"The aim of the paper is to discuss how the knowledge of the landscape architect can be used to create sustainable school grounds. The paper also looks critically at the professional role and identity of the landscape architect in a participative context. School grounds in Sweden are still, in spite of many campaigns and projects, places with few incentives for pupils and teachers to use other than as a place to run about in and get some fresh air. The demand for developing different methods for involving pupils in all stages of school ground use, planning, building and maintenance, as a means for a long term sustainable solution has noticeably increased over the last few years according to a survey conducted in 2002. Who can help out on this? Landscape architects belong to a profession that has knowledge about places and how they can be used and managed. They are also educated to see and visualize for others how places can change and be developed. These qualities are a potential for new thinking that is today not fully realized in the development of children's environments. In a case study at a secondary school in northern Sweden a new method for participatory planning was tried, so called "knowledge workshops". This method is in part based on Future Workshops, a method for visionary planning developed in Germany, but "knowledge workshops" includes the place itself as an actor and as a base for joint learning. Pupils, teachers, landscape architects and the project leaders from the community worked together over time. This resulted in a proposal for change which was then built. The paper will also address the findings from a focus group of landscape architects in Sweden discussing the role of the landscape architect in general, with a starting-point in school ground development. In what manner does the paradigm of the landscape architect (the first aesthetical standpoint she or he takes) have importance for the final design of school grounds? How much does a common language mean in this context? The "knowledge workshops" which included both children and adults showed that this last question is important. Working together with the place itself as an actor made a difference in how the process evolved, and to some extent in what was built. The question of whose aesthetic preference takes precedence was shown to be a point of debate. Another question of interest was how such newly-won knowledge can, together with different actors be a part of communal learning about a physical, tangible change to a place. Seeing what the obstacles are today against using the knowledge of landscape architects in school ground development and the significance of landscape architects in that process can be a basis for change in teaching landscape architecture. This critical analysis can also be of importance to planners and schools who can then put new and more relevant questions to landscape architects when developing school grounds."