge and traditions may impact child development. Researchers have explored the role of Indigenous knowledge in early childhood development through land-based educational practices (Barnes-Najor et al., 2024). This research also examined connections to land and reciprocity with the more-than-human world, resilience, social connections, and many more concepts significantly connected to Indigenous traditions and culture, that go beyond the scope of this research but are worthy of examination. Understanding the connections within nature-based programs to Indigenous knowledge, history, and practice could enrich early childhood development programs and recenter Indigenous ways of knowing. Peer Leadership The Helpers and Healers culture and the encouragement of Peer Leadership could also be an area for further investigation. Parents, children, and guides all highlighted the notion of being “helpers and healers” which highlighted how integral this is to the culture of their school community. Developing a deeper understanding of how these values are taught to the nature preschool students and the impact of age-appropriate and safe leadership opportunities in early childhood may shed further light on children’s social-emotional development and resilience promotion. This appears to be an integral piece of the nature based program within this study and merits further research to examine the practices and impacts in depth. While there were limitations to this study, it provides support for the existing quantitative research which suggests that participation in nature-based preschools - and time spent in nature itself - promotes resilience. It also provided rich feedback on the interplay of these complex constructs. Resilience is a multidimensional and malleable attribute, influenced by social, psychological, and ecological factors. Past research has indicated that early childhood is a key developmental window for developing resilience (Masten & Barnes, 2018). While much of 71 the existing research indicates the importance of the attributes examined within this study (confidence, perseverance, self-regulation, etc.), exploring these constructs through the perceptions of participants provided further insight on how they interact, how they can be supported through early childhood nature experiences, and highlighted the importance of community. The great value of nature-based preschools in the promotion of resilience does not stem from any one independent variable, but from the unique way each promotive feature comes together to create a patchwork of support. The nature-based preschool subject within this study highlights the significance of community support in creating a sense of safety and freedom that allows children to explore and learn from, with, and for nature. 72 References Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: Are they related? Progress in Human Geography, 24(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913200701540465 Afek, A., Ben-Avraham, R., Davidov, A., Berezin Cohen, N., Ben Yehuda, A., Gilboa, Y., & Nahum, M. (2021). Psychological Resilience, Mental Health, and Inhibitory Control Among Youth and Young Adults Under Stress. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.608588 Angell, C., Alexander, J., & Hunt, J. A. (2015). ‘Draw, write and tell’: A literature review and methodological development on the ‘draw and write’ research method. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 13(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X14538592 Ardoin, N. M. (2006). Toward an Interdisciplinary Understanding of Place: Lessons for Environmental Education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (CJEE), 112– 126. Armstrong, A., & Greene, B. T. (2022). Sense of Inclusion and Race in a Public, Outdoor Recreation Setting: Do Place Meanings Matter? Society & Natural Resources, 35(4), 391–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2022.2045413 Barnes-Najor, J., Stonefish, B., Wentworth, C., Gartner, D., Saucedo, J. S., Howard-Bobiwash, H., Koval, P., Burnett, R., Martin, L., Leask, M., Schneider, R., Hopps, C., Gordon, C., & Cameron, A. (2024). Stories and reflections on gikinawaabi: Recentering Indigenous Knowledge in early childhood development through food- and land-based practices. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 69, S102–S117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.12.014 Basu, A., Duvall, J., & Kaplan, R. (2019). Attention Restoration Theory: Exploring the Role of Soft Fascination and Mental Bandwidth. Environment and Behavior, 51(9–10), 1055– 1081. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916518774400 https://doi.org/10.1191/030913200701540465 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.608588 https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X14538592 https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2022.2045413 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.12.014 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916518774400 73 Bergen, N., & Labonté, R. (2020). “Everything is perfect, and we have no problems”: Detecting and limiting social desirability bias in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 30(5), 783–792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319889354 Bethell, C., Jones, J., Gombojav, N., Linkenbach, J., & Sege, R. (2019). Positive Childhood Experiences and Adult Mental and Relational Health in a Statewide Sample: Associations Across Adverse Childhood Experiences Levels. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(11), e193007. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3007 Biggs, A. T., Seech, T. R., Johnston, S. L., & Russell, D. W. (2023). Psychological endurance: How grit, resilience, and related factors contribute to sustained effort despite adversity. The Journal of General Psychology, 0(0), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2023.2253955 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, February 4). Child Development: Middle Childhood (6-8 years old). https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/childdevelopment/positiveparenting/middle.html Chawla, L. (2015). Benefits of Nature Contact for Children. Journal of Planning Literature, 30(4), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595441 Children, N. R. C. (US) P. to R. the S. of B. R. on S.-A., & Collins, W. A. (1984). Introduction. In Development During Middle Childhood: The Years From Six to Twelve. National Academies Press (US). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216770/ Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among five approaches (Third Edition). Sage Publications Inc. Creswell, J., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319889354 https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3007 https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2023.2253955 https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/childdevelopment/positiveparenting/middle.html https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216770/ 74 Crouch, E., Radcliff, E., Merrell, M. A., Hung, P., & Bennett, K. J. (2021). Positive Childhood Experiences Promote School Success. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 25(10), 1646–1654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-021-03206-3 Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 Ernst, J., & Burcak, F. (2019). Young Children’s Contributions to Sustainability: The Influence of Nature Play on Curiosity, Executive Function Skills, Creative Thinking, and Resilience. Sustainability, 11(15), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154212 Ernst, J., Johnson, M., & Burcak, F. (2019). The Nature and Nurture of Resilience: Exploring the Impact of Nature Preschools on Young Children’s Protective Factors. International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 6(2), 7–18. Ernst, J., Juckett, H., & Sobel, D. (2021). Comparing the Impact of Nature, Blended, and Traditional Preschools on Children’s Resilience: Some Nature May Be Better Than None. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 724340. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724340 Ernst, J., Sobel, D., & Neil, A. (2022). Executive function in early childhood: Harnessing the potential of nature-based practices to elevate and equalize outcomes. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2022.1011912 Gartland, D., Riggs, E., Muyeen, S., Giallo, R., Afifi, T. O., MacMillan, H., Herrman, H., Bulford, E., & Brown, S. J. (2019). What factors are associated with resilient outcomes in children exposed to social adversity? A systematic review. BMJ Open, 9(4), e024870. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024870 Gray, T. (2019). Outdoor learning and psychological resilience: Making today’s students better prepared for tomorrow’s world. Curriculum Perspectives, 39(1), 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-019-00069-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-021-03206-3 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154212 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724340 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2022.1011912 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024870 https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-019-00069-1 75 Groulx, M., Freeman, S., & Lemieux, C. (2022). Accessible nature beyond city limits – A scoping review. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 37, 100490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2022.100490 Han, D., Dieujuste, N., Doom, J. R., & Narayan, A. J. (2023). A systematic review of positive childhood experiences and adult outcomes: Promotive and protective processes for resilience in the context of childhood adversity. Child Abuse & Neglect, 144, 106346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2023.106346 Henderson, D. X., DeCuir-Gunby, J., & Gill, V. (2016). “It Really Takes a Village”: A Socio- Ecological Model of Resilience for Prevention Among Economically Disadvantaged Ethnic Minority Youth. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 37(5), 469–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-016-0446-3 Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 4(Volume 4, 1973), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245 Ingulli, K., & Lindbloom, G. (2013). Connection to Nature and Psychological Resilience. Ecopsychology, 5(1), 52–55. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2012.0042 Jiang, B., He, J., Chen, J., Larsen, L., & Wang, H. (2021). Perceived Green at Speed: A Simulated Driving Experiment Raises New Questions for Attention Restoration Theory and Stress Reduction Theory. Environment and Behavior, 53(3), 296–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916520947111 Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272- 4944(95)90001-2 Kausar, F. N., Sial, Z. A., & Bahoo, R. (2024). Investigating the Effectiveness of Play-based Learning Strategies on Cognitive, Social, and Emotional Development in Preschools. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2022.100490 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2023.106346 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-016-0446-3 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245 https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2012.0042 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916520947111 https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2 76 Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 12(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhss.2024.v12i3.2497 Kraft, M., & Cornelius-White, J. (2020). Adolescent Experiences in Wilderness Therapy: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 15(3), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/15401383.2019.1696259 Levine, S. (2003). Psychological and social aspects of resilience: A synthesis of risks and resources. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 5(3), 273. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2003.5.3/slevine le Polain de Waroux, Y., Carignan, M.-C., del Giorgio, O., Díaz, L., Enrico, L., Jaureguiberry, P., Lipoma, M. L., Mazzini, F., & Díaz, S. (2024). How do we study resilience? A systematic review. People and Nature, 6(2), 474–489. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10603 Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The Construct of Resilience: A Critical Evaluation and Guidelines for Future Work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. Mah, V. K., & Ford-Jones, E. L. (2012). Spotlight on middle childhood: Rejuvenating the ‘forgotten years.’ Paediatrics & Child Health, 17(2), 81–83. Malik, F., & Marwaha, R. (2024). Developmental stages of social emotional development in children. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534819/ Marselle, M. R., Warber, S. L., & Irvine, K. N. (2019). Growing resilience through interaction with nature: Can group walks in nature buffer the effects of stressful life events on mental health? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16060986 Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227 https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhss.2024.v12i3.2497 https://doi.org/10.1080/15401383.2019.1696259 https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2003.5.3/slevine https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10603 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534819/ https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16060986 https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227 77 Masten, A. S. (2011). Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice, and translational synergy. Development and Psychopathology, 23(2), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579411000198 Masten, A. S. (2018). Resilience Theory and Research on Children and Families: Past, Present, and Promise. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 10(1), 12–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12255 Masten, A. S., & Barnes, A. J. (2018). Resilience in Children: Developmental Perspectives. Children, 5(7), 98. https://doi.org/10.3390/children5070098 McDonald, M. (2023). Indigenous Land-Based Education in Theory and Practice. Yellowhead Institute. https://iportal.usask.ca/record/107009 McKenna, K. M., Hashimoto, D. A., Maguire, M. S., & Bynum, W. E. I. (2016). The Missing Link: Connection Is the Key to Resilience in Medical Education. Academic Medicine, 91(9), 1197. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001311 Merenda, F. (2021). Adventure-Based Programming with at-Risk Youth: Impact upon Self- Confidence and School Attachment. Child & Youth Services, 42(4), 321–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2020.1829465 Mestre, J. M., Núñez-Lozano, J. M., Gómez-Molinero, R., Zayas, A., & Guil, R. (2017). Emotion Regulation Ability and Resilience in a Sample of Adolescents from a Suburban Area. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01980 Mesurado, B., Cristina Richaud, M., & José Mateo, N. (2016). Engagement, Flow, Self-Efficacy, and Eustress of University Students: A Cross-National Comparison Between the Philippines and Argentina. The Journal of Psychology, 150(3), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2015.1024595 Miljevic-Ridicki, R., Plantak, K., & Bouillet, D. (2017). Resilience in Preschool Children—The Perspectives of Teachers, Parents and Children. International Journal of Emotional Education, 9(2), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579411000198 https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12255 https://doi.org/10.3390/children5070098 https://iportal.usask.ca/record/107009 https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001311 https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2020.1829465 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01980 https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2015.1024595 78 Minnesota Department of Education. (2013). Minnesota recess moves! toolkit. Minnesota Department of Education. https://statepolicies.nasbe.org/health/categories/physical- education-physical-activity/recess/minnesota Moore, D., Morrissey, A.-M., & Robertson, N. (2021). ‘I feel like I’m getting sad there’: Early childhood outdoor playspaces as places for children’s wellbeing. Early Child Development and Care, 191(6), 933–951. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2019.1651306 Natural Start Alliance. (2016, February 29). Nature-based preschools take the national stage. Natural Start. https://naturalstart.org/feature-stories/nature-based-preschools-take- national-stage Natural Start Alliance. (n.d.). Nature-based preschool professional practice: Teaching. Natural Start. https://naturalstart.org/nature-based-preschool-professional-practice-teaching Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847 O’Sullivan, G. (2011). The Relationship Between Hope, Eustress, Self-Efficacy, and Life Satisfaction Among Undergraduates. Social Indicators Research, 101(1), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9662-z Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (n.d.). Early childhood development and education—Healthy People 2030. https://odphp.health.gov/healthypeople/priority- areas/social-determinants-health/literature-summaries/early-childhood-development- and-education#cit1 Ohly, H., White, M. P., Wheeler, B. W., Bethel, A., Ukoumunne, O. C., Nikolaou, V., & Garside, R. (2016). Attention Restoration Theory: A systematic review of the attention restoration potential of exposure to natural environments. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B, 19(7), 305–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2016.1196155 https://statepolicies.nasbe.org/health/categories/physical-education-physical-activity/recess/minnesota https://statepolicies.nasbe.org/health/categories/physical-education-physical-activity/recess/minnesota https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2019.1651306 https://naturalstart.org/feature-stories/nature-based-preschools-take-national-stage https://naturalstart.org/feature-stories/nature-based-preschools-take-national-stage https://naturalstart.org/nature-based-preschool-professional-practice-teaching https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9662-z https://odphp.health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health/literature-summaries/early-childhood-development-and-education#cit1 https://odphp.health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health/literature-summaries/early-childhood-development-and-education#cit1 https://odphp.health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health/literature-summaries/early-childhood-development-and-education#cit1 https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2016.1196155 79 OpenStax, & Learning, L. (n.d.). What is Perception? https://pressbooks.online.ucf.edu/lumenpsychology/chapter/reading-what-is-perception/ Peters, A. (2024). A review of “The arts of living in a more-than-human world”—B. Davies, & J. Speedy (2024). The arts of living in a more-than-human world. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 40(3), 647–649. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2024.58 Peterson, G., Allen, C. R., & Holling, C. S. (1998). Ecological Resilience, Biodiversity, and Scale. Ecosystems, 1(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100219900002 Petruccelli, K., Davis, J., & Berman, T. (2019). Adverse childhood experiences and associated health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Child Abuse & Neglect, 97, 104127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104127 Pimm, S. L. (1984). The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature, 307(5949), 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1038/307321a0 Ramani, G. B. (2012). Influence of a Playful, Child-Directed Context on Preschool Children’s Peer Cooperation. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 58(2), 159–190. Robson, C., & McCarten, K. (2006). Real World Research (4th ed.). Wiley. Shawanda, A. (2023). Nda-nwendaaganag (All My Relations): A relational approach to citation practices. Turtle Island Journal of Indigenous Health, 1(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.33137/tijih.v1i3.38567 Shields, G. S., Moons, W. G., & Slavich, G. M. (2017). Better executive function under stress mitigates the effects of recent life stress exposure on health in young adults. Stress, 20(1), 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10253890.2017.1286322 Sisto, A., Vicinanza, F., Campanozzi, L. L., Ricci, G., Tartaglini, D., & Tambone, V. (2019). Towards a Transversal Definition of Psychological Resilience: A Literature Review. Medicina, 55(11), 745. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55110745 Sobel, D. (2008). Childhood and Nature: Design Principles for Educators (1st ed.). Routledge. https://web-p-ebscohost- https://pressbooks.online.ucf.edu/lumenpsychology/chapter/reading-what-is-perception/ https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2024.58 https://doi.org/10.1007/s100219900002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104127 https://doi.org/10.1038/307321a0 https://doi.org/10.33137/tijih.v1i3.38567 https://doi.org/10.1080/10253890.2017.1286322 https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55110745 https://web-p-ebscohost-com.libpdb.d.umn.edu:2443/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzI5OTQzN19fQU41?sid=393c7c44-6b4c-4fa3-8811-9f4711211156@redis&vid=0&format=EB&lpid=lp_19&rid=0 80 com.libpdb.d.umn.edu:2443/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzI5OTQzN19fQU41?si d=393c7c44-6b4c-4fa3-8811- 9f4711211156@redis&vid=0&format=EB&lpid=lp_19&rid=0 Tamura, S., Suzuki, K., Ito, Y., & Fukawa, A. (2021). Factors related to the resilience and mental health of adult cancer patients: A systematic review. Supportive Care in Cancer, 29(7), 3471–3486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05943-7 Teufel-Shone, N. I., & Williams, S. (2010). Focus Groups in Small Communities. Preventing Chronic Disease, 7(3), A67. Tillmann, S., Tobin, D., Avison, W., & Gilliland, J. (2018). Mental health benefits of interactions with nature in children and teenagers: A systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health, 72(10), 958–966. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2018-210436 Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7 Wadi, M., Izzati, N., Roslan, N., Tan, C., & Yusoff, M. S. B. (2020). Reframing Resilience Concept: Insights from a Meta-synthesis of 21 Resilience Scales. Education in Medicine Journal, 12, 3–22. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2020.12.2.2 Wasik, B. A., & Jacobi-Vessels, J. L. (2017a). Word Play: Scaffolding Language Development Through Child-Directed Play. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45(6), 769–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0827-5 Whitfield, K. M., & Wilby, K. J. (2021). Developing Grit, Motivation, and Resilience: To Give Up on Giving In. Pharmacy, 9(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9020109 Wortsman, B., Brice, H., Capani, A., Ball, M.-C., Zinszer, B., Tanoh, F., Akpé, H., Ogan, A., Wolf, S., & Jasińska, K. (2024). Risk and resilience factors for primary school dropout in Côte d’Ivoire. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 92, 101654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2024.101654 https://web-p-ebscohost-com.libpdb.d.umn.edu:2443/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzI5OTQzN19fQU41?sid=393c7c44-6b4c-4fa3-8811-9f4711211156@redis&vid=0&format=EB&lpid=lp_19&rid=0 https://web-p-ebscohost-com.libpdb.d.umn.edu:2443/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzI5OTQzN19fQU41?sid=393c7c44-6b4c-4fa3-8811-9f4711211156@redis&vid=0&format=EB&lpid=lp_19&rid=0 https://web-p-ebscohost-com.libpdb.d.umn.edu:2443/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzI5OTQzN19fQU41?sid=393c7c44-6b4c-4fa3-8811-9f4711211156@redis&vid=0&format=EB&lpid=lp_19&rid=0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05943-7 https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2018-210436 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7 https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2020.12.2.2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0827-5 https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9020109 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2024.101654 81 Yemini, M., Engel, L., & Ben Simon, A. (n.d.). Place-based education – a systematic review of literature. Educational Review, 0(0), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2177260 Zelazo, P. D., Blair, C. B., & Willoughby, M. T. (2016). Executive Function: Implications for Education. NCER 2017-2000. In National Center for Education Research. National Center for Education Research. Zhang, Y., Zhang, X., Zhang, L., & Guo, C. (2019). Executive Function and Resilience as Mediators of Adolescents’ Perceived Stressful Life Events and School Adjustment. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 446. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00446 Zimmerman, M. A. (2013). Resiliency Theory: A Strengths-Based Approach to Research and Practice for Adolescent Health. Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 40(4), 381–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198113493782 https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2177260 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00446 https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198113493782 82 Appendix Appendix A – Recruitment Materials Recruitment Email The following is the language used in a recruitment email sent by the lead teacher of the Nature-based Preschool: Hello, My name is Melanie Kroll and I am a second-year graduate student at UMD conducting a research study on resilience in alumni of [the Nature Preschool]. This will be conducted through focus groups with parents and caregivers to alumni students, as well as an opportunity for youth ages 6-11 years old to participate in an art based activity. If you would like to learn more, please follow the link below to share your availability: [Redacted] If you have any questions, you can contact me at kroll214@d.umn.edu. mailto:kroll214@d.umn.edu 83 Recruitment Survey Alumni Resilience Research Study Availability Hello! My name is Melanie Kroll and I am a 2nd year student in the Master of Environmental Education program at UMD. I am conducting research exploring perceptions of resilience in former [redacted] students. Adults Who: Parents/Caregivers of former students (now between ~6-11 years old) What: Focus groups (90 - 120 minutes long) When: May/June of 2024 Youth Who: Alumni 6 - 11 years old What: Draw, Write, Tell activity, (~30 minutes long) When: May/June of 2024 Purpose The purpose of this research study is to gain a better understanding of how former students and their families demonstrate resilience-promoting behaviors. If you and/or your child are interested in participating, please share your contact information and indicate your availability to participate in a focus group. Snacks will be provided! We are excited to hear from you! * Indicates required question 1. Email * Adult Focus Group Interest The following section is for you to share your interest and availability to participate in a focus group with other parents and caregivers. 2. Which week would be best for you to participate in a 90-120 minute focus group? Check all that apply. 84 May 19 - 25 (Thurs/Fri/Sat Only) May 26 - June 1 June 1 - June 8 June 9 - June 15 Other: 3. Which day(s) of the week work best for you? Check all that apply. Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 4. What time of day is best for you? Check all that apply. 9 a.m. 12 p.m. 5 p.m. Other: 5. Would you be interested in an interview if you are not available for focus group times? Mark only one oval. Yes No 85 Youth Participants Alumni, between 6 and 11 years old, are invited to participate in a Draw, Write, Tell activity. It's estimated that this will take up to 30 minutes, but youth can take as much or as little time as they would like. Please indicate your child/children's interest below. 6. Would your child be interested in participating in an art-based research activity? * Mark only one oval. Yes No 7. Would your child be available during your focus group time (if you participate)? Please indicate what times/days would be best: 8. Allergies or dietary restrictions? Mark only one oval. Vegetarian Vegan Gluten-free None Other: 9. Any other comments and/or questions? 86 This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google. Forms https://www.google.com/forms/about/?utm_source=product&utm_medium=forms_logo&utm_campaign=forms https://www.google.com/forms/about/?utm_source=product&utm_medium=forms_logo&utm_campaign=forms 87 Appendix B - Consent Forms 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 Appendix C – Participant Background Survey 95 Appendix D – Participant Questions Focus Group Questions 1. For this study, control is described as “being composed and controlled under stressful adversity”. This includes traits and attributes listed on Table 2 (resource provided). a. Based on this description, what aspects of control do perceive your child demonstrate when faced with adversity? 2. For this study, involvement is defined as “being committed to deal with the adversity”. This includes traits and attributes listed on Table 2 (resource provided). a. Based on this description, what aspects of involvement do you observe in your child when they are faced with adversity? 3. In this study, growth is described as “being able to keep growing and bouncing back stronger from adversity”. The traits and attributes associated with growth are listed on Table 2 (resource provided). a. Based on this description, in what ways do you observe your child growing from adversity? 4. In this study, resourceful is defined as “being able to find appropriate solutions to deal with adversity”. The traits and attributes associated with growth are listed on Table 2 (resource provided). a. Based on this description, what is your perception of your child’s ability to find appropriate solutions to deal with adversity? 5. Since the focus of this study is to examine the role nature plays in developing children’s resilience, please share your perception of how nature connectedness influences your family? 96 Interview Questions 1. How do you observe children develop in their ability to maintain composure in the face of adversity? 2. What ways do you see children improve in their commitment to deal with adversity and challenging experiences? 3. What changes do you see in children’s ability to find appropriate solutions to adverse experiences? 4. In what ways do you see children’s capacity to grow and bounce back from adversity change or improve over time? 5. Can you describe some ways you see children use nature as a support or comfort when they are facing adversity? a. Are there situations where nature is the adversity or challenge itself? 6. If you would like to share more information about your curriculum and/or pedagogies for the Nature School, would you like to expand on that now or provide supplemental materials? Draw, Write, Tell Questions 1. What does the nature preschool mean to you? 2. What do you do when you are dealing with a stressful situation? (Draw a picture of what helps you feel better when you are stressed or dealing with a scary/hard/difficult situation? These could be actions you take, or people, places, or things that help you.) 97 Appendix E - Thematic Analysis Plot Figure 9. A visualization of the coding process to help correlate examples with themes 98 Appendix F - Results: Children’s Draw, Write, Tell Responses Responses to Question 1: What does the nature preschool mean to you? Figure 10. Q1: Playing with Friends on the Swing 99 Figure 11. Q1: Features of the Outdoor Classroom 100 Figure 12. Q1: Love of the Forest Figure 13. Q1: Mud Kitchen Fun 101 Figure 14. Q1: Path through the Forest 102 Figure 15. Q1: Preschool means Fun On the Swing 103 Figure 16. Q1: Nature Preschool means…Friends, Trees, Heart, Rollercoaster 104 Figure 17. Q1: Drawing of child standing in trees Parent: “What does the Lead Guide always say?” Youth participant: “Look for the moooooon” 105 Figure 18. Q1: Playing Tag with Friends 106 Figure 19. Q1: Boy standing in the Forest The text explanation of Figure 16 reads, “[The Nature Preschool] to me is a great school because it has a good teaching style where they balance learning with playing. Which here as a 107 student I had lots of fun but also got to learn a lot and was prepared for 1st grade. They also teach good values and morals to all the kids. These teach them how to be kind to people and act in certain situations.” Responses to Question 2: What do you do when you are dealing with a stressful situation? (Draw a picture of what helps you feel better when you are stressed or dealing with a scary/hard/difficult situation? These could be actions you take, or people, places, or things that help you.) Figure 20. Q2: “I find my family” 108 Figure 21. Q2: “I take deep breaths or ask for help” 109 Figure 22. Q2: “Jump on the rocks” Figure 23. Q2: “I ask the Guide for help” 110 Figure 24. Q2: “Hug my dog” 111 Figure 25. Q2: Deep breaths in the forest 112 Figure 26. Q2: Playing with Dog and Building with Legos Melanie Thesis Sig Pg (1) (1).pdf ResiliencePerceptions_Kroll_Final.pdf