This concept is not as important as it should be in American society. Many schools, from elementary to college, do not put as much emphasis on holistic learning, but rather focus on memorizing information through standardized testing. Learning can and should occur anywhere, not just in a typical classroom setting. In fact, a lot of useful information for life comes outside of the classroom. It reminds me of a quote by Mark Twain “I have never let my schooling interfere with my education”. People should always be in a state of learning, figuring out new things and expanding their minds in multiple ways, not just in narrow subjects that come in school.

Is this referring to one fifth of a student's time in school is spent in the classroom, or one fifth of a student's complete life is spent in school? I would think the first would be true, but it is not hard to imagine that so much of our time is spent in school.

In some ways, while I believe addressing the need for green space as a break in attention is important, is it perhaps ignoring the real issue? In so much of American culture, there is the standards upheld of working long hours, taking smaller and smaller breaks, skipping vacations, and just the overall sense that less is more when it comes to work. I think this belief not only applies to the job industry, but schooling as well. Instead of trying to help students engage less and maintain the normal course load, would it be better for there to be more time for rest?

"...lures of the outside world" sounds very ambiguous. I'm not sure if this sentence is trying to refer to the world and it's distractions, or some other meaning. It almost makes "the world" sound like a dangerous place, like a student should not venture there. However, college is the place where students are supposed to be preparing for the world, and instead of being afraid of it, school should make a student more confident and comfortable when approaching the world. For example, I think the GSU campus does a great job of putting students in the middle of the larger world while also giving them help on how to navigate. Other campuses that are more secluded, such as UGA, do not really offer as much real world experience that one could get from being in a more urban environment. In that case, being on a campus that is separated and apart from the rest of the world could actually be a negative aspect.

Perhaps it is just me, but this phrase seems rather wordy. I feel as though the meaning behind this part of the sentence is lost or at least the point can be easily misconstrued. It is trying to say that more research should be done on this topic that is already supported by evidence. So is the research reliable, or not? Is it supported, or not? If there is not enough evidence to make a claim, why is this article being written as though this premise about green space is fact?

I think this is the first time the authors use a different point of view in their writing, referring to themselves as "we". It breaks up the flow of the article a bit as suddenly the authors are referencing themselves after writing the whole article objectively until this point. However, they do this to justify their reasoning and address any complaints that might arise from their argument, so perhaps the change in perspective is justified.

While assertions like this are cited with sources, I think this article would be much more effective if it described in more detail how it came to these conclusions about learning and the environment. Was there a study done, or did they take a survey, or perform an experiment? At this point we know the information was taken from somewhere, but are these sources reliable or recent?

In "So you like the University of Chicago’s rejection of ‘safe spaces’ for students? Consider this."https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/08/30/so-you-like-the-university-of-chicagos-rejection-of-safe-spaces-for-students-consider-this/, the article speaks of The University of Chicago's statement about denying those who wish to be alerted to controversial topics on campus. instead of getting rid of speakers who might have racial views or putting out "trigger warnings" for certain classes and their subject matter, the University boldly supported equal thought and expression on campus. The feeling behind this choice was the belief that college students nowadays are coddled way to much, and need to hear dissenting opinions to their own thoughts. I found a correlation between this article and "Recognizing Campus Landscapes as Learning Spaces" in the way that both articles speak about a "safe place" for students. While in the first article, the "safe place" refers to a figurative area where students can be by themselves with their beliefs, the "safe place" in the second one describes an area that is closer to nature.

What are quads and greens? A quad is a rectangular courtyard surrounded by buildings on all sides. It's full name is actually a quadrangle, and many college campuses are known for to include impressive quads, including Harvard, Cornell, and Yale. Many colleges that host quads are also known for their sustainability initiatives on campus. http://www.businessinsider.com/beautiful-iconic-college-campus-quads-2014-1

Yet, as I mentioned, there is not enough emphasis put on rest, not enough time given for a student to recover. I talked more about this in my previous annotation.