Playwork:
Principles into
Practice
A Play Wales
level 3
DIPLOMA
Learners handbook
Analyse the
nature of play
Unit 1 Playwork:
Principles into
Practice
Level 3 (P3)
?
?
??
?
The therapeutic
affects of play –
an introduction
Summary
In this section we will
examine some of the
therapeutic affects of
play.
In the previous P3 level 3 Award course we
considered the range of generally agreed
benefits that play has for children. As part
of these benefits we described how play is
a governing element in how children are
able to control their emotional lives, and
integral to their emotional wellbeing. In
this section we will examine some of the
therapeutic affects of play, that is, ways in
which play is generally agreed to be healing
and important for restoring and maintaining
good mental health.
1
over their lives. Such activities can
restore a sense of identity, help them
make meaning of what has happened
to them, and enable them experience
fun and enjoyment’ (ibid: 17).
Play is now widely considered to
have a range of important therapeutic
effects for children and is used by
a range of services and workers
including playworkers, social workers
and psychiatric social workers, play
therapists, occupational therapists,
specialist teachers, hospital play
specialists and child development centre
workers. Comparable roles can be found
in many countries and play’s importance
to children’s lives is stated explicitly
in Article 31 of the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Children
(UNICEF 1989).
Although there is substantial agreement
on the general therapeutic value of
children’s play there is considerable
variation in how it is supported and the
role of adults who might facilitate it. We
examine some of these approaches
below.
Before we continue we should emphasise
our responsibilities as playworkers for
safeguarding the welfare of children.
Children may play out a whole range
of thoughts, feelings and experiences
from routine everyday worries to serious
chronic instances of abuse and violence.
It is essential that we are fully aware of
our role in safeguarding children by:
Recently, this Article has been enhanced
by a General Comment (UNCRC 2013),
which, in its description of play explicitly
states that play can be a means of
externalising traumatic or difficult life
experiences to make sense of children’s
past and better cope with their future. It
enables them to ‘communicate, better
understand their own feelings and
thoughts, prevent or resolve psychosocial
challenges and learn to manage
relationships and conflicts through a
natural, self-guided, self-healing process’
(ibid: 10). The General Comment further
notes that play:
• Developing positive relationships in
which the interests of children come
first
• Offering an emotionally and physically
safe environment
• Using agreed working practices that
actively safeguard
‘can help refugee children and
children who have experienced
bereavement, violence, abuse or
exploitation, for example, to overcome
emotional pain and regain control
• Making and acting upon sound
professional judgements, supported
by effective policy and procedures.
Children may play out a whole range of thoughts, feelings
and experiences from routine everyday worries to serious
chronic instances of abuse and violence.
2
As playworkers, we maintain that play
is a result of a basic biological drive
– a drive to play that investigates the
immediate experiences, activities,
relations and environment of the
individual child, as well as their identity,
emotional equilibrium and sense of self.
Because of the play drive’s complex
comprehensive nature and internal
source, Else (2012) asserts we cannot
know for certain what is good for the
child as they may play for many different
reasons and on many different levels
including physical development, social
experience, emotional fun, and health
and wellbeing. Crucially this process
must, under some sense, be under the
child’s control and be responsive to their
needs if it is to be effective.
Safeguarding children is covered in detail
in the P3 level 3 Certificate.
Therapeutic playwork
They will decide – based on their
sensations, emotions and experiences
– what is stimulating, what is dull and
what painful. It is this that leads us to
conclude that ultimately play is beneficial,
restorative and healing. (ibid: 5).
Therapeutic playwork draws on the ideas
from a number of sources including the
work of Sturrock and Else, Hughes, and
Brown. It is based on the notion that play,
driven by the child’s own internal play
drive, has a powerful curative as well as
developmental function. ‘It is the act of
playing that has the healing inherent in it’
(Sturrock and Else 1998: 11). The healing
potential of play, unlike most therapies,
lies not in the power and knowledge
of the adult, but in the play of the child
(Sturrock 1995).
Of course, children do not always get
to choose – they are often faced with
peer pressures. ‘The individual plays
what his class, gender or age – or the
seasonal or festival sequence – requires’
(Sutton-Smith 1995: 289). Nor are play
experiences always positive, and so it
is in these cases where our support as
playworkers can be important.
In the ‘Colorado Paper’ (1998) Sturrock
and Else suggest that the poorly adapted
play cycle may lie at the root of neurosis.
If so, they argue, then the playworker
is active at the precise point where
potential neuroses are being formed and
so might enable them to be ‘played out’.
On playgrounds children may generate
and engage with the same material that
occurs in analysis or therapy.
What does therapeutic playwork practice
look like? The following initial points
are derived from Else (2012) although
supplemented by others. Therapeutic
playworkers:
• Start with children where they are.
Children decide when and where
3
and Else 1998). A play cue is a
child’s invitation to the surrounding
environment to join in play, and
a crucial element of our role as
playworkers is to respond to these
cues in various ways (ibid). This is
important as play cues may not always
be positive and we need to be able to
interpret and respond in appropriate
ways in different circumstances.
to be playful. Brown (2008) argues
that this approach is a unique feature
of playwork that sets us apart from
others in the children’s workforce. For
example, a teacher must deliver the
national curriculum – an adult agenda
– whereas playworkers work to the
child’s agenda.
• Adopt a dynamic and considered
approach to intervention that may vary
from simple maintenance to complex
intervention, and from the subtle to
the blatant (Sturrock and Else 1998).
Any intervention we make should be
to extend or facilitate further play –
anything else would be adulteration.
• Are culturally competent. Cultural
competence is about being sensitive
to the needs of children from diverse
communities. Although this requires a
level of knowledge and skill, the most
important quality is that we approach
different children with openness,
respect and a willingness to learn. This
requires a level of self-awareness and
an understanding of our own cultural
beliefs and practices. (Adapted from
O’Hagan 2001). This interpretation
of cultural competence is related to
the importance of the playworker
suspending their prejudices and being
non-judgemental in all their dealings
with children (Brown 2008).
• Enrich the child’s play environment
so that it supports as many play
opportunities as possible (Hughes
1996). Brown (2008) suggests that this
can be achieved by taking account
of ‘compound flexibility’, loose parts,
and what he terms the Portchmouth
principle. Compound flexibility is a
concept that suggests that flexibility in
the environment promotes increased
flexibility in the child, who in turn is
more able to make use of the flexible
environment. The Portchmouth
principle says ‘it helps if someone, no
matter how lightly, puts in our way the
means of making use of what we find’
(1969: 7).
• Create trusting relationships with
children. Children should feel safe
and secure to engage with others so
that they are able to express fully their
internal play drive in a broad range of
behaviours.
• Have a range of knowledge that
includes childhood and child
• Are skilled in the sensitive assessment
of the children’s play cues (Sturrock
Cultural competence is about being sensitive to the needs
of children from diverse communities.
4
and absurdities (ibid). Because of
this close connection, by having a
sense of humour ourselves we show
children that we value their humour
and their play. A sense of humour
is a vital practical ingredient in any
playful approach – it can reduce
anxieties, defuse tensions, reassure
children, and sometimes extend their
play. However, this is not in any way
to suggest that playworkers should
make light of children’s traumatic
experiences. In situations such
as the one below where children
have been abused and neglected,
playworkers are extremely sensitive
and so humour would generally be
inappropriate.
development. The therapeutic
playworker has an understanding
of the biological, psychological and
emotional developmental changes
that children experience, as well as
an understanding of environmental
factors that affect their wellbeing and
development.
• Have integrity, authenticity and
self-knowledge. As playworkers
we endeavour to be trustworthy,
dependable, fair and impartial in all
our work with children and adults. We
are honest and open with children
and this is one of the most important
things we can do with them (Else
1999). Else explains that this does
not mean exposing young minds to
things they cannot understand, rather
it means responding in a mature way
when children show they are ready to
enquire about such things. We must
also be honest with ourselves. This
means reflecting on and, if necessary,
confronting our own blocks and
biases.
An example of a therapeutic playwork
project in practice
Research by Brown and Webb (2005)
described the White Rose Initiative
project - a playwork intervention with
abandoned children living in a Romanian
paediatric hospital. (We outlined the
impact of this project in the P3 level 3
Certificate course but we recap it here).
The children aged one to ten suffered
chronic neglect and abuse, having spent
most of their lives tied to the same cot
in the same hospital ward. During the
research period the only change in
their lives was the playwork project yet
‘these chronically abused and neglected
• Have a sense of humour. Play
and humour are closely connected
as ‘both are enjoyable, reality
bending, and internally motivated
and controlled’ (Bergen 2006: 141).
Although not all play is humorous,
play, especially pretend play, shares
with humour an ‘as-if’ approach that
delights in ambiguities, contradictions
As playworkers we endeavour to be trustworthy,
dependable, fair and impartial in all our work with children
and adults
5
Play therapy
children made the progress that many
experts assumed would be impossible’
(ibid: 155). The children no longer sat
rocking staring into space but became
‘fully engaged active human beings’ (ibid:
140).
A full description of the development
and use of play therapy is beyond the
scope of these materials but the following
summary is based on that provided by
the websites of the British Association of
Play Therapists (BAPT 2013), and Play
Therapy UK (PTUK 2011).
What had caused this remarkable
change? Brown and Patte note (2013):
‘The most fundamental causal factor
was undoubtedly the fact that these
children now had play-mates – that,
and the example provided by the
playworkers who were encouraged
to treat the children with love and
respect at all times.’
Play therapy’s origins are associated
with the forerunners of psychoanalysis
beginning in the 1930s and in particular
the work of Anna Freud, Margaret
Lowenfield, Melanie Klein and Donald
Winnicott. While there are different
theories and practices around each
psychotherapy tradition, they are
‘connected by the central proposition that
play transmits and communicates the
child’s unconscious experiences, desires,
thoughts and emotions’ (ibid).
Fortunately, the children’s conditions
improved dramatically after a year and a
half but the project continues, albeit in a
more preventative mode.
Playwork can enable children to recover
their social, physical and intellectual
abilities although recently Brown (2010)
has voiced some reservations about its
capacity to restore emotional equilibrium.
The research nevertheless stands as a
testament to the healing transformative
power of play.
Drawing on Carl Rogers’ person centred
approach to psychotherapy in the 1940s,
Virginia Axline introduced a more child
centred approach in which the therapist
uses a non-directive approach.
6
Axline outlined her ideas about play therapy in several
books, most famously Dibs: In Search of Self (1964)
in which Dibs, supported by the therapist, uses play to
heal himself. Axline (1969) summarised her ideas about
non-directive play therapy in principles that still inform
the work of many therapists today.
In the UK play therapy is defined as:
the dynamic process between child and Play
Therapist in which the child explores at his or
her own pace and with his or her own agenda
those issues, past and current, conscious and
unconscious, that are affecting the child’s life in the
present. The child’s inner resources are enabled by
the therapeutic alliance to bring about growth and
change. Play Therapy is child-centred, in which play
is the primary medium and speech is the secondary
medium (BAPT 2013).
Although there are many different kinds of play therapy
Russ (2004) states that play has four broad functions in
the child therapy literature.
1. Play is the natural language of children. It reflects
the child’s internal world and is used to express
thoughts, feelings and fantasies including those that
are worrying and anxious. The expression of feelings
– known as catharsis – is thought by some to be
therapeutic.
2. The child uses play to communicate with the
therapist who in turn empathises and interprets the
play, which helps the child feel understood.
3. Play allows the child to work through troubling
experiences until they are manageable. In this way
‘the play process has been thought of as a form of
conflict resolution’ (ibid: 35).
4. Play allows children to try out and practice new and
different behaviours, ideas and expressions in a safe
environment without the usual consequences and
concerns of the real world.
Play therapy aims to help children suffering from
a number of psychological conditions including
depression, anxiety and aggression, and in situations
involving family breakdown, abuse, trauma, grief,
7
• Mastery of skills
and domestic violence (Clack et al
2010). It aims to improve children’s
psychological health and how they feel
about themselves and others. It allows
children to express and make sense of
difficult or painful experiences through
play and encourages the development
of resilience and emotional competence.
Play therapists usually work closely with
the child’s parents throughout the play
therapy intervention.
• Problem solving and creative thinking
• Emotional release of strong emotions
• Playing out of past stressful events
• Opportunity to try out alternative
behaviours and different roles
• Make believe play empowers children
to develop feelings of mastery over
their environment and gives their
imaginations free reign
A recent research paper, An Effective
Way of Promoting Children’s Wellbeing
and Alleviating Emotional, Behavioural
and Mental Health Problems (PTUK
2011), shows that between 74 percent
and 83 percent of children receiving play
therapy, delivered to PTUK standards,
show a positive change. The more
severe the problems, the greater was the
percentage of children showing a positive
change - 74 percent for those with slight/
moderate problems, 83 percent for those
with severe problems.
• Insight into their concerns and
experiences
• Attachment
• Self-esteem and closeness to others
• Enjoyment, positive emotions and an
antidote to stress
• Overcoming fears and reducing
anxieties
In his discussion on why play is
therapeutic, the American psychologist
Charles Schaefer (1993) lists a number
of beneficial outcomes including:
• Ego control and socialisation.
Despite or perhaps because of the
general agreement of the therapeutic
value of play there are many different
methods of therapy including directive
and nondirective approaches with each
drawing on different theoretical traditions.
• Expression of conscious thoughts and
feelings, and unconscious wishes and
conflicts
Play therapists usually work closely with the child’s parents
throughout the play therapy intervention.
8
process. He found that play provided
a vital coping mechanism for dealing
with treatment and procedures. It also
promoted self-expression and the ability
of children to voice their feelings, which
in turn assisted medical professionals to
better understand children’s feelings and
concerns. Patte describes the following
specific forms of therapeutic play:
There is now an officially recognised
register of Play Therapists, accredited by
the Professional Standards Authority for
Health and Social Care, and managed by
Play Therapy UK (PTUK). The Academy
of Play and Child Psychotherapy (APAC)
offers a range of postgraduate play
therapy courses at Certificate, Diploma
and Masters level, all accredited by
Leeds Beckett University.
• Distraction play – being absorbed in
their play can help children cope with
pain and distressing procedures.
Play in hospitals
In the P3 level 3 Award and Certificate
courses we discussed some of the
benefits of play for children and clearly
those benefits also apply to hospitalised
children. However, there are some
particular forms of play that are especially
important for children in hospital. Patte’s
(2010) study reinforced the evidence that
play is vitally important to the healing
• Expressive play – allows children to
express their feelings around their
illness or hospitalisation.
• Developmental-support play –
encourages a sense of normalcy and
supports the continuation of typical
childhood development experiences.
9
qualifications are still recognised) as well
as a Licence to Practice as a Registered
Play Specialist (Health).
• Medical play – can allow children
to familiarise themselves with the
processes and medical equipment
involved in their treatment, and
can allow them to rehearse coping
behaviour.
Play in prisons
In the UK in 2010 more than 17,000
children were separated from their
mothers who had been sent to prison
(The Howard League for Penal Reform
2011). For many children affected by
the imprisonment of a loved one the
experience can be unpleasant at best
(Hart and Clutterbrook 2008). Separation
may cause children emotional, social,
material and psychological damage, and
evidence indicates that compared to their
peers, children of prisoners have about
three times the risk of mental health
problems and other adverse outcomes
(Social Care Institute for Excellence
2008). Children may feel angry towards
their parents for leaving, and resentful
towards prison staff and police for
incarcerating them (Davis 2008).
Hospital play staff work to minimise
fears and anxieties and to assist children
and young people in developing coping
strategies during treatment. Play is used
to help the child regain confidence and
self-esteem as well as provide an outlet
for feelings of anger and frustration
(National Association of Health Play
Specialists 2012). It can help the child
understand their treatment and illness
and aid in their recovery.
Hospital play staff work with the whole
family of a child who is admitted.
This includes siblings who are also
encouraged to play and work through any
feelings of anxiety, jealously or guilt they
may have (Jun-Tai 2008).
In the UK play is now recognised as a
basic need for children staying or visiting
hospital and an essential part of the
services provided for them (Department
of Health 2003a).
Brown and Patte (2013) describe how
providing play opportunities has many
benefits for children of incarcerated
parents including:
Hospital play staff in the NHS are
currently required to hold a Foundation
Degree Award in Healthcare Play
Specialism (although previous
• Alleviating many of the negative
outcomes associated with visiting a
prison such as anger, anxiety, and
guilt
Hospital play staff work to minimise fears and anxieties
and to assist children and young people in developing
coping strategies during treatment.
10
Conclusions
• Compensating for a lack of play
opportunities in children’s home and
local community
As playworkers we are able to observe
at first hand how play is intimately bound
up with children’s emotional lives. We
are able to watch how children play
out their feelings and process troubling
events. We observe them finding comfort
and meaning in their play. We may
even witness the expression – often
symbolically – of their conscious and
unconscious thoughts. However, what
other first hand evidence exists for the
therapeutic affects of play?
• Providing opportunities for parents
and children to strengthen their
attachment and relationship.
For incarcerated parents, the benefits
include:
• Developing an understanding of the
importance of play for healthy child
development through playing with
their children
In her summary of the empirical evidence
for play, Russ (2004) notes that there
is good evidence that play facilitates
problem solving ability and flexibility, and
that these abilities relate to the ability to
think of alternative coping strategies in
daily life. There is also evidence for play’s
effects on children’s relationships with
others and aspects of adjustment. She
reports that several studies show play,
and in particular pretend play, can reduce
instances of children’s fear and anxiety.
Russ and Moore (2006) describe how
pretend play also has positive effects on
pain management, adaptation to chronic
illness, and externalising behaviour (i.e.
negative behaviours that are directed
externally, such as, aggression, bullying
and theft).
• Reduction of feelings of guilt and
loneliness
• Strengthened relationships between
families reduce the risk of reoffending.
In England and Wales there are
numerous initiatives that support the
maintenance of family ties although less
specifically supporting children and their
play needs. Most prisons now offer some
sort of play facility for visiting children
although the facilities vary considerably
in extent and quality (Davis 2008).
Play England (ibid) recommends that
play settings supporting visits should
employ qualified playworkers as the role
can require great sensitivity to support
children in self-directed play. An example
of this approach is described by Hart
and Clutterbrook in Brown and Taylor’s
Foundations of Playwork (2008).
Clark (2007) describes a number of
instances of self-directed play being used
As playworkers we are able to observe at first hand how
play is intimately bound up with children’s emotional lives.
11
Of course not all instances of children
using the therapeutic power of play will
be privately imagined but this story does
illustrate that most adults are very poor
at recognising them (ibid). Children use
play in many different therapeutic ways,
however one form that appears frequently
and has been described by researchers
is role reversal. For example, a sick child
may take the doctor’s role in their play
while a playmate or a toy is given the role
of patient, or a child takes the role of a
reproachful adult who scolds their doll for
being naughty.
therapeutically by children. Often these
took the form of imaginative play and
the children used them without any adult
awareness. For example, she describes
a severely asthmatic boy denied the
comfort of a stuffed (and perhaps asthma
triggering) soft toy. The boy imagines that
the Teenage Ninja Turtles pictured on
his bedspread would fly off and fetch the
doctor at night if he was gravely ill.
In another example Clark describes a
hospitalised young girl who imagines that
her toy tiger would prevent the doctors
and nurses from mortally harming her
during hurtful procedures. Oblivious to
this the nurses unfortunately removed
the tiger thinking it might frighten the
girl. This resulted in her profound grief
and the event was still a highly painful
memory three years later.
As playworkers there is a need to be
continually watchful and sensitive if we
are to avoid disrupting children’s own
imaginative ways of coping and making
meaning from their experiences.
Children use play in many different therapeutic ways,
however one form that appears frequently and has been
described by researchers is role reversal.
12
Despite this and the other evidence described above,
there is a significant shortage of studies demonstrating
the therapeutic impact of playwork. This is especially
true for studies on children in more typical everyday
situations (Brown 2014). Play has a therapeutic affect
for all children and not just ones who have suffered
extreme trauma. Freiburg (1959, cited by Elkind 2007:
113) describes how a simple game of peekaboo with
a young child can help them overcome the anxieties
associated with the disappearance and return of a loved
one.
What is the pleasure of these games? If the
disappearance and return of loved ones is such a
problem to him, why should the baby turn all of this into
a boisterous game? The game serves several purposes.
First by repeating the disappearance and return under
conditions that he can control (the missing person can
always be discovered again after brief waiting), he
is helping himself overcome the anxiety associated
with this problem. Secondly, the game allows him to
turn a situation that would, in reality, be painful into a
pleasurable experience.
Throughout this overview of the therapeutic aspects
of play we have seen several different applications of
how adults may work with children at play. While some
approaches are undoubtedly more directive than others
all of them share a belief in the healing powers of play
and its critical importance in the lives of all children.
Whether all these approaches can be loosely grouped
under the heading of ‘playwork’ or whether they should
continue to remain separate but related professions is
an on-going debate in the playwork world (Brown 2010).
Whatever our approach ‘it is good to remember that
playing is itself a therapy. To arrange for children to be
able to play is itself a psychotherapy that has immediate
and universal application’ (Winnicott 1971: 50).
13
Notes
Learners into
practice
Given the evidence for its wide-ranging
therapeutic benefits, why do you think
play is still very often marginalised in
many societies?
While the therapeutic effects of play
are significant and wide-ranging, play
is not an instant ‘quick fix’. Different
children will take different amounts of
time to work through different types of
experiences in different ways. What
are the implications of this for our
practice?
What do you think are the key
differences between the various
professional approaches to the
therapeutic uses of play described
here?
14
?
?
??
?
The physicality
of play
Summary
In this section we will
look at some aspects of
the physicality of play.
A reflection
‘It is the height of summer and the
adventure playground I am visiting is full to
the brim. To the casual eye the playground
looks chaotic, noisy and unruly but looking
more closely at specific children and
specific areas of the playground clear play
behaviours can be seen. A group of boys are
playing kick-about and one scores a goal.
He begins an elaborate celebration and his
friends soon jump on him, drag him to the
floor and hug him.
15
play opportunities. In this section we will
consider some aspects of the physicality
of play including the role of touch, rough
and tumble play, and locomotor play.
Two five year old girls walk up to me, arm
in arm and announce ‘We’re best friends’.
In another part of the playground children
have constructed a wrestling ring and
a small group play out elaborately
choreographed movements. Two
wrestlers complete with capes made from
some old sheets take turn to wrestle their
partner to the ground. A girl hangs upside
down from a post supporting a swing. On
the tyre swing itself three more huddle
together as they rock vigorously back
and forth. Two girls gather close so as to
skip together with a single rope. A boy
runs past me with a look of mock terror
on his face shortly pursued by a slightly
older girl with lips puckered comically. A
child has fallen off a balance beam and
with a grimace looks at his grazed knee.
His friend puts an arm on his shoulder to
comfort him and tells him not to worry.
Touch
The importance of touch in the
development of babies and young
children is well documented. Physical
contact and reassurance is essential
for children to feel secure and newborn
children are instinctively driven to seek
physical and emotional closeness
with their carer – a process known
as ‘attachment’ (Bowlby 1969). Early
animal research showed that the security
provided to the infant from clinging to a
cloth covered ‘surrogate’ mother (made
of wood) was more important than
even food (Harlow 1958). Numerous
more recent studies have shown that
appropriate touch from a carer stimulates
anti-stress chemical systems in the brain
and calms babies (Sunderland 2006).
As I think about all these different
episodes I am struck by the sheer
physicality of the play. There is a physical
intensity to so much of the behaviour – a
desire for playful contact with a friend –
to touch, to communicate a whole range
of emotions, to strengthen social bonds,
to reassure, to discover and delight in the
use of movement’.
Schwartzenberger (2007) summarises
a range of research that shows touch
to be important in helping children selfregulate their emotions and reduce stress
and anxiety. It stimulates the body’s
natural pain suppressor and enhances
the immune system. It is essential
for forming secure attachments and
healthy development. Despite its crucial
importance for young children there are
very few studies investigating its affect
on older children, especially through
play. One of the few that did look at this
area concluded that touch during parentchild play was important for healthy
psychological adjustment (Whiddon and
Montgomery 2011).
Reflections like these begin to suggest
the extent to which play is a deeply
physical process for many children.
Brown (2014), in Play and Playwork: 101
Stories of Children Playing, devotes a
chapter to this aspect of play. However,
descriptions of physically active play of
all kinds are generally neglected in the
research studies on play. These areas
are also inadequately addressed in the
training of early years workers, teachers,
playworkers and others who may facilitate
16
Recently research has demonstrated
that humans have an innate ability to
understand emotions through touch
alone (Hertenstein et al 2009). Touch
can communicate multiple emotions in
surprisingly complex ways, and to all
parties involved. Commenting on his
research into tactile communication
amongst US basketball players,
the psychologist Michael Kraus in
conversation with the writer Rick
Chillot reports that, ‘touch strengthens
relationships and is a marker of
closeness … it increases cooperation
but is also an indicator of how strong
bonds are between people’ (Chillot
2013). Touch is very context dependent
and rightly we have rules about what is
appropriate, when and where.
has been observed throughout the
world. Rough and tumble is a complex
play behaviour usually comprising a
combination of elements from play
fighting such as wrestling, and other
elements from locomotor or social
exercise play such as chasing (Jarvis
2014).
Touch is an important part of many
different types of play. Some of these
are obvious because they involve direct
contact, such as rough and tumble play.
However, touch is no less important
for investigating and modifying the play
environment, and in giving and receiving
emotional communication in social and
pretend play. For children who are unable
or unwilling to talk, touch can provide a
powerful channel with which to express
their pleasure or discomfort with a
situation. Touch plays a key role in many
games (such as chase, tag, piggyback,
and tickling), and is frequently the source
of play cues and returns. Playful physical
contact in rough and tumble can be
calming, but it is also informative (Pellis
and Pellis 2009).
Crucially it is characterised by the playful
intent of the children involved and real
threats are rare. Rough and tumble often
has exaggerated movements to further
help signal the playful and not aggressive
intent to other players (Pellegrini 2009).
With younger children rough and
tumble may be accompanied by fantasy
elements such as ‘superhero play’, while
older children may introduce elements
from popular culture and sport, such as
professional wrestling and martial arts.
In the P3 Level 3 Award course we drew
a comparison between the indicators
of rough and tumble and real fighting.
For example, rough and tumble is
characterised by role reversal, selfhandicapping, playful expressions and
movements, and restraint.
Rough and tumble
Rough and tumble play is common to
humans and many other animals and
17
Pellegrini (2009), describing a range
of studies, suggests rough and tumble
contributes to children’s ability to regulate
their emotional states. Rough and
tumble, like play itself, is characterised
by its unpredictability within a safe
arena (Spinka et al 2001). Pellis and
Pellis (2009) conclude that rough and
tumble always contains an element
of ambiguity, as there is always a risk
that the message ‘this is play’ might
be missed or misunderstood. Perhaps
that friendly punch was too hard, or that
slap really did hurt. Because of this they
conclude that rough and tumble can be
useful for assessing, cementing and
even manipulating social relationships.
‘The most wonderful evolutionary tool to
achieve full socialization of the brain is
the rough-and-tumble play system of the
mammalian brain’ (Panksepp 2007: 60).
The message that these signs convey is
that ‘this is play’ (Bateson 1955) and not
actual aggressive fighting. This message
is less likely to be misunderstood between
children who are friends than between
children who are merely acquaintances
(Pellegrini 2009). Rough and tumble is
characterised by players taking turns to
adopt dominant and submissive roles,
between ‘aggressor’ and ‘victim’ (ibid). If
the play involves children of unequal sizes
and abilities the larger or more able will
usually self-handicap in order to prolong
the play.
Researchers who have studied rough
and tumble play have proposed a number
of physical and social benefits, both
immediate and deferred. Rough and
tumble benefits children’s strength, fitness
and endurance (Aldis 1975). It has also
been proposed that it provides a means
of practicing fighting skills to be used later
(ibid).
In older children and young people rough
and tumble can sometimes be used to
assert or maintain dominance, and to
indicate the strength of the respective
participants while staying playful (Smith
2010). It is a way of ‘reminding everyone,
albeit in a playful manner, exactly who is
in charge’ (Pellis and Pellis 2009: 146).
Finally, other studies have linked the
increase in boy-girl rough and tumble
often seen in adolescents to emerging
heterosexual relationships (Pellegrini
2009).
Rough and tumble has been linked
to a range of socialisation skills both
competitive and cooperative; including,
establishing relationships, self-control,
maintaining dominance, group cohesion,
negotiation, and conflict resolution
(Pellegrini 2009, Smith 2010). Brown
(2010) notes that the therapeutic playwork
project he founded in Romania (which we
referred to at some length in the P3 Level
3 Certificate course) sees a great deal of
rough and tumble play.
Rough and tumble benefits children’s strength, fitness and
endurance (Aldis 1975).
18
it will turn into real fighting. However, is
this true? What does the evidence say?
Smith (2010) states that, based on the
available observational studies only one
in a hundred play fights turns into a real
fight. This is especially true when children
are engaged in rough and tumble with
friends.
Rough and tumble play inevitably
involves physical contact, and touch,
when used appropriately can release
opioids – naturally produced chemicals
that are associated with feelings of
pleasure and stress reduction. Physical
touch also provides an effective and
immediate means of communication.
Children, particularly those who are
friends and therefore familiar to each
other, are frequently able to communicate
their feelings about the play through
touch. For example, we have observed
children playfully wrestling on the floor
when one child will suddenly stiffen
their body in response to an overenthusiastic grapple. Their partner
immediately realising their mistake was
quick to release their hold followed by an
apologetic ‘Sorry, I was only playing’.
In younger children rough and tumble is
rarely exploited for aggressive ends (Fry
2005). However, inevitably children will
very occasionally make mistakes that
may result in real aggression. Instances
of real aggression may also be higher
involving children who have few friends
and have had little opportunity to develop
effective social skills (Pellegrini 1994).
As well as being prevented because it
doesn’t conform to a particular view of
what makes up appropriate behaviour,
adults often stop rough and tumble play
because it is mistaken for real fighting.
Despite the number of differences
between the two it is not uncommon to
hear children being told to stop fighting
only for them to complain, ‘But we were
only playing Miss!’ As adults, perhaps we
can learn from the children themselves
by observing and identifying what criteria
do they most commonly use to tell the
difference between the two.
In his study of rough and tumble play
Reid (2005) notes that this behaviour
between friends is one of the few ways
boys in particular have of expressing care
for one another. ‘It gives the appearance
of aggression and hostility but in reality is
an expression of caring’ (ibid: 67). Rough
and tumble, Reid comments, allows boys
to express their feelings of care, and
experience close and friendly touch in a
socially acceptable way.
Unfortunately, rough and tumble is
frequently prevented in many settings
where children play. Engaging in vigorous
play may result in children being told
to ‘play nicely’ or to ‘stop being silly’
as the behaviour doesn’t fit with the
conduct the adults prefer or are trying
to encourage. This attitude is the very
opposite of the playwork approach. A
common argument used by some adults
to justify stopping rough and tumble play
is that ‘it will end in tears’, in other words,
Smith (2010) reports on studies that show
children use clues from participant’s facial
expressions (‘it was play because they
were smiling’). They also pay attention
to the emotional state and intention of
the players, (‘it was a real fight because
they were angry’, or ‘that kick didn’t hurt
so it was play fighting’). Another study
(Costabile et al 1991) showed videotaped
footage of play fighting to children in
England and Italy.
19
• Fathers engage in more rough and
tumble play with sons
Both groups of children, some as young
as five, were able to tell the difference
between play fighting and real fighting
using similar reasoning. They were even
able to differentiate easily between the
two when it involved children speaking a
foreign language! The more experience
of play fighting children had the more
accurate their judgements were.
• Girls’ play is more closely supervised
• Many teachers and other adults inhibit
physically energetic play which they
consider inappropriate for girls
• Children have a clear idea of what is
considered appropriate behaviour for
their gender. This is re-enforced by
peer pressure
Just as children are better than adults
at distinguishing play fighting from real
fighting, men, overall, are more accurate
than women (Pellis and Pellis 2009).
However, this difference is greatly
reduced if women have had experience
of play fighting as a child. For us as
playworkers, it is vital that we are aware
of the differences between play fighting
and real fighting and this is especially
important if we have little or no personal
experience on which to draw.
• Normal exposure to male hormones
during early development predisposes
boys to vigorous activities
• In traditional societies adolescence
is often characterised by periods of
ritualised physical contests, which
are related to future prestige and
community standing.
There are differences between boys’
and girls’ play behaviour and these are
especially apparent in rough and tumble
play. Boys engage in more rough and
tumble play and this has been found in
almost all human cultures (ibid). These
differences include parent-child play and
play with peers (Smith 2010). What could
be the cause of these differences? Smith
outlines a number of possible social and
biological reasons including:
It is worth emphasising that although
studies do show that boys engage in
more rough and tumble than girls, that is
not to say girls don’t take part in vigorous
play. The gender differences are most
acute in play fighting where partners
attempt to wrestle for superior position.
They are less apparent in behaviour that
attempts to playfully slap, kick, push, pull
or hold another child without any attempt
to pin them down (Aldis 1975).
There are differences between boys’ and girls’ play
behaviour and these are especially apparent in rough and
tumble play.
20
Not all adults are sympathetic to vigorous
physical play and as playworkers we
need to be able to explain its importance
and advocate its role as part of a
necessary range of play behaviours.
When there is rough and tumble between
boys and girls it is often interspersed
with chases and takes the form of
repeated attack and retreat, for example,
games of kiss-catch, or ‘raids’ of one
another’s dens in which loose parts
might be stolen. These exchanges would
appear to share much in common with
the alternating roles of dominance and
submission in playful wrestling, or the
desire to both be caught and to escape in
a game of tickling for example.
Locomotor play
Play that involves physical activity has
been relatively neglected in the research
literature (Smith 2010) and there is even
less research on locomotor play than on
rough and tumble play (Powers 2000).
Despite this lack of information, locomotor
play occurs in all cultures in which it has
been studied (ibid) and despite many
variations it contains shared essential
characteristics.
Rough and tumble play can be
encouraged by the provision of soft
surfaces – perhaps a grassy bank or
soft matting. Most of all however, rough
and tumble play needs permission and
understanding from adults who are able
to distinguish it from real fighting and
who appreciate the importance of these
experiences for children.
Locomotor play may be solitary or occur
in groups and can involve a wide range
Rough and tumble play needs permission and
understanding from adults who are able to distinguish it
from real fighting ...
21
of vigorous behaviours including, running,
jumping, rolling, climbing, swinging,
splashing, acrobatics, twisting and
turning, sliding, and even dancing.
would be engaged in locomotor play,
while the child being pushed could not
be described as authentic locomotor play
since they are not using their own effort.
Of course all these behaviours can occur
in non-play behaviours as well so how
is locomotor play different from non-play
activities that involve physical exercise?
Locomotor play occurs in a nonthreatening context and is characterised
by exaggerated, often repeated
movements that, crucially, are done for
their own sake (Fagan 1981). Locomotor
play also features elements of serious
escape and pursuit (Powers 2000).
In general children who are denied
opportunities for locomotor play will
attempt to compensate later by engaging
in longer and more intense bouts of
locomotor play. From this observation
Pellegrini (2009) deduces that locomotor
play must have some developmental
function – but what? One possibility is
contained in Hughes’ (1996) description
that emphasises the exploratory nature of
locomotor play and its role in familiarising
children with their environment – which
parts are safe and which should be
avoided. This view of locomotor play is
based on animal studies that suggest that
this type of play is used to practice and
refine foraging behaviour and escaping
from predators (Fagan 1981).
Like rough and tumble play locomotor
play often features role reversal and selfhandicapping. A child chasing another
may slow down or speed up to intensify
or prolong the play. Locomotor play
is frequently seen together with other
play types such as fantasy, imaginative
and social play, and in games involving
superheroes, monsters, war play,
skipping with rhymes, or group chasing
games such as ‘Cops and Robbers’.
Children may sometimes repeat the same
locomotor behaviour over and over, but
with a slight variation each time once
it has been mastered. Hughes (2002)
terms this idea ‘repetition’ and we discuss
it within the section describing ‘play
mechanisms’.
The most obvious possible benefit of
locomotor play is that it contributes
towards muscular-skeletal development
(Brown 2014), and in particular, increased
strength, endurance and motor skills
(Byers and Walker 1995). These effects
certainly benefit children in the short term
but the evidence for long-term effects is
more controversial (for example Powers
2000 and Pellegrini 2009).
Locomotor play may also be important
for children’s cognitive development.
Several studies on playtime in schools
have shown clear evidence that children
following physically active unstructured
play have renewed concentration and
aptitude towards learning (for example
Pellegrini and Bohn 2005, Brown and
Patte 2013).
Locomotor play is often seen in games
of tag, hide and seek, and climbing and
swinging on play structures. However,
Hughes (2006) notes that some games
are more authentically locomotor play
than others. For Hughes ‘only when the
child is engaged in the physical act of
propulsion or directional manipulation
is this Locomotor Play (ibid: 47). In this
view a child pushing another on a swing
22
deeply ambivalent towards high levels
of what appears to be unstructured
physical activity in children and this is
reflected in over-diagnosed cases of
ADHD (Pellegrini 2009). As with rough
and tumble play children engaging in
strenuous and or noisy play may be
warned to ‘play nicely’!
Finally locomotor play has been
suggested as a means of fat reduction
(Barber 1991). This proposes that play
uses up surplus energy so that it is not
stored as additional fat. It has also been
suggested as a way of children being
able to regulate their body temperature,
for example by engaging in vigorous play
children raise their body temperature
when the surrounding temperature is
low (ibid). While it is not completely
clear which of these benefits is the most
accurate it certainly seems possible that
different forms of physically active play
could serve different developmental
functions.
Facilitating locomotor play requires
an open and varied landscape with
opportunities for running, climbing,
swinging, chasing, and kick-about games.
Equally it is also important that the play
space is genuinely a shared space, and
that it is not dominated by a single activity
or group of children (Hughes 2006).
Physical play also benefits from having
interesting stimulating equipment.
Like rough and tumble play, gender
appears to be significant in the amount
of locomotor play that boys and girls
engage in. Although there is little
research specifically on locomotor
play, boys appear to engage in more
physically active play than girls (Powers
2000). However, the situation is not
straightforward and it may be that at least
some of the difference is the result of
observers measuring different types of
physical play.
Hughes (2008) reported on a study that
modified a number of playgrounds in an
effort to increase the amount of locomotor
play. Adding a rope bridge, some
runways/stepping stones, some loose
parts, a tower, and a large sculpture, had
the effect of raising locomotor activity
between 15 percent and 56 percent, even
after accounting for the effects of novelty
and initial exploration. Locomotor play
can occur in every direction – up, down
and across – and landscaping, together
with appropriate structures, can help
stimulate a range of these behaviours
(Hughes 1996).
For example, Fagot and O’Brien
(1994, cited in Powers 2000) note
that the typical adult observer is likely
to react quite differently to dancing
than to wrestling! Many adults are
Like rough and tumble play, gender appears to be
significant in the amount of locomotor play that boys and
girls engage in.
23
Chasing play
One distinctive type of locomotor play that is common
to many animals and children is chasing games.
Aldis (1975) describes how chasing games typically
begin by a child playfully ‘attacking’ another and then
running away. The second child will then give chase.
Sometimes the chaser will soon give up and seeing this,
the instigator will also stop. Other times the chaser will
catch the instigator, either because they are quicker
or because the instigator has allowed her/himself to
be caught. Most chases are brief and are over quickly.
Chasing is sometimes accompanied by other behaviours
such as verbal and physical taunts and teasing,
elements of rough and tumble, and slaps and punches.
Chasing in its simplest form may just involve two
children chasing each other for the fun of it. However,
more complex forms may involve chasing to make
someone ‘it’, or where touching has a poisonous effect.
They may also involve teams and have specific rules
such as ‘safe’ areas where players can be saved or
rescued. They may have special ways of chasing such
as holding hands, or have elements of suspense such
as ‘What’s the time Mr Wolf?’
Sometimes chasing involves role reversal. This may
be because it is part of the rules such as in a game of
tag. However, it is also a universal phenomenon in the
chasing play of animals and in the rough and tumble
play of children (ibid). Role reversal allows the play to
continue and adds novelty and variety to the play. Of
course role reversal doesn’t always occur, particularly if
games are organised and competitive.
Children sometimes increase the thrill of being chased
by provoking older children or even adults. Younger
children may annoy or tease older children while older
children may even enrage certain unsympathetic adults
‘to get a chase’. Anyone with a younger sibling will
probably remember an occasion when they were taunted
or teased by their younger brother or sister only for them
to run to a parent when they were chased.
24
A reflection
‘I remember playing as a child in the woods and
fields behind where we lived. Most of the time we
were happy to play in the woods and the “bottom
field” that, in truth, was just a small scrubby piece of
land of little commercial value. Occasionally though,
the game would involve going up to the “top field”
where the local farmer often grazed his cows. The
cows were looked after by the farmer’s grown-up
son who, we all believed, hated children. The point
of the game was to get the farmer’s son to chase us
either by us annoying him or the cows (he was much
easier to wind up than the cows!). Of course one day
the inevitable happened and he caught two of us. I
don’t remember playing the chase game there again!
However, we continued to look for chases in other
areas such as the times when we went to the lido and
would flick our towels at the wasps around the bins
so that they would get angry and chase us!’
Conclusion
For many children play is frequently an intensely
physical experience. Any casual observation of
children at play will reveal that they use their bodies
in any number of dynamic, sometimes repetitive,
sometimes wild or exaggerated movements. Young
children especially often exhibit joy in the sheer
delight of physical display – ‘Look what I can do!’
25
Although much of play is physical its purpose extends far
beyond simple exercise. Rough and tumble play despite,
or perhaps, even because, of the amount of physical
contact it involves is primarily a social behaviour. Through
touch children both give and receive powerful yet subtle
messages about friendship, social relationships, physical
closeness, empathy, and the intentions of others.
The importance of physically active play is often
overlooked and underappreciated particularly in Western
cultures and increasingly elsewhere. Traditionally these
cultures have prized rational thought and promoted
the skills that teachers and educators believed to be
useful (Smith 2010). Influential theorists like Piaget
paid no attention to physically active play or rough and
tumble play (ibid). However, this position is slowly being
challenged as increasing amounts of evidence document
the beneficial influence of physically active play on
cognition and healthy brain function.
Children’s freedom to engage in self-directed physical
activities is increasingly limited and under threat in
developed societies. The growth in childhood obesity
suggests that opportunities for strenuous and vigorous
play behaviour are decreasing and may be poorly
facilitated. In those supervised spaces where children
can still freely engage in rough and tumble and locomotor
play of all sorts, it is vital that playworkers fully understand
why these behaviours are important and do not intervene
prematurely or unnecessarily. The evidence suggests
that these behaviours have evolved over human history
and play a vital role in children’s physical, social and
emotional health and wellbeing. It is essential that they
are not prevented or tamed.
27
Learners into
practice
Notes
In the play space that you facilitate do
particular activities or groups of children
dominate particular areas? How does
this impact on the amount of diverse
physical play that occurs?
Some adults are uncomfortable with
play that is overly physical. Why do you
think this might be? How would you
advocate for the importance of vigorous
physical play?
What would you say to someone who
argues that it is better to intervene in
rough and tumble play to keep children
safe?
Do you think that organised sports can
be a substitute for rough and tumble
or locomotor play? Think about your
reasons.
28
?
?
??
?
Children’s play
cultures – an
introduction
Summary
In this section we will
look at children’s play
cultures.
What is culture?
Culture is a notoriously wide-ranging term
to define but in general it is thought to
encompass the ideas, customs, and social
behaviours of particular people or society
(Oxford Dictionaries 2014). It is the product
of learnt behaviour and experiences that are
passed on from generation to generation.
Sutton-Smith (1997) suggests that the basic
features of culture are individuals who
have predictable, sequential and consistent
patterns of behaviour with each other, and
social hierarchies and shared understandings.
Spiegal (2002) describes the idea of culture
as akin to that of inheritance.
29
subjects of socialisation but active in the
construction and determination of their
own lives and of those around them
(Prout and James 1997).
This inheritance is not just about physical
objects but language, meanings,
customs, rituals, and symbols, and
the behaviours behind them. A culture
is learned both through teaching and
through experience.
Children use the events and situations
that they encounter in their play – these
may draw on the routine and domestic,
such as playing shops or teachers; they
may represent the influence of mass
media, such as playing superheroes or
princesses; and they may also use darker
more unsettling influences drawn from
experiences of violence and abuse, for
example.
As well as the specific beliefs, traditions
and behaviours that distinguish different
societies, culture can consist of universal
aspects that are found in every society
such as, categorising people according
to age and gender, the use of language,
and play.
In any description of children’s culture it
is important to ask whose culture is it?
Mouritsen (1998) describes three types of
children’s culture.
Children’s culture
Given such a definition it is unsurprising
that Sutton-Smith (1997) suggests that
all forms of human play are subject to
the influence of culture. Children’s play
culture is both dependent upon yet
separable from adult culture.
1. Culture made by adults for children –
such as children’s literature, toys, TV,
film and computer games. Mouritsen
divides this culture into two subtypes:
the ‘quality’ culture produced for
children that tries to educate and
inform, and the market-oriented
culture that is concerned with turnover
and entertainment.
Some sociologists have gone so far
as to equate play with the culture of
childhood – that is, the arena in which
children as social actors are most
likely to express their values, their art,
their music, their physical culture, and
their language and humour (Prout
and James 1997). It is, like its adult
counterpart, a culture that can at
times be creative or destructive, cruel
as well as innocent (NPFA 2000).
2. Culture with children – where both
adults and children make use of
culture and media. This includes
activities such as sport and after
school activities.
3. Children’s culture or play culture. This
is culture produced and performed by
children. It consists of a rich array of
games, stories, riddles, rhymes, jokes,
singing and dancing, customs and
lore that are part of children’s folklore.
Mouritsen notes that children, in their
play cultures, use various media in
their own way.
Through their play children both learn
about their culture and contribute
towards shaping that same culture.
‘Play, a dominant activity of children in
all cultures, is viewed to be both cause
and an effect of culture’ (Roopnarine
and Johnson 1994: 5). In this two-way
process children are not simply passive
30
appear, from an adult perspective, to lack
purpose. For example, an adult might
ask, ‘What was the point of that?’ Only to
receive the reply, ‘It was fun!’ Adults may
also censor children’s play culture when
it undermines or subverts existing adult
cultures and authority.
These categories draw attention to the
fundamental difference between cultures
that are about children and cultures that
are by children. The former are usually
concerned with ensuring that children
have the relevant skills and knowledge
that adults consider necessary to
become a competent adult. The latter
is represented by play in which children
form their own identities, negotiate
friendships, express their own desires
and wishes while considering others’, and
make sense of what appears immediately
relevant or interesting.
McMahon and Sutton-Smith (1999: 304
citing Bronner 1988) give us the parody,
‘Row, row, row your boat; gently down the
stream. Throw your teacher overboard,
and listen to her scream’. Children’s
play culture is full of examples that
involve obscene or vulgar language and
behaviour, or include examples of bizarre
and fantastic imagination.
Mouritsen notes that play culture
bypasses adult institutions and is
channelled through informal peer
networks. It is passed from one child
to the next, from older child to younger
child. In Newell’s (1884) evocative phrase
the older child becomes the ‘inventor of
legend’. Peer culture can be thought of as
a steady set of activities, artefacts, values
and concerns that children produce and
share when they interact with their peers
(Corsaro 1997). Adults find some of
these expressions undesirable, as they
Adults may also misunderstand particular
expressions of children’s play such as
mistaking play fighting for real fighting.
(We look closer at this issue under the
section describing the physicality of play
in these materials). Through their own
play children can temporarily upend
the existing norms of adult control and
authority, and speak for themselves. ‘The
players can experiment with standpoints,
31
Changing times
redefine their identities and, thereby take
back their power of self-definition’ (Guss
2005: 233). While some adults may
feel some forms of children’s play are
threatening or have little developmental
benefit, this view is certainly not shared by
children (Lester and Russell 2008).
In recent years there has been concern
over the significant reduction in the
opportunities for children to engage in
various forms of play. Brown and Patte
(2013) list the following as significant
contributing factors:
While talking about children’s play culture
we should remember that there is no one
single children’s play culture as there is no
one typical childhood. Particular children
experience particular environments under
particular conditions. These include
an enormous variety of environmental,
economic, cultural, and social conditions
and influences including:
• fear
• reduced access to quality play spaces
• increased amounts of screen time
• a reduction in school-based playtime.
Children’s play is more institutionalised
– organised sports and adult controlled
activities take away control from children.
Mounting pressure on parents to act as
early educators of their children has led to
children’s time and play being increasingly
organised and structured.
• family traditions and culture
• children’s peers
• societal norms and traditions
• adult attitudes towards play
An increase in the number of organised,
structured and paid for activities has
resulted in children’s play becoming
more privatised which takes away
‘sharing’ (Meire 2007). Increasingly
children have restricted access to public
space and especially the streets in their
neighbourhoods. At the same time the
commercialisation of play activities has
grown. All of these factors have further
removed children from street life and
consequently from community life in
general (ibid).
• the availability of time and space to
play
• beliefs around class, gender, race and
disability
• the impact of mass media
• the availability of toys
• geography and climate.
While talking about children’s play culture we should
remember that there is no one single children’s play culture
as there is no one typical childhood.
32
Marsh and Bishop (2014) argue that in
comparison with previous generations,
children, in some circumstances, have
increased influence, such as through
school councils. However, in many other
ways children’s lives are more supervised
and under closer surveillance – and this
is particularly true when accessing space
outside of the home. ‘The public space of
the street used to be a child space, but
…it has been transformed into an adult
space. Conversely, private home space
– traditionally the domain of adults – has
become a child space’ (Karsten 2005
cited in Marsh and Bishop 2014: 101).
One feature of the institutionalisation of
children’s lives in general is that children
now spend more time with adults and
with those of the same age, and have
less contact with peers of different ages.
As well as the impact of smaller families
with fewer children, a report for the
Lego Learning Institute (2003) suggests
that educational theories, which advise
children learn best in small groups of their
own age, have contributed to the demise
of large mixed age groups of children.
Children’s play culture is dependent on
the cultural heritage handed down from
one generation of children to the next.
Traditionally this has occurred through
older children but with the reduction in
the amount of different age play, children
are now seeking inspiration elsewhere,
such as through social media.
Different ages and genders
One common finding across cultures and
societies is that girls have more restricted
opportunities to play than boys. Girls
are often expected to look after younger
siblings or help with domestic chores.
Additionally, there is a gendered aspect to
children’s play culture (Mouritsen 1998).
Boys and girls each have specific as well
as shared games and traditions. Crucially,
play is also used to create and affirm
gender identities, for example, football
is usually seen as a boy’s activity, while
pink is frequently considered a colour
just for girls. Parallel to this conclusion
is the observation that boys and girls
If play spaces are streamlined so as
only to include a limited age range
then inevitably there is a reduction in
what children can absorb in the form of
behaviour, language, culture, and values
without being explicitly taught. This is
what Hughes (2002) terms ‘absorption’
which we discuss in the section on play
mechanisms in these materials. For us
as playworkers it is important that we
operate provision across age ranges and
do not artificially or excessively separate
younger children from older children.
One common finding across cultures and societies is that
girls have more restricted opportunities to play than boys.
33
A fuller exploration of gender and its
impact on play is discussed elsewhere in
these materials.
often choose to play separately and this
practice peaks in early adolescence
(Thorne 1993). Gender separation also
appears to be more extensive in schools
than in many neighbourhoods (ibid).
Differences and commonalities
between play cultures
Although children may often choose
to play separately there are many
exceptions to this and children may
choose to play together for particular
activities. Burn and Roud (2011) note
that girls are sometimes able to join in
boys’ games particularly if they have
the agreed level of skill. The reverse,
however, is less common and boys are
less likely to join in girls’ games unless
it is to parody or disrupt them. Despite
these differences, Burn and Roud caution
against assuming that these roles apply
universally – individual children may not
conform to any gender rule and there are
many exceptions.
Although play is a universal phenomenon,
children’s play cultures are also a product
of their particular society. Most studies
of children’s play are of western urban
middle class culture (Gosso 2010).
However, there are many other children
throughout the world who live in very
different societies. One of the great
benefits of studying the play of these
different children is that we are able to
see the consistencies and differences
between play cultures and so be better
able to suggest some of the evolutionary
Although play is a universal phenomenon, children’s play
cultures are also a product of their particular society.
34
describes how in their play children
represent the activities and values
they observe adults doing. The
closer they are able to observe
adult life the more realistically it
can be represented in their play. In
hunter-gatherer societies children
often have unrestrained access
to adults and adult activities, and
consequently their play frequently
features those behaviours. For
example, South American Indian
boys play bows and arrows while girls
make baskets or imitate their mother
doing body painting. In industrial
societies children have much less
close access to adult work activities
and this is particularly true for male
roles. In contrast these children have
considerably more access to mass
media and consequently characters
from TV or digital media for example
are common themes in their play.
features of play. In her account of play
in different cultures Gosso notes some
of the factors that contribute to cultural
similarities and differences, which we
summarise below.
• The amount of time available to play
is important. Gosso notes that children
in rural or agricultural societies or
who belong to low-income families
have less time to play, as they must
help adults with domestic chores.
Girls in particular have less free time
than boys as they often have to care
for younger siblings or do domestic
chores. In industrial societies this
difference although less pronounced
still exists.
• Children prefer to play with their own
gender. Regardless of the specific
culture boys tend to occupy more
space, go further from their house
to play, play in larger groups, and
engage in more rough and tumble and
locomotor play. Girls are more likely to
occupy smaller spaces, play in smaller
groups with more selection over their
play partners, prefer to play with dolls
and other domestic play, and act out
social activities more often. In many
traditional societies gender roles are
clearly defined.
• The attitude of adults towards
children’s play is important. Adults
vary considerably in their views about
play and whether or not they believe
children should be encouraged to play
or be provided with space, time and
toys. Attitudes range from ones where
play is actively cultivated and valued
for its developmental benefits, to
societies where it is merely tolerated,
to societies where play is actively
curtailed (Gaskins et al 2007).
• The availability of adult role models
affects how children play. Gosso
Adults vary considerably in their views about play and
whether or not they believe children should be encouraged
to play or be provided with space, time and toys.
35
Cadw’r Castell, neu’r Twmpyn’, and in
Scotland, ‘Willy Wassle’. Other traditions,
however, are certainly not old and may
in fact be brand new. These ‘traditions’
can be swiftly transmitted among children
and this allows them to respond almost
immediately to the latest mass media
event or trend (Bishop and Curtis 2001).
Children’s play activities are consequently
a ‘kaleidoscopic mix of tradition and
innovation’ (Roud 2010), of continuity
and change. For example, Burn and
Roud (2011) note that while conkers and
marbles have declined in recent years,
clapping rhymes and fantasy games have
increased tremendously.
• The type and range of objects made
available to children varies. Objects
have meaning and can represent the
cultural values of the society in which
they are given. Gosso notes that
in European or American societies
children are often given miniature
play objects that encourage symbolic
play. In many South American Indian
societies boys receive bows and
arrows while girls receive baskets and
in this way powerful messages are
communicated about the expected
roles of boys and girls. However,
this view should be tempered by the
fact that children, as they become
more experienced players, use toys
in their own ways and to express
their own imagination and creativity
(Sutton-Smith 1986). In other words,
‘the plans of the playful imagination
dominate the object or the toys, not
the other way around’ (ibid: 204).
Children are endlessly creative in
adapting and modifying existing games.
Rosen (2011a) notes that children
everywhere improvise new forms of
games to suit their needs. Using football
as an example children may play ‘three
and in’, ‘keepie uppie’ or ‘everyone
against everyone’. ‘As with all other
games football is used as a source which
children transform to fit the participants
of the moment and the contingencies of
place’ (ibid).
Children’s games
A characteristic of children’s play culture
is the range of unique expressions it
takes. Many children’s games, rhymes
and traditions are passed down over
many generations, for example, ‘knock,
knock’ jokes were already popular in the
1930s. Many traditions are much older.
Skipping games with ropes can be traced
back to the 18th century. The folklorists
Iona and Peter Opie (1959) recorded
jokes that were collected in Queen
Anne’s time, and riddles that were posed
when Henry VIII was a boy. Roud (2010)
records that the traditional cry,
‘I’m the king of the castle / You’re the dirty
rascal’ was known throughout Britain from
Victorian times. It was often accompanied
by an energetic game, versions of which
in South Wales were called, ‘Chwarae
The impact of technology
One aspect of children’s lives that has
changed dramatically in recent years is
the scale and influence of technology.
Many children in developed nations have
access to almost unlimited amounts of
screen entertainment and music. In the
UK in the past 50 years there has been
a 100-fold expansion in the number of
hours of children’s television (Livingstone
2008). Moreover, recently the internet
has become increasingly influential in
children’s lives and now 12-15 year olds
spend as much time on the internet as
they do watching TV (Ofcom 2012).
36
sources this is rarely the case. Instead
children transform, recombine and
subvert the material often in surprising
ways. Examples recorded by researchers
include children using objects as magic
consoles, waving imaginary game
weapons such as ‘light sabres’, and using
mimed versions of first-person shooter
(FPS) games (ibid).
Children and young people are prolific
social networkers and have readily taken
up digital technologies. Inevitably the
characters, themes, and memes from
computer games and online media have
found their way into children’s play.
Children have always used whatever
materials were available in their play as
part of their intrinsic desire to discover.
In their play, children both imitate
and innovate (Sutton-Smith 1979).
However, the influence and reach of new
technologies means that specific local
play cultures are now often mixed with
global trends. Children are enthusiastic
users of mobile technologies and as
their physical ranging has become more
restricted so these communication media
have become increasingly important for
developing and maintaining friendships
and providing spontaneous contact.
There is a concern amongst some that
‘traditional’ games have been displaced
or undermined by more modern types
such as computer games but Burn (2011)
argues that the opposite is the case.
Children have traditionally incorporated
media influences in their play, such as
advertising jingles, pop songs and TV.
These influences are now accompanied
by newer media such as computer games
and social media. In this way Burn argues
that play today has more possibilities for
imaginative and dramatic play.
Marsh and Bishop (2014) argue that the
material children produce to communicate
in their play is influenced by their
experiences. Since these experiences
are increasingly shaped by the influence
of new technology and media, the
materials children produce as part of their
play are now more acutely influenced
by media and popular culture. Certainly
the TV, video games and movies provide
much of the raw material for a range
of pretend play behaviours. Rosen
(2011b) asserts that while it may seem
that children are simply copying these
Children have traditionally incorporated media influences in
their play, such as advertising jingles, pop songs and TV.
37
cinema and radio, then comics, television
and video games were all blamed. Today,
the targets are more likely to be computer
games, social media and the Internet.
However, not all writers on children’s play
share this view. The prolific American
author Joe Frost is deeply critical of the
effect of mass media and new consumer
technology, arguing that ‘many children
have become pawns of their cyber toys
and never learn the age-old joys and
skills of creating for themselves’ (2010:
217). Stutz (1996) bemoans the alleged
disappearance of traditional games and
claims that children are bored and do not
know how to occupy themselves. In her
view, playtime is being taken over and
even destroyed by saturation of electronic
entertainment.
It is not uncommon to hear adults say
traditional games are dying out and
that children don’t play like they used
to. However as Bishop and Curtis point
out, the word ‘traditional’ can be loaded
with particular meanings. Does it refer
to genuinely old traditions that have
been passed down the generations, or
does it just refer to playing in ways that
adults are familiar with from their own
childhoods? Bishop and Curtis comment
that ‘traditional games’ usually refer to
‘socially acceptably’ games such as
marbles, skipping or singing games.
However, other less desirable behaviours
such as jokes, taunts, and forceful
physical games are equally traditional yet
they are rarely seen as in decline or in
need of restoring.
Today, children’s lives are utterly
immersed in popular culture and digital
media. Inevitably these influences play
a significant role in their play. However,
children’s engagement with media is
generally active and not passive, and is
generally a social not individual activity.
Nevertheless there are legitimate
concerns remaining over children’s use of
new technology, not least issues around
safeguarding and access to inappropriate
content. There are also valid concerns
that the virtual world should not be
seen as a substitute for the physical
world. Children need access to a full
range of play behaviours and first hand
experiences in their local environment.
What does not seem to be in doubt
is that children’s play is ever more
supervised and regulated. There is good
evidence (for example Brown and Patte
2013) that children have significantly
less opportunity to play outdoors, and
any opportunities that do remain are
increasingly curtailed and monitored. Too
often adults sanitise or even prohibit the
full expression of children’s play culture,
demanding that it is limited to a narrow
band of predictable outcome focused
behaviours. To do so is to misunderstand
‘the very characteristics of personal
direction, unpredictability, flexibility and so
on that make play so special’ (Lester and
Russell 2008: 221). Children will continue
to play using whatever materials are
available but in many environments that
behaviour is increasingly organised and
overseen by adults.
The decline of children’s play?
Notwithstanding the comments above
there is a belief amongst many adults that
children’s play is declining in Britain and
in other industrialised nations. Although
widespread, this view is hardly new (for
example Opie and Opie 1959). Bishop
and Curtis (2001) note that commentators
in the nineteenth century blamed play’s
decline on the coming of the railway and
national schools. In the twentieth century,
38
Children’s play culture and poverty
One common misconception about children’s play and
children’s play cultures is that they are dependent on
material wealth in order to flourish. Brown’s (2012)
work with the Roma children of Transylvania revealed
that, despite them being amongst the most materially
deprived children in Europe, ‘their play is rich in many
of the most fundamental aspects of a healthy play
experience’ (ibid: 73).
What features led to this claim? Brown suggests
that their play is characterised by the total freedom
to explore and experiment with whatever they find in
the environment. Their play is self-directed with little
adult interference, and is rich in loose parts, creativity,
boisterous physical activity and a variety of games.
Brown notes that the children were free to come and
go as they pleased and determined how and why they
played, or as Hughes (2001) called it the content and
intent of their play. Given this evidence it suggests that
the richness of a play culture is not dependent on the
material wealth of the society in which it operates.
Conclusions
In 1938 the Dutch historian Johan Huizinga wrote that
‘civilisation arises and unfolds in as play’ (1950: ix). That
is, play both predates human culture and is its primary
constituent. Since that time the connection between play
and culture has been revealed to be complex, dynamic
and reciprocal. Children are actively engaged in creating
culture and not simply passive recipients. They take
what is offered by the prevailing adult culture and adopt
and modify it according to their unspoken cultural codes.
This process happens in all societies whether or not
that particular society acknowledges, supports or sets
aside time for play. Consequently children’s play culture
can be thought of as universal and culture specific
(Roopnarine et al 1994).
In recent years there have been considerable concerns
about the effects of mass media and digital media on
children’s lives. Despite the growing influence of all
forms of media, play still involves a continual process of
39
mixing and remixing available influences, both traditional
and new, in children’s lives. ‘This continuous process
of appropriation, accommodation, assimilation and/or
adaptation will continue to take place in the future, no
matter how far developments in technology change the
range of media available to children’ (Marsh and Bishop
2014: 77). Nevertheless there are real concerns over the
decline in children’s freedom to play outdoors and the
increase in all forms of adult supervision of children.
The valuable lesson for adults and particularly all of us
who are involved in facilitating children’s play is that
‘children’s play culture flourishes in corners where adults
do not reach’ (Kalliala 2006). How can we ensure that
children’s play culture has the time, space, permission
and materials that it needs without adulterating its
essentially self-directed nature with adult concerns?
Given the constraints of supervised play provision this
is a significant on-going challenge for all playworkers
and requires a high level of skill, understanding and
reflection.
Learners into
practice
How do playworkers ensure they do not become part
of the increasing institutionalisation of children’s play
cultures?
Why is it important that children should be allowed to
challenge and disrupt adult authority?
Should playworkers be concerned that some games,
which they fondly remember playing as children, are
dying out and being replaced by more modern ones?
Some adults comment that, ‘children have forgotten how
to play’. Do you agree with this assertion? Is there any
evidence for it?
40
?
?
??
?
Play pretence
and creativity
Summary
In this section we will
look at some of the
features and abilities
that characterise both
play and creativity
and look at some of
the implications for
playworkers.
In his obituary the influential psychologist
and psychoanalyst Eric Erikson was quoted
as saying,
‘You see a child play, and it is so close to
seeing artist paint, for in play a child says
things without uttering a word. You can
see how he solves his problems. You can
also see what’s wrong. Young children,
especially, have enormous creativity, and
whatever’s in them rises to the surface in
free play.’
(The New York Times 1994).
41
• problem solving
Play has long been associated with
creativity both theoretically (for example
Vygotsky 1967; Piaget 1962 and
Winnicott 2001) and more recently
empirically (for example Russ 2004,
Garaigordobil 2006), however, this
relationship has never been simple or
straightforward. As we have seen in
these materials, play is a multifaceted
and ambiguous term that covers many
different behaviours, each of which may
have evolved for different reasons and
have different purposes and functions
(Burghardt 2005).
• the ability to produce a useful or
valuable outcome.
Adults who are creative are often
considered to be playful and there
are many examples of highly creative
individuals who frequently displayed
very playful behaviour throughout their
lives (such as Picasso, Einstein, and
Steve Jobs). Creativity is a key part
of much play behaviour and children
can be endlessly creative given the
opportunity. ‘Both creativity and play
require imagination, insight, problem
solving, divergent thinking, the ability to
experience emotion and to make choices’
(ibid: 7).
Similarly the term creativity has only
the most general of agreed definitions
and is used to mean different things by
different people. Nevertheless the two are
closely related. Very creative individuals
are often considered playful, while very
playful individuals, especially children,
are often considered creative. In this
section we will briefly look at some of the
features and abilities that characterise
both play and creativity and look at some
of the implications for playworkers.
Bateson and Martin (2013) differentiate
between creativity and innovation.
Creativity is about developing new
behaviours and ideas, while innovation
is changing the way in which things
are done – in other words, it is new
things made useful. Play generates
lots of different ways of dealing with
the environment – some of which are
useful, and some not. Creativity is
about generating novelty. Russ (2004)
expresses a similar idea when she
makes the distinction between creative
process and creative product. A creative
product must be both novel and useful
or aesthetically pleasing. Of course we
should remember that what is creative
or innovative must be judged in the
context of the individual child and their
development. What for one child may
be routine may be completely new for
another.
Like the term play, creativity is commonly
used in many different contexts and
situations and has been given many
different definitions and theories. These
tend to focus on the creative person, the
creative product, the creative process,
or the creative environment although
they are all interrelated (Davis 1999). In
general, the creativity is agreed (Sharp
2004) to involve:
• imagination
• originality (coming up with new ideas
and products)
• productivity (generating different
ideas)
42
ways of thinking, for example, through
combining, transforming, associating,
and the use analogies and metaphors.
How do the various processes and
behaviours that make up play stimulate
creativity? Mainmelis and Ronson (2006)
suggest that play facilitates five key
cognitive processes that are important for
creativity:
4. Playing encourages experimentation
that under normal circumstances
would not be tried (Bruner 1972).
Because the risks are reduced – ‘it’s
only play’ – and because players are
free from the constraints of normal
rules, outcomes and expectations,
play allows new arrangements, ideas
and associations to be formed.
1. Playing allows problems to be posed
in unique ways and thinking about a
problem differently can lead to new
and creative solutions. By focusing on
the means rather than the ends, the
playing child is not fixed on finding
existing traditional solutions. Because
play is usually motivated from within
and not because of some external
influence it is more likely to generate
creative responses. This idea seems
to be akin to Sylva’s (1977) idea of
combinatorial flexibility.
5. Playing also allows the fantastical and
the contradictory, the symbolic and
the imaginary all of which encourage
creativity. Through play children can
create alternate realities, even entire
imaginary worlds through the use of
imagery, analogies and symbols.
2. Playing encourages the generation
of numerous ideas and solutions in a
flexible approach. This is sometimes
known as ‘divergent thinking’, which
contrasts with ‘convergent thinking’
where logic is used to arrive at a
single correct solution.
6. The most creative solution is rarely
the first to be discovered and the
fluidity, flexibility, and rewarding nature
of play encourages children to play
longer and so stimulate practice with
alternatives responses. This behaviour
also enables a more informed
evaluation and selection of a solution
(Singer and Singer 1990).
3. Playing also facilitates the ability
to take existing knowledge and
transform it into new patterns and
43
3. The capacity to enjoy the excitement
and tension of a playful challenge
All of these processes are facilitated when
children play.
4. The capacity to take pleasure in
solving a problem
Play facilitates exploring different
perspectives, creating alternative
worlds, assuming different roles,
enacting different identities, and also
taking all these, and the players
themselves, out of the cognitive
contexts in which they normally operate
(Mainmelis and Ronson 2006: 95).
5. The cognitive ability to control and
moderate emotions so that ideas and
products can be evaluated.
In line with our earlier suggestions in
these materials, Russ (ibid) suggests that
children learn to express and regulate
their emotions through their play, and
this may also include negative as well as
positive expressions of emotions.
In other words, as Linus Pauling the
double Nobel Prize winning chemist put
it, ‘The best way to have a good idea
is to have lots of ideas’, and play is a
behaviour that produces lots of quirky
variability, redundancy and flexibility
(Sutton-Smith 1997).
In practice these cognitive and affective
processes influence each other and are
expressed together particularly in pretend
play.
In addition to the mental and cognitive
processes involved in creative expression,
play involves several affective and
emotional processes. In her review of
the evidence Russ (2004) highlighted
a number of categories of affect as
important in the creative process.
Important in these were:
Pretend play
Pretence can be thought of as a mental
state in which the worlds of fantasy and
reality are created, recognised, and
navigated without any confusion between
the two (Golomb and Kuersten 1996).
Imagination is not unique to the child who
is pretending – it can be found in many
other forms of play behaviour. However,
‘what makes the imagination in pretence
so important to its definition is that the
goal of pretence… is to enact imagination’
(Mitchell 2007: 53). In other words
Mitchell defines pretence as deliberately
1. The ability to think about thoughts and
images that are emotional, such as
daydreams and fantasies
2. An openness to feel the emotion
itself, such as when children are
enthusiastically involved in a task, or
find comfort with intense emotions, or
when they experience and are tolerant
of ambiguity
Imagination is not unique to the child who is pretending – it
can be found in many other forms of play behaviour.
44
characterised by ‘as if’ behaviour, that is,
where one thing or person is treated as
if it were another, for example a pencil
becomes Doctor Who’s sonic screwdriver,
or a child becomes a dinosaur. Objects
become transformed and freed from
everyday practical outcomes. Pretend
play allows children considerable license
with respect to actual experiences and it
is rarely simply imitation or substitution of
one thing for another. For Fein children
use information about emotional events
and relationships in their lives, which they
then manipulate and recombine in their
pretend play.
allowing an inaccurate or fictional idea
to guide behaviour and feelings. Of all
the types of play that children universally
demonstrate, pretend or imaginative play
has been widely studied as it is strongly
linked with divergent thinking, insight,
imagination and emotional expression, all
of which are highly relevant to creativity
and creative problem solving (Russ and
Wallace 2013).
However, why should pretend play foster
creativity? What evolutionary advantage
could there be? Or as Walker and Gopnik
ask, ‘children need to learn so much
about the real world. So why do they
spend such a large amount of time and
energy engaging with unreal worlds?’
(2013: 40). Russ and Wallace (2013)
speculates that play provides practice
for solving problems and processing
emotions and that both categories
foster creativity. There are many other
ideas about the purpose of pretend play
including emotional expression (Freud
1965), assimilation and adaption (Piaget
1962), providing practice in divergent
thinking (Singer and Singer 1990), and
pretend play as a form of improvisation
(Sawyer (1997). Picciuto and Carruthers
(2011) theorise that pretend play is a
uniquely human adaptation that functions
in part to enhance adult creativity.
Other aspects of pretend play include its
nonlinear quality so that events are not
necessarily played out in sequence or in
time. In pretend play children are aware
that the play is not real and this allows
them to see themselves ‘disconnected’
and from a distance as it were. For
example, children often provide a
commentary on their actions in pretend
play and may talk about themselves in
the third person. (For example, a child in
a playful game of football might provide
a commentary of his or her performance,
‘And now Bale breaks into the penalty
area, beats one, two, three players, he
shoots… and scores!’).
Singer and Singer (2013) note that
pretend play is consistently connected
with laughter and satisfaction in children.
In her study of pretend play Fein
(1987) noted that pretend play was
In pretend play children are aware that the play is not real
and this allows them to see themselves ‘disconnected’ and
from a distance as it were.
45
During make-believe children do a lot
of smiling but are also learning how to
control and work out some of their anger
and aggression.
Make-believe play also encourages
self-regulation and self-control as to
play together children must co-operate.
Sutton-Smith (1997) notes that even
when children have their play modelled
for them by television, they are forced
by their need to co-operate to make all
sorts of compromises. Who will take what
role? How will particular gestures, special
powers or costumes be recreated? How
will each child’s feelings be adapted
within the scenario? What children then
produce is not a reproduction but an
adaptation: not an imitation but a creative
interpretation. ‘The logic of play is the
logic of dealing with emotions such as
anger, approval, or fear, and it has to do
with how these may be expressed and
reacted to in any mundane or fantastic
way that the player chooses’ (ibid: 158).
Creative play activities cannot be forced
and must arise out of children’s own
interests and desires.
Children need sustained periods of time
to explore and work out solutions to the
problems they identify. The play frame
may unfold over an extended time, even
several days or weeks, and without the
uninterrupted opportunity to explore,
the process may be cut short. In his
book The Venture: a case study of an
adventure playground, Brown (2007)
includes Ben Tawil’s story about how a
lorry load of old furniture delivered to
an adventure playground provoked a
two-week uninterrupted display of rich,
imaginative, socio-dramatic and role play.
Children young and old were immersed
in a complex play frame where real and
significant issues from their own lives
were played out.
Encouraging creativity
While we believe all children are
born with the impulse to be creative,
studies show that creativity tends to
decrease when children enter school
(for example Robinson 2006). Children
may become less creative because they
lack confidence, are anxious, or simply
because they are denied opportunities to
engage freely in play in environments that
stimulate the imagination.
Playworkers can make a significant
contribution to the range and likelihood
of creativity occurring by ensuring the
play environment is stimulating and has
a range of interesting props. The Theory
of Loose Parts (Nicholson 1971) is
well established in playwork and states
‘in any environment, both the degree
For creativity to flourish children need
the opportunity actively to control their
play behaviour. As in play, the principle of
freedom is an essential condition for all
kinds of creativity (Vygotsky 1967).
46
of inventiveness and creativity, and the possibility of
discovery, are directly proportional to the number and
kind of variables in it’. Loose parts are simply any
variable that can be played around with to experiment
and discover new things. Creative environments are
not fixed and unchanging but are dynamic, changeable
and sometimes surprising. They offer space in which
problems can be solved and challenges overcome and
contain non-prescriptive props and opportunities that
stimulate the senses. Most of all they allow children first
hand access to alter and change what they find in ways
that they find novel and interesting. Even the messiness of the typical play environment may
be a stimulant to creativity. Recent research (Vohs et al
2013) suggests that disorderly environments encourage
behaviour that is more creative and more likely to
break tradition and convention, than tidy environments.
Of course this is not an excuse for dirty hazardous
environments but it does reinforce the idea, expressed
in the loose parts theory, that environments that are
changeable, adjustable, malleable, and irregular are
likely to encourage creativity.
As playworkers it is all too easy to fall into a predictable
pattern of working where routines and norms become
firmly established. Things are done in certain ways
that make sense at the time but then become fixed in
place even when the original need for them has gone.
‘Assumption and routine make us more efficient but
they also keep us from being spontaneous and creative’
(Runco 2007: 100).
While the play environment can have a significant
influence on the expression of children’s creativity, a
sense of permission is essential. Children must feel that
it is okay to be creative and perhaps to be different in
their thinking. Behaviours that are unusual or distinctive
are always at risk of being ridiculed and it is important
we are able to establish an atmosphere where these
quirky acts of creativity are valued and seen as natural.
By being willing to engage in playful behaviours
ourselves we can establish an unexpected and untypical
adult behavioural norm which gives children permission
to play out the emotional content of their feelings
(Hughes 1996).
47
after a few moments some children
decided that it looked like fun and joined
in. Soon more and more joined until
almost everyone was running around
outside performing the craziest chicken
impressions they could manage. Traffic
even slowed on the adjacent road as
people stopped to watch. Soon children
started impersonating other animals
and the game transformed again, and
the playworker was able to disengage
unnoticed.
Older children particularly may feel
pressure to conform to a certain way of
behaving that is intolerant of ‘foolishness’.
Once, while observing a group of boys
playing a game that involved the loser
having to do a forfeit, a playworker
noticed that one seemed upset, as he
was reluctant to do the forfeit. This
involved running around outside in the
public park while pretending to be a
‘funky chicken’!
The playworker asked whether he could
be the chicken and when everyone
agreed, proceeded to go outside and
give the wildest most energetic chicken
impression he could manage. Everyone
laughed at the playworker but then
Sometimes children will play out themes
that are challenging or contrary to the
values of some of the playworkers
who are facilitating the play. One wellrecognised situation is war play, which
Sometimes children will play out themes that are
challenging or contrary to the values of some of the
playworkers who are facilitating the play.
48
playworkers and there is considerable
skill in balancing the needs of children to
play out negative or aggressive emotions
while protecting them and others from
serious harm. Our response should be
based on the needs of the individual
child and be sensitive to the context of
the particular situation. Nevertheless, as
we noted earlier in these materials when
we discussed conflict, we should always
be tolerant and prepared to give children
another chance.
was, and sometimes still is, banned
in early years settings. Whatever our
personal view about aggression and
weapons, this type of play is often a rich
source of imagination that can allow the
development of conflict resolution skills
and reconciling feelings (Holland 2003).
Sometimes, despite our best intentions
adults can discourage creativity in
children. Richards (2007, citing Westby
and Dawson 1995) describes research
that lists the traits of highly creative
children. These children were:
Reflection
I remember one boy who was generally
considered to be one of the toughest on
the estate. Most of the time he would
hang out with his friends or play football
or basketball, but rarely, despite our
encouragement, would he play in any
way that could be considered childlike, ‘uncool’ or creative, particularly if
his older adult brothers were near. One
day he told me that he had a new baby
brother and he was clearly moved and
excited. Later that day, I noticed him
hanging around, but this time without
his friends. When most children had left
or were outside on the field I watched
him paint a picture of a big rainbow and
then make some tiny animals out of clay.
His demeanour suddenly seemed much
younger and when I smiled at him he
replied that he was making things for his
baby brother. Afterwards when reflecting,
I realised that we still had a way to go in
tackling the pressures that prevent some
children from letting go and expressing
their feelings creatively.
• more likely to make up rules as they
went along
• more emotional
• impulsive
• non-conforming.
In contrast less creative children were
more likely to be:
• sincere
• appreciative
• responsible
• reliable.
Yet when these lists were given to
teachers and they were asked to indicate
what they considered typical of creative
children, they believed the opposite, and
identified higher creativity with sincerity
and reliability.
Play is a trial and error process where
the consequences are usually less
serious than they would be in non-play
conditions. In English there is no word
that means ‘fully justified venture but
for reasons beyond your control did not
Although play is often characterised by
positive emotions and moods, children
do play out negative emotional themes.
This is a difficult area to negotiate for
49
them. One way we can do this is by
asking open-ended questions and
responding to children’s inquiries in ways
that encourage further experimentation.
For example, unable to raise their tyre
swing over a high branch some children
approach us for help. How should we
respond? We could take their appeal
for help at first hand and just give them
instructions. Worse, we could simply do
it for them solving the problem instantly
and short cutting the entire process.
Alternatively, we could respond in ways
that encourage the children to think
in different ways through open-ended
and ‘what if’ responses. These put
the responsibility back on the child for
their creative thinking and encourage
experimentation and persistence.
succeed’ (de Bono 2006). Adults tend
to view anything that isn’t successful
as a mistake. It is important that as
playworkers we are tolerant of children’s
experimentation and accept that they will
make mistakes from time to time and that
these are vital lessons in their growth
and development as independent and
resilient individuals. Sometimes children
will experiment in ways that are at odds
with our adult sensibilities, for example,
‘What will happen if I mix all the colours
of the powder paint together – will it make
a rainbow?’ ‘Can I make face paint by
mixing liquid soap and paint?’ Children’s
creativity is often most dynamically visible
when they are comparing, questioning,
negotiating and arguing with each
other about their developing ideas and
opinions.
A powerful source of creativity is
to combine previously distinct or
unconnected elements into something
new. It is behaviour that often starts with
the question, ‘What would happen if?’
This approach has clear implications for
playworkers and how the play space is
used. Elements in the play environment
meant for one thing may be used for
another, or else combined to produce
something new entirely. We must be
careful to avoid giving fixed purposes to
spaces and materials that limit creative
thinking and behaviour. Spaces that
are inflexible and unchanging deny
children novelty and diversity, and are
likely to produce limited or stereotypical
For example, overheard were two
children being pirates arguing about
whose pirate was the fiercest –
Blackbeard or Bluebeard. A third child
entered the discussion with the comment
that he was going to be Black and
Bluebeard as that way he would have
the powers of both characters, and
besides, black-and-blue was what you
got from having lots of accidents or fights,
so Black-and-Bluebeard must be the
toughest!
Children’s creativity, as with their play in
general, can be encouraged by nurturing
these behaviours without adulterating
A powerful source of creativity is to combine previously
distinct or unconnected elements into something new.
50
One summer some of the children said
they wanted to play hide-and-seek in the
dark and suggested that we make the
play building pitch black inside. This was
no easy task to achieve, as there were
many windows and at the time it was
always light outside. Through trial and
error they discovered how to make a sort
of blackout curtain and after many days
of preparation they did finally get to play
their game inside in the dark.
behaviours. Children usually find such
spaces boring places to play. Providing
creative opportunities needn’t be
complicated or expensive. We know
of one playworker who one day turned
all the tables upside-down in the play
building before the children arrived!
A reflection
One of the children’s favourite games
involved a variety of hide-and-seek. It
was usually played in the autumn and
winter months and at the end of the play
session, as it needed to be quite dark
outside. Like any game of hide-and-seek
children would hide, aided by the dark,
except that in this version, the seeker
would have the large torch that we kept
at the playground, which had a powerful
beam. The seeker would catch children
by capturing them in the torch’s beam.
There were variations involving lasers,
characters from Star Wars, and rules
involving the ‘regeneration’ of caught
players, but the basic game remained the
same.
Conclusion
As Simon Nicholson’s (1971) Theory of
Loose Parts so clearly reminds us all
children are born with the potential to be
creative and inventive. Creativity is not
the preserve of just a few highly talented
artists and scientists. As playworkers
we can facilitate ‘everyday’ creativity
(Richards 2007) in all the children we
serve. ‘For children, creativity in daily
life often takes the form of pretend play.
Pretend play becomes, then, a child’s
creative product’ (Russ and Wallace
2013).
51
Creativity and play share intrinsic motivation, initiative,
freedom to think independently and self-expression,
and so playing and creativity often go hand-in-hand
(Johnson 2007). By nurturing play we can do much
to encourage children to be imaginative and creative.
Loose parts and a play environment that is flexible
and adaptable can promote innovative and resourceful
behaviour. Playworkers themselves can also encourage
creativity by being permissive, playful, imaginative,
flexible, non-judgemental, tolerant of ambiguity, and
even unconventional.
The ability to respond creatively to novel problems
improves with practice and this is something that the
inherently rewarding nature of play delivers. What play
provides is not so much specific skills, although these
may be learnt, but a way of reframing problems, and
exploring and evaluating different alternatives and
possibilities. ‘The key relationship between play and
creativity exists in the flexibility of responses to the
situation and the non-serious interpretation of disparate
stimuli’ (Lester and Russell 2008: 67).
Learners into
practice
Play is a process of trial and error and not a process
of trial and rightness (drawing on von Oech 1992).
What are the implications of this statement for children
in the play environment? What are the implications for
playworkers?
Is the appearance of the play space you facilitate a
foregone conclusion? Are the kinds of play behaviour
that happen there predictable and routine?
When was the last time you were surprised by a child’s
play behaviour?
Creativity can sometimes be challenging and risky.
How comfortable are you with children’s thinking and
behaviour that can be humorous, playful, contrary,
fantastic, anarchic, rebellious and emotional?
52
?
?
??
?
Play Mechanisms
Summary
In this section we will
examine the various
mechanisms taken from
the literature that make
up the play process.
In 2002, Play Wales published The First
Claim – desirable processes (Hughes 2002a)
– the concluding advanced framework for
playwork quality assessment. This framework
is designed to be used in conjunction with
the basic and intermediate frameworks
contained in the earlier The First Claim … a
framework for playwork quality assessment
(Hughes 2001).
As an advanced framework The First Claim – desirable
processes offers a deeper view into play and the
challenges facing playworkers. It is designed for the
experienced playworker to be able to ‘identify and
facilitate the complex mechanisms that drive play,
and critically evaluate their personal and professional
53
• Spaces to play that are attractive,
challenging, flexible, safe, accessible,
and changeable
motives and methods for intervening
in those mechanisms’ (Hughes 2002a:
3). In these materials we will examine
the various mechanisms taken from the
literature that make up the play process,
although we recommend learners study
the complete framework presented in The
First Claim – desirable processes.
• Permission that it is okay to play as
the child chooses
• Materials and props that are diverse
and freely available.
‘Play Mechanisms’ is the term Hughes
uses to refer to playwork interpretations
of a number of scientific observations
of play behaviour. These mechanisms
describe the play process in greater detail
than the play types (Hughes 2002b), for
example. However, we present them here
not as replacements but as an additional
tool with which to develop insights into
children’s play and to inform playwork
practice. Each of the mechanisms
described here can vary in its frequency,
reach and intensity.
In addition to these general principles we
have highlighted points drawn from
The First Claim – desirable processes
about the quality features specific to each
play mechanism.
Immersion
Immersion is defined as ‘being engaged
in a play experience with such focus
and intensity, that temporary sensory
dissociation from external reality occurs’
(ibid: 24).
Each account of a play mechanism
concludes with some suggestions about
how it might be facilitated. In general, all
of the play mechanisms described here
need:
Immersion occurs when children are fully
engaged in their play and lost in thought.
When children are immersed in play
their focus is total and to such an extent
that they lose sense of the passage
of time and experience diminished
consciousness of self (Brown 2009).
• Time to ensure children have
sufficient uninterrupted periods to play
freely and in their own way
54
particularly careful not to disturb children
immersed in play unnecessarily and to
allow them time to re-engage with reality.
For example, when the play setting
is closing we should give children fair
warning to give them time to adjust and
to avoid the shock of being rudely pulled
from one world to another.
‘We stop worrying about whether we look
good or awkward, smart or stupid. We
stop thinking about the fact that we are
thinking’ (ibid: 17). Immersion involves a
loss of a sense of context and a feeling
of being utterly lost in the moment so that
the outside world is forgotten.
If we have ever gazed at the flames of a
campfire, spent hours creating detailed
other worlds, or played a game so
intently that we forgot to eat and didn’t
hear our parents call ‘get in’, then we
have experienced immersion. Immersion
is also often characterised by play that is
‘close up’, for example children engaged
in ‘small world’ play such as acting out
events and fantasies with miniature
figures, cars, blocks or nearby loose
parts.
Related to this mechanism is a
concept that Hungarian psychologist
Csikszentmihalyi (1975) calls ‘flow’. In
his view people are happiest when they
are totally absorbed in an activity so that
nothing else seems to matter and the
activity is done for its own sake. People
in flow are ‘in the zone’ where their
skills are fully deployed and emotions
completely channelled to perform a task.
Flow is characterised by total focus and
motivation. Csikszentmihalyi (1993)
defined eight dimensions of the flow
experience:
Hughes (2002a) suggests that through
immersion the child is transported
to a place where they can become
independent and powerful and that
everything that happens in this imagined
world is a consequence of something
they have done. Accordingly it is a
powerful and satisfying mechanism
for enabling imagination and fantasy.
‘Immersion in play produces a particular
type of knowing that is personalised,
intimate and unmediated. It offers a
type of knowing from within, a practical
handling of lived experience that cannot
be achieved by other means’ (O’Grady
2013: 16).
• Clear goals and immediate feedback
• A balance between the level of
challenge and personal skill
• Action and awareness merge
• Deep and effortless involvement
• Sense of control over one’s actions
• Disappearing concern for the self
• Altered sense of duration of time
To enable this level of engagement,
children who are immersed in their play
shut down their usual awareness of the
outside world - but this may take some
time. Similarly when children are utterly
engaged in their internal fantasy they
may take a while to return to physical
reality. Because of this we should be
• Done for its own sake (autotelic).
As playworkers how can we facilitate
immersion?
In addition to the four conditions
described above (time, spaces,
permission, materials and props) for
55
facilitating play, immersion in particular
requires that children feel safe and
secure, and are not distracted by external
factors that prevent them from entering
into an immersive state.
Hughes argues that this biological drive to
access multiple experiences through play
is sometimes diminished by adult agendas
that have a range of non-play outcomes
more concerned with social targets such
as crime reduction or childcare.
Non-specialisation
As playworkers the implication of nonspecialisation is that we must provide
children with access to the widest range
of experiences when they play, and
this access should be unforced and
spontaneously accessible whenever
possible.
Non-specialisation is defined as ‘being
and feeling so competent with a
continually changing and diverse range
of play choices, that no individual play
type or group of play types is allowed to
dominate behaviour’ (Hughes 2002a: 26).
How can we facilitate non-specialisation?
In addition to the four wide-ranging
primary needs of time, space, permission
and materials described above, Hughes
(2002a) emphasises the need for the play
space to be stimulating, freely available
and diverse. Of course, children must also
feel confident to try out new experiences
certain in the knowledge that they will
not be ridiculed, harshly judged or
disproportionately reprimanded.
For Hughes non-specialisation refers to
play behaviour that engages with multiple
tasks or play types in different ways
and on different levels. ‘It is a browsing
mechanism that enables them continually
to note, assess and update their
knowledge and skills vis-à-vis the whole
of the surrounding environment’ (ibid: 27).
In this way children can develop a broad
range of skills and become good at many
things instead of being expert at a few
(Hughes 2012).
Bio-identification
As a species we are generalists –
adaptable and versatile and have evolved
as ‘specialists in non-specialisation’
(Lorenz 1972). The inquisitive nature of
much play behaviour has clear adaptive
benefits allowing children to access
the widest range of experiences and
information about their environment.
Bio-identification is defined as ‘frequently
interacting with a diverse range of natural
elements, non-humans and other flora
and fauna in preference to playing within
narrow social or cultural parameters’ (ibid:
28).
As a species we are generalists – adaptable and versatile
and have evolved as ‘specialists in non-specialisation’
(Lorenz 1972).
56
of sensory stimulation and appropriate
natural props. Hughes notes that
playworkers must be careful not to
adulterate children’s engagement with
bio-diversity in the play space. Children’s
early exploration and experimentation
may place them at odds with adult
attitudes intent on protecting the
environment.
As non-specialisation encourages
children to engage in a wide range of
play behaviours so bio-identification
supports children’s engagement with the
natural world. Hughes emphasises that
bio-identification encourages children
to develop a worldview in which human
beings are part of nature. However, it is
not just a feeling of being connected to
the earth; our relationship with nature
has been suggested as contributing to
our identity and our values. ‘Not only
is the natural world given an identity
through the way in which people view
and experience their relationships with it,
but it also influences individual identities’
(Clayton and Opotow 2003: 9).
The writer Edith Cobb (1959) described
children and nature as being in an
interdependent relationship in which
children experience a growing sense of
wonder and an awareness of their own
unique separateness and identity.
Combinatorial flexibility
The natural environment is rich in
sensory experiences and is a space that
has its own feel and aesthetic value.
Kellert (2002) asserts that direct handson experience of nature plays a perhaps
irreplaceable role in affective, cognitive,
and evaluative development.
Combinatorial flexibility is defined as
‘freely associating with the play space
in ways which enable the use of novel
combinations of behaviour and which
develop an evolving combinatorial
repertoire’ (Hughes 2002a: 30).
The idea derives from the work of Jerome
Bruner (1972) and states that play allows
children the opportunity to try out novel
combinations of behaviour that under
usual functional or non-play pressure
would never be tried. This, Brown (2003)
notes, has two significant benefits:
It has also been suggested that it has
a vital restorative function for children’s
wellbeing (for example see Kaplan and
Kaplan 1989). For a fuller discussion of
children’s play in natural settings see
Lester and Maudsley’s review of children’s
natural play Play, Naturally (2006).
1. It promotes the acquisition of
information about the world
As playworkers how can we facilitate
non-specialisation?
As well as time, space, permission and
materials, children need a wide range
2. It promotes the development of
flexibility and creativity in problem
solving.
57
statement is that good play environments
offer diverse and comprehensive play
experiences where children are freely
able to access a full range of play
behaviours.
Most objects in a child’s world have
the potential to be used flexibly – for
example, we have observed a child
using a traffic cone in quick succession
as a hat, a robotic helmet, a goal post, a
weapon, a pedestal to balance on, and
finally as a catching device. However,
when objects are combined, the potential
for their creative uses in solving problems
becomes almost limitless.
As playworkers how can we facilitate
combinatorial flexibility?
Hughes suggests that combinatorial
flexibility will occur when children feel
secure and trusted to experiment and
engage in trial and error. The play space
should be stimulating and diverse and
contain different problems and challenges
that allow progression.
In the example above, finding some
rope introduced a whole new set of
possibilities as well as some challenges
for the child with the traffic cone. How can
I attach the rope to the cone? How long
should the rope be to allow me to swing
the cone around? With another cone
could I make a tightrope? What is being
learnt through such behaviour is not so
much specific information but rather a
set of general rules and principles. ‘What
is acquired through play is not specific
information but a general set towards
solving problems that includes both
abstraction and combinatorial flexibility’
(Sylva 1977: 60).
Neophilia
Neophilia is defined as ‘showing
a frequent attraction to new and
novel environmental features and
characteristics’ (Hughes 2002a: 32).
Neophilia (literally love of the new) is the
term that Desmond Morris (1964), the
renowned zoologist and ethologist, used
to describe our tendency to be attracted
to novelty. Our insatiable inquisitiveness
that begins in childhood he calls ‘the
greatest survival trick of our species’
(Morris 1967: 114). Children’s fascination
with their surroundings and all things
new keeps them playing and encourages
them to explore increasingly wider and
more diverse interests.
The more a child plays in a diverse
and novel environment the better she
will be at performing those complex
combinatorial tasks, and solving
the puzzles and problems essential
to her continued adaptation and
development’ (Hughes 2012: 137). For
us as playworkers the implication of this
Hughes suggests that combinatorial flexibility will occur
when children feel secure and trusted to experiment and
engage in trial and error.
58
Repetition
‘He/she’s into everything’ is a commonly
heard judgement by parents who
recognise that their children are driven to
explore and experiment with what they
encounter.
Repetition is defined as ‘repeating
particular actions or patterns of
behaviour, whilst gradually incorporating
minor and major variations to them’
(Hughes 2002a: 34). This is the type of
activity that Piaget (1951) identified as
being the most significant contributor
to the cognitive development process.
In fact he described play as ‘the happy
display of known actions’. Of course this
sort of limited view has not been well
received by either leading play theorists
(for example Sutton-Smith 1997, Bruner
1972), or leading playwork theorists (for
example Hughes 2012, Brown 2014).
Hughes (2008) notes that it is the
principle behind neophilia that,
unconsciously, has driven the practice
of constant modification on adventure
playgrounds. Playworkers, he asserts,
realised that play spaces needed to be
ever-changing if they were to provide
the range of stimulation necessary to
engage children fully in graduated play
repertoires.
The play space should not be static
but rather subject to continual change.
Facilitating neophilia means physically
changing the space so that new and
interesting materials, ideas, concepts,
combinations, and senses are available
and children are encouraged to explore
them.
Despite what its name suggests,
Hughes asserts that repetition is not
simply repeating the exact same
behaviour again and again. Rather he
says, it is behaviour that is repeated
but with crucial differences each time,
sometimes small and sometimes large.
Repetition allows the child to progress
from relatively simple behaviour to more
complex challenging behaviours. For
example, a child skipping may begin
with slow and steady turns of the rope
but once mastered increase the level of
challenge by introducing rhymes and new
movements, including other skippers,
increasing the speed of the rope, or even
attempting ‘Double Dutch’.
However, we should remember that
not all children respond to new sensory
experiences in the same way. Some may
find change confusing and overwhelming
and we must be sensitive to the needs
of all the children we serve. In practice,
this may mean sometimes moderating
instances of change and novelty in the
play setting with routine and tradition so
that both are freely available.
The play space should not be static but rather subject to
continual change.
59
Examples of absorption might include
watching other children play a game
and taking on the underlying rules about
power, influence or gender roles; picking
up different ways of talking; and being
influenced by trends and crazes. Of
course not everything that is absorbed
by children will be regarded as positive
by adults. For example, they may pick
up industrial language, or racist or sexist
language and ideas.
Repetition allows children to develop
and consolidate new skills that are
manageable, and opens up the
possibility of engaging in more complex
combinations of behaviours (through
their ability to engage in combinatorial
flexibility).
How can we facilitate repetition in the
play setting?
Hughes (2002a) states that repetition
requires:
How can we facilitate absorption?
In addition to time, space, permission
and materials children specifically need
a play environment that offers a wealth
of experiences in which they feel secure
enough to open themselves up to a range
of new experiences and influences.
• A number of challenges that can be
overcome
• An atmosphere where children
know they can engage in repeated
movements without fear of ridicule or
censure.
Repetition also requires time, space
and a range of suitable props that allow
repetitive behaviour such as ropes to skip
and steps to jump from.
Co-ordination
Co-ordination is ‘moving different parts
of the body, in relation to eye and object
in a balanced, efficient and fluid manner’
(Hughes 2002a: 38).
Absorption
Co-ordination involves the management
and synchronisation of motor skills, and
provides opportunities for children to
develop control and agility over their
bodies. Examples include, children riding
bikes, performing cartwheels, climbing
trees, or navigating a balance beam.
Absorption is defined as ‘integration of
externally generated stimuli in the form of
behaviour, language, culture and values
into one’s own identity being taught or
instructed’ (Hughes 2002a: 36).
Much of what children learn through play
is not specific information but a more
general outlook that can be applied
across different situations both in the
present and in the future. Hughes writes
that the actual process of acquiring new
insights is a continuous and unconscious
one although it may be driven by specific
sub-conscious desires to belong or stand
out.
How can we facilitate co-ordination?
Co-ordination requires a play
environment that offers a number of
interesting and graduated physical
challenges such as opportunities to climb,
swing, balance, run, jump and crawl.
Hughes stresses that these opportunities
need to be uninterrupted and of sufficient
length so as to allow the development
60
Staring into a fire may encourage
thoughts about the mythic or spiritual
realms, or more generally allow the child
time to mull over their experiences.
of co-ordinated skills. For playworkers a
proper risk-benefit assessment process
should be in place that can facilitate
instances of co-ordination while enabling
children to feel secure.
Hughes (2002a) notes that abstraction is
the product of experience and rumination,
that is, reflecting on and thinking about
the events they have experienced can
lead children to develop ideas and
concepts, and foster the ability to problem
solve.
Abstraction
Abstraction is ‘visualising and rearranging
or restructuring objects and ideas in,
and into their component parts’ (Hughes
2002a: 40).
How can we facilitate abstraction?
Like immersion, abstraction is an internal
process that may take some time and
should not be interrupted. Abstraction can
be encouraged when children feel secure
and at ease and have opportunities
to deliberate and consider in an
environment that provides stimulation and
novelty.
Abstraction is characterised by
contemplating the ideas and concepts
that arise naturally from engaging with
the play space. Hughes notes that much
of what is gained from play is not tangible
and concrete but abstract ideas. For
example, a game of touch may be as
much about feelings of friendship, loyalty
or pride, as it is about physical speed and
co-ordination.
Abstraction is characterised by contemplating the ideas
and concepts that arise naturally from engaging with the
play space.
61
Ranging
Ranging is defined as ‘moving through, exploring
and engaging with an ever-widening area of the play
environment’ (Hughes 2002a: 42).
Ranging is the process whereby children discover
and explore new spaces, gradually extending the
distance between home and where they play (ibid).
The extent over which they are able to range may vary
considerably, from a few metres to a few miles. This may
depend on the child’s age and ability but also disability,
parental attitudes, traffic, and local attitudes towards
crime. Of these factors recent research in the UK and
Germany shows that age is the key factor when giving
the freedom to range to children. Gender on the other
hand has recently become much less significant in
affecting the granting of independent mobility (Shaw et al
2013).
Ranging enables children to construct an internal
map of their local environment and highlight the
potential opportunities and threats it offers for different
kinds of play behaviours. Children’s ranging ‘is an
important factor in the development of their senses of
environments and of their spatial capability in navigating
their way through and between place’ (Catling 2005).
Children’s ‘play radius’ – the area around their home
where they are allowed to roam unsupervised – has
decreased dramatically over recent generations (Shaw
et al 2013). Many parents are under pressure to
encourage their children to spend their time at home
with friends or else take part in activities organised by
adults where their safety can be more easily controlled
(Valentine 2004).
How can we facilitate ranging?
Ranging can be best facilitated when children feel
secure enough to explore a space that is interesting,
changeable, exciting, or potentially offers novel
experiences. Further Hughes (2002a) suggests that
children will be more likely to range if they feel they have
a stake in the space.
62
Recapitulation
What form does this recapping take?
Examples include building fires, making
dens, using paints and masks, large
group events, deep play, growing food,
playing at war, and interaction with
the elements. Frequently, adults have
restricted some of these activities, such
as making fires and playing war, as
they run contrary to their own political
and moral ideologies. The effect of this
Hughes asserts, is that children, unable
to draw on those experiences that link
them with their evolutionary past, may
feel distress and detachment.
Recapitulation is defined as ‘engaging in
“evolutionary play”, some of which will be
more reminiscent of tribal, hunter-gatherer
and pre-tribal behaviours’ (ibid: 44).
The idea of recapitulation draws on
the work of Hall (1904) and Reaney
(1916) and states that children’s play is
a repetition or replaying of the various
successive stages of human evolution.
For example, the evolutionary stages
termed ‘the animal’ would equate to
children interacting with the elements;
the ‘savage’ stage would translate as
sadistic interaction with other species; the
‘nomad’ as children ranging; the ‘pastoral’
as mastery play; and the ‘tribal’ stage as
membership of gangs and clubs.
Recapitulation remains a controversial
idea with many playworkers not because
of children’s desire to sometimes
engage in ritualistic behaviour, which is
well documented, but because of the
unproven assertion that it represents a
genetic link to our evolutionary history.
We refer the learner to the P3 level 3
Award handbook where a number of
serious questions about recapitulative
play are described.
Hughes (2002a: 45) suggests,
‘that recapitulation acts to bring
human children up to “evolutionary
speed” by recapping their past prior
to their engagement in any new
interactions, interactions which would
then be incorporated unto their genes
to be passed on a to the next and
future generations’.
How can we facilitate recapitulation?
Children need to feel that it is okay to
engage in ‘primitive’ and risky activities
and playworkers need to feel comfortable
with this behaviour. Children need
uninterrupted access to a space with a
range of natural features and materials.
In this way he asserts that recapitulation
connects the child’s present with its
genetic past so providing a sense
of continuity and permanence that
contributes towards their emotional and
physical wellbeing.
The idea of recapitulation ... states that children’s play is a
repetition or replaying of the various successive stages of
human evolution.
63
Calibration
Interestingly, while this play mechanism is
concerned with the physical environment,
recent work by researchers suggests that
calibration may be primarily concerned
with the emotions (Pellis and Pellis 2009:
162).
Calibration is defined as ‘developing a
relative relationship with the world based
upon physical comparison – weight,
height, speed of movement – by playfully
interacting with an ever-changing physical
environment’ (Hughes 2002a: 46).
Of course, we do acknowledge, and
provide evidence for, the possibility that
some motor, cognitive, and social skills
are improved, directly, by the experience
of play. Nonetheless, we consider that the
primary avenue for the improvement of
skills is via emotional calibration.
Calibration is characterised by a child
periodically checking the physical
environment and their capabilities so
that they are able to build up a picture
of their developing strengths and
skills. It provides feedback about their
own developing physical capabilities
as well as informing them about their
surroundings. For example, a child
play fighting with another child receives
information about his or her own and
partner’s strength and skills. Similarly,
running, climbing, balancing and lifting
all provide the child with evidence that
allows them to assess and measure their
evolving physical relationship with their
environment. Importantly, calibration is
repeated over time as the child grows
and changes in size and strength, both
absolutely and relatively to their peers
and environment.
How can we facilitate calibration?
Like many other play mechanisms,
calibration will occur more frequently
when children feel permission to engage
in challenging physical activities and
there are a range of appropriate props
available that allow them to climb, swing,
balance and run for example. These
props and the space that contains them
need to be stimulating and flexible so that
they can be adapted and changed by the
children.
64
Conclusions
This overview of the play mechanisms outlined by The
First Claim – desirable processes may feel difficult
and challenging to employ in practice. Perhaps this
is inevitable. Given the multifaceted nature of play it
follows that these mechanisms, as interpretations of
specific play behaviour, will themselves be complex and
many-sided. Recognising, interpreting and facilitating
the conditions for these mechanisms to flourish requires
skill, understanding and persistence.
Much like the taxonomy of play types we examined
in the P3 level 3 Award course, the play mechanisms
described here may occur singularly, or together in
combinations. Moreover, as Hughes (2002a) makes
clear, several of the mechanisms share similar
facilitating features although in practice there is
considerable variation.
While facilitating these mechanisms effectively will
always likely be challenging, the crucial point for
improving our practice, as The First Claim – desirable
processes makes clear, is that we repeatedly engage in
observation, analysis, reflection, action and review. Only
if we are prepared to delve deeper can we more fully
understand the forces that drive children to play and
how we might address them.
Learners into
practice
Which of the play mechanisms described above do
you recognise from your own play provision? Are some
absent and if so, why might this be?
Effective use of play mechanisms in developing our
understanding of children’s play behaviours requires we
develop our observational, reflective and analytical skills.
Using the materials from this qualification (especially
unit 4 in the P3 level 3 Award and Certificate courses)
plan how each of these skills can be developed and
improved.
65
Analysing
playwork
practice
Unit 2
Playwork: Principles
into Practice
Level 3 (P3)
?
?
??
?
Affordances
Summary
In this section we will
look at the affordances
of the play environment
and what this means for
playworkers.
Playworkers are very used to thinking and
talking about the play environment they
facilitate – what it contains, how it looks,
what goes where and so on. Normally this
is done in quite straightforward language.
However, as Heft (1988) notes this is not the
only way or arguably even the most useful
way to describe such an environment. An
alternative method is not to emphasise the
objects or things in the settings - its form,
but instead focus on the kind of actions the
various features of the environment offer the
individual – its function. We might imagine a
child thinking not ‘What does the playground
contain?’, but ‘What can I do, and how will it
make me feel?’
66
A small hand-sized object is perceived to
be graspable, that is, it affords grasping,
and a knee-height surface is perceived to
be sit-on-able and affords sitting-on (Heft
1988). Other examples of affordances
include objects that are lift-able or throwable, surfaces that are stand-on-able or
slide-able, and features that are climbover-able or crawl-under-able. Each
of these functions are relative to the
individual child so that what affords climbover-able will vary according to ability and
inclination. Nevertheless, affordances are
part of what an object is and not solely
dependent on the needs or perception
of the child observing it. ‘The object
offers what it does because it is what
it is’ (Gibson 1986: 139). For example,
a puddle offers splashing and playing
with water but whether this is taken up
depends on the needs and desires of the
child, and often the level of permission if
there are supervising adults.
Thinking in this way can reveal fresh
insights into how children perceive and
experience the play environment and
consequently how it can be assessed,
modified and enriched by playworkers.
What are affordances?
‘Affordance’ is a term that was coined
by the psychologist James J. Gibson
in his 1977 article The Theory of
Affordances. An affordance is a property
of an object that allows an individual to
perform an action. For example, some
bushes might afford hiding, a twig might
afford breaking or poking, and a ledge
might afford jumping, balancing and
walking. Affordances represent real and
measurable possibilities but they are
always in relation to the individual who
recognises them.
‘The affordances of the environment
are what is offers the animal, what it
provides or furnishes, either for good
or ill’ (Gibson 1986: 127). Affordances
provide opportunities for different kinds
of behaviour to any individual able to
perceive and use it. In other words, they
are properties of the environment but
taken relative to the individual (Chemero
2003). Put simply, affordances are clues
from the environment that invite actions.
Gibson suggests that what children
perceive when they first look at objects
is not their qualities but their affordances
– in other words, when a child looks at a
pencil for example, what they notice first
is that it affords or offers the opportunity
to make a mark, rather than the pencil’s
length, thickness or colour.
An affordance is a property of an object that allows an
individual to perform an action.
67
2. Affordances are changeable and
dynamic in the sense that the same
physical feature or object may result
in different responses and play
behaviour from children on different
occasions. For example, a grassy
bank may afford: rolling down, a game
of ‘king of the castle’, an obstacle
to ride over, a place to relax and
sunbathe on a summer’s day, or a
mud slide on a rainy one.
3. The more complex the environment
becomes the more affordances
it offers. The most complex
environments, and the ones most
desired by children, are natural
outdoor environments. Natural
spaces support a wide range of play
behaviours and allow opportunities
for children to mediate their emotions
(Sutton-Smith 2003). A child
comments, ‘climbing rocks is more
fun than climbing trees – but climbing
trees is more fun than the boring
playground equipment’ (Fjortoft and
Sageie 2000: 83). Moreover, play
provision with the highest level of
safety and risk aversion tends to have
the lowest level of affordances and
challenge (ibid). For playworkers,
assessing the number and range of
available affordances can contribute
to an effective evaluation of the play
environment.
Affordances for playworkers
What does this theory mean for
playworkers? Maudsley (2007) notes that
the idea of affordances has a number of
significant implications for children’s play
and playwork.
1. Affordances, as we have already
noted, are unique to the individual
playing child or group of children.
Children respond to both the physical
characteristics of the environment
and to its mood and ambience. For
example, a tree affords a range
of complex possibilities including:
climbing, swinging, hiding, den
making, resting under, meeting under,
using as a ‘mobbing post’ or as a
base for hide-and-seek, discovering
animals, bugs, conkers and fir cones,
and rubbing, wrapping and tying with
objects. These affordances can be
taken up at different times and by
different children according to the
atmosphere and ‘flow’ of the play
setting.
4. Through manipulating and controlling
their environment, children discover
new affordances. This is akin to
Brown’s (2003a) Compound Flexibility
spiral where the flexibility in the
child’s world influences opportunities
for experimentation and control by
the child. This is linked to positive
feelings and the development of
self-confidence, problem-solving
68
isn’t solitary depends on the recognition
or even misrecognition of other’s
affordances. Actions afford more actions.
and flexibility in the child. This in
turn enables the child to exploit the
flexibility in their world more effectively
(see Section 3 of this Unit for a more
detailed examination of this concept).
While we find it useful to break down
affordances into categories we shouldn’t
forget that this is an artificial process
designed to help understanding. In reality
children seek out and experience a
whole variety of affordances – physical,
emotional, and social – all at once.
There is rarely any separation between
how they are perceived; in fact they
are interdependent and reciprocal.
For example, three friends sharing a
tyre swing are very likely accessing a
significant range of social and emotional
affordances such as trust, physical
closeness, belonging, co-operation, and
camaraderie, in addition to any physical
affordances derived from swinging.
Moreover the physical affordances may
be more likely to be taken up because of
the emotional ones. Quite simply, while for
many children it’s more fun to swing with
your friends, it also provides a wider range
of affordances.
5. Children are naturally good at finding
affordances and will often try to
increase them by creating playful
problems for themselves. For example,
a child might deliberately walk on
the wall rather than the adjacent
pavement, or ride their bike ‘no hands’.
Further considerations on the
theory
While affordances are often thought of
as physical objects this thinking can be
applied to other areas in the play setting.
King and Howard (2011) outline four areas
of affordances:
• Structural affordance (referring to
the play space that is often not
changeable)
• Functional affordance (referring to the
activities and resources found in the
play space)
While affordances are usually thought of
as positive and desirable they can be both
beneficial and detrimental. To illustrate
Gibson (1977) notes that a cliff can afford
walking along on one side but falling off on
the other! Different substances that afford
eating can afford nutrition, poisoning or be
neutral. More complexly, the environment,
and the features within it enable people
to afford comfort or injury, and reward or
punishment.
• Social affordance (referring to the
people within the play space)
• Emotional affordance (referring to the
‘feelings’ experienced when in the play
space).
They assert that ‘children’s choice is a
complex matrix of structural, functional,
social and emotional affordances’ (ibid:
14), although arguably the richest and
most elaborate affordances are provided
by other people. All play behaviour that
Affordances can also be perceived
incorrectly as when a child mistakes
poison ivy for ivy, or a bully’s smile for
genuine friendship. However affordances
69
are perceived, whether positive or
negative, they must include an element of
choice.
• Sit-on-able
Another aspect, although only implicit in
Gibson’s theory, is the suggestion that
affordances can be nested one inside
another as when one action is composed
of several other possible actions. For
example, a swing affords swinging, which
in turn comprises balancing, grasping,
sitting/standing, rocking and so on. In this
way complex actions can develop from
the combination of a number of simple
perceptions.
• Ride-on-able
• Run-on-able
• Jump-over-able
• Hide-in-able
• Hide-behind-able
• Swing-able
• Sway-able
• Pick-up-able object
Towards a taxonomy of
affordances
• Throw-able object
One difficulty with describing the play
environment with the type of approach
we’re discussing is the sheer number of
affordances available and the difficulty
of categorising features that have similar
affordances. For example, consider the
following long list of affordances reported
by Heft (1988):
• Dig-with-able object
• Climb-on-able
• Mold-able materials
• Jump-up-on-able/down-off-able
• Sound producing feature
• Walk-on-able
• Prospect/refuge feature.
• Strike-with-able object
• Break-able object
• Tear-able object
• Squash-able object
• Pick-able object
For example, a swing affords swinging, which in turn
comprises balancing, grasping, sitting/standing, rocking and
so on.
70
Non-rigid, attached objects afford:
This list describes the affordances of a
single seven-year-old boy on just one
day based on an earlier observation by
researchers (Barker and Wright 1951).
• Swinging on
• Hanging.
A more practical alternative is to group
different features in the environment by
their common and distinctive functional
properties, for example, trees, structures
and mounds all offer climbing-on. Kytta
(2002, derived from Heft 1988) adopts
such an approach and outlines the
following categories of affordance for
children’s environments.
Climbable features afford:
• Climbing.
Shelter affords:
• Hiding
• Being in peace and quiet.
Flat, relatively smooth surfaces afford:
Mouldable material (dirt, sand, snow)
affords:
• Cycling
• Running
• Moulding something
• Skipping
• Building of snow.
• Skating
• Playing hopscotch
Water affords:
• Skiing
• Swimming
• Playing football, ice-hockey, tennis or
badminton.
• Fishing
• Playing with water.
Relatively smooth slopes afford:
• Coasting down
Environmental opportunities for sociality
afford:
• Skateboarding.
• Role-playing
• Playing rule game
Graspable/detached objects afford:
• Playing house
• Throwing
• Playing war
• Digging
• Being noisy
• Building of structures
• Following/sharing adult’s business.
• Using plants in play.
71
It is worthwhile noting that this list emphasises the
physical aspects of play. The categories that are
described above can of course afford many other types
of play, for example, water not only affords swimming,
fishing, and playing with water, it also affords splashing
your friends and a whole variety of social and emotional
responses. The list also focuses on positive affordances
but of course they can equally be used in other ways,
for example, a shelter affords doing things you don’t
want others to see, and water affords the opportunity to
soak those you dislike or want to tease.
As well as the obvious practical advantages of
categorising affordances in a taxonomy, one of the
benefits is that it makes explicit the fundamental way
children immediately experience the environment. It
provides a psychological insight into the environmental
features that are available to them.
Kytta (2002) describes how the affordances of a
playground can seem different for each individual as
well as for individuals in different situations.
Each child sees the environment through his or her
‘affordance spectacles’ – their affordance preferences.
These are influenced by their abilities, intentions and
activities, but also by social and cultural factors (ibid).
Because of this it is possible to use affordances to think
about features of the environment for specific children.
72
Heft (1988) suggests that a gap in the
fence might afford an attractive squeeze
through for a small child but not for a
larger one. Considered this way we can
ask not only what does the environment
offer children, but also what does it offer
specific children?
‘Shaped’ refers to the manipulation
of the environment, creation of new
affordances, and alteration of existing
ones. By influencing which affordances
are selected, individuals also influence
the affordances that are available for
others.
Further developments of the
theory
By adopting this scheme ‘potential
affordances become qualities of the
environment and actualised affordances
become individual relationships with the
environment’ (Kytta 2003: 49).
We have seen that affordances are
offers of activity to the individual from the
environment, but this offer may only be
seen when the child’s abilities, intentions
and social needs match what is provided.
For example, a tree affords climbing but
only for those able and willing at the
time to climb it, as well as those allowed
to climb it. From this, Kytta (2003, after
Heft 1988) argues that it is useful to see
affordances in terms of stages or levels
rather than as either/or phenomena. She
develops the idea of affordances into a
scheme for assessing the qualities of a
child-friendly space, which, in brief, we
outline below.
Just because an affordance is present
doesn’t mean it will occur. ‘Actualised’
affordances are subject to social and
cultural influences that may promote
or restrict social activity. Drawing on
the work of Reed (1993) Kytta (2003)
describes three subdivisions of her
scheme that describe how affordances
can be promoted, constrained, or taken
up independently by the child.
Field of promoted action. Affordances
are carried out according to approved
social and cultural norms. These
messages about how to behave can
be blatant or subtle. For example,
playworkers might convey – deliberately
or otherwise – traditional gender roles by
having male play staff always oversee
sporting and active play, while female
staff oversee artistic and creative
activities. We do not recommend such a
restricted approach.
Potential affordances. These are all the
affordances that are in principle available,
and are infinite in number.
Actualised affordances. These include
all the affordances that have been
perceived, taken up, and shaped by
individuals.
Affordances are offers of activity to the individual from the
environment, but this offer may only be seen when the child’s
abilities, intentions and social needs match what is provided.
73
Field of constrained action. Affordances are limited
or prevented through adult prohibition or through poor
design and layout of spaces. For example, children are
prevented from engaging in messy or wet play because
of parental concerns about dirty clothes.
Field of free action. These are affordances that the
child has explored and taken up independently. For
example, a playworker is supervising some children
sitting around a fire toasting marshmallows. A child,
noticing some nearby green leaves, picks some up and
throws them on the fire and discovers, first-hand and
to everyone’s displeasure, how to produce thick acrid
smoke from a fire. The field of free action overlaps the
previous two fields in that the child independently can
realise affordances that are both socially promoted and
suppressed.
Thinking about the play environment
Where do these further developments of Gibson’s
original theory leave us? As we have previously
described in these materials there are often many
barriers to the play process in modern environments
and so a key role of all playworkers is the facilitation
of stimulating, enriched play environments, which are
based upon, and responsive to, children’s play needs
(for example Hughes 1996, Brown 2003b, PPSG 2005).
By considering the number and range of affordances
that have been freely taken up or ‘actualised’ by children
we are undertaking a comparable role. What does the
environment offer or ‘promise’ the child, and are these
offers freely accessible to the children we serve?
This type of thinking can provide a useful mechanism
with which to analyse the play environment we facilitate.
For example:
• Does the environment allow for affordances of
all kinds to be taken up and shaped by children
themselves?
• What messages does the physical environment
give out? Does it suggest a place of exploration,
74
language or climbing on the tables, or
more subtle such as the fulsome smiles
and compliments for a child who helps
staff tidy up.
experimentation and excitement, or
is it a place of closely supervised
predictable routines?
• What messages do the playworkers
give out? Are we likely to constrain
or promote specific behaviours and
certain types of play, or are we
more likely to take a back seat and
allow children to navigate their own
affordances and direct their own play?
The puddle
At a summer playscheme attached to a
school, it was decided by the supervising
adults that it would be good to undertake
a project to find out where the children
wanted to play. To help with this, their
plan was to create a display informing
everyone about children’s favourite
places to play. The researchers gave
the children some disposable cameras
and asked them to take pictures of their
favourite places to play in the surrounding
area. Fortunately for the adults the
children agreed that this task sounded
like fun and set about taking photos. After
a few days the photos were printed and
catalogued. The adults set about creating
a display of favourite places – there were
pictures of back gardens, bedrooms, a
few of the park, then they came across
a picture of a small dirty puddle behind
the building. The adult called one of the
younger children over who had taken it
and asked,
• Is the play space a versatile and
flexible space that allows for
alternatives and different uses, or is it
a space where children are expected
to do specific activities at certain times
in particular areas?
• Do the social and cultural norms
of the play setting and/or local
environment and community
contribute towards children’s free
action or undermine it?
Each of these questions could act as
the starting point for an analysis of the
play environment, what it offers and
how children perceive and experience it.
They can reveal how the environment,
the objects it contains, and how they
are viewed by the playworkers within
it, influence the play that occurs. For
example, an environment that is limited
and restricted in the props and materials
available to children inevitably biases
the range of affordances and play
behaviour. Similarly, an environment that
unnecessarily restricts what the children
are offered, or unduly promotes some
behaviour over others, again limits the
variety and richness of the environment
and the affordances it contains. These
influences can be blatant such as a
playground rule that prohibits bad
‘Did you take this?’ The child nodded.
‘Well, I think you’ve made a mistake – we
wanted your favourite place to play.’
The child responded, ‘But it is my
favourite place to…’
‘Oh, don’t be silly,’ interrupted the adult,
‘we need your favourite place. Here, why
don’t you choose somewhere from these
other pictures – they’re much nicer.’
The child looked bewildered and
hesitated so the adult took a picture of
a park and placed it next to the child’s
name on the display.
75
1. They are relative to the capabilities of
the child, for example a high platform
affords jumping off but only for the
brave. Of course it also depends
on many other factors such as age,
height, and previously acquired motor
skills for example.
‘There, doesn’t that look nice?’ exclaimed
the adult. The child began to walk away
in silence.
‘That little one’s a funny one; I don’t know
what’s got into her,’ observed the adult to
a colleague.
2. They exist independently of the child’s
ability to perceive it, for example the
jump-off-ability of the platform exists
whether a child perceives it or not.
For children a good play environment
becomes a place and not just a space.
That is, rather than just being a physical
location or space, it becomes a complex
subjective place of emotional and
sensory connections, and symbolic
meaning. It becomes defined and named
according to children’s culture and from
their meaningful experiences as a place
‘they are meant to be’ (Palmer 2008).
3. The affordance remains even though
a child’s needs and goals might
change, for example the platform
offers the affordance jump-off-ability
even though the child may have
conquered that particular challenge
and moved on to something else for
example.
Conclusions
Despite these statements there is still no
consensus on the wider understanding
and application of the theory (Zeleke and
Junshan 2009). For playworkers on the
ground there is still much to explore and
refine around affordances both in theory
and practice.
To conclude, affordances are
opportunities for action; offers from the
environment to the child. They can be
positive or negative as well as physical,
emotional, and social. McGrenere and Ho
(2000) state that an affordance has three
fundamental properties:
76
The instinct to explore and play means that children
are expert at seeking out affordances, and this can
lead to conflict with adults who are keen to promote
other agendas that may override play. Children’s drive
to find affordances for themselves while strong, is not
impervious to disapproval and criticism. Consequently
playworkers have a vital role in creating an atmosphere
of freedom, confidence and permission.
Affordances offer a powerful conceptual method for
investigating how children perceive and interact with
their environment. Moreover, when used as part of a
taxonomy, they can also form part of the assessment
and evaluation of the play environment and how
individual children view and use it.
Learners into
practice
How do the props you make available to children
influence their play?
To what extent are the affordances in your play
provision promoted or constrained by adults as opposed
to freely engaged in by the child?
How does the theory of affordances fit with other ideas
and theories examined in these materials (such as
compound flexibility, loose parts, and the affective
environment)?
Sometimes children use elements in the play
environment in very different ways to how we initially
imagined they might. Examples we have seen include:
children riding bikes up a slide, using pancakes as
Frisbees, and footballs stuffed under t-shirts to simulate
pregnancy!
How does this relate to the idea of affordances, and
what are the implications for playworkers responsible for
modifying and enhancing the play environment?
77
?
?
??
?
The affective
environment
Summary
In this section we will
look at the affective
environment and how
it impacts on children’s
emotions.
When asked about a memorable play
experience adults often recall what it felt
like, indeed the feelings involved can remain
powerful and vivid for many years. Children
also frequently talk about play in terms of
how it made or makes them feel. Despite
this, it is common for playworkers to spend
considerable energy thinking about what
the physical play space contains but much
less consideration is usually given to its
emotional impact. This has led some to
assert that playworkers have become overconcerned with the ‘doing’ elements of
play at the expense of the role of emotion
(Kilvington and Wood 2006).
78
Council on the Developing Child (2004)
lists the essential features of emotional
development as:
Children’s preferences about their
environment come from a direct and
immediate emotional response yet the
processes underneath are complex and
far-reaching (Kaplan 1992). It is some of
these processes that we shall describe in
these materials.
• Identifying and understanding one’s
own emotions
• Reading and understanding others’
emotional states
The term ‘affective’ is used in different
ways but is generally agreed to be
concerned with the emotions, feelings
and moods. Used in this sense ‘affect’ is
what you display or experience towards
an object or situation (Damasio 2000).
When emotions become frequent and
longer lasting they are considered
moods. One of the difficulties for anyone
concerned about how the environment
impacts on children’s emotions is
that while basic positive and negative
emotions have recognisable common
expressions, the detail and depth of many
feelings are internal and often hidden. ‘It
is through feelings, which are inwardly
directed and private, that emotions, which
are outwardly directed and public, begin
their impact on the mind’ (ibid: 36).
• Managing strong emotions
• Regulating one’s own behaviour
• Developing empathy
• Establishing and sustaining
relationships and friendships.
Children’s experiences and the influence
of their environment affect multiple
regions of the developing brain. ‘Stated
simply, as young children develop, their
early emotional experiences literally
become embedded in the architecture
of their brains’ (ibid: 1). Moreover, the
neural circuits concerned with emotional
regulation are closely involved with
those functions responsible for planning,
judgement, and decision-making. In other
words the emotions are not separate from
logical thought but integral to the process
of reasoning and decision-making
(Damasio 2000).
Why is it important that children can
experience and play out their feelings?
Children’s emotional development has
immense importance and significance
in their lives and is crucial for wellbeing
and the ability to navigate social
relationships. The National Scientific
Children’s experiences and the influence of their
environment affect multiple regions of the developing brain.
79
Given the importance of emotional
development it is crucial that playworkers
support its expression in the play
environment, but what is an affective
play space? Kilvington and Wood (2006)
define an affective play space as one
where children can:
strong feelings in a safer environment in
a process known as ‘displacement’. If we
have ever taken out our frustrations at
work or on our loved ones at home then
we have ‘displaced’ our feelings so they
can be expressed in a safer substitute
way.
• Express whatever they are feeling,
whether this is an expression of their
past or a response to the present
Children may frequently be seen
expressing a range of strong emotions
through their play and for SuttonSmith (2003) this is no accident. As we
described in the P3 level 3 Certificate,
Sutton-Smith proposes that play acts as a
kind of moderator of the emotions, giving
them a voice while preventing them from
overwhelming the child.
• Experiment with different feelings
• Experience new feelings from a range
of stimuli.
Let’s examine each of these points in
more detail.
Specific emotions are linked to the
motivation for specific kinds of play
so that ‘individuals who play more will
be more capable of controlling their
emotional lives in terms of their capacities
for performance strategy, courage,
resilience, imagination, sociability, or
charisma’ (ibid: 15). For playworkers the
implications of this are that children will –
in fact, must – on occasions play through
their primary emotions, including those
that we find disruptive or uncomfortable
such as anger or fear. We need to
be able to respond appropriately and
playfully to these feelings and recognise
that controlling their play is a vital part of
children controlling their emotions and
vice versa.
Play is widely agreed to be the natural
mechanism through which children better
understand their thoughts and feelings
and ‘prevent or resolve psychological
challenges and learn to manage
relationships and conflicts through a
natural, self-guided, self-healing process’
(UNCRC 2013: 10). Play can be a way
for children to make sense of what is
happening to them. It can be a means
of ‘playing out’ material in a way that is
restorative and healing. Indeed Sturrock
and Else (1998) claim that this is one
of play’s main functions. The good
play environment is also a therapeutic
environment.
The affective play environment should
not be a static imitation of the adult
world but a rich, flexible and evocative
collection of loose parts, materials and
opportunities that stimulate the senses
and the imagination. It is an environment
that is accessible, welcoming, and
playful where reality can be suspended
Traumatic memories are not always
accessible through language and instead
may emerge gradually through imaginary
play, for instance (Akhtar 2011).
Children may take out their feelings and
frustrations on the playworker or the
play space as a defence mechanism; in
other words, they express their anger or
80
Russ (2004) identifies a number of
affective processes that occur in play:
and meaning reordered through the
everyday magic of the play process. To
be successful, the affective space needs
to contain novelty and stimuli that arouse
children’s curiosity and creativity. It should
be an environment of alternatives, of
experimentation, and of self-direction. The
affective play space is as much felt as
seen and heard, and the ambience of the
space will have a powerful impact on the
type of play behaviours that occur, as well
as the likelihood of children returning to
the space.
• Expression of emotion – the ability to
express both positive and negative
emotions in play
• Expression of affect themes – the
ability to include themes about specific
emotions in play, for example a child
building a fort with guns expresses
ideas about aggression
• Comfort and enjoyment – children
experience pleasure and joy through
becoming immersed in play
Although we are often aware of how we
are feeling, sometimes these feelings
are subconscious or unconscious.
For example, we observe a group of
children behaving in a way that makes
us uncomfortable but we are unsure why,
or our intuition tells us that a situation
is about to change and we need to act.
Similarly sometimes children will only be
dimly aware of the reasons for the feelings
that they are experiencing and so need
time and space to make sense of them.
• Emotional regulation and modulation
of affect – the ability to contain and
control both positive and negative
emotions
• Cognitive integration of affect – the
ability to express affect within a
cognitive context, for example the child
expresses aggression within a story
about a boxing match.
81
This list provides a number of processes
that could be observed and assessed,
however, they focus on the individual
child. What about the influence of the
environment?
• Enjoyable – children can have fun
without too many rules
The atmosphere of a play environment
is affected by the moods and emotions
of the children who play there and
these in turn are influenced by the
feel or ambience of the space that the
playworkers create. Hughes (1996)
suggests the following characteristics or
‘ambience indicators’ that we summarise
below, which playworkers facilitating a
supervised and hence artificial play space
should adopt.
• Familiar – the space is recognisable
and provides a sense of place and
belonging
• Available – the space is available
when children need it
• Sharing – playworkers routinely
demonstrate and value sharing
behaviour
• Friendly – the space is welcoming and
friendly to every child
• Homely – children will feel relaxed,
comfortable and at home
• Cliché free – the space avoids
formulaic activities
• Multi-choice – children get to choose
what they do or don’t do
• Accessible – the space is easy to get
to for all children
• Non-detrimental – the ethos of the
space is one where children can be
themselves without fear of ridicule
• Caring – the space has skilled and
committed playworkers who routinely
offer caring and sensitive help when
needed
• Non-judgemental – differences are
accepted as normal
• Trustworthy – children trust the
playworkers as honest and genuine
• Non-petty – the space doesn’t have
silly or disproportionate rules or
sanctions
• Empowering – playworkers facilitate
and enable children to explore and
experiment for themselves
The atmosphere of a play environment is affected by the
moods and emotions of the children who play there ...
82
• Variable – the space is well-resourced
and offers a range of experiences
• Alternative – the space offers
inspiring, interesting and challenging
alternatives and playworkers are
aware of what is missing in children’s
experiences
• Sensitively supervised – the
playworkers generally supervise from
a distance and only intervene when
asked or to prevent injury.
• Respectful – playworkers respect
children and provide a service for
them
Playworkers contribute to the feel of a
play space by being playful, friendly,
energetic and even quirky (ibid). Crucially
they are non-judgemental (Brown 2008)
and careful not to adulterate play in any
intervention. By their actions playworkers
can transmit a ‘can do’ message that
promotes invention and creativity while
reducing the fear of ridicule. Moreover,
as we have indicated elsewhere in these
materials playworkers are careful not to
bring any personal baggage into the play
environment. The play environment exists
solely for children’s play needs and not
as a resource for adults to work through
their own issues, concerns or hang-ups.
• Secure – the space should be
overlooked and playworkers should be
vigilant especially for younger children
• Safe – the environment should
be appropriately maintained in
accordance with the relevant
standards, laws and procedures
• Spacious – the space should be large
enough to cater for a variety of play
needs
• Sanctuary – the space feels like
it belongs to the children and the
access of other adults is sensitively
handled
A reflection
Some of the girls had asked to do tiedyeing at our play centre and I had
given them the dyes, lots of plain fabric,
scissors, and some old plain white
t-shirts. They were having a great time
experimenting and showing each other
the results, as well as generally getting
covered in dye.
• Useful – the space offers experiences
that are flexible, creative and
transferable
• Unthreatening – behaviour that is
oppressive such as bullying and
racism is tackled appropriately
Playworkers contribute to the feel of a play space by being
playful, friendly, energetic and even quirky.
83
I noticed a few boys looking at them; however, at the
start of the activity one of the older more influential boys
had declared that tie-dye was ‘gay’ and no boys dared
contradict him and get involved. I thought this was really
sad and I suppose I could have immediately got into a
discussion about homophobia but that didn’t seem right
or likely to achieve much. Instead I just got some dye
and some material and sat in the corner to have a go
myself. I found myself making a sweatband that tennis
players might use around their head, and then I ended
up making another one with a kind of rising sun design
at the centre.
One of the boys who had watched the girls earlier came
over and asked could he have a go. I gave him all the
materials I had and he looked quietly pleased. Soon
another boy came over and then another all keen to
have a go. Eventually everyone wanted to get involved
and I was kept busy trying to find an endless supply of
fabric. Even the boy who had declared that it was ‘gay’
was soon engrossed in making something. After a while
the activity began to peter out but the fabric tie-dyed
headbands the children had made led to the creation of
a superhero ninja game and I was left alone to tidy up.
If the playspace is truly owned by the children then it will
be a place where they can work through and play out
their experiences, even when these are challenging for
the playworker.
84
The affective space in practice
The ambience of a play space is no less important
than its physical contents. Ambience can be thought
of as the character or atmosphere of the space – its
special quality. Often this is felt rather than deliberately
considered, but as thoughtful playworkers, we can
actively influence the ambience and atmosphere of the
play space.
1. We ensure that it stimulates the senses
Visually the space should be interesting and varied.
Lighting, colours, decoration and images can all convey
– individually and in combination – a range of emotional
states or moods. For example, just to take one of these
elements, lighting can be anything from dazzling to dim,
neon, spotlit, flashing, twinkling, coloured or switched
off completely. The other visual elements can be equally
diverse.
Aurally the space is affected by music, human
voices, noise and the background ‘hum’ of activity, by
mechanical sounds, natural sounds such as the wind or
birds crying, and sounds from the external environment
such as traffic. While not all of these can be controlled,
music, for example, can be loud or soft, tranquil or
aggressive, danceable or background, live or recorded,
new or old, familiar or strange, and represent almost
every style and culture known.
For smell, the space can be influenced by aromas of
every kind from the pungent fuzz of perspiration on a
summer’s day to the smell of baking bread, cakes or a
home made curry. Other sources include natural and
aromatic scents such as cut grass or acrid smoke from
a fire; even artificial odours like the whiff of cleaning
chemicals influence our feelings about a place.
For taste, food of all kinds – cooked, uncooked, and
wild – can introduce new experiences and recall old
ones. Berries picked from a bush or tree can open up
a new world for children more accustomed to junk and
processed foods.
Tactile experiences can be enormously varied and can
include textures and qualities of all kinds, such as the
85
parts (Nicholson 1971) and enabling the
process of compound flexibility (Brown
2003).
comfort of a homemade cosy corner
improvised from blankets and coats, the
curious elasticity from pulling dried glue
off skin, the joy of deliberately getting
very muddy or wet, or painting your face
blue as part of some fantasy role or just
because you can. Human touch is also
very much part of friendship and care, as
well as games with physical contact and
challenge.
3. The environment must satisfy
children’s basic emotional needs
The affective space is one where
children feel respected and accepted,
and where they are valued for whom
they are, and listened to without being
belittled or patronised. Their opinions,
concerns and feelings are important. The
affective space empowers children and
treats them as competent and capable
individuals who can make decisions
about their own play needs. In it, children
direct their play in their own way and for
their own reasons (Hughes 2012) and
this self-direction is critically important
in children’s sense of what is, and what
isn’t, play.
2. The environment should stimulate
children’s imagination
Variety, diversity and novelty of all
kinds can provide interest and so
spark all kinds of emotional responses.
Environments should contain different
levels of complexity to intrigue and
challenge without bewildering or
continually frustrating children. They
should contain a level of mystery and the
unexpected such as the very big and the
very small, the secret and the hidden. For
example, den and fort building tap into
a deeply held human need for privacy
and security and allow opportunities for
contemplation, autonomy, subterfuge,
rest, confiding, and experimentation
(Leichter-Saxby 2009).
The affective space includes all children
and endeavours to meet their play needs
as part of the community in which they
live. The affective space feels secure and
like a place where children are accepted,
protected and cared for, and won’t be
ridiculed or made fearful. It is a space
where children trust the playworkers to
be caring, helpful, and sheltering when
needed.
A stimulating play environment should
allow for the quirky, where the fantastical
and surreal are not out of the ordinary.
Finally it should be a flexible space where
elements can be combined, linked, and
used together in new and unexpected
ways. It is an environment featuring loose
4. Playworkers provide the supporting
framework for these things to happen
They actively cede control and power
to children and enable children’s
A stimulating play environment should allow for the
quirky, where the fantastical and surreal are not out of the
ordinary.
86
culture to grow (Palmer 2008). They emphasise by
their words and actions that it is okay to be oneself
and to experiment, try out and give something a go,
and explore all things in a positive spirit of play and
playfulness (ibid). Playworkers are confident, easygoing and tolerant, and have the knowledge and skills
to assess the feel of a play space and diagnose when
it is and isn’t working well. They are adept at handling
conflict and understand that children may play out and
express strong emotions and occasionally clash with
others. They are skilled at interpreting feelings and nonverbal cues and signals. Playworkers are interested in
what children are interested in.
Children delight in showing their interests to adults who
care for them, and by responding with genuine concern
we show that we respect and are interested in them. As
a result children in turn will be more enthusiastic and
more motivated to continue playing. Finally playworkers
are playful and good-humoured and are able to spark off
instances of play but quickly return to a more analytical
reflective role as required.
All these requirements may seem demanding but unless
we can provide for and recognise the emotions that
children display we are failing in our responsibility to
provide a stimulating and enriched play environment that
supports children’s development and self-fulfilment. ‘One
doesn’t have to operate with great malice to do great
harm. The absence of empathy and understanding are
sufficient’ (Blow 2012).
The affective environment is not an ‘extra’, or a
particular space for play providers with generous
resources. Opportunities for children to express and
experience a range of emotions can be achieved with
very few materials apart from a good supply of loose
parts and a willingness to be creative and adaptable.
In fact, materials that are not valuable are preferable
as they are easier to replace, and playworkers are
less likely to interfere with play because of a need to
conserve resources. For example, consider the following
story.
87
Analysing the impact of
affective play spaces
David was keen to attend the summer
play session at the school in his local
area; however, because of his disability
he was reliant on his carer taking him.
Before this could happen his carer first
visited the play session to make sure it
would meet David’s needs. Concerned
by the noise and amount of energetic
child-led activity the carer informed
the play staff that David would need a
‘sensory corner’ that was calming and
relaxing. These were available from
several commercial specialists at a cost
of several thousand pounds! For a small
summer playscheme this was impossible
but it didn’t stop the staff from meeting
David’s needs.
Having described why the affective play
environment is so important and what
it might feel like in practice, the next
consideration is to use that knowledge
to analyse the impact it is having on
children’s play. One solution is to carry
out an affective audit that catalogues the
range and availability of different sensory
and emotional experiences. Hughes
(2012) includes an example from Kelda
Lyons, a practicing London playworker,
which focuses on the five senses in an
attempt both to extend existing play
and provide new opportunities. Another
possibility would be to catalogue the
instances of moods that children exhibit,
for example, using Hughes’ ‘mood
descriptors’ (2001). Ultimately there is
no substitute for regularly observing
and reflecting on children’s play noting
examples of positive emotions, immersion
in play, and children’s developing
emotional control and regulation.
Some cardboard, paint, glitter, luminous
stars, several lamps, some coloured
plastic, fairy lights, bubble wrap, fake fur,
and a large homemade beanbag later
and the playworkers had created an
alternative for a few pounds. David loved
his homemade ‘chill-out zone’ and so
did all the other children, and soon other
examples made by children began to
appear all around the play space.
88
While all children need and crave the stimulation
provided by interesting affective spaces, their individual
emotional responses can be very different. Children
have different temperaments – some more extravert and
some more shy – and they may control their emotions in
different ways and seek out different kinds of emotional
experiences. As playworkers, we must be careful to
provide a varied emotional environment and not make
assumptions about individual children. For example, the
prospect of an end of summer playscheme party with
flashing lights and pounding dance music might delight
and enthuse some children, but worry and alarm others.
Conclusions
Just as children’s feelings are as important as their
thoughts, so the affective impact of the play space is as
important as its physical make-up. ‘Children’s emotional
health is closely tied to the social and emotional
characteristics of the environment’ (National Scientific
Council on the Developing Child 2004: 2). Moreover,
this influence is not fleeting but becomes etched into the
architecture of the brain.
As Kilvington and Wood (2007) point out, when
Playwork Principle 5 talks about the creation of play
spaces this should be taken as meaning a physical
and affective environment, and one which is mindful of
children’s psychological and emotional needs. Ultimately
if the play environment we facilitate for children is
attractive to them and satisfies their emotional needs
then they will play for longer and in more diverse ways.
89
Learners into
practice
Notes
Is the play setting you operate a place for
children or
a children’s place? (Meire 2007)
Why is it so important that children
can access a wide variety of affective
experiences? What might be the
consequences of a limited or biased
selection of experiences?
Is the atmosphere more a reflection
of our own (or the staff’s) tastes
and preferences or is it genuinely
representative of all the children who
attend?
How does the play environment
compensate for opportunities and
experiences that are not available in the
local environment? How will you know the
compensation is effective?
Is the play space interesting? What new
or unusual experiences or opportunities
have you facilitated in the last week?
What do you and your playwork
colleagues do to create a ‘permissional’
atmosphere that empowers children?
90
?
?
??
?
Compound
flexibility
Summary
In this section we will
look at Fraser Brown’s
compound flexibility
theory.
Flexibility as the key for adaptation and
development is an important theme running
through the work of many significant writers
and scholars on play (for example Bruner
1986, Sutton-Smith 1979 and 1997, Fagen
1981, Spinka et al 2001). Flexibility has
also continued to be an important theme
in playwork and in particular the work of
Hughes (2001) and Brown (2003). Compound
flexibility was developed by the playwork
writer and theorist Fraser Brown to highlight
the relationship between the developing
child and the play environment.
91
Flexibility and the play
environment
Unlike some of the other theoretical ideas
we have explored it was developed with
playwork in mind. We briefly looked at the
concept of compound flexibility in the level
3 Certificate and we return to this key idea
now to examine it in more detail.
What do we mean by the play
environment? Brown (2003) makes it clear
that the play environment includes not
just the physical environment – whether
natural or man-made – but everything
it contains that might be used as a
plaything. This could include the available
loose parts, materials, and toys as well as
the playworkers themselves. For example,
in the film Pushing Eddie in the Nettles
with Connor (Play Wales 2006), two boys
are filmed making a den at an adventure
playground. As part of their den they
weave some straw between the gaps in
the fence. For them the play environment
is not just contained by the fence, the
fence is also part of the play environment
to be used and adapted in ways the
adults who built it never imagined.
Brown (2003) declares that central to
our role as playworkers is tackling the
deficits and barriers that prevent the
compound flexibility process. This entails
creating flexible environments that are
‘substantially adaptable or controllable by
the children’ (ibid: 3-4).
In essence, compound flexibility proposes
that the degree of flexibility available
in the environment influences the
opportunities available for experimentation
and control by the child: the more freedom
to experiment, the greater the sense of
achievement and pleasure. These in
turn encourage the development of selfconfidence, self-awareness, and selfacceptance, and so the child becomes
more comfortable taking risks and more
varied tackling problem solving. Such
an approach allows the child ‘to use the
full potential of the play environment.
Thus the child moves closer to their
developmental potential than would
otherwise have been the case’ (ibid: 57).
What do we mean by flexibility? Flexibility
refers to the ability to switch between
approaches and generate ideas from
multiple sources (Bateson 2013). To
be flexible children need the freedom
to try out different ways of behaving
and different modes of thinking. They
need the opportunity to control their
environment and modify it in numerous
ways according to their instincts. They
need the opportunity to discover and
find solutions to challenges through
first-hand experimentation without adult
interference. They need the opportunity
to engage with a wide range of materials
that stimulate the imagination and fuel
the emotions. In a supervised setting all
these opportunities require playworkers
to create an atmosphere of playful
permission where children are free to
‘create and recreate their own play
environment’ (Brown 2003: 59).
Although we have referred to the process
as a cycle, it is in fact a longitudinal
developmental process. Brown (2003)
writes that, because of its self-supporting
nature, the process would be better
described as an ever-growing spiral of
positive development.
92
93
instead would make their own ‘cave’ with
whatever materials were available. The
cave started out as a few dens outside
but to make them darker the children soon
moved them inside.
What would a flexible environment look
like? Brown (2003) asserts that one way
to create a flexible environment is through
the use of ‘loose parts’. Nicholson’s
‘theory of loose parts’ is based on his
assertion that ‘in any environment both
the degree of inventiveness and creativity,
and the possibility of discovery, are
directly proportional to the number of
kind of variables in it’ (1971: 30). Play
environments should be full of materials
and all those things that tempt children
to experiment, discover and invent rather
than toys. An empty cardboard box is a
classic example of a ‘variable’ as it allows
the child to stamp its own thoughts on
the box, rather than the other way around
where, for example the design of most
toys determines exactly what the child
should do.
Gradually most of what was inside –
including furniture – moved outside to
make room for the caves! The caves grew
and grew and became joined together with
dark crawl spaces made from cardboard,
tables and chairs, and black bin bags. The
caves spread to the toilet area and the
children decided that a ‘bog monster’ lived
there complete with slime filled paddling
pool. Local traffic cones were ‘borrowed’
and became stalagmites and stalactites,
and windows were blacked out. Bike lights
were taped to intrepid cavers’ heads,
lengths of string became dangling spiders,
and black bin bags and black paint were
in short supply! The caves were the
scene of innumerable games of pretence
featuring vampires, spiders, aliens and
monsters of all kinds. After a few days the
children grew tired of the caves and set
about destroying them. Some of the staff
seemed happy for the centre to return to
‘normality’ but the children talked about
the caves for years later although they
never rebuilt them.
The cave
During the summer holidays at an inner
city play centre the staff had organised
a trip to a local cave led by some expert
cavers. Unfortunately, due to unforeseen
circumstances the trip was cancelled
at the last minute. Everyone was really
disappointed and the staff set about
planning a replacement trip to make up for
the cancellation. However, some children
decided they weren’t going to wait and
94
The negative cycle
violent neighbourhoods or play that
does not involve contact with other
living things (Hughes 2003). All of these
are potentially damaging to healthy
development although a lack of research
means the precise effects of less severe
deprivation remains unknown.
Compound flexibility describes a positive
cycle of development but the model can
be turned on its head to look at what
might happen when the environment is
inflexible. The damaging alternative to
the virtuous cycle of development is a
negative cycle of compound flexibility.
In this negative version of the theory
a lack of flexibility in a child’s world
leads to reduced opportunities for
experimentation and control by the
child, and consequently they have fewer
positive experiences. This in turn slows
development of self-confidence, selfawareness, and self-acceptance. It also
restricts the degree of flexibility and
impedes the development of problem
solving skills.
Control
Nevertheless, Brown makes it clear that
‘playwork is not simply about redressing
the damaging effects of play deprivation.
It is more concerned with enabling
children to achieve their full potential
in developmental terms’ (2003: 59).
Crucially playworkers assert that this full
potential is unlikely while children are
denied control of their play. ‘One of the
key factors in the compound flexibility
process is that sense of the child being
in control of their destiny’ (ibid: 60).
As playworkers we work to the child’s
agenda and seek to intervene only when
invited.
Brown (2003), drawing on his experience
of working in Romania which we
described elsewhere, believes that this
negative cycle is not hopeless and that
it may never be too late to help children
who have been severely stimulusdeprived. Although this extreme level
of deprivation is fortunately unusual,
nevertheless playworkers routinely work
with many children who have suffered
some sort of play deprivation or bias.
This may be because of the impact
of commercial developments, fear
of traffic, perceived stranger danger,
parental fears, poor housing or diet,
What compound flexibility is not is a
means of offering children lots of activities
while keeping them firmly under adult
control. ‘Variety implies adults offering
children lots of choices. Flexibility, on the
other hand, implies children controlling
their own environment (ibid: 61). This can
be challenging to adults, as our tendency
is to protect, teach or socialise, and this
way of thinking is deeply embedded in
What compound flexibility is not is a means of offering
children lots of activities while keeping them firmly under
adult control.
95
social policies concerning children and young people
(Lester and Russell 2008). Nevertheless children make
it quite clear to those who listen that the important things
to them in play settings are freedom, choice and control
over what to do (Manwaring 2006).
Conclusions
A flexible environment is increasingly unavailable to
many children in developed nations. Public space and
public attitudes have become increasingly hostile to
children with arguably fewer opportunities for first-hand
control and experimentation (Valentine 2004; Brown
and Patte 2013). The spaces that traditionally offered
flexibility such as waste ground and open spaces are
increasingly unavailable or colonised by adults.
Consequently it has become ever more important that
those spaces that remain where children can play are
adaptable spaces that empower children to express their
imagination and creativity. As playworkers we must be
continuously alert to the importance of flexibility in the
play environment and this should inform our approach
to working with children, and in particular the level of
control that they have over their play environment.
The Playwork Principles ‘are based on the recognition
that children and young people’s capacity for positive
development will be enhanced if given access to the
broadest range of environments and play opportunities’
(PPSG 2005). This is a clear recognition of the
play environment’s impact on the developing child.
Compound flexibility, however, goes much further
and asserts that this relationship is reciprocal and
interdependent in a complex spiral. Compound flexibility
provides a compelling rationale for the creation of
flexible play environments and a significant model for
playwork.
96
Learners into
practice
Notes
Is promoting a flexible play environment
the same as encouraging a creative
one? If not, what is the difference?
What would you say to another adult
who questions the need for flexibility,
instead suggesting that children need
boundaries and guidance, and benefit
from being told what they can and
cannot do?
97
?
?
??
?
Intervention
modes
Summary
In this section we
will look at different
approaches to playwork
intervention.
‘Intervention modes’ is the term Hughes
(2002) uses in The First Claim – desirable
processes to refer to a number of different
approaches to playwork intervention. These
intervention modes together with the
play mechanisms are part of the advanced
framework in The First Claim – desirable
processes. Although more complex, all of
these modes are grounded in the beliefs
that informed the ‘intervention styles’ in
The First Claim ... a framework for playwork
quality assessment (Hughes 2001a) and the
first edition of Evolutionary Playwork and
Reflective Analytic Practice (Hughes 2001b)
in the same year.
98
any contact to them. It is important that
they are not prevented from playing in
their own way or unduly influenced by the
motivations and agendas of supervising
adults. This mode is in keeping with the
assertion that children should direct their
own play, for their own reasons without
adult interference.
Intervention modes have a range of
applications; some are more general in
use while others may be best in specific
contexts or locations. In addition Hughes
(2002) notes that they are not always
exclusive – sometimes an intervention
may be a combination of two or three
different modes. Whichever approach is
taken it is the playworker’s responsibility
to reflect on the suitability and
effectiveness of the intervention used.
This mode does not equate to a disregard
of children’s play by the playworker,
rather, Hughes (2002) notes that children
are monitored from a distance and any
potential problems pre-empted.
All of these intervention modes are based
on the premise that, if the child is to get
maximum benefit from playing, the play
space must be authentic, that is, it must
provide the opportunity for children to
control how and why they play without
excessive or unnecessary interference
from playworkers (ibid).
In practice distance supervision requires
that the playworker remain unobtrusive
and low-key. This is more about the
playworker’s attitude and general
demeanour than the actual physical
distance between themselves and a
playing child. Inevitably, the playworker
cannot always be physically distant from
all children but they avoid a blatant, ‘in
your face’ presence. In our experience
distance supervision can become more
effective over time as children become
habituated or comfortable and familiar
with the supervising playworkers.
Playworkers become ‘part of the furniture’
and children learn that they are free
to pursue their play without undue
interference.
Hughes (2002) describes the following
nine intervention modes.
1. Distance
Distance supervision is the usual
approach for the playworker, and can
be considered the default position
in these intervention modes. As it’s
name suggests, it involves watching
and listening from a distance so as to
minimise the sense for children that they
are being observed or scrutinised in any
way. Hughes describes this as essentially
a noninterventionist approach that, once
children’s security is established, leaves
Playworkers in distance mode look
without staring, and listen without
eavesdropping, so that the approach is
Intervention modes have a range of applications; some are
more general in use while others may be best in specific
contexts or locations.
99
Children are content and relaxed to play
naturally in front of these playworkers.
casual rather than overt. Although this
mode is informal it is not unthinking and
automatic, as it requires awareness
of the environment and an inner selfawareness. There is no place for any
‘baggage’ that the adult might bring
(Brown and Webb 2005), or as Sturrock
and Else (1998) termed it, ‘unplayed out
materials’ (as covered in point 4 below).
Also there are powerful societal norms
and social policies that reinforce our
tendency to protect, teach or socialise in
our relationships with children (Lester and
Russell 2008).
This is a mode that is strengthened
through the development of trusting,
respectful relationships and Hughes
notes that adopting the Perceived
Authentic mode can be the consequence
of a successful application of the
Distance mode.
The Perceived Authentic approach that
Hughes (2002) describes contrasts with
the other role that playworkers must
adopt from time to time. On the one
hand playworkers must operate the play
space and this requires considerable
serious analysis and reflection, as well
as practical and diagnostic skills. On the
other hand playworkers need to enable,
and be empathetic towards, the creation
of playful experiences and atmospheres,
and be able to form and maintain
positive, respectful relationships with
children where adult power is actively
ceded. These two roles require conflicting
qualities and skills but the advanced
playworker must be able to alternate
consciously between the two.
2. Perceived Authentic
Perceived Authentic is another
intervention mode that has a general
application. It refers to the condition
where the playworker operates easily,
naturally, and in obvious comfort in the
play space, while responding to children
in a non-directive and non-judgemental
way. By not adulterating children’s
play the playworker demonstrates their
respect for the play space and the
children in it. Hughes (2002) notes that
such playworkers are totally accepted by
the children and may even be seen as
almost honorary children.
100
and belonging. It involves the expression
and playing out of negative feelings
and emotions, and the development of
resilience. It involves the negotiation in the
complex world of social relationships and
friendships, where alliances and hostilities
are forged and re-forged. Telling a child to
‘play nicely’ shortcuts all these processes
and takes away the evolutionary and
developmental value of the play process.
3. Without Preconceptions
Without Preconceptions is a mode that is
specifically concerned with countering the
pressures introduced by adult agendas
and beliefs. The play space is a child’s
space and ‘only exists to enable and
facilitate play. It is neither designed nor
intended for social, political, cultural
or civic education’ (Hughes 2002: 60).
As playworkers our practice should be
centred on the processes of children’s
play behaviours, and any intervention
should be made on the basis of
developmental need and not made to
implement adult policies.
Hughes recognises that this is a difficult
area and one in which, in practice, it
is impossible to be totally inflexible.
Playworkers must abide by the legal
and organisational requirements that
affect them even when their impact may
sometimes be damaging to children’s
control of their own play. In practice good
playworkers can mitigate these effects and
ensure that they are able to offer authentic
play opportunities.
As well as being used for other
adult purposes, play is sometimes
misrepresented as something that is
always inoffensive, pleasant and idyllic.
As Sutton-Smith (for example 1984 and
1997) clearly demonstrates this is far
from being the case. Play is frequently
anarchic and challenging where children
deal with themes about power, fairness,
Hughes suggests an important proviso
to this need to work through a range of
behaviours, both positive and negative.
Supervised play spaces are artificial
spaces, designed to attract a wide range
of children. Because of this they often
contain individuals and groups who
would not normally mix in their play. They
may be children from different areas,
or different genders, races or cultures.
This mix may increase the potential for
negative interaction and the playworker
may need to intervene and mediate
more frequently than otherwise would be
desirable.
4. Unadulterating
This mode describes an approach
to intervention where the playworker
normally only engages with the child when
invited, or when responding to a child’s
enquiry. The rationale for this mode is that
by interfering with the play process adults
tend to rob it of much of its complexity,
and so children benefit less from the
process. The knowledge and skills learnt
Play is frequently anarchic and challenging where children
deal with themes about power, fairness, and belonging.
101
come from trial and error. Hughes
asserts that in play that is adult-free,
children are able to control the scale,
duration and frequency of their play and
so feel responsible for their actions.
Unadulterated play allows children the
opportunity to think about how what has
been learnt might be applied to other
situations.
As we have covered previously there
are many triggers that can tempt the
playworker to interfere when children
play. Some of these may arise from the
best of intentions, such as the desire to
help, teach or instruct. Hughes (2002)
suggests others may come from a failure
to recognise that the power of play lies in
its process and not in a tangible outcome
or product. Examples might include
playworkers failing to understand why
at the end of a play frame a carefully
crafted den might be destroyed or simply
abandoned by its creators, or why a
beautifully painted picture might be
discarded.
by adult preconceptions of normality.
A permissional approach sends the
message that the play space is a space
of possibilities, a ‘can do’ space where
children are enabled to follow their own
play instincts and be themselves without
fear of censure or ridicule.
Hughes (2002) notes that children
may feel unable to engage in these
behaviours unless someone else – a
playworker in our case – has gone first
and demonstrated that it is permitted
and emotionally safe. This is particularly
the case when engaging in behaviours
that are traditionally censored in school
and at home, for example, shouting and
screaming, getting wet or muddy, cross
or outlandish dressing, play fighting, and
risky and deep play of all kinds.
A further possibility why playworkers
might adulterate children’s play comes
from the need to play out material from
the past (Sturrock and Else 1998),
perhaps as a way of dealing with painful
memories and anxieties. While these may
be understandable and even desirable
in an adult therapeutic context, the play
space is not the place for adults to deal
with these experiences. ‘The playworker
must be there entirely for the good of the
child’ (Brown and Webb 2005: 151).
By showing that these behaviours are
okay in the play space playworkers
can clear a path for children to follow
without fear. Of course there are other
considerations here and Hughes (2002)
notes that we should consider the child’s
parents’ reactions, as well as their peers.
5. Permissional
Permissional refers to the idea that the
playworker conveys to the child that they
are able to do and say all sorts of things,
and that they aren’t restricted or censored
102
6. De-centred
7. Perceived Indifferent
This mode is specific to situations
when the playworker needs to consider
play behaviour that is erratic, violent
or unusual. It involves standing back
and making a dispassionate analysis of
the possible causes and remedies. Of
course this diagnosis is from a playwork
point of view and is not a replacement
or substitute for behaviour requiring
professional medical or social care
assessment. ‘It is not so much play
therapy, as play as therapy’ (Hughes
2002: 66). Although many children will
play easily, some may have specific
difficulties. Examples Hughes (2002)
suggests include: physical withdrawal,
unreadable meta-communication, lack
of energy, neuroses about specific
activities, and a low level of calibration
revealed in clumsiness or aggression.
Children may be unable to play normally
because they are tired, hungry, over or
under stimulated, or because their play
experiences have been limited or biased
in some way.
This mode involves a playworker
deliberately ignoring specially targeted
children. This is not a general style of
intervention but a specific response to
children who have suffered trauma, such
that any adult engagement may rekindle
the thoughts and feelings associated
with it. Hughes (2002) describes that the
point of this approach is to allow targeted
children to feel unmonitored and so
engage with the environment and other
children in a natural unselfconscious way.
Consequently, they are able to access
the healing potential of play by allowing
themselves to confront and take control
of their experiences.
Hughes (2000) theorises that children
who have experienced traumatic events
may become trapped between two
worlds, neither immersed in internal
imagination and fantasy, nor completely
in ‘normal physical reality’. For them the
play process has been cut short and they
are unable to become fully immersed so
that they can play through, and assimilate
and repair their trauma. Hughes
compares this process to the milder
form of distress that can be seen when
children are told that the playground is
closing immediately rather than allowing
them time to re-engage gradually with
reality.
A de-centred intervention means
assessing through observation whether
children are playing typically and coming
to a conclusion on the likely causes.
Such a conclusion allows the playworker
to respond appropriately, and, together
with the child, provide the time, space,
and opportunities to meet their needs.
A de-centred intervention means assessing through
observation whether children are playing typically and
coming to a conclusion on the likely causes.
103
This mode can be difficult for playworkers as it
may conflict with the natural desire to comfort and
communicate our concern for children who have
suffered grief and suffering. The purpose of this mode
is to give control to the child so as to allow them to find
their own method for confronting and dealing with the
trauma they have experienced. Hughes (2002) asserts
that the more the playworker interferes with this process
the less effective it will be, and the greater the likelihood
of the child suffering a relapse.
8. Without Stereotypical Play Narratives (SPNs)
Stereotypical Play Narrative refers to the result of
pressure felt by the child to conform to an identity,
stereotype or particular way of behaving dictated by
an adult. Playworkers do not have a list of behaviours
and activities that convey what’s allowed and expected,
either implicitly or explicitly, for example no shouting,
no getting wet, only using the loose parts or art
materials ‘properly’, being polite, and ‘playing nicely’.
Children should not be pressured into conforming
to the preconceptions of the playworker, rather they
themselves must be able to control how and why they
play.
This pressure to conform to adult preferences can apply
to any setting where children play but for playworkers
the most vulnerable environments are childcare and
closed access play provision. In open access staffed
play provision children, ultimately, children have the
power to leave if they feel that adults are threatening
or manipulative. However, in closed access this isn’t
possible and Stereotypical Play Narratives can be
serious. Hughes (2002) argues that in this type of
provision the content and structure of the child’s play,
and therefore the creation of its identity, is literally at the
mercy of the adults running the provision – perhaps for
a considerable time.
While we all have preferred ways of working,
playworkers must always be alert to any potential
messages they might send that could pressurise
children into adapting or conforming their play episodes
to meet adult preferences. Play belongs to the children
who are engaged in it.
104
experiences. In other words, playworkers
are compensating for a poverty of play
experiences and opportunities.
Inevitably it is not possible to provide for
every possible experience. The practical
constraints of resources, staffing and
the play space itself mean that what is
offered will always be restricted to some
extent. Nevertheless, Hughes stresses
that given these limits, ‘the playworker
is charged with the responsibility of
enabling the child to access the most
comprehensive range of play experiences
it can’ (2002: 73).
9. Compensatory
Conclusion
The Compensatory mode is underpinned
by the belief that play should be a
comprehensive experience consisting
of the widest possible selection of
fundamental play skills and behaviours.
Not all children have access to the range
of skills they need to develop and thrive.
The playworker’s role is to assess the
range and depth of the experiences of the
particular children they serve to identify
and compensate for any shortfalls. It
is also to avoid excessive duplication.
Based on their analysis, playworkers are
able to customise the play space to suit
the specific needs of the children in the
local environment, for example, they may
discover a shortage of mastery play or
an excess of creative play, and so modify
the environment appropriately.
These intervention modes provide a
range of approaches to intervention that
are detailed, complex and analytical.
They are characterised by an approach
that seeks to relinquish adult power to
children at almost every opportunity.
While these intervention modes provide
considerable detail on why and how
playworkers might intervene there is
still significant skill in deciding when to
intervene, as well as taking into account
knowledge about specific children. For
example, in the Certificate course we
considered one playworker’s response
to a dispute between two young people
– one of who was brandishing a mallet.
Here timing can be everything.
Although these modes provide a
sophisticated range of tools with which to
analyse and engage with children’s play,
they still require playworkers to consider
each situation afresh and take into
account their own self-knowledge, play
history and experiences.
Hughes (2002) is careful to note that
this is not based on social or economic
factors but rather on an assessment
of the particular skills that are absent
because of children’s impoverished play
105
It is vital that they are used knowingly and are routinely
considered as part of reflective practice.
What are the characteristics of intervention in a high
quality play space?
Hughes (2002) suggests that:
• Intervention will be generally ‘distance’ and
supervisory
• The playworker’s chief rationale is to assure
children’s security and allay anxieties that might
inhibit play
• There is an awareness of the need for occasional
diagnostic strategies (for example, ‘de-centred’ and
‘perceived indifferent’ modes)
• Intervention will be part of a strategy to compensate
for any specific play deficits
• There is a continual awareness of the covert or
unwitting introduction of playworkers’ and other
adults’ personal agendas.
Intervention in children’s play is a complex and difficult
area. While it is underpinned by our core professional
beliefs, in practice it can be infinitely subtle and
nuanced. It requires personal qualities and skills that are
often believed to be in opposition: considered yet timely,
knowing yet spontaneous, analytical yet playful, and
dispassionate yet empathetic.
Our approach is both hands off and, when necessary,
hands on, or as Hughes terms it, ‘facilitative and
empowering’ (2012). It is facilitative because it allows for
children who have lost some of their skill and freedom
to interact playfully, and it is empowering because it
is about stepping back and returning the initiative and
control to children.
While these intervention modes may be technical and
challenging, the practice of intervention is a defining
area in the quality of supervised play provision.
106
Learners into
practice
Notes
Are some of these intervention modes
unused or little used in your practice?
Why is that?
How do enthusiastic playworkers avoid
dominating and taking ownership of
the play space away from children?
How do analytical playworkers avoid
being un-playful and uncreative?
Why is it important that playworkers
understand the rationale for these
interventions and can explain them to
others, including colleagues?
‘Stop, play nicely!’ Why is this
demanding Stereotypical Play
Narrative (SPN) at odds with the
Playwork Principles?
107
?
?
??
?
Complex active
intervention
Summary
In this section we will
look at complex active
intervention.
Throughout these materials we have
stressed the position that intervention is
overwhelmingly a responsive discipline.
Hughes (2012) describes intervention as
primarily supervisory and preparatory.
Approaches like the intervention styles
(Hughes 2001) and the intervention
modes (Hughes 2002) are both at pains to
emphasise the intrinsic personally directed
nature of play and the role of the playworker
as facilitator rather than leader. They stress
the inherent benefits of play and warn
us against any interference that tries to
determine or influence children’s play with
an adult agenda.
108
children from harm, teaching them how to
behave and socialising them around adult
values. This position is underpinned by
the view that children learn and develop
through play and that adults should guide
them through the immaturity of their
childhood to become complete adults.
Playworkers become involved in play
when invited by a cue, but they also
become involved when they perceive
there is a problem that cannot be solved
by the children. Examples might include
the imminent threat of violence, bullying,
and significant emotional hurt. The
play space is an artificial space, which
attracts, in close proximity, a variety
of children who otherwise would be
unlikely to play together (Hughes 2012).
Inevitably there will be a level of friction
in even the best run setting as children
experiment, form friendships and absorb
the social and cultural norms in their local
environment.
Russell (2008) contrasts this position with
the ludocentric or play-centred approach
that prioritises playing. This view asserts
that the benefit from play, both immediate
and deferred, comes from its intrinsic
and self-directed nature. It considers that
children are competent individuals who
are the best judges of their own play
needs.
At the heart of playwork practice
is a significant contradiction. It is a
contradiction between our desire to
empower children so they direct their
own play, and our responsibility to
protect children from serious harm.
How can we enable children to ‘pursue
their own play agenda’ (Brown 2003)
when we are expected and sometimes
required to act otherwise? The difficulty
is well expressed by Russell (2008)
who contrasts the didactic approach
with the ludocentric approach. Didactic
means ‘designed or intended to teach’
(Chambers 2006) but often has a
prescriptive or moral undertone. Russell
(2008) describes how the didactic
approach aims to structure children’s play
around the right kind of things: protecting
As Russell (2008) admits, rigidly applying
this ‘either-or’ thinking is not helpful.
Things are rarely neatly divided into two
and this position doesn’t ‘allow for the
complexity of the play setting, or the
necessity for playworkers to develop a
range of responses to children’s playing’
(ibid: 86). As a solution Russell (2008)
suggests a model that she terms the
‘Brawgs continuum’ (2004 and 2008)
in which the ludocentric approach sits
between the two extremes of didactic
(directing and teaching) and chaotic
(negligent and egocentric). While a close
study of this model is beyond the scope
of these materials we recommend it to
interested learners.
Playworkers become involved in play when invited by a
cue, but they also become involved when they perceive
there is a problem that cannot be solved by the children.
109
These approaches often confound the
usual power dynamics between children
and adults. They are likely to wrongfoot, startle, distract, or amuse children
so that the situation becomes reset or
re-evaluated by the participants. Many
of these approaches show awareness of
the expected power relationship between
supervising adults and children. All of
them attempt to square the circle that
is expressed in Playwork Principle 8,
namely ‘to choose an intervention style
that enables children and young people
to extend their play’ (PPSG 2005).
Hughes (2012) questions whether this
is possible because in a supervised
setting the playworkers are responsible
for children’s safety and must establish at
least some semblance of order.
In practice – examples from real life
While there is a good amount of
description in these materials and in
the playwork literature of why and when
playworkers should and should not get
involved, there is almost no reference
as to how this should happen. Yet
intervention is just as much a practical
skill as a theoretical one and how it is
done may be just as important as the
reasons why it is done, particularly in
terms of the outcome. Brown (2008)
adopts a similar argument in his critique
of the Playwork Principles, suggesting
that they focus almost entirely on
statements about what we do rather than
how we do it.
While our approach to intervention
is primarily responsive and based on
situations where the child asks for help,
it is important to discuss other occasions
where we intervene without invitation to
prevent serious harm or because a child
is very distressed or unhappy. Of course
there is no one fixed way that intervention
occurs – each situation is different and
needs to be treated according to its own
merits. An intervention that is considered
successful one day may fail the next, and
an approach may work well with one child
but not another. Nevertheless we feel it is
important to explore some of the practical
difficulties of maintaining a play centred
focus to intervention whenever possible.
Nevertheless, we include a number
of approaches that playworkers have
carried out in response to concerns about
children’s wellbeing. The approaches
generally involve the use of surprise,
humour, redirection and body language.
We describe these approaches here
not to endorse them but to show how
playworkers have intervened in creative
and unexpected ways in an attempt
to maintain the focus on play, and not
reinforce the traditional power imbalance
between supervising adult and child.
They are neither a theoretical justification
nor a ‘selection box’ of intervention
approaches to choose from; rather, they
represent a real life selection of playfocused responses from playworkers
in the field. They are presented to
encourage discussion and reflection.
Below we include a list of approaches
adapted from an original list of ‘everyday
intervention approaches’ compiled by the
Table Twenty Three Group during the 8th
National Playwork Conference (Wood
2010).
110
The examples:
Affective approach
In this subtle approach the playworker
changes the mood and atmosphere by
the introduction of a change of music or
lighting for example.
Sparkling approach
The adult issues a play cue to redirect
behaviour and suggest new playful
possibilities. For example, they start
walking around with a book on their head.
Win win approach
The playworker enters the frame but
takes on a role so that harmful behaviour
is modified without the child losing face.
For example, the intervening playworker
declares, ‘I’m a reporter from the Saturn
Herald and I have heard that one of the
alien enemy is being tortured. Do you
have any comment Captain?’
manner. It derives from an example when
a playworker suggested a different kind of
grip to a child who was grappling another
child in a play fight to avoid a visit to A&E
but without actually stopping it.
Big bang approach
This is an extreme mode of intervention
that carries significant risks. The
playworker stops everyone in their tracks,
for example by doing extreme acrobatics
or smashing a plate.
Back tracking approach (oops)
This simply describes an approach
where the playworker takes back their
suggestion, says sorry and admits they
got it wrong.
‘Eyebrow’ approach
The playworker uses body language to
convey a message such as the raised
eyebrow or strong stance.
Wrong foot approach
The lurgy approach
This approach uses the element of
surprise to wrong-foot the child that the
playworker would respond in such a
The playworker suggests what they
consider to be a funny but undesirable
(for the child) consequence in response to
111
unacceptable behaviour; for example, ‘If
you can’t stop smashing other people’s
stuff up, the first dance at the disco is
mine’.
Taking notes
This involves very obviously appearing
to write down what the playworker sees.
This may cause the children to be curious
or even suspicious. However, the ‘writing’
turns out to be a drawing or a doodle.
The whistler (hey you!)
The playworker whistles to attract
attention.
Giving notes
The playworker gives small post-it notes
to a child with their thoughts on what is
happening, asking them what they think.
Presence approach (be there)
The playworker subtly lets the child know
they are available, maybe by a touch of
the arm, or perhaps by moving closer.
It’s for you
A phone call is surreptitiously arranged
for the child about something completely
different to the situation involved.
Affectionate approach
The playworker responds to the
challenging behaviour designed to attract
attention by being caring, warm and
friendly. This perplexes the child, as it is
not the expected response.
Some of these approaches clearly do not
extend play, but they may well allow it
to restart, re-engage or take off in other
directions. Others may only work once or
even not at all. While the intention behind
these inventions may be to prevent
serious harm they are still carried out
in playful ways that are more likely to
reignite play.
The Pavarotti approach
The playworker sings the words they say
to children. (They will likely think you are
very funny or just plain weird!).
112
• ‘I want you to apologise, right now!’
‘There may be times when our adult
responsibility, our duty of care, requires
us to intervene in a play frame and
terminate it or re-direct it in order to
prevent imminent harm or to protect
another play frame. Such a professional
judgement, a reflection-in-action, would
be made using all our understanding of
the children, the context and, crucially
our selves. It would be non-ludic, in
that its intent is to prevent harm rather
than suggest the play of the child at
that moment. However, our manifest
behaviour might still appear ludocentric:
we may distract or redirect the child,
or reframe the playing, rather than
directly tell her to stop what she is doing’
(Sturrock et al 2004: 32).
• ‘You have to show them who’s boss’
• ‘Because I say so!’
Whose needs are these ugly phrases
really serving? These statements are
significantly at odds with the playwork
approach to intervention that is founded
on being:
• Generally ‘distant’ or supervisory
although occasionally diagnostic
(Hughes 2002)
• Careful to avoid adulteration (Hughes
2001, Sturrock and Else 1998)
Contrast the approaches above with
these examples of well-worn but highly
negative phrases that aggressively assert
adult power and do nothing to encourage
play:
• Non-judgemental, non-stigmatising
and always offering another chance
(Brown 2007)
• Active in promoting positive
reinforcement rather than criticism
(Brown 2007).
• ‘How would you like it if…’
• ‘How many times do I have to tell
you?’
Analysis
• ‘Just what do you think you’re playing
at?’
Although we have consistently advocated
for a ludocentric or play-centred approach
to intervention it is by no means easy.
It may feel ‘unnatural’ (Sturrock et al
2004) and it may face misunderstanding
• ‘What on earth do you think you were
doing?’
Although we have consistently advocated for a ludocentric
or play-centred approach to intervention it is by no means
easy.
113
or opposition from other professionals and even
other playworkers. As a result it is essential that we
are comfortable with the idea both personally and
professionally (ibid).
If our intervention is to be authentic, that is, genuinely
play-centred, we must recognise not just the external
conditions in which it occurs but also our internal world
of feelings and emotions. This requires an awareness
of our ‘triggers’, our values, beliefs and prejudices. ‘If
our responses to children at play are to be authentic,
our emotional responses should be aligned with
our behavioural responses’ (Russell 2008: 88). This
process can only happen through a continuous active
process of self-reflection and analysis, and recognition
that intervention in practice is complex, relative, and
occasionally messy.
When the situation requires that we intervene
immediately there is little time for considered analysis
and we must rely more heavily on experience and
instinct. However, after the event it is important we
take time to analyse and consider our actions and
feelings (reflection-on-action) as part of professional
development.
The following questions may provide a springboard to
investigate the impact of our intervention.
• Why did I choose to intervene in the way I did?
• Were my own feelings aligned with my actions – in
other words, was my intervention sincere?
• Was my impulse for intervening sparked by my own
view of what is important or did it favour the child’s
view and their need to play?
• Was my intervention explicitly or implicitly about
asserting or reaffirming adult power and control,
or did it attempt to concede or share authority with
children?
• Was my intervention playful? How could it have been
playful?
114
• Did my intervention extend play? If not (for example,
it was concerned with preventing imminent harm),
did it reframe, redirect or restart play?
• Did the outcome of my intervention match my
intentions? If not, why was this?
• What have I learned from the intervention and what
lessons, both positive and negative, should I share
with my colleagues?
In any analysis it is important that we are honest, open
and not defensive. Inevitably we will get things wrong
on occasion. Sometimes despite our best intentions play
will be extinguished and conflict may remain or be made
worse. In these situations we must be objective and
persistent in our analysis. Our ability and effectiveness
to champion the play process in any intervention is
rarely absolute. Rather it is about honestly attempting to
support children’s play as much as we are able rather
than implementing some other agenda, including our
own. We may not always achieve the best possible
approach but we must attempt to achieve the best
approach possible.
Learners into
practice
Why is it important to share your experiences of
intervention with fellow playworkers?
Why is it important for playworkers whenever feasible
to respond playfully in any intervention, even when
that intervention is prompted by the desire to prevent
immediate harm rather than supporting play?
Why might ‘playing through’ (Sturrock et al 2004)
negative emotions, rather than denying or suppressing
them, be important for children? What are the
implications of this suggestion for playwork intervention?
115
Analyse
organisational
practice in
playwork
Unit 2
Playwork: Principles
into Practice
Level 3 (P3)
?
?
??
?
Recruiting and
selecting staff
Summary
In this section we will
look the essential
processes in the
organisation and
management of
playwork provision.
In this section we will explore some of the
essential processes in the organisation and
management of playwork provision. This
includes recruiting and selecting a staff
team and ensuring the team is supported
by effective communication and financial
processes. While we will describe what we
believe to be best practice around these
issues, it is important that learners, in the
first instance, follow their own organisation’s
policies and procedures.
116
The Equality Act 2010 brings together
and strengthens existing discrimination
law and supports progress on equality.
It sets out the legal requirements for
employers and covers:
In any staffed play provision, the
playworkers are undoubtedly the biggest
asset. Caring trusted playworkers are
highly valued by children and young
people (Beunderman/Demos 2010) and
can make a significant difference to
the range and quality of children’s play
experiences. The position is simply too
important to be left to chance or suffer
through less than thorough processes.
Effective recruitment and selection must
always be carefully planned to ensure
children are getting a competent effective
playworker who is able to meet their
needs, and that they are protected from
inappropriate poor practice.
• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
Careful planning also helps to ensure
the organisation meets its legal
responsibilities for fairness and equality
and helps match up the right applicants
to the correct post. Recruitment can be
expensive in terms of money, resources
and time and it is important to get it right.
The quality of play provision is dependent
on recruiting, selecting and retaining
appropriate staff with appropriate
attitudes and knowledge for the job role.
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation.
In addition to legal requirements
associated with employing staff,
those managing play provision have
additional responsibilities that need to
be considered (Care Council for Wales
2010b). These include:
Legal requirements
• that there is a minimum number
of staff to meet National Minimum
Standards in registered provision
All employers refer to legal requirements
when recruiting, selecting and employing
staff (Employment Rights Act 1996).
Organisations may have a dedicated
person undertaking a human resource
function or these may be delegated
to others to undertake. Because the
recruitment process may involve several
people, it is important that we all
understand the process and principles
of good practice. All of those involved
will have an interest in fair and nondiscriminatory practice.
• that those staff have the appropriate
qualifications as set out in the
Childminding and Day Care
Regulations (Wales) 2010. (Those
in other nations will have their own
national regulations to adhere to.
These are referred to in P3 Level 3
Certificate.)
117
• that staff have a Disclosure and Barring Service
(DBS) check (formerly known as a Criminal Record
Bureau (CRB) check).
The process of recruitment and
selection
There are several practical stages in the recruitment and
selection process:
• Analysis of job
• Planning
• Advertising
• Managing applicants
• Selection technique
• Appointment.
Analysis of job
The recruitment process should begin with an analysis
of the job. It is important to understand the nature of
the vacancy. If it is a new role, it may be that parts of
this stage have already been undertaken to secure
funding or make the case for the position. If it is due to a
member of staff leaving, it is useful to reflect on the job
role, as roles in playwork may not always remain static.
Reflecting on whether the vacancy is normal or part of
a high turnover of staff might be indicative of deeper
problems that need addressing. If the position is the
result of a member of staff leaving or resigning, it is
useful to conduct an exit interview with that person to
gather information, which might help inform the job
analysis, and the recruitment and selection process in
general.
118
• agreeing assessment and interview
techniques
Analysis of the job enables us to consider
the qualifications, knowledge, skills and
attitudes that the post requires. This
analysis helps to identify if and how
the job has changed and developed
and ensures that not only are the job
requirements met, but it also helps to
address the requirements of the existing
team. Involving the existing team in
the job analysis helps to identify any
particular skills gaps that the vacancy has
resulted in. This will help to inform the
development of the job description and
person specification.
• developing short listing and scoring
processes
• deciding who will deal with enquiries
and who will take up references and
check qualifications.
The size and makeup up of the shortlist
and interview team will vary from
organisation to organisation. Some
employers have a well-established
and traditional protocol that involves
a specific team with rigid rules and
techniques. However, when selecting
playworkers, it is often helpful to adopt a
flexible approach. For instance, while it is
important to have personnel with current
knowledge of recruitment and selection
legislation and policies, it is vital that the
majority of the selection team has a good
understanding and awareness of the job
role and setting.
When conducted properly, the job
analysis should enable us to consider
the needs of the children and the wider
community using the provision. This
stage of the process helps us to reflect
on how representative of the community
the provision and the team that operate it
is.
The planning stage
Sometimes, if the job enables a
promotion for several members of
the team, it may be useful to have an
objective professional who does not
work closely with potential applicants.
It may be necessary from time to time,
particularly when new projects are
developing, to co-opt members on to
the team if there are specialist skills or
experiences needed.
This stage involves thinking about and
agreeing all of the practical elements of
recruitment and selection:
• deciding on the shortlist and interview
team
• planning and agreeing dates
• developing and agreeing a job
description and person specification
Involving children
Children and young people’s level of
involvement in the recruitment process
should be agreed in this stage of
the process. The Children Act 1989
determined that the views of children
must be sought when making plans for
• setting an agreed wage structure and
benefits
• reviewing, and if necessary
developing terms and conditions of
service and contracts of employment
119
them and in 1991 the UK Government
ratified the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of the Child – UNCRC
(UNICEF 1991). Article 12 of the
convention outlines the right of children to
have a say in matters affecting them and
for their views to be taken seriously.
Providing children and young people
with the opportunity of taking part in
the recruitment and selection process
allows them to have an input into who
will be working with them. For strategic
roles or other roles within services that
do not have direct contact with children
and young people, their attitudes and
approach to children and young people
can be assessed. It is also an extremely
powerful way of demonstrating to
candidates the importance and value the
organisation places on the participation
and involvement of children and young
people.
The involvement of children and young
people can include preparation of job
descriptions and person specifications
and contributing to the short-listing
before interview. It is commonplace for
children and young people to take part on
interview panels either alongside adults or
separately.
There is a premise that children and
young people can only be involved in the
recruitment and selection of staff when
the process has been properly planned
(Michel and Hart 2002). If children are to
be involved in recruitment and selection in
a meaningful way, the organisation must
be committed to providing support for this
engagement. Devising a system helps to
identify:
• Which vacancies will involve children
and young people
• Which children and young people
will be involved and how they will be
chosen
• What the extent of the involvement is
• What the benefits to children, young
people and the organisation are.
120
Some adults may be ambivalent towards
involving children and young people as
part of the recruitment process. However,
case studies suggest that the process
enables children to feel valued and
listened to and that adults interviewed by
a panel which included children found it
an enjoyable experience and led them to
feel more accountable in their role (Action
for Children, n.d.).
Job description
A proper job description is an essential
requirement for all staff, whether full or
part time. Nicholls (2002) asserts that the
key functions of a job description are to:
However, as playworkers, we need to be
creative when considering developing a
process to involve children in recruitment
and selection. To avoid creating an
adulterative agenda, their involvement
must be something that children
understand and want to do. Developing
a process to involve children is crucial.
Once we have identified to what extent
children will be involved it may be useful
to approach the local school and engage
some of the children who attend the play
setting during school time. This means
that children will not be taken away from
time spent playing at the setting to be
involved.
• Clarify expectations of the role
• Outline the key duties and
responsibilities
• Establish accountability
• Provide a basis for assessing
performance and work
• Setting job parameters
• Focus work in times of conflicting
demands.
It is vital that a job description contains
clear statements about the job purpose,
responsibilities, and specific playwork
duties. In particular, it should give a clear
indication that facilitating children’s play is
the central responsibility of the role
There is useful information in the Play
Wales Right to Play Workshop pack
(2014), which supports us to engage
with schools and help to explain how
involvement supports the curriculum.
Another way to involve children is to
use a practical element to the selection
process – this is described in more detail
further in this section.
Nicholls recommends job descriptions be
structured around the following:
• The job title
• Clear statement of to whom the
playworker is responsible
As playworkers, we need to be creative when considering
developing a process to involve children in recruitment and
selection.
121
headings of essential and desirable
qualities, or criteria. Those that must
be held to ensure that the function of
the playwork job is met are listed as
essential; desirable criteria enhance job
performance and effectiveness.
• Clear statement of for whom the
playworker is responsible
• The job purpose
• The main duties of the post.
A typical person specification must link to
the specific role and will include:
In addition a job description should
include a pay scale and state minimum
working hours.
• The level of training and qualification
needed
We should remember that job
descriptions are a description of the job
at the time they are written. Inevitably
as organisations and provision change
it may be necessary to update job
descriptions to reflect any major
changes, although it is not normally
necessary for smaller changes and
changes in procedures. This should
be part of managing change and any
analysis should always be done with the
involvement of the playworker involved,
and not simply implemented from above
by management (Lofthouse et al 2001).
• The level of experience and skills
needed
• The attributes needed to work in a
team
• Personal attributes and/or
circumstances that apply to the job
role (for instance, this may involve
ability to drive or work specific hours).
The application form
A good application form allows the
employer to take control of the process
and specify the type and amount of
information required. This can help
ensure that the information submitted
remains relevant and the process more
efficient. Some organisations may
allow applicants to submit a Curriculum
Vitae (CV). However, CV’s can include
irrelevant information, which can
encourage bias or prejudice to surface
(ibid).
Person specification
How can we be sure that we select
applicants on the basis of the knowledge,
skills and attitudes that the post requires?
A person specification outlines the profile
of the knowledge, skills, experience,
and qualities needed to identify the
person required to fill the vacancy (Care
Council for Wales 2010b). The person
specification is the key document that will
be used to select staff.
Even if we are recruiting for an existing
post, it is important to review the person
specification. Auditing and reviewing
the skills of existing staff will help
identify gaps and will inform the person
specification. The person specification
is traditionally designated under the
What should we consider when writing an
application form? The Care Council for
Wales (2010b) suggests:
• Carefully considering every question
with equality of opportunity in mind
122
As Lofthouse (2001: 49) points
out, the advertisement ‘reflects the
professionalism of the service and the
image it wants to project. If an advert
does not communicate well, is poorly
presented or is missing information’, it
does not give an accurate impression to
applicants. The advert is the first point of
contact for applicants and should include:
• Putting personal detail on the first
page so that it can be omitted if the
forms are copied before short-listing
which can reduce pre-conceptions
and bias about gender, ethnicity or
age for example
• Requesting employment history
along with education, training and
qualifications
• Job title
• Requesting professional development
information
• Employer details and contact details
• Including a statement that indicates
applicants must undergo suitability
checks with the Disclosure and
Barring Service (DBS)
• Location of work
• Qualification and experience needed
• Conditions
• Providing space for the candidate to
explain their suitability
• Application submission details
• Requesting the contact details of at
least two referees.
• Notice that a DBS check is mandatory
Advertising the post
When advertising the post, it is essential
to consider not only the wording of the
advertisement, but also the way in which
it will be presented as this provides the
applicant with a clear understanding of
the provision.
• Expected start date.
• Closing date and interview date
Occasionally, additional information
will be necessary. For instance, some
funders require that their details be
provided. From time to time, based on
123
circumstances, it may be necessary to recruit for posts
that are exempt from the Equality Act 2010.
Managing applicants
As part of the planning process, an experienced member
of the panel should have been identified to respond to
queries about the post. If a large number of applicants
are expected, an initial short-listing process will need to
be undertaken. The person specification can be used
as a basis to develop a matrix, or similar, to short list
applicants. It helps if more than one person undertakes
this stage so that it remains objective.
This stage is important as it helps to identify the
applicants most suitable to interview. Those involved in
the interviewing process should agree on the maximum
number of applicants to interview. It may also be useful
to have an agreement as to the process should only
one candidate present themselves as appropriate for
interview.
Interviewees should be informed of what will be expected
from them at the interview and associated details such
as location, date, time, and length of interview.
Once applicants have been invited to interview, it is
important for the interview panel to ensure that any
special arrangements necessary for applicants are put
into place, that there is a set of agreed questions, and an
agreed scoring system.
Selection technique
Many playwork employers ask candidates to attend a
practical interview as part of the selection process. This
may involve asking a candidate to attend a play session
for a set period of time. This provides benefits for both
the candidate and the employer. The candidate gets a
feel for the nature of the provision and the duties that will
be required, while their engagement with children and
young people can be observed and noted. This approach
may provide a way to include the views of children. It
may also provide the opportunity for current staff to
meet candidates and have some input into the selection
process. It is important that this part of the selection
process is recorded and scored.
124
Appointment
Once a decision has been made, it is
important that the successful candidate
knows any further conditions we may
have before formal appointment (that
is qualification or reference check), an
agreed start date and any terms and
conditions of the post.
A more formal interview with set questions
normally follows a practical interview.
In this instance, it is important that
conditions such as privacy and comfort
are considered so that interviewees
are well placed to provide sufficient
information to those interviewing. Care
Council for Wales (2010b) provides some
helpful hints with regards to conducting a
formal interview:
Once the successful applicant has
accepted the post, it is important to agree
how feedback will be given to those who
have been unsuccessful. This can be
done orally or in a letter, but whichever is
favoured, it is important that the feedback
is accurate and relates specifically to the
application process.
• Questions should be asked to enable
the interviewee to answer to the best
of their ability
• A note of responses to questions and
any supplementary questions and
responses should be made
All applications and information generated
as part of the recruitment should be
stored securely and access should be
limited. It is good practice to keep these
records for at least a year should the
employer be asked to demonstrate fair
practice during the selection process.
• Interviewees should be provided
with the opportunity to ask their own
questions of the panel.
Those on the interview panel must be
satisfied that they have gathered sufficient
and accurate information to make an
informed decision. When the time comes
to select the successful candidate, the
decision should be based on:
Conclusions
Although there are consistent practice
and procedures with regards to
recruitment and selection across all
sectors and professions, care should
be given during the recruitment of
playworkers. It is in a playwork employer’s
best interest to develop safe recruitment
practice. Developing a well-understood
• An assessment of the application form
• Assessment during both practical and
formal interviews
• Feedback from children and staff
involved in the process.
It is in a playwork employer’s best interest to develop safe
recruitment practice.
125
and coherent recruitment and selection process helps
those interviewing and appointing to be well prepared,
understand their roles and make well-informed and
objective decisions in the best interest of children and
the play setting.
As the Care Council for Wales (2010b: 3) rightly points
out, developing a sound process protects:
• ‘Children from potential harm
• The organisation from potential claims of
discrimination
• The staff team from the effects of poorly managed or
inappropriate recruitment
• Applicants from the impact of investing time, effort
and emotion in applying for (and perhaps getting) a
post which is unsuitable’.
Learners into
practice
What might some of the barriers to recruitment and
retention currently be in the playwork sector?
What might happen if the recruitment process is not
properly managed?
What aspects should be considered during the
recruitment process to help plan for the retention of
staff?
126
?
?
??
?
Inducting staff
In this section we look
at staff induction and
making it playwork
specific.
Once the successful candidate has accepted
the offer of employment, we need to prepare
for their induction. Most businesses and
organisations across all sectors use some sort
of an induction programme to welcome new
employees to the organisation and prepare
them for their new role. Playworkers are the
most important asset to any play setting. A
sound induction process gives us the chance
to welcome new employees on board quickly
and efficiently and provide a positive and
supportive environment.
127
along, they are likely to do so randomly
or in a haphazard manner (Adirondack
1998).
Although the body of research literature
exploring the effectiveness of staff
induction programmes is limited, it is
widely recognised that there are common
goals achieved in induction programmes
(Ashby et al 2008):
• Improved performance
Many settings use a written induction
checklist or record and a timetable to
ensure that all areas are covered. The
Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration
Service booklet Recruitment and
Selection (ACAS 2014b) provides a
useful template of an induction record.
• Increased retention
Normally, induction checklists comprise:
• Promotion of personal and
professional wellbeing
• A welcome and introduction by
line manager, which will include
information about line management
arrangements, probationary periods
and appraisal schedule
• The achievement of smooth transition
into the workplace
• The support of teamwork.
Induction needs to be properly planned
and consistently delivered to ensure that
we treat all new employees fairly and that
they receive the same information.
For many playworkers, the induction
process begins at the pre-employment
stage. Many will have received
information about the setting at the
application stage. If we use a practical
interview as part of the selection process,
they will have visited the setting, or at
least, a similar one.
• An introduction to colleagues, children
and families
• A list of staff and job titles
• A brief history of the organisation
• Essential policies/staff handbook
• The completion of necessary
personnel paperwork
• A basic health and safety introduction.
Even in our smallest and busiest settings,
it is vital that induction is planned, with
named individuals managing specific
sessions or tasks. If it is left to new
playworkers to pick things up as they go
The length of the induction process
will vary depending on the size
of the organisation and the time
Even in our smallest and busiest settings, it is vital that
induction is planned, with named individuals managing
specific sessions or tasks.
128
Making staff induction
playwork specific
constraints associated with face-to-face
playwork. Trying to cover all aspects
of an organisation, carry out essential
introductions and expect the absorption
of complicated information over a few
days is likely to be counter-productive
(Lofthouse 2001). It is important to allow
sufficient time for the new employee to
concentrate on becoming familiar with
the specific job, basic systems and
procedures.
Induction traditionally provides an
opportunity to familiarise new playworkers
with our policies on areas such as health
and safety, equality and discrimination.
Once essential organisational procedures
and policies have been shared and
absorbed by the playworker, the induction
period can be used to identify the
learning and skills needs of playworkers.
A thorough induction programme can
inform individual learning plans and can
help identify on-going learning needs.
It is worth bearing in mind that certain
new employees may have specific needs
in terms of induction. These include:
• school leavers starting their first job
The induction process is our opportunity
to impart information about the principles,
policies and procedures that guide the
culture of our play organisations and
settings. It has a crucial role in ensuring
that new staff understand their role in
supporting children to realise their right to
play.
• people with a disability
• people returning to work after a break
• older employees
• staff returning from a secondment,
following promotion or being
transferred from another setting.
In Inducting Well: A guide to effective
induction, the Care Council for Wales
129
also fosters a philosophy of continuing
professional development, and reinforces
to the entire team that learning should
continue throughout our careers.
(2010a) has designed a section that
provides employers in the early years and
childcare sector with guidance and an
overview of the core areas to be covered
within a thorough induction:
The induction period provides an ideal
opportunity for us to introduce new
playworkers to the Playwork Principles
(PPSG 2005) and articulate how our
setting embraces the professional and
ethical framework for playwork. For
transferred, seconded or promoted
playworkers, revisiting these principles
provides the opportunity for us to explore
what is unique about play and playwork,
as they provide the playwork perspective
for working with children and young
people. Care Council for Wales (2010a)
identifies that the topics of child centered
approaches, equality and inclusiveness in
practice may also be covered here.
• Principles and values essential for
working with children in Wales
• Children’s rights
• Understanding your role in the early
years and childcare workforce
• Health, safety and security
• Listening and communication
• Understanding development and
behaviour
• Keeping children safe from harm
The induction period should reinforce a
common sense approach to managing
risk and that playworkers provide
opportunities for all children to encounter
or create uncertainty, and unpredictability
as part of their play. We do not mean
putting children in danger of serious
harm.
• Developing yourself and your skills.
This child-centred approach provides
a useful framework for us to consider
how we might use the induction process
to reinforce how we provide children
with access to the broadest range of
environments and play opportunities.
Although it may result in a lengthy
induction period, this approach allows
playworkers to demonstrate that they
have the skills to work confidently and
effectively with children and communities
to facilitate children’s play. This approach
It is also useful to introduce and reinforce
the issues of children’s rights and the
importance of listening to children during
the induction as these underpin our work
with children and young people.
The induction period should reinforce a common sense
approach to managing risk ...
130
and other recreational activities. However,
the benefits are diminished, particularly in
the development of creativity, leadership
and team spirit if control by adults is so
pervasive that it undermines the child’s
own efforts to organize and conduct his
or her play activities.’ (ibid: 4-5)
It is well known by most of us that
the right to play, leisure and culture is
articulated in Article 31 of the UNCRC
and that the United Nations has
published General Comment Number
17 on Article 31 (UNCRC 2013). This is
an official statement that elaborates on
the meaning of an aspect of the UNCRC
that requires further interpretation or
emphasis.
The induction period also helps us to
explore other Articles that are useful to
consider when providing for children’s
play:
The aim of the General Comment is to
raise the importance of an Article and
increase accountability among countries
that have signed up to the Convention.
There are particular points within the
General Comment that relate to the role
of adults which are useful to reinforce as
part of the induction.
• Article 12: Respect for the views of
the child
When adults are making decisions
that affect children, children have the
right to say what they think should
happen and have their opinions taken
into account.
‘Both play and recreation can take place
when children are on their own, together
with their peers or with supportive adults.
Children’s development can be supported
by loving and caring adults as they relate
to children through play. Participation
with children in play provides adults
with unique insights and understanding
into the child’s perspectives. It
builds respect between generations,
contributes to effective understanding
and communication between children
and adults and affords opportunities to
provide guidance and stimulus. Children
benefit from recreational activities
involving adults, including voluntary
participation in organized sports, games
• Article 15: Freedom of association
Children have the right to meet
together.
Conclusions
The recruitment and selection process
does not end when the successful
candidate has been identified, offered
the job and arrives for the first day at
the setting. Information and support will
be needed for the playworker to settle in
and feel part of the team and comfortable
in the new post and new setting. A
demotivated and poorly supported
‘Both play and recreation can take place when children are
on their own, together with their peers or with supportive
adults...’
131
playworker may feel ineffective or unwelcome and this
can contribute to a high turnover of staff. When staff
do leave before settling in, it results in a waste of time,
energy and resources that went into the recruitment
process. An induction process should be in place to
ensure that new employees:
• Adjust to the new job and working environment
• Get to know their co-workers, and the children and
families who attend the setting
• Understand their roles and responsibilities
• Gain a clear understanding of the way that the play
setting operates and offers a playwork service.
Learners into
practice
Reflect on your first few days and weeks in your current
role. Are there any aspects to your induction that might
be improved?
What were the benefits of your induction to you and to
the service?
132
?
?
??
?
In this section we
explore mentoring,
supporting and
appraising staff.
Mentoring,
supporting
and appraising
staff
The induction programme for a new
employee may involve several people
because of their particular roles. It may be
useful to appoint a ‘mentor’ for the new
playworker. The mentor can act as a guide
and advisor during the induction process
and during the first few months as the
new playworker settles in to the new work
environment.
133
In a professional setting, mentoring
is relationship oriented, where the
mentee (the individual being mentored)
shares whatever issues affect his or her
professional success. Although specific
learning goals may be identified by the
mentee, mentoring goes beyond these
areas to include other things which
influence professional development, such
as work/life balance, self-confidence,
self-belief and also more practical issues,
such as how to approach a particular
challenge.
When mentoring, our role is to develop
and foster an on-going relationship that
may last for a long period of time. The
mentor supports a very flexible approach
with meetings taking place as and when
the mentee needs them.
When we are mentoring we establish a
relationship in which a more experienced
colleague uses their knowledge
and understanding to support the
development of a newer, inexperienced
or reluctant member of the team.
Before agreeing to mentor a colleague,
we should analyse what we have to offer
the mentee. We should honestly consider
what influence, skills, knowledge or other
contributions we can make towards the
professional development of the mentee.
We should acknowledge our own weak
spots.
The role of the mentor is to pass on their
experience and knowledge to the mentee.
It is important that the mentor uses their
experience to progress the professional
development of the individual being
mentored.
The mentee draws on the knowledge
and experience of their mentor to help
them to take on new roles, progress
through an organisation or make
important transitions in the workplace.
Effective mentoring relies on the mentor
having a direct experience of the work
of an organisation and the roles and
responsibilities of the mentee. Mentoring
is used to ‘support and encourage people
to manage their own learning in order
that they may maximize their potential,
develop their skills, improve their
performance and become the person
they want to be’ (Parsloe 2008).
When mentoring, we create a positive
counseling relationship and climate for
open communication. When we don’t
have the answers or solutions to specific
issues, we refer our mentee to others. To
be an effective mentor, we may signpost
the mentee to other sources (such as
seminars, websites or articles) that
address issues and challenges that have
been discussed. This allows mentees to
develop as well as showing them that we
are interested in their success.
The role of the mentor is to pass on their experience and
knowledge to the mentee.
134
which establish what is important to
the professional relationship. This may
include things such as confidentiality
and record-keeping. Other logistics to
consider include:
As mentors, we mentor more effectively if
we:
• are aware that communication styles
between ourselves and the mentee
differ
• Meetings – following the initial
meeting, we should agree a series of
meeting dates, times and venues.
• give the person we are mentoring the
benefit of the doubt if differences arise
during the mentoring relationship
• Length of mentoring – the
organisation should have a framework
in place, which details the duration
of the programme. However, some
will benefit from a shorter or longer
period.
• make every effort to understand the
challenges and issues the playworker
is facing
• are honest about the limitations or
difficulties which you identify
• Record-keeping – it is good practice
to distinguish between confidential
records and records which might
be used for wider evaluation. For
instance, confidentiality may be
needed when notes are taken by a
mentor following analysis of an issue
with the mentee. Records which
might be evaluated include helpful
techniques used by either party.
• ask for permission to go beyond
sharing of knowledge. For instance,
asking some direct questions, such as
‘Do you want my support with this?’ or
‘Shall we work together on this?’ may
help
• address areas of skill enhancement
• reinforce the strengths of the
playworker we are mentoring
• Review – it is also good practice
for the partnership to be evaluated
to identify how well the practical
arrangements are working, how
well the mentor’s style works for
the mentee, can the mentee see
progress?
• remember that adjusting to a new
environment takes time and can be
overwhelming.
When we mentor a colleague, it is
useful to agree some ground rules,
As mentors, we mentor more effectively if we are aware
that communication styles between ourselves and the
mentee differ.
135
Supporting staff
While supervision deals with the work,
support deals with the playworker. A good
support session:
The support and supervision of staff are
separate managerial functions, which
overlap and are not easily separated.
Supervision is a structured opportunity for
playworkers or volunteers to discuss their
work with their manager. Supervision is
the basis for managing work performance
and for most staff these sessions should
ideally be held every four to six weeks
and scheduled on a regular basis
(Adirondack 1998). It is a formal process
and should be held in private without
disturbances.
• Provides playworkers with a safe
setting to talk about their feelings
about work
• Provides playworkers with the
opportunity to explore professional
development
• Provides playworkers with the
opportunity to consider how outside
influences are affecting work.
Facilitating supervision sessions is much
easier for us if our organisation and
setting has clear aims and objectives.
Both ourselves and the playworker
should know what these objectives are
and how they affect the playworker’s
job and vice-versa. The supervision
session provides the opportunity for the
joint assessment of the playworker’s
performance, suggestions for change and
how to implement the joint suggestions.
There are inherent problems with trying
to provide support within the workplace.
Most notably, the boundaries between
work-related and personal support and
the potential conflicts between support
and supervision confuse the situation.
In addition to the unclear boundaries
between personal and work-related
support, Adirondack (1998) also identifies
confidentiality as a problem. It may be
136
that a playworker is having a problem outside of work
but does not wish colleagues to know the reasons.
There will be times when we are unable to guarantee
confidentiality as the needs of the organisation might
take precedence.
When it becomes clear that a member of our team is
to reveal a problem it is useful to be clear about this
before the person tells us what the issue requiring
confidentiality is. Using a phrase such as, ‘I can’t agree
to keep a secret before I know what it is’ may help to
set some boundaries. When a secret is revealed, it
is important that we keep the line of communication
open with the member of the team. We use our best
judgement when deciding whether or not to tell anyone
else.
It is highly likely that a crisis in a playworker’s personal
life will affect their work performance and their
satisfaction with work. If one of our team is facing a
serious problem, our responsibility is:
• To make time to listen
• To help identify possible support or advice networks
• To help the playworker to think about what and how
co-workers should be notified
• To consider offering reduced work arrangements, or,
when appropriate, sick or compassionate leave
• To acknowledge the seriousness of the issue when it
is causing great distress.
When offering and providing support to others, we must
not neglect the impact on ourselves. We might need to
seek the advice of our own line manager or mentor to
enable us to manage the situation with discretion and in
the best interests of the playworker and the setting.
137
Staff appraisal
• Support professional development
While supervision deals with work related
issues on a day-to-day or month-to
month basis, staff appraisals are normally
held annually and provide us with an
opportunity to identify how staff feel about
their jobs, their professional development
and the workplace. For newer staff,
appraisals are often held a few weeks
after the worker starts work, or toward the
end of the induction period. As well as
exploring how the worker is settling in, we
can also use this first session to review
the recruitment and selection process
and the induction programme.
• Identify areas in which the service can
be developed or improved.
Staff appraisals, as with supervision
sessions, work best when both the
playworker and us are prepared.
Many organisations enable this with a
standard appraisal form with questions
that are answered beforehand. To avoid
this becoming a sterile question and
answer session, we should encourage
the team member we are appraising to
make a note of particular points to be
covered, and, we should do the same.
Appraisal forms may contain the following
information:
Undertaking staff appraisals fulfils several
functions. Crucially, it allows us to check
that the team and organisation is working
effectively towards shared goals. Hope
and Pickles (1995) identify appraisal as
a continuous process of mutual feedback
about individual and organisational
performance.
• Playworkers’ name and job title
• Location and date of appraisal
meeting
• Changes since the last appraisal.
Appraisals work most effectively when
they are part of a supportive culture
within an organisation committed to
learning and development. It is highly
unlikely that appraisals will be valued
if they are seen as an annual ‘tick box’
exercise and they work best when there
are supervision and support sessions
between the manager/supervisor and
playworker.
Questions asked of both the appraiser
and appraisee will be about:
• the job, how the worker feels about
certain aspects of it and whether the
level of work undertaken is right
• the organisation, its policies and
procedures
Some organisations use the appraisal
process to make decisions about salaries
or promotion; however, it is likely, that in
our role, the function of staff appraisals
will be used to:
• the strength of the skills the
playworker brings to the job, and what
additional skills are necessary
• long term plans to help to support a
learning and career development plan.
• Plan future work plans and tasks
138
It is worth noting that the root word of appraisal is
praise. The appraisal session should be an opportunity
to recognise and build on the strengths of the
playworker. While recognising achievements, if the
playworker has had effective supervision sessions it
should be straightforward for both the playworker and
us to identify potential weaknesses and how we can
work together to maintain success and identify potential
improvements.
Conclusions
We all do our jobs well when we feel valued, know what
we are meant to be doing, are allowed to make and
learn from any mistakes we might make and receive
praise when we are committed and do things well. We
can make sure this happens when our organisation/
setting has a clear policy, which, as well as staff
induction, includes supervision, support, and appraisal.
Offering mentoring enhances these methods of support
and allows a focus on continuing professional and
personal development.
Learners into
practice
Reflect back on your career as a playworker to date.
Has there always been an opportunity for you to meet
with someone in the organisation to talk about your
successes, challenges and plans?
How, as a manager, can you make sure this happens?
139
?
?
??
?
Managing
conflict
In this section we
explore different styles
of managing conflict.
Even with sound induction, regular
supervision, support and appraisal systems in
place, from time to time there will be conflict
within a team. This can create tension, which
we as managers have a responsibility to
manage. As managers, we invest much time
and energy into establishing a commitment
to shared ideas, namely, facilitating the
opportunity for children to exercise their
right to play. But, it is also important that we
recognise that effective playwork teams are
diverse. It is often the individual differences
of playworkers that enable our teams to work
successfully in the communities we serve.
140
Before we identify the process of
conflict resolution needed, it is important
to be clear about the outcomes we
desire. Ideally, the process will result in
resolution, or an agreement about how
to deal with the disagreement. We will
be effective if we work with our team to
identify a solution to draw the conflict to
a close. And, there will be reconciliation,
building on the good relationships within
the team (ibid).
A well-managed and supported playwork
team will recognise the differences as
an opportunity to debate, discuss and
challenge one another to best effect for
the children who access our service.
Well-supported playwork teams feel
comfortable in voicing their opinions,
while recognising the differing view of
colleagues.
That said, just because we value and
recognise differences not everyone
will always get what they want. A wellmanaged playwork team will recognise
that they work and function as a group.
This sometimes means that playworkers
have to do something they don’t wish to
do or go along with a decision that they
do not fully agree with.
In the 1970s Kenneth Thomas and Ralph
Kilmann identified five main styles of
dealing with conflict (Weaver and Farrell
1998). These styles vary in their degrees
of cooperativeness and assertiveness.
They argued that people have a preferred
conflict resolution style, while noting that
different styles were useful in different
situations. They developed the ThomasKilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI),
which helps us to identify which style we
tend towards when conflict arises.
Thomas and Kilmann’s identified these
styles:
When disagreements present
themselves, it is normal for us to focus
upon the detail of our own position.
However, it is more productive to identify
the issues or causes, rather than the
problem itself. Adirondack (1998)
identifies four categories of underlying
issues to conflict:
Competitive: When we lean towards a
competitive style, we take a firm stand,
and know what we want. When we use
this style, we operate from a position
of power, drawing on our position or
expertise. It may be useful for us to use
this style when there is an emergency
and a decision needs to be made fast
or when the decision is likely to be
unpopular. However, we must be mindful
• Differing view on policies and priorities
• Insufficient resources to meet the
needs of the service
• Inappropriate organisational structures
and procedures
• Personal or historical issues.
Before we identify the process of conflict resolution needed,
it is important to be clear about the outcomes we desire.
141
Avoiding: When we lean towards
this style we actively seek to dodge
the conflict. When we use this style
we delegate controversial decisions,
underpinned by a desire of wanting to
avoid hurting anyone’s feelings. We may
use this style when a complete situation
is impossible or when we identify that
disagreement is trivial. However in many
situations this is a weak and ineffective
approach to take as a manager and
may prove to undermine our team’s
confidence in us.
that this can leave our colleagues feeling
unsatisfied and resentful if we use it in
less urgent situations.
Collaborative: When we lean towards
a collaborative style, we try to meet the
needs of all of those involved. When we
use this style, we may still be assertive,
but here, we aim to cooperate by
acknowledging that the views of everyone
are important. We may use this style
when we need to bring together a variety
of viewpoints to get the best solution
or when the team has been in conflict
previously.
Once we understand the different styles,
we use them to think about the most
appropriate approach (or mixture of
approaches) for the situation we find
ourselves in. We can use the steps
such as these to help identify the most
appropriate approach (Weaver and
Farrell 1998):
Compromising: When we lean towards
a compromising style, we try to find
a solution that will go some way in
satisfying everyone. We use this style
when the cost of conflict is higher than
the cost of losing sight of our shared
objectives or when colleagues are at a
standstill.
Step 1: Expression of differences. It
is easier to resolve the conflict when we
know what the cause is. Using questions
such as ‘When did you feel upset?’ and
‘How did this begin?’ helps to give us an
idea of the cause of the problem.
Accommodating: When we lean
towards an accommodating style, we are
indicating that we are willing to meet the
needs of others at the expense of our
own needs. We use this style when the
issues matter more to the other party,
when resolution is more important than
‘winning’. Here, we need to be cautious
that we are not choosing this style or to
call in this ‘favour’ we gave. People don’t
always return favours, and this approach
is unlikely to present the best outcome.
When we are facilitating these
discussions, it is important to provide all
those involved the opportunity to share
their side of the story. This helps us
gain an understanding of the situation
and demonstrates our desire to remain
impartial.
When we are facilitating these discussions, it is important to
provide all those involved the opportunity to share their side
of the story.
142
Step 4: Agreement on commonality.
You are listening for the most acceptable
course of action. Point out the merits
of various ideas, not only from each
other’s perspective but also in terms of
the benefits for the organisation and the
children and community who use the
setting.
Step 2: Awareness of conflict. Often
it is not the situation itself but the
perspective on the situation that causes
anger and disgruntlement within the
team.
The source of the conflict may be a
minor issue that occurred months before,
but the level of stress has grown to the
point where those involved have begun
attacking each other personally instead
of addressing the real issue. To manage
getting to the root of the conflict we can
pose questions such as ‘What do you
think happened?’ or, ‘When do you think
this issue first came about?’
It is not always easy to identify when a
disagreement becomes a conflict due to
the different ways in which we all react
and respond. ACAS (2014a) identifies
these stages and signs in the lifestyle of
a conflict:
• Beginning – signs include
incompatible goals, avoidance of
conflict, tension starts to be noticed
Step 3: Request solutions. After getting
the viewpoint of all of those involved
in the conflict we can ask for help from
everyone to try to identify how we might
change the situation.
• Early growth – confrontation, seeking
allies, more apparent signs of conflict
• Deadlock – conflict is at its peak,
blame is apportioned, communication
ceases
In this instance, we have to be active
listeners, aware of every verbal nuance,
as well as a good reader of body
language.
• Look for a way out of the conflict – an
acceptance that the problem needs to
be sorted
Our key role in this is to steer the
discussion away from blame and toward
resolution.
143
complicated, such as whose turn it is
to attend a highly desired professional
conference or whether or not a disruptive
child should be removed from the play
setting.
• Working together for a solution –
collaboration and consensus.
Sometimes, it is common for people to
abdicate responsibility with the phrase ‘it
wasn’t my fault’. It may be necessary for
us to remind ourselves, or others, that
despite having no control over the events
that have happened, we (or they) were
the responsible person, or at least we (or
they) have the responsibility for sorting
out the mess. This confusion between
‘fault’ and ‘responsibility’ often lies at the
core of unresolved issues.
Conflict affects everyone, but when it is
allowed to develop and grow in the
work-place, it can also affect productivity.
Conflict is destructive when:
• one person has to give in too much
• the disagreement harms either a
personal or professional relationship
Sometimes, it might be the case that
those involved in the conflict cannot
identify a solution and we may feel it
inappropriate to impose one. In the few
instances when this occurs, it may be
useful to involve someone from outside
the immediate group. This objective
person might be better placed to help
those of us involved to find either our own
solution, or in some cases, we might ask
them to identify one.
• there is no agreement reached
• there are uncontrolled emotions,
anger, and raised voices
• the conflict prevents or stops people
from working.
Conflict is constructive when it:
• leads to resolution
Conclusions
• builds a strong relationship with
improved communication
Conflict is all around us. It’s not
something we can choose to have or
not have. It may centre on something
as trivial as who bought milk for coffee
break last or whether or not to buy a
new piece of equipment for the play
setting. Sometimes, it may be a bit more
• opens us to new ideas
• develops common goals
• clarifies a situation that has become a
problem and leads to positive change.
This confusion between ‘fault’ and ‘responsibility’ often lies
at the core of unresolved issues.
144
Effectively supporting and managing a team of
playworkers can be both rewarding and exhausting in
equal measures. By nature, our sector tends to attract
and retain a wide variety of people who are passionate,
committed and diverse individuals who are driven by
a common purpose – to enable children and young
people to play. Inevitably, this wide variety of people,
influenced by their experiences, will sometimes lead to
disagreements and misunderstandings.
For the most part, we strive as a profession to evolve
and respond to changing needs. This change and the
pressure we place on ourselves to deliver a quality play
service can also lead to conflict in teams. Successful
organisations need to experience and resolve conflicts,
but the challenge is to use the ‘the conflict in productive
rather than destructive ways’ (Farrell and Weaver 1998:
104). It helps to avoid thinking of conflict as a bad or
disruptive thing. When managed and resolved well,
experiencing conflict can contribute to dynamic and
productive teamwork.
Learners into
practice
Try to think of a recent conflict in the work place. If you
were you one of the parties, think about how effectively
and to what extent it was resolved.
If you were tasked with resolving the conflict, what style
did you adopt? Was it a positive resolution?
145
?
?
??
?
Maintaining
communication
processes
Summary
In this section we will
look at maintaining
organisational
communication
processes.
The culture of an organisation, where it
is developmentally, its structure and our
managerial style will be reflected in the way
the organisation is managed (Adirondack
1998). If we are to be good managers and
team leaders, it is essential that we manage
effective communication and create and
enable a culture of open exchange.
In previous P3 Level 3 materials, we have defined
communication and considered aspects of effective
communication. Here, we explore organisational
communication and our role in maintaining it and helping
our team participate in it.
146
(Adirondack 1998: 51) When we are
communicating effectively across the
organisation, we are clear about:
Wikibooks (2009) defines organisational
communication as ‘the sending and
receiving of messages among interrelated
individuals within a particular environment
or setting to achieve individual and
common goals’.
• the purpose of the communication
• what we want to happen as a result
Individuals in organisations communicate
in a variety of ways – through face-toface, written, and facilitated (such as
supervision sessions or team meetings)
means.
• who needs to receive the
communication
• the information we think the team
needs to meet the purpose
Organisational communication helps us
to:
• the most effective way of
communicating
• undertake tasks relating to specific
roles and responsibilities
• possible misunderstanding about
the content or nature of the
communication.
• adapt to changes through
organisational, and each other’s,
creativity and innovation
Communication depends on its purpose,
so it is important to know why we are
communicating. Adirondack (ibid) notes
that communication may have one or
several purposes:
• complete tasks in line with our
policies, procedures or regulations
• develop relationships where feedback
is effectively delivered and received.
• Information – to explain an issue or
to explain a decision. This requires
no action from the person being
communicated with
The study of organisational
communication developed over a
hundred years ago as a result of
the rapid changes that the Industrial
Revolution presented (ibid). Since then
rapid advances in technology have
made it difficult for us and organisations
to anticipate what changes lie ahead.
What worked during the industrial age
may no longer be relevant in the 21st
century. However, even with the constant
change and growing dependency on
modern e-technology, there are some
key aspects that remain the same. Good
communication depends on the ‘right
people, getting the right information,
in the right form, at the right time’
• Questioning – to get information
• Persuasion – to influence our
colleagues. This may be linked to a
desired action
• Action – to request that our
colleagues do something. This will
need clear information so that people
know whether they are being asked
or told to do something. It must also
be clear what is being requested or
required, and why, when or how it is
to be done.
147
• Background for discussion – to enable discussion
about an issue. This indicates the purposes and
provides sufficient information to all participants
• Background for a decision – this is to reach a
decision and provides enough information so the
issue can be considered fully to make a decision. It
may include proposals or recommendations or leave
options open
• Confirmation – this confirms a discussion or
agreement
• Historical record – this provides a record of what
happened and why.
Knowing the purpose of the communication helps us to
identify the most effective way of communicating. Verbal
communication is the simplest form of communication
and takes place face-to-face, by telephone, and
in informal and formal meetings. Although verbal
communication enables an instant response where initial
misunderstandings may be recognised and clarified,
there is also potential for a later disagreement. Backing
up discussions by sharing notes helps to mitigate this
danger.
Written communication may be emails, letters, notes of
meetings and reports. If it is important that the whole
team, or the wider community, need to be communicated
with, this method ensures that everyone receives the
information in the same way. Of course, there is no
guarantee that they will all read it and act accordingly.
Written communication is also useful when complex
information needs to be communicated and shared.
After we communicate in written format, it may be useful
to back this up with verbal communication, which allows
for discussion, questioning and clarification.
Communicating in the 21st century
Today, organisations and the individuals who work within
them, use email, mobile phones and social media as a
popular tool for communication. These are used for a
variety of communication purposes. We may use them
as a way of sending a brief message or to address
148
employees that the email system
should not be used to:
more serious issues and situations.
Although we tend to view these methods
as informal written messages it is useful
to formalise the way we use them in the
workplace.
• ‘Transmit or receive confidential or
sensitive information
• Transmit or receive discriminatory,
harassing, sexually oriented,
offensive or other illegal or
improper messages
According to Smith (2001), ‘… All
companies should develop and
communicate a sound email policy
to communicate proper usage of the
company email system to employees.
The employer should distribute its email
policy regularly to all employees, and
require them to sign an acknowledgement
that they have received, read, understood
and agree to abide by the rules.’
Smith (ibid) identifies that a good email
policy should contain information such as:
• Download unauthorised software
onto the employer system.’
3. A statement regarding the monitoring
of employee emails and how any
monitoring will take place. The
policy should include a statement
that clarifies that we should have no
expectation to privacy regarding any
emails sent, received or stored on
workplace computers.
1. A statement that the organisation’s
email system is the property of the
employer and is used mainly for workrelated communication. The policy
should state whether the organisation
allows personal emails, and clarify
if there are any limitations on our
personal use of the system.
These principles can extend to the
emerging social media available to
us. In short, it is our job as managers
to ensure that the team understands
their responsibilities to themselves, the
organisation, and the community when
using electronic communication. We
can also use this policy to articulate the
2. An explanation of the email system
rules. For example, we might inform
149
relationships, communication is not always
successful, nor is getting it right always
straightforward.
policy regarding use of mobile phones,
regardless of whether or not we provide
them. These issues can be explored and
clarified:
Like all policies, an organisational
communication policy benefits from
a regular review and updates when
necessary. Involving the entire team in
the process encourages everyone to
understand their roles and responsibilities.
• The use of text messages for relaying
information. For instance, a team
member might use this mode to tell us
they are running late or to ask whether
or not we need specific equipment
for a session. But, we may prohibit
its use for more formal decisions and
discussions.
• The use of phones to take and
circulate photographs of children or
team members.
When emails or other social media are
misused in the workplace, more often than
not, it is not intentional. Usually, we do not
understand that these transmissions are
not private documents. It is important that
we all understand and acknowledge that
inappropriate use opens both ourselves
and our organisation to personal
embarrassment and puts the reputation
of the organisation at risk. A well-drafted,
well-communicated organisational policy
will support us to think twice before
clicking the ‘send’ or ‘post’ button.
Conclusion
The key to organisational success,
both for us and our organisations, is
effective communication. As we have
experienced in both our personal
relationships and organisational
Ineffective communication can cause
many problems in connection with our
ability to undertake our job, our job
satisfaction, and ours and the team’s
morale. More crucially, it can have an
adverse effect on the relationships we
have with the children who use the play
service, their parents and carers and the
wider community.
Differences in perception and the
failure to communicate clearly, can
lead to misunderstandings between
colleagues and at organisational level.
Organisationally, communication failure
occurs due to information overload,
bad timing, lack of information,
misunderstanding of key messages,
lack of respect, insufficient information,
minimal feedback, and even disinterest.
To be successful in our organisational
environments, we need to be active
participants and active listeners, to
ensure effective communication and job
satisfaction. A playwork organisation
cannot successfully operate to meet
its common goal of quality play
opportunities for children without effective
communication at every level.
150
Notes
Learners into
practice
What is your preferred method
of delivering and receiving
communication?
Can the way in which you provide or
receive information in the workplace be
improved? If so, how?
151
?
?
??
?
Group
reflection
In this section we
will consider our
participation in group
reflection of playwork
practice.
We covered peer reflection in the P3 Level
3 Certificate and it is well established
that reflective practice is a key part of
effective playwork practice (Kilvington and
Wood 2010). This section considers our
participation in group reflection of playwork
practice.
We describe group reflection as a group of colleagues
who meet and gather on a regular basis to learn and
reflect on their day-to-day experiences in the play
setting. Participating in group reflection can be an
effective supporting element of individual reflective
practice.
152
As team leaders and managers, it is our
role to ensure that there is sufficient time
to reflect together to cope with some
of the emotional impact of our work. As
Kilvington and Wood (2010: 10) point out,
‘trying to support the play needs of each
individual child, whatever their personal
needs and preferences, personality type,
previous experiences, expectations … is
an almost impossible task.’ The varying
needs of the children, young people and
communities we work with, as well as
those of our colleagues can often make
playwork very intense and so, reflective
practice as a group can help staff to
consider, communicate and manage their
feelings.
Isles-Buck and Newstead (2003) identify
a five-stage reflective practice model:
If we are responsible for facilitating group
reflection, we should aim to carry it out in
a structured way for it to be an effective
learning tool. As a manager, we can
support the group to decide together how
to use and organise the time to discuss
work-related issues.
• Development – in this final stage, we
identify what we can learn from the
interaction. If it achieved the intention,
what did we do to make this happen?
If it didn’t, what could we have done
differently?
• Intention – in this stage, we reflect on
what we hoped to achieve through a
particular activity or action on our part
• Experience – here, we gather together
an honest account of what happened
before, during and after our actions
• Actions – this stage involves us
noticing our actions – how we felt,
what we thought during our actions
• Outcome – here, we assess the
outcome of our actions. Did it achieve
the intention?
153
• Demonstrate and encourage flexibility.
We participate in group reflection
effectively when we accept that
we may need to change. Through
analysing our practice as a group,
we can assess to what extent our
playwork practice is up to date with
current thinking and practice. Our role
as managers is to help the team to
consider if the practice is as it should
be, or whether or not in needs to be
adapted.
As managers, it is important that we are
mindful of the difficulties in participating
in group reflection. The playworkers will
be diverse and some will find it easier
than others to take part in group reflective
practice. Time restraints, worries about
how one will be perceived, levels of
openness/shyness and a general
adversity to this sort of learning and
communicating are all factors we need
to be aware of. Developing our own
skills will enable us to better support the
team to develop theirs. Isles-Buck and
Newstead (ibid) identify a range of skills
which might help us to encourage group
reflection, we:
• Acknowledging personal success.
Participating in group reflection
provides an ideal opportunity to
celebrate successes, as individuals
and as a group. Our role as managers
is to ensure that even those very shy
and humble members of the team
are able to pass on and receive
compliments and praise.
• Accept and support the team to
accept ‘imperfection’. We must
all accept that sometimes we get
our interaction with children, our
colleagues and others right, and
sometimes we don’t. Participating in
group reflection helps us to reinforce
the message that making mistakes
is part of the learning process and
should not be interpreted as a sign of
failure.
• Demonstrate and promote
professional integrity. Recognising
that we need to do things differently
or change our practice is an important
part of reflective practice. It is
important we encourage objectivity
both in ourselves and in the team
when assessing what might need to
change.
• Establish a foundation of honesty.
Being honest is absolutely vital in
reflective practice in general. The
truth is, most of the time in playwork
settings, the things that haven’t gone
as we planned can be easily sorted.
Being honest means that we can
see the possibilities for doing things
differently.
• Demonstrate and encourage analytical
thinking. Playwork settings are vibrant
and busy places to work. Sometimes,
we are stretched and need to make
on-the-spot decisions. As managers,
As managers, it is important that we are mindful of the
difficulties in participating in group reflection.
154
we need to establish a structure that allows the team
to consider the work analytically and in a constructive
manner.
Conclusions
Participating in group reflection plays an important
role in maintaining and sustaining a quality playwork
service and helps to improve the experiences of the
children and communities we work with. It allows a
playwork team to examine their thoughts and actions
and understand how these elements might positively
impact on the lives of children and young people. It also
provides the opportunity for us to offer mutual support
in dealing with issues which are more challenging and
make us feel uncomfortable so that it doesn’t interfere
negatively in our future interactions with specific groups
of people.
Mutual support is a well-established way of receiving
and providing advice and companionship. Participating
in group reflection provides us with insights from, and
into, our peers who understand the nature of the work
and the issues that affect us as facilitators of children’s
play. The perspectives of others can help us become
more self-aware and allow us to share beneficial
feedback with and on behalf of frontline staff.
Group reflective practice is a way of studying our own
experiences to improve the way we work, while also
offering mutual support to the team we manage. It is
useful for playworkers who wish to continue learning and
developing through their professional lives. Participating
in group reflection helps to increase confidence and
support the playworkers we manage or supervise to
be more proactive and qualified. Engaging in group
reflective practice should help us to improve the quality
of play experiences for children and young people and
close the gap between theory and practice.
155
Learners into
practice
Notes
Are you happy with the amount and
quality of group reflection that is
available to you and your staff? If not,
what stops you making changes to
improve matters?
As a manager what steps can you
take, without being heavy-handed,
to ensure everyone in your team
participates in reflection?
156
?
??
?
?
? ?
?
Evaluating
managerial
styles
In the P3 Level 3 Award, we identified various
models of management style. We have
already undertaken a range of activities to
help us to identify which style works best for
us in a number of scenarios.
It is important to find an effective management style
when we have responsibility for managing a team of
playworkers. Feeling well managed helps playworkers in
terms of morale, job satisfaction and job effectiveness.
157
So, conversely, ineffective managers:
There are different ways to lead, and
each style comes with its own set
of pros and cons. To find the best
leadership style for you, you must take
many associated circumstances into
consideration; a task that requires some
deliberation.
• Abdicate responsibility
• Are indecisive and uninformed
• Take credit when someone else in the
team has undertaken the work
Adirondack (1998: 31) identifies that
there is an abundance of information on
management functions, roles and styles,
and he promotes the concept of the ‘good
enough manager’. When we are a good
enough manager we are respected and
can:
• Does not consult and learn from our
team
• Make judgments about people on the
basis of stereotypes
• Create a culture of blame when things
go wrong, which inhibits us to learn
from mistakes.
• Help our colleagues to identify
priorities and develop work plans
• Consult, listen and learn from our
team
As well as good communication skills,
a willingness to learn, and the ability to
show sensitivity and flexibility, effective
managers have strong leadership skills.
A strong manager is a leader who is
trusting and has confidence in others.
When we proactively trust others, it often
follows that others have confidence in us
and the organisation as a whole.
• Take responsibility and make
decisions
• Be firm, but flexible; understanding
without being ‘soft’
• Manage our own time well
• Give praise when members of the
team succeed and help them learn
and improve when necessary
To evaluate the effectiveness of our
managerial style, we should re-familiarise
ourselves with the different styles of
leadership discussed in P3 Level 3 Award
materials.
• Inspire confidence, in the
management and the setting.
There are several basic styles we may
choose from, based on the distribution of
• Delegate responsibility
As well as good communication skills, a willingness to
learn, and the ability to show sensitivity and flexibility,
effective managers have strong leadership skills.
158
• Delegative/laissez-faire management.
This managerial style relies on the
competency of each member of the
team, as it involves little managerial
involvement and complete autonomy.
We might choose this managerial
style when it is evident that an
efficient and knowledgeable team
has been established and proven to
work together effectively. When we
choose this style, it is important that
we remember that we maintain overall
responsibility and remain accountable
to the team to help them accomplish
their tasks.
power. Ideally, we should combine certain
aspects of two or more styles to tailor our
management style to our circumstances.
• Democratic/participative/consultative
management. This managerial style
relies on the participation and input
of every member of our team. When
we choose a democratic style of
management, we encourage our
colleagues and the style supports
good morale across the team with
good outcomes.
• Autocratic/authoritarian management.
This managerial style puts the
majority of power and control in
our hands, as the manager. When
we choose an autocratic style of
management, we make all of the
decisions without consulting with our
colleagues. We might use this style in
situations where we are more aware
than the team members about the
specific aspects of a project or issue.
However, many employees find this
management style can be stifling if we
overuse it.
If we are to evaluate the effectiveness
of our managerial style, it is important
that we evaluate our needs, the needs
of the team and of the organisation.
As a manager, we consider all of the
circumstances surrounding the team, and
quite often, a particular project or issue
to identify the best managerial style to
adopt.
159
• Project aspects. We consider all
of the issues involved to help us
determine the effective delegation
of responsibility. If we have strict
time constraints, or are working with
a team of new or less experienced
playworkers, or have limited
resources, then we may need to
choose an authoritarian style. On the
other hand, when our team is well
equipped to undertake the job, or
there are substantial resources, or
there is a strong need for teamwork, a
delegative or democratic style will be
more suitable.
We need to consider:
• Our team members. We consider
how long the team has been working
together and for the organisation. We
also take on board their collective
and individual skill set, knowledge
and reliability. This process helps to
identify the amount of responsibility
we are comfortable giving them.
• Manager/employee dynamic. We also
need to consider how we work with
our team members. We will more
often than not work directly with them
at a play setting, or we may work from
a separate setting and may not be
overly familiar with them. Considering
our relationship with employees helps
us to identify which managerial style
to use, and helps to evaluate the
effectiveness of the style.
Evaluating our managerial style allows
us to strike a good balance between
considering the needs of our team
and the organisation. This process
of evaluation helps us demonstrate a
commitment to teamwork, team building,
and strong morale. Coupled with keeping
the task or aim of the service firmly in
mind, this process helps the team to
stay focused on facilitating quality play
opportunities for children.
• Our own personality. As a manager,
we need a good level of selfawareness as our personality type
determines the managerial style we
are most comfortable adopting. Those
who are a dominant personality might
find a paternal style easier to adopt.
If we enjoy being team players, then
we will find ourselves well suited to
democratic or delegative styles. This
level of self-awareness has significant
importance in deciding how well we
will adopt or merge the managerial
styles to best effect.
Conclusions
If we want an accurate answer to the
question ‘How effective is my managerial
style?’ then we must reflect and identify
how the team perceives our style of
management. Our team has first-hand
Evaluating our managerial style allows us to strike a good
balance between considering the needs of our team and
the organisation.
160
experience of our management style and this will
determine how they operate as playworkers, team
members and employees.
The members of our team are the best judges of the
effectiveness of our leadership and managerial style. Of
course, some members of the team may find it difficult
to provide honest feedback and may be reluctant to take
part in discussions regarding our approach. This is one
of the many reasons why encouraging reflective practice
in a learning environment is important as it enables all of
us to be honest participants.
When the playworkers we supervise tell us what they
honestly think about our managerial style we should
remember that they’re being honest and candid.
These qualities should be treated as gifts, and so, we
should say, ‘Thank you for your feedback’. Next, it is a
good idea to ask if there is anything else they want to
share with us. When we show our team that we won’t
become defensive or hostile when we are given an
honest evaluation of our managerial style, we find that
it opens the door to a more honest and co-productive
relationship.
There is no one correct, a ‘good’ or a ‘bad’ managerial
style. Rather, our managerial style is judged by those
who are most influenced and affected by it. When it
comes to our managerial style, it is the response of the
team around us that matters most.
When we consider the options and issues and choose
an effective managerial style, we will usually receive a
positive response including job satisfaction, high morale,
and good play opportunities for the children we serve.
If these positive responses are scarce, or hard to come
by, then perhaps we need to reflect and identify which
aspect of our style needs to be changed or adapted.
161
Learners into
practice
Notes
Are there occasions when you feel you
are unable to adopt the most suitable
and effective management style? What
prevents you?
Do your colleagues have confidence
in your management and leadership
ability? What precise elements of
your approach do you think contribute
towards their view?
162
?
?
??
?
Financial
processes and
procedures
Summary
In this section we will
look at organisational
financial processes and
procedures.
Our role with regards to finance will depend
on the nature of our setting and what type
of organisation we work for. Often, those of
us working in small voluntary organisations
will have more financial responsibility than
those of us working for local authorities.
Although we might have more responsibility
than our team, there will be times when
some financial procedures will be shared
out. Paying staff and issues regarding salaries
will often be the responsibility of someone
else in the organisation – it might be a
management committee or local authority.
163
This section considers essential
bookkeeping processes and cash
handling procures that we all need to
be aware of. It also begins to discuss
fundraising and financial support.
There are two categories of financial
management: financial accountability and
financial responsibility (Adirondack 1998).
Financial accountability is being clear
about who needs to know about how
money is used. If we have responsibility
for financial processes and procedures
we will be accountable to a financial
officer or, in the case of smaller voluntary
organisations, to a treasurer, and through
the treasurer to a governing body (ibid).
Financial responsibility relates to:
• Planning expenditure, or budgeting.
Being clear what we are committed to
doing, how much that costs and how it
will be funded.
Again, the level of involvement and scope
that we have in budgeting is largely
determined by the type and size of
organisation we work for. But, generally,
when we are planning expenditure, there
are a few steps to help us:
• Fundraising. We make sure that our
organisation will have enough funds to
deliver the objectives.
• Risk analysis. We don’t take on new
activities that we cannot afford.
• Calculate the income – work out how
much funding is definitely allocated
and what it needs to be spent on
and what we hope to achieve with
fundraising. This will be based on
what we know from the past. For
instance, if we hold an annual car
boot sale, we can include an average
of the last few years profit to the
budgeting if we anticipate holding
something similar for the year ahead.
• Cash flow. We make sure that our
organisation has the money to pay
bills, on time.
• Bookkeeping and record-keeping. We
keep proper records and document
the money and funds that come into
and go out of the organisation.
• Financial reporting. We make sure
that the relevant people in our
organisation receive the information
they need.
• Identify the areas of expenditure.
Again, these will vary, but may
include:
164
• Rent and Council Tax
• Utilities – gas, electricity, water
• Insurance
• Stationary
• Maintenance
• Materials for the setting
• Equipment for the setting
• Staff training.
• List the spending for each category.
• The term ‘cash handling’ covers various activities.
Generally, in playwork settings, it involves the
collection, receipting, recording and banking of
funds into the organisation. It includes financial
activity such as the use of floats, operation of petty
cash accounts, and the control of unofficial and
unexpected funds (such as donations).
• It is important that we establish or adhere to a wellknown procedure regarding the handling of income
and cash. A key point to consider when developing
or implementing a procedure is to be absolutely
clear who is able to accept and handle cash. This
is particularly important when we work with a
larger team, sessional staff and volunteers. It is our
responsibility to protect both the money and the
staff and having rules about finance will not appear
strange to our colleagues.
Some other helpful tips include:
• We should keep cash and cheques received safely
and pay them into the organisation’s bank account
at the earliest opportunity.
• We should try to avoid accumulating large sums of
cash.
• Although it’s highly unlikely that we will be dealing
with large amounts of cash, at least two people
should take significant sums of cash to the bank
165
should note the date, amount, what
it was from, and the signature of the
member of staff who has taken the
cash, with a supporting signature, if
possible.
and ensure that cash should be
concealed when in public places.
• We should try not to establish a
routine of going to the bank at exactly
the same time each week, and avoid
trips with cash becoming common
knowledge.
• If our organisation supplies services,
records of invoices issued and
payment dates should be kept.
• We should not send cash in the post.
The sort of information we keep a record
of in terms of expenditure includes
receipts or invoices. It is highly likely
that we will be allocated a small sum of
money as ‘petty cash’ to deal with dayto-day purchases. We account for this
by collecting a receipt and keeping a
written record of the transaction. This
will include details of date, amount
and what the purchase relates to. As
the petty cash amount decreases, the
receipts are swapped for money. This
petty cash money or float is normally
kept in a secure place. It is important
that we ensure that any playworker who
has access to this float understands the
recording system and our responsibility to
get it right.
Regardless of how large or small our
organisation is, there are common
principles, which inform financial
record-keeping (ibid). The first principle
is to keep a record, with supporting
information, of all the money that comes
into and goes out of the organisation. It
is important that we keep these records
up to date and in a safe place. Many
accounting systems are computerised;
however, in smaller settings, we may
have books, such as petty cash or a cash
income book. There is a range of income
related information that we will keep:
• A letter, which might come with
a payment, for instance a grant
payment.
The second principle is one of
appropriateness. Our bookkeeping must
• For cash income (for instance
proceeds from a car boot sale), we
166
we explore here a number of funding
relationships, which we might be involved
in.
meet the needs of our organisation and
be understood and manageable. If we
manage staff who have some financial
responsibility, we must ensure that they
understand the system and that they can
cope with it.
One funding relationship we may be
familiar with is grants. Grants are given
to a voluntary sector organisation by
a statutory body, a charitable trust or
foundation for either general or specific
purposes, and the funder does not receive
a service in return. These grant providers,
or funders, will impose some conditions,
such as the provision of quarterly reports
or an expectation that we have specific
policies in place.
A third principle is to keep organised
and up to date. Recalling the example of
petty cash, we make sure that all receipts
are entered and kept and ensure our
colleagues do the same. We make sure
that everything is up to date. It can be
time consuming and overwhelming if we
leave bookkeeping activity to pile up. If
the bookkeeping and record-keeping is
becoming overwhelming or causing worry,
we should seek advice or ask our own
manager for help. Ignoring a financial
situation will only make the matter worse.
As long as we have kept proof of our
income and expenditure, it is normally
straightforward to rectify mistakes.
It is important that we demonstrate that
we have complied with these conditions
and used the money as it was intended.
Otherwise, it is within the grant provider’s
right to claim the money back.
And finally, it is important that the people
who need the financial information receive
it to help them make the right financial
decisions. A good record-keeping system
includes reporting to ensure that funders,
managers and treasurers receive regular
information.
Funding relationships
Regardless of which sector we work
in, all playwork projects can use extra
funds. The sources of funding vary and
Contracts are another funding relationship
that we may be part of. A contract is a
legal term for a ‘legally binding and legally
enforceable agreement’ (ibid: 85). These
conditions must be met in a contractual
relationship:
• Offer and acceptance by all parties.
In other words, every side offers and
accepts something
• Consideration of the material value
• Intention to enter this legal relationship.
A good record-keeping system includes reporting to ensure
that funders, managers and treasurers receive regular
information.
167
what we intend using the extra money
for. Bonel and Linden (1996) identify
these considerations when preparing
applications:
We sometimes manage funding
relationships known as service
agreements. In the case of playwork
services, this term is another name for
a contract where one party purchases
services from another. According to
Adirondack (ibid), a service agreement
may also accompany a grant to detail
specifically:
• Read the application form thoroughly
before beginning to complete so that
the information needed is understood
• Make sure that what the fund is for
meets the aims and objectives of the
organisation
• What is being funded
• What standards of quality are
expected
• Sell the service well – we point out
what is unique about our service or
project
• What the funder provides
• The management or financial
conditions required of the provider of
the service by the funder.
• Make sure the amount being sought
is well considered. More and more
funders require business plans as part
of the application process
Fundraising
• Be clear about the aims and
objectives of the project or service we
are seeking funding for
There will be many sources of funding,
from our annual car boot sale example to
government funding, European funding
and charitable trusts. The type of funding
we seek will depend on the nature
of our setting and organisation and
• Build in an evaluation process so
that the difference made is evident.
This will help to make the case when
making future funding applications.
168
• Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary
Action (NICVA) is the national
infrastructure body for the voluntary
and community sector in Northern
Ireland: www.nicva.org
Unless we are already aware of a specific
funding source, finding one will need
to be researched. One way of finding
possible funding sources is to use our
networks. Ask colleagues in similar
organisations how they have managed to
secure funding, and from where.
• The Scottish Council for Voluntary
Organisations (SCVO) is the national
body for Scotland’s charities,
voluntary organisations and social
enterprises: www.scvo.org.uk
Another is to seek the advice of our
local County Voluntary Council (CVC).
CVC’s operate in every county in Wales.
Their role is to support, develop and
represent third sector organisations, and
a list of those in Wales can be found on
the Wales Council for Voluntary Action’s
(WCVA) website:
www.wcva.org.uk/members-partners/
county-voluntary-councils.
Not all funds are suitable for every
project. Middleton (2004) presents these
points to consider when looking for
funding sources:
• Status of our organisation. Some
funders ask for the organisation to be
a registered charity, others will require
that we are a public sector body.
Most funders will want proof that our
organisation is legally constituted in
some way.
WCVA supports the national infrastructure
for the voluntary sector in Wales. Its
website (www.wcva.org.uk) also provides
up to date information on funding advice
and funding opportunities. WCVA has a
range of very useful information sheets
and WCVA and local county voluntary
councils run courses on fundraising and
other issues relating to funding from time
to time.
• The amount of funding we require.
Some funds, such as the European
Social Fund, are specifically targeted
at very large projects. Others, such as
the Big Lottery Fund’s Award for All
programme, is aimed at much smaller
projects, and smaller organisations.
Each of the other nations has a similar
infrastructure:
• The National Council for Voluntary
Organisations is the umbrella body for
the voluntary and community sector in
England: www.ncvo.org.uk
• Timing. Some funds, such as some
charitable trusts, are always open for
applications. Others, such as the Big
One way of finding possible funding sources is to use our
networks. Ask colleagues in similar organisations how they
have managed to secure funding, and from where.
169
Lottery Fund have specific bidding rounds linked
to programmes, which means we can only apply at
certain times and for specific projects.
• Our resources. Some funders will ask that we bring
in some match funding. Match funding can come
from our own funds, from a partner organisation, the
donation of equipment or staff time. This is known
as in kind funding. It is useful to remember that
although we can sometimes use other grant funding
as match funding, there may be restrictions to this.
• Our beneficiaries. Some funds are quite specific
about what work they will support.
• What we need funding for. Some funds are very
specific about what they will and won’t fund (that is
salaries, running costs, building work). More often
than not, grant funding will pay only for specific
project costs.
• How popular the funding source is. It is worth us
finding out how oversubscribed some funding
bodies are. Larger ones may seem like a safe
bet, but they may receive a very high number of
applicants, while trusts or foundations with smaller
amounts to give may receive fewer bids. Many
funding bodies will provide us with an indication of
the amount of bid they expect. For the most part,
the funding body needs to manage the number of
applicants it receives and it certainly doesn’t want
small organisations with limited capacity to spend a
vast amount of time applying if they are likely to be
unsuccessful.
When the time comes to look for additional funding,
it is important to start with a well worked out idea of
what we need money for. As well as helping to identify
sources of funding and demonstrate to funders that
our project is well considered, it also mitigates against
the likelihood that we will seek funding sources first
and build project ideas around the funding criteria. This
approach, sometimes known as ‘funding led’, can result
in us losing sight of our organisation’s main objective
and change our service to meet the criteria of funding.
170
There is no point in chasing money
for the sake of it and it is better use of
our time to spend it researching other
sources of funding rather than receiving
funding for a service or project that we
don’t have the skills to deliver.
When planning our project for funding
purposes, Middleton (ibid) advises that a
good starting point is to think about our
organisation:
• Can we sum up its purpose in one
sentence?
• Who are the main beneficiaries (who
benefits most from) our organisation?
simplest of general bookkeeping systems
might seem overwhelming and confusing.
It is important that we try not to panic and
seek advice if this becomes the case.
• What experience do we have in
developing and delivering projects?
• Does our organisation’s purpose and
experience fit with the funding round
or programme we have identified?
For most of us, mistakes can be rectified,
providing we maintain a good level of
records and documentation.
Fundraising at any level can seem
daunting and applying to funding bodies
can be particularly time-consuming and
difficult. Many funding bodies will develop
and provide guidance for applicants
to support them to develop bids, and
our local CVC can point us in the right
direction in terms of building our skill
base to equip us to apply for external
funding. While there are techniques to
good bid writing, the skill can be learned
and improved with practice. Proper
project planning is crucial and, as well as
being attractive to funders, makes for a
more effective project in the end.
• Are there other funding bodies or
funding rounds, which might be more
suitable?
Conclusions
It is important for us to remember that
money matters, even if it is frustrating
that it takes us away from our key role of
facilitating children’s play. It is important
to understand those of our organisation’s
financial matters that are relevant to
us and to make sure that our team
understands their role and responsibility
as well. From time to time, even the
171
Learners into
practice
Notes
Do you have a good understanding
of the financial procedures in your
organisation?
Do you feel there are improvements
that can be made to the system used?
If you use bookkeeping software, what
additional issues should you be aware
of?
172
References
ACAS (2014a) Mediation: An Approach to Resolving
Workplace Issues. The Advisory, Conciliation and
Arbitration Service [online] Available at:
www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/2/q/Mediation-an-approachto-resolving-workplace-issues.pdf [Accessed 10 April
2014].
ACAS (2014b) Recruitment and Selection. The Advisory,
Conciliation and Arbitration Service [online] Available
at: www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/p/9/Getting_it_right_
factsheet_-_Recruitment_and_selection-accessibleversion-July-2011.pdf [Accessed 6 April 2014].
Action for Children (n.d.) The right choice – Involving
children and young people in recruitment and selection.
London: Action for Children.
Adirondack, S. (1998) Just about managing? London:
London Voluntary Service Council.
Aldis, O. (1975) Play Fighting. London: Academic Press.
Akhtar, M. (2011) Remembering, Replaying and Working
Through: The Transformation of Trauma in Children’s
Play. In: Akhtar, M. ed. (2011) Play and Playfulness.
Plymouth: Jason Aronson.
Ashby, P. et al (2008) Beginner teacher’s experiences
of initial teacher preparation, induction and early
professional development: overview of literature.
London: Department for Children, Schools and Families
(DCSF).
Axline, V. (1964) Dibs: In Search of Self. London:
Penguin.
Axline, V. (1969) Play therapy (Rev. ed.). Cambridge,
MA: Riverside Press.
BAPT (2013) A History of Play Therapy. British
Association of Play Therapists [online]. Available at:
www.bapt.info/historyofpt.htm [Accessed 25 January
2014].
1
Barker, R. C. and Wright, H. F.
(1955) Midwest and its children: The
psychological ecology of an American
town. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson, & Co.
Brown, F. (2003) Compound flexibility:
the role of playwork in child development.
In: Brown, F. ed. (2003) Playwork,
Theory and Practice. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Bateson, G. (1955) A Theory of Play and
Fantasy. In: G. Bateson, (1972) Steps
to an Ecology of Mind. London: Jason
Aronson Inc.
Brown, F. ed., (2003b) Playwork Theory
and Practice. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Bateson, P., and Martin, P. (2013) Play,
Playfulness, Creativity and Innovation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, F. (2007) The Venture – a case
study of an adventure playground.
Cardiff: Play Wales.
Barber, N. (1991) Play and energy
regulation in mammals, The Quarterly
Review of Biology, 66: 129-147.
Brown, F. (2008) The fundamentals of
playwork. In: Brown, F. and Taylor, C.
eds. (2008) Foundations of Playwork.
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Bergen, D. (2006) Play as a Context for
Humour Development. In: Fromberg, D.
P. and Bergen, D. eds. Play From Birth
to Twelve: Contexts, Perspectives, and
Meanings. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Brown, F. (2008) The Playwork
Principles: a critique. In: Brown, F.
and Taylor, C. (2008) Foundations of
Playwork. Maidenhead: Open University
Press. Ch.25.
Beunderman, J./Demos (2010) People
Make Play. London: Published for Play
England by National Children’s Bureau.
Brown, F. (2009) Factsheet No.14 What
is Playwork? [pdf] London: Children’s
Play Information Service for the National
Children’s Bureau. Available at: www.ncb.
org.uk/media/124806/no.14_what_is_
playwork.pdf [Accessed 12 May 2014].
Bishop, J. C. and Curtis, M. (2001)
Introduction. In: Bishop, J. C. and Curtis,
M. eds. (2001) Play today in the primary
school playground. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Brown, F. (2010) Dr Fraser Brown –
Therapeutic Playwork Parts 1 – 3. [video
online] Available at: www.youtube.com/
watch?v=X7cE8RIgBPE www.youtube.
com/watch?v=1-5_EkpvBns www.
youtube.com/watch?v=biAb8tfQSyU
[Accessed 20 January 2014].
Blow, C. M. (2012) I Know Why the
Caged Bird Shrieks. The New York
Times, 19 September [online] Available
at: http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.
com/2012/09/19/blow-i-know-whythe-caged-bird-shrieks/?_php=true&_
type=blogs&_r=0 [Accessed 11 April
2014].
Brown, F. (2012) The play behaviours
of Roma children in Transylvania,
International Journal of Play, 1:1, 64-74.
Bonel, P. and Linden, J. (1996) Good
practice in Playwork. Cheltenham:
Stanley Thornes (Publishers) Ltd.
Brown, F. (2014) Playwork. In: Brock,
A., Jarvis, P. and Olusoga, Y. eds.
Perspectives on Play: Learning for Life.
2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Bowlby, J. (1969) Attachment and
Loss: Volume 1 Attachment. London:
The Hogarth Press and the Institute of
Psycho-Analysis.
2
Brown, F. (2014) Play and Playwork: 101
Stories of Children Playing. Maidenhead:
Open University Press.
Burn, A. and Roud, S. (2011) Change and
Continuity. Hear from the researchers.
Learning Playtimes: A century of
children’s games and rhymes. [video
online]. Available at: www.bl.uk/learning/
langlit/playground/browseadultview.htm
l#cm=Videos&gm=Hear&id=120566
&id2=120932 [Accessed 14 February
2014].
Brown, F. and Patte, M. (2013)
Rethinking Children’s Play. London:
Bloomsbury.
Brown, F. and Webb, S. (2005) Children
without play, Journal of Education, no. 35:
139-158.
Byers, J. A. and Walker, C. (1995)
Refining the motor training hypothesis for
the evolution of play. American Naturalist,
146, 25-40.
Brown, S. (2009) Play: How it Shapes
the Brain Opens the Imagination, and
Invigorates the Soul. London: Penguin.
Bruce, T. (1994) Play, the universe and
everything! In: Moyles, J. (1994) The
Excellence of Play. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Care and Social Services Inspectorate
for Wales (2012) National Minimum
Standards for Regulated Childcare.
Cardiff: Welsh Government/Crown
Copyright.
Bruner, J. (1972) Nature and uses of
immaturity. American Psychologist, 27,
687-707.
Care Council for Wales (2010a) Inducting
Well: A guide to effective induction.
Cardiff: Care Council for Wales.
Bruner, J. (1972) Nature and Uses
of Immaturity. In: Bruner, J. S., Jolly,
A. and Sylva, K. eds. (1976) Play: its
role in development and evolution.
Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd.
Ch.1.
Care Council for Wales (2010b)
Recruiting Well. Cardiff: Care Council for
Wales.
Catling, S. (2005) Children, Place
and Environment. In: Geographical
Association, GA Annual Conference.
University of Derby 31 March-1 April
2005. [online] Available at: www.
geography.org.uk/download/EVcatling1.
doc [Accessed 14 January 2014].
Chambers (2006) The Chambers
Dictionary. 10th ed. Edinburgh:
Chambers Harrap Publishers Ltd.
Bruner, J. (1986). Play, Thought, and
Language. Prospects 16: 77-83.
Burghardt, G. M. (2005) The Genesis
of Animal Play: Testing the Limits.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Burn, A. (2011) Media Cultures. Hear
from the researchers. Learning Playtimes:
A century of children’s games and
rhymes. [video online]. Available at:
www.bl.uk/learning/langlit/playground/
browseadultview.html#cm=Videos&gm=
Hear&id=120566&id2=120932 [Accessed
14 February 2014].
Chemero, A. (2003) An Outline of a
Theory of Affordances. Ecological
Psychology 15(2), 181-195.
Chillot, R. (2013) The Power of
Touch. [online]. Available at: www.
psychologytoday.com/articles/201302/thepower-touch [Accessed 3 February 2014].
3
Clack, G., Crowley, K., Waycott, L.,
Prince, J., and Birdsey, N. (2010)
Childcare Practitioners’ Knowledge and
Perceptions of Play Therapy. In: British
Journal of Play Therapy, 6, pp19-34.
de Bono, E. (2006) Edward de Bono
on creative thinking. [video online]
Available at: www.youtube.com/
watch?v=UjSjZOjNIJg [Accessed 13
March 2014].
Clark, C. D. (2007) Therapeutic
Advantages of Play. In: Göncü, A.
and Gaskins, S. eds. (2007) Play and
Development: Evolutionary, Sociocultural
and Functional Perspectives. Abingdon:
Taylor & Francis Group.
Department of Health (2003a) National
Service Framework for Children,
Young People and Maternity Services.
[online] Available at: http://webarchive.
nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/
eOrderingDownload/DH-40496PDF.pdf
[Accessed 24 January 2014].
Clayton, S. and Opotow, S. (2003)
Identity and the Natural Environment:
The Psychological Significance of Nature.
London: MIT Press.
Department of Health (2003b) Getting
the right start: National Service
Framework for Children Standard
for Hospital Services. Department of
Health. [pdf] Available at: www.nhs.
uk/nhsengland/aboutnhsservices/
documents/nsf%20children%20in%20
hospitlaldh_4067251%5B1%5D.pdf
[Accessed 23 January 2014].
Cobb, E. (1977) The Ecology of
Imagination in Childhood. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Corsaro, W. (1997) The Sociology of
Childhood. London: Pine Forge Press.
Elkind, D. (2007) The Power of Play.
Cambridge, MA.: Da Cape Lifelong.
Costabile, A., Matheson, P. and Aston, J.
(1991) Cross-national comparison of how
children distinguish between serious and
play fighting. Developmental Psychology,
7(5), 881-887.
Else, P. (2012) What is therapeutic
playwork? In: IPA EWNI Newsbrief Issue
15 January 2012. [online] Available
at: www.ipa-ewni.org.uk/services/
Newsbrief%2015%20Jan%202012.pdf.
Originally available as What is therapeutic
playwork? entry on the Ukplayworkers
Website, 23 November 2001.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975) Beyond
Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1993) The
Evolving Self: A Psychology for the Third
Millennium. New York: HarperCollins.
Else, P. (1999) Seeing the Whole Picture
– Playwork Content in the Playwork
Curriculum. In: Sturrock, G. and Else, P.
(2005) Therapeutic Playwork Reader one
1995-2000. Eastleigh: Common Threads
Publications Ltd. pp.131-145.
Damasio, A. (2000) The Feeling of What
Happens. London: Vintage.
Davis, G. A. (1999) Creativity is Forever
4th ed. Dubuque, IA.: Kendall/Hunt
Publishing Company.
Fagan R. (1981) Animal Play Behaviour.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Davis, L. (2008) Policy briefing 4: Play
in prisons: doing it justice. Play England.
[pdf] Available at: www.playengland.org.
uk/media/130540/play-in-prisons-briefing.
pdf [Accessed 22 January 2014].
4
Fein, G. (1987) Pretend play: Creativity
and consciousness. In: Gorlitz, P. and
Wohlwill, J. (eds.) Curiosity, imagination,
and play. London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of
affordances. In: Shaw, R. and Branford,
J. eds., Perceiving, acting, and knowing:
Toward an ecological psychology.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Ch.8.
Fjortoft, I. and Sageie, J. (2000) The
natural environment as a playground
for children. Landscape description
and analysis of a natural playscape.
Landscape and Urban Planning 48,
83-97.
Gibson, J. J. (1986) The Ecological
Approach to Visual Perception. London:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Golumb, C. and Kuersten, R. (1996)
On the transition from pretence play
to reality: What are the rules of the
game? British Journal of Developmental
Psychology, 14, 203–217.
Freud, A. (1965) Normality and
pathology in childhood: Assessment of
development. New York: International
Universities Press.
Gosso, Y. (2010) Play in Different
Cultures. In: Smith, P. K. (2010) Children
and Play. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Frost, J. L. (2010) A History of Children’s
Play and Play Environments. London:
Routledge.
Guss, F. (2005) Reconceptualizing Play:
aesthetic self-definitions. Contemporary
Issues in Early Childhood, 6(3), 233-243.
Frost, J. L. (2010) A History of Children’s
Play and Play Environments. London:
Routledge.
Hall, G. S. (1904) Adolescence:
its Psychology and its Relations to
Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex,
Crime, Religion and Education. Vol. 1.
New York: Appleton.
Fry, D. P. (2005) Rough-and-Tumble
Social Play in Humans. In: Pellegrini, D.
A. and Smith, P. K. eds. The Nature of
Play: Great Apes and Humans. London:
Guilford Press.
Harlow, H. (1958) The Nature of Love. In:
American Psychologist, 13, 673-685.
Garaigordobil, M. (2006) Intervention in
Creativity With Children Aged 10 and
11 Years: Impact of a Play Program on
Verbal and Graphic–Figural Creativity.
Creativity Research Journal, 18(3) 329345.
Hart, J. and Clutterbrook, A. (2008)
Playwork in the prison environment:
working with children separated by
incarceration. In: Brown, F. and Taylor,
C. eds., (2008) Foundations of Playwork.
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Garvey, C. (1990) Play (enlarged edition)
Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University
Press.
Heft, H. (1988) Affordances of children’s
environments: A functional approach to
environmental description. Children’s
Environmental Quarterly 5(3), 29-37.
Gaskins, S., Haight, W., and Lancy,
F. (2007) The Cultural Construction of
Play. In: Göncü, A. and Gaskins, S.
eds. (2007) Play and Development:
Evolutionary, Sociocultural and Functional
Perspectives. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis
Group.
Hertenstein, M. J., Holmes, R.,
McCullough, M. and Keltner, D. (2009)
The Communication of Emotion via
Touch, Emotion, 9, 566-573.
5
Holland, P. (2003) We don’t play with
guns here. Maidenhead: Open University
Press.
Hughes, B. (2008) Neophilic Modification
– An experiment in Novelty [pdf] Islington
Play Association. Available at: www.
islingtonplay.org.uk/files/documents/
neophilic-modification.pdf [Accessed 14
January 2014].
Hope, P. and Pickles, T. (1995)
Performance Appraisal A Handbook
for Managers in Public and Voluntary
Organisations. Lyme Regis: Russell
House Publishing Ltd.
Hughes, B. (2012) Evolutionary Playwork
2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge.
Hughes B. (1996) A Playworker’s
Taxonomy of Play Types. London:
PLAYLINK.
Huizinga, J. (1950) Homo ludens: a study
of the play element in culture. New York:
Roy.
Hughes, B. (1996) Play Environments: A
Question of Quality. London: PLAYLINK.
Isles-Buck, E. and Newstead, S. (2003)
Essential Skills for Managers of ChildCentred Settings. London: David Fulton
Publishers, Ltd.
Hughes, B. (2000) A Dark and Evil
Cul-De-Sac: Has Children’s Play in
Urban Belfast been Adulterated by the
Troubles? MA Dissertation. Cambridge:
Anglia Polytechnic University.
Jarvis, P. (2014) Building ‘Social
Hardiness’ for Life: Rough and Tumble
Play in the Early Years of Primary
School. In: Brock, A., Jarvis, P. and
Olusoga, Y. eds. (2014) Perspectives on
Play Learning for Life. 2nd ed. London:
Routledge.
Hughes, B. (2001) Evolutionary playwork
and reflective analytic practice. London:
Routledge.
Hughes, B. (2001) The First Claim
… A framework for playwork quality
assessment. Cardiff: Play Wales.
Johnson, J. E. (2007) Play and Creativity.
In: The International Conference of
Play and Creativity, National University
of Tainan, Tainan, Taiwan, 30 May,
2007. Available at: http://scripts.cac.
psu.edu/users/j/e/jej4/Play%20and%20
Creativity%5B1%5D.doc [Accessed 13
March 2014].
Hughes, B. (2002a) The First Claim –
Desirable Processes. Cardiff: Play Wales.
Hughes, B. (2002b) A Playworker’s
Taxonomy of Play Types. 2nd Edition
London, PLAYLINK.
Jun-Tai (2008) Play in Hospital. In: OMEP
UK Updates March 2008 Play in Various
Settings. [online] World Organisation for
Early Childhood Education. Available
at: www.omepuk.org.uk/images/omep_
updates_march_2008.pdf [Accessed 23
January 2014].
Hughes, B. (2003) Play Deprivation, play
bias and playwork practice. In: Brown, F.
ed. (2003) Playwork Theory and Practice.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Hughes, B. (2006) Play Types:
Possibilities and Speculations. London:
The London Centre for Playwork
Education and Training.
Kalliala, M. (2006) Play Culture in a
Changing World. Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
6
Kytta, M. (2003) Children in Outdoor
Contexts: Affordances and Independent
Mobility in the Assessment of
Environmental Child Friendliness. PhD.
Helsinki University of Technology. [online]
Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/
viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.101.7247&
rep=rep1&type=pdf [Accessed 16 April].
Kaplan, S. (1992) Environmental
Preferences in a Knowledge-Seeking
Knowledge-Using Organism. In: Barkow,
J. H., Cosimides, L. and Tooby, J. eds.
(1992) Adapted Mind. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Kaplan, R. and Kaplan, S. (1989) The
Experience of Nature: A psychological
perspective. New York: Cambridge.
Lego Learning Institute (2003) The
Changing Face of Children’s Play
Culture. Slough: The Lego Learning
Institute.
Kellert, S. R. (2002) Experiencing Nature:
Affective, Cognitive, and Evaluative
Development in Children. In: Kahn Jr., P.
H., and Kellert, S. (2002) Children and
Nature, Psychological, Sociocultural, and
Evolutionary Investigations. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press. Ch.5.
Leichter-Saxby, M. (2009) Children’s
Places of Secrecy and Play:
A Playworker’s Guide to Dens and Forts.
[online] Available at: www.islingtonplay.
org.uk/files/documents/Guide_to_Dens_
and_Forts.pdf [Accessed 14 April 2014].
Kilvington, J. and Wood, A. (2007) The
Gentle Art of Agonism. In: Russell, W.
Handscomb, B. and Fitzpatrick, J. (eds)
Playwork Voices. London: London Centre
for Playwork Education and Training.
Lester, S. and Maudsley, M. (2006) Play,
Naturally: A review of children’s natural
play. London: Play England/National
Children’s Bureau.
Kilvington, J. and Wood, A. (2010)
Reflective Playwork: For all who work
with children. London: Continuum
International Publishing Group.
Lester, S. and Russell, W. (2008) Play
for a Change: Play, Policy and Practice:
A review of contemporary perspectives.
London: National Children’s Bureau.
King, P. and Howard, J. (2011)
Maximising children’s choice during play
in relation to structural, functional, social
and emotional affordances? [Pdf] [online]
Available at: www.playwales.org.uk/login/
uploaded/documents/Events/IPA%20
2011/pete%20king%201.pdf [Accessed
16 April 2014].
Livingstone, S. (2008) On the future of
children’s television – a matter of crisis?
In: Gardam, T. and Levy. D. eds., (2008)
The Price of Plurality: Choice, Diversity
and Broadcasting Institutions in the
Digital Age. Oxford: Reuters Institute for
the Study of Journalism. Ch.8.
Kytta, M. (2002) Affordances of children’s
environments in the context of cities,
small towns, suburbs and rural villages
in Finland and Belarus. Journal of
Environmental Psychology 22, 109123. [online] Available at: http://lib.tkk.fi/
Diss/2003/isbn9512268736/article1.pdf
[Accessed 15 April 2014].
Lofthouse, I., Moss, L., and Butt, B.
(2001) Recruitment and Selection: A good
practice guide 2nd ed. Bradford: Gizmo
Publications.
Lorenz, K. (1972) ‘Psychology and
Phylogeny’. In: Studies in Animal and
Human Behaviour. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
7
Michel, E. and Hart, D. (2002) Involving
Young People in the Recruitment of
Staff, Volunteers and Mentors. London:
National Children’s Bureau.
Mainmelis, C., and Ronson, S. (2006)
Ideas are born in fields of play: Towards
a theory of play and creativity in
organizational settings, Research in
Organizational Behavior, 27, 81-131.
Mitchell, R. W. (2007) Pretense in
Animals: The Continuing Relevance
of Children’s Pretense. In: G, A. and
S. Gaskins, Play and Development.
Abingdon: Taylor and Francis Group.
Ch3.
Mainwaring, B. (2006) Children’s Views
2006: children and young people’s
views on play and playworkers.
[pdf] SkillsActive. Available at: http://
stepstoexcellence.org.uk/steps_to_
excellence/reflection_folder/reflec%20
text%20pdf/140.pdf [Accessed 16 May
2014].
Middleton, J. (2004) Guide to bidding:
devising and structuring projects for grant
funding. Middlesex: Middlesex University
Press.
Marsh, J. and Bishop, J. C. (2014)
Changing play. Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
Morris, D. (1964) The response of
animals to a restricted environment,
Symposium Zoological Society of London
13: 99-118.
Maudsley, M. (2007) Factsheet:
Children’s Play in Natural Environments.
London: The Children’s Play Information
Service.
Morris, D. (1967) The Naked Ape.
London: Jonathan Cape.
McGrenere, J. and Ho, W. (2000)
Affordances: Clarifying and Evolving a
Concept. In: Proceedings of Graphic
Interface, Montreal, 179-186. [online]
Available at: http://teaching.polishedsolid.
com/spring2006/iti/read/affordances.pdf
[Accessed 22 April 2014].
Mouritsen, F. (1998) Child culture play culture. Odense: Department of
Contemporary Cultural Studies, Odense
University. Available at: http://static.
sdu.dk/mediafiles/Files/Information_til/
Studerende_ved_SDU/Din_uddannelse/
Kultur_og_formidling/WorkingPapers/02_
ChildCulture_PlayCulture%20pdf.pdf
[Accessed 9 February 2014].
McMahon, F. R. and Sutton-Smith,
B. (1999) The Past in the Present:
Theoretical Directions for Children’s
Folklore. In: Sutton-Smith, B., Mechling,
J., Johnson, T. W., and McMahon, F. R.,
eds. (1999) Children’s Folklore. Logan,
Utah: Utah State University Press.
National Association of Health Play
Specialists (2012) Resources. [online].
Available at: http://nahps.org.uk/index.
php?page=resources [Accessed 21
January 2014].
Meire, J. (2007) Play in retro – and
perspective. In: Jambor, T. and Van Gils,
J. eds. (2007) Several Perspectives on
Children’s Play. Antwerp – Apeldoorn:
Garant.
National Scientific Council on the
Developing Child (2004) Children’s
Emotional Development is Built into the
Architecture of Their Brains: Working
Paper No. 2. [online] Available at: http://
developingchild.harvard.edu/index.php/
resources/reports_and_working_papers/
working_papers/wp2/ [Accessed 14 April
2014].
Meire, J. (2007) Qualitative research
on children’s play: a review of recent
literature. In: Jambor, T. and Gils, J. V.
eds. (2007) Several Perspectives on
Children’s Play. Antwerp: Garant.
8
Newell, W. W. (1884) Games and Songs
of American Children. New York: Harper
& Brothers.
Palmer, M. (2008) ‘The place we are
meant to be’: play, playwork and the
natural rhythms of communities. In:
Brown, F. and Taylor, C. eds. Foundations
of Playwork. Maidenhead: Open
University Press. Ch.27.
Nicholls, D. (2002) Employment Practice
and Policies in Youth, Community and
Play Work 2nded. Lyme Regis: Russell
House Publishing.
Nicholson, S. (1971) How Not to Cheat
Children: The Theory of Loose Parts,
Landscape Architecture 62, 30-35.
Panksepp, J. (2007) Can PLAY Diminish
ADHD and Facilitate the Construction of
the Social Brain? Available at: www.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2242642
[Accessed 25 January 2014].
NPFA (2000) Best Play. What Play
Provision Should Do for Children.
London: NPFA/Children’s Play Council/
playlink and Department of Culture,
Media and Sport.
Parsloe, E, (2008) The Oxford School
of Coaching and Mentoring. [online]
Available at: www.mentorset.org.uk/
pages/mentoring.htm [Accessed 6 April
2014].
Ofcom (2012) Children and Parents:
Media Use and Attitudes Report. [online].
Ofcom. Available at: http://stakeholders.
ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/medialiteracy/oct2012/main.pdf [Accessed 14
February 2014].
Patte, M. (2010) The Therapeutic
Benefits of Play for Hospitalized Children.
In: Nwokah, E. E. ed. (2010) Play as
Engagement and Communication:
Play and Culture Studies, Volume 10.
Plymouth: University Press of America.
O’Grady, A. (2013) Interrupting flow:
Researching Play, Performance and
Immersion in Festival Scenes. In:
Dancecult: Journal of Electronic Dance
Music Culture 5(1): 18-38. Available
at: https://dj.dancecult.net/index.php/
dancecult/article/view/353/358 [Accessed
8 January 2014].
Pellegrini, A.D. (1994) School Recess
and Playground Behaviour: Educational
and Developmental Roles. Albany, NY:
State University of New York Press
Pellegrini, A. D. and Bohn, C. (2005) The
Role of Recess in Children’s Cognitive
Performance and School Adjustment,
Research News and Comment, AERA,
Jan/Feb 2005: 13-19.
O’Hagan, K. (2001) Cultural Competence
in the caring professions. London:
Jessica Kingsley.
Pellegrini, A. D. (2009) The Role of Play
in Human Development. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Opie, I. and Opie, P. (1959) The Lore and
Language of Schoolchildren. London:
Oxford University Press.
Pellis, S. and Pellis, V. (2009) The
Playful Brain: Venturing to the Limits of
Neuroscience. Oxford: Oneworld.
Oxford Dictionaries (2014) Culture.
[online] Available at: www.oxforddictionaries.
com/definition/english/culture [Accessed 10
February 2014].
Piaget, J. (1951) Play, Dreams and
Imitation in Childhood. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
9
Piaget, J. (1962) Play, dreams, and
imitation in childhood. New York: Norton.
Reed, E. S. (1993) The Intention
to Use a Specific Affordance: A
Conceptual Framework for Psychology.
In: Wozniak, R. H. and Fischer, K. W.
eds. Development in Context: Acting
and Thinking in Specific Environments.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Picciuto, E. and Carruthers P. (2011) The
Origins of Creativity. [online] Available
at: http://faculty.philosophy.umd.edu/
pcarruthers/Origins%20of%20creativity.
pdf [Accessed 12 March 2014].
Play Wales (2006) [video] Pushing Eddie
in the Nettles with Connor. Cardiff: Play
Wales.
Reid, T. L. (2005) A Qualitative Approach
to Boys’ Rough and Tumble Play: There
is More Than What Meets the Eye.
In: McMahon, F. F., Lytle, D. E. and
Sutton-Smith, B. eds. (2005) Play: An
Interdisciplinary Synthesis. Landam Md.:
University Press of America.
Play Wales (2014) Right to Play
Workshop. Cardiff: Play Wales.
Portchmouth, J. (1969) Creative crafts for
today. London, Studio Vista.
Richards, R. ed. (2007) Everyday
Creativity. Washington, DC.: American
Psychological Association.
Powers, T. G. (2000) Play and
Exploration in Children and Animals.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Robinson, K. (2006) How schools kill
creativity. [video online] Available at:
www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_
schools_kill_creativity [Accessed 13
March 2014].
PPSG (2005) Playwork Principles, held in
trust as honest brokers for the profession
by the Playwork Principles Scrutiny
Group. [Internet] Available from: www.
playwales.org.uk/eng/playworkprinciples
[Accessed 9 June 2013].
Roopnarine, J. L. and Johnson, J. (2004)
The Need to Look at Play in Diverse
Cultural Settings. In: J.L. Roopnarine,
J.E. Johnson, and F.H. Hooper, eds.
(1994) Children’s Play in Diverse
Cultures. Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press.
PTUK (2011) An Effective Way of
Promoting Children’s Wellbeing and
Alleviating Emotional, Behavioural
and Mental Health Problems. [online]
Available at: www.playtherapy.org.uk/
AboutPTUK/paperV2.pdf [Accessed 3
May 2014].
Rosen, M. (2011a) Ball games. Learning
Playtimes: A century of children’s games
and rhymes. [video online]. Available at:
www.bl.uk/learning/langlit/playground/
browseadultview.html#cm=Videos&gm=B
all&id=120548&id2=120910 [Accessed 14
February 2014].
Prout, A. and James, A. (1997)
Constructing and Re-constructing
Childhood. London: Falmer Press.
Reaney, M. J. (1916) The Psychology of
the Organized Group Game. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Rosen, M. (2011b) Pretend play. Learning
Playtimes: A century of children’s games
and rhymes. [video online]. Available at:
www.bl.uk/learning/langlit/playground/
browseadultview.html#cm=Videos&g
m=Pretend&id=120551&id2=120922
[Accessed 14 February 2014].
10
Roud, S. (2010) The Lore of the
Playground. London: Random House
Books.
Sharp, C. (2004) Developing young
children’s creativity: what can we
learn from research? National
Foundation for Educational research.
[online] Available at: www.nfer.ac.uk/
publications/55502/55502.pdf [Accessed
13 March 2014].
Runco, M. A. (2007) To Understand is to
Create: An Epistemological Perspective
on Human Nature and Personal
Creativity. In: R. Richards, ed. (2007)
Everyday Creativity. Washington, DC.:
American Psychological Association.
Shaw, B., Watson, B., Frauendienst, B.,
Redecker, A., Jones, T. with Hillman, M.,
(2013) Children’s independent mobility:
a comparative study in England and
Germany (1971 - 2010), London: Policy
Studies Institute.
Russ, S. W. (2004) Play in Child
Development and Psychotherapy.
London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Singer, D. G. and Singer, J. L. (1990).
The house of make-believe: Children’s
play and the developing imagination.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Russ, S. and Moore, M. (2006) Pretend
play as a resource for children:
implications for pediatricians and health
professionals, Journal of Developmental
Behavioural Pediatrics. 27(3): 237-248.
Singer, D. G. and Singer, J. L. (2013)
Reflections on Pretend Play, Imagination,
and Child Development, American
Journal of Play, 6(1), 1-14.
Russ, S. W. and Wallace, C. E. (2013)
Pretend Play and Creative Processes,
American Journal of Play, 6(1), 136-148.
Smith P. K. (2010) Children and Play.
Chichester, West Sussex: WileyBlackwell.
Russell, W. (2008) Modelling playwork:
Brawgs continuum, dialogue and
collaborative reflection. In: Brown, F.
and Taylor, C (2008) Foundations of
Playwork. Maidenhead: Open University
Press. Ch.17.
Smith P. K. (2010) Children and Play.
West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
Smith, S. (2001) Email In The Workplace:
Avoiding Legal Landmines [online]
Available at: www.hr.com/en/communities/
email-in-the-workplace-avoiding-legallandmines_eacwyfvi.html [Accessed 12
April 2014].
Sawyer, P. K. (1997) Pretend play
as improvisation. London: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Schaefer, C. (1993) What is Play and
Why Is It Therapeutic? In: Schaefer, C.
ed. The Therapeutic Powers of Play.
Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
Social Care Institute for Excellence
(2008) Children’s and families’ services
SCIE guide 22: Children of Prisoners –
maintaining family ties. [pdf]. Available
at: www.scie.org.uk/publications/guides/
guide22/files/guide22.pdf [Accessed 22
January 2014].
Schwartzenberger, K. (2007)
Developmental Play Therapy in the
Treatment of Childhood Trauma.
Available at: www.playtherapyseminars.
com/Articles/Details/10006 [Accessed 3
February 2014].
11
Spiegal, B. (2002) Play as Culture,
Incorporating play in cultural strategies.
PLAYLINK. Available at: www.playlink.
org/pubs/culture.pdf [Accessed 12
February 2014].
Sutton-Smith, B. (1986) Toys as Culture.
New York: Gardner Press.
Sutton-Smith, B. (1995) Conclusion: The
Persuasive Rhetorics of Play. In: The
Future of Play Theory. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Spinka, M. Newberry, R. C. and Bekoff,
M. (2001) Mammalian Play: Training for
the Unexpected, The Quarterly Review of
Biology 76(2).
Sutton-Smith, B. (1997) The Ambiguity of
Play. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Sturrock, G. (1995) The Sacred and the
Profane. In: Sturrock, G. and Else, P.
(2005) Therapeutic Playwork Reader one
1995-2000. Eastleigh: Common Threads
Publications Ltd. pp.3-11.
Sutton-Smith, B. (2003) Play as a Parody
of Emotional Vulnerability. In: Little, D.
E. ed. Play and Educational Theory and
Practice: Play and Culture Studies, Vol.
5. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Sturrock, G. and Else, P. (1998) The
playground as therapeutic space:
playwork as healing. In: Proceedings
of the IPA/USA Triennial National
Conference, Play in a Changing Society:
Research, Design, Application. June
1998, Colorado, USA.
Sutton-Smith, B. and Kelly-Byrne, D.
(1984) The Idealization of play. In: Smith,
P. K. ed. (1984) Play In Animals and
Humans. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
Sylva, K. (1977) Play and Learning. In:
Tizard, B. and Harvey, D. eds. (1977)
Biology of Play. London: Heinemann
Medical [for] Spastics International
Medical Publications. Ch.6.
Sturrock, G., Russell, W. and Else, P.
(2004) Towards Ludogogy: Parts l, ll
and lll. The art of being and becoming
through play. In: Sturrock, G. and Else,
P. eds. Therapeutic Playwork Reader 2.
Sheffield: Ludemos.
The Howard League for Penal Reform
(2011) The Voice of a Child. London: The
Howard League for Penal Reform.
Stutz, E. (1996) Is electronic
entertainment hindering children’s play
and social development? In: Gill, T. ed.
(1996) Electronic Children. London:
National Children’s Bureau.
The New York Times (1994) Obituary.
Erik Erikson, 91, Psychoanalyst Who
Reshaped Views of Human Growth, Dies.
The New York Times. 13 May.
Sunderland, M. (2006) What every
parent needs to know. London: Dorling
Kindersley.
Thorne, B. (1993) Gender Play.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
UNCRC (2013) General Comment
No. 17 (2013) on the right of the child
to rest, leisure, play, recreational
activities, cultural life and the arts (article
31). CRC/C/GC/17: United Nations
Committee on the Rights of the Child.
Available at: www.playwales.org.uk/eng/
generalcomment [Accessed 27 January
2014]
Sutton-Smith, B. (1979) Epilogue: Play
as Performance. In: Sutton-Smith, B. ed.
(1979) Play and Learning. New York:
Gardner Press.
Sutton-Smith, B. ed. (1979) Play and
Learning. New York: Gardner Press Inc.
12
UNICEF (1989) United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Svenska: UNICEF Kommitten.
Whiddon, M. A., and Montgomery, M. J.
(2011) Is touch beyond infancy important
for children’s mental health? In: Walz,
G. R., Bleuer, J. C. and Yep, R. K. eds.
Ideas and Research You Can Use:
VISTAS 2011. American Counseling
Association. Available at: http://
counselingoutfitters.com/vistas/vistas11/
Article_88.pdf [Accessed 5 February
2014].
Valentine, G. (2004) Public Space and
the Culture of Childhood. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Vohs, K. D., Redden, J. P. and Rahinel,
R. (2013) Physical Order Produces
Healthy Choices, Generosity, and
Conventionality, Whereas Disorder
Produces Creativity, Psychological
Science, 24(9) 1860-1867.
Wikibooks (2009) Survey of
Communication Study/Chapter 11 Organizational Communication [online]
Available from: http://en.wikibooks.
org/wiki/Survey_of_Communication_
Study/Chapter_11_-_Organizational_
Communication#Challenges_in_
Organizational_Communication
[Accessed 12 April 2014].
Von Oech, R. (1992) A Whack on the
Side of the Head: How you can be more
creative. Menlo Park, CA.: Creative
Think.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1967) Vaobraszeniye
i tvorchestvo v deskom voraste
[Imagination and creativity in childhood].
Moscow: Prosvescheniye. (Original work
published 1930). Translated by M. E.
Sharpe, Inc. (2004) In: Journal of Russian
and East European Psychology, 42(1).
Winnicott, D. W. (1971) Playing and
Reality. New York: Basic Books.
Winnicott, D. W. (2001) Playing and
Reality. Hove: Brunner-Routledge.
(Original work published 1971).
Wood, A. (2010) The Table Twenty Three
Group. [email] (Personal communication,
2 September 2011).
Walker, C. M. and Gopnik, A. (2013)
Pretense and Possibility – A Theoretical
Proposal About the Effects of Pretend
Play on Development: Comment on
Lillard et al (2013). Psychological Bulletin,
139(1) 40-44.
Zeleke, S. E. and Junshan, M. (2009)
The Theory of Affordance as a
Conceptual Tool for Landscape Deign and
Evaluation. [online] Available at: www.
china-landscape.net/manager/ewebeditor/
uploadfile/20100428090441814.pdf
[Accessed 22 April 2014].
Walter, M. (2014) Compound Flexibility
[video online]. Available at: http://vimeo.
com/88790911 [Accessed 16 May 2014].
Weaver, R. and Farell, D. (1997, 1999)
Managers as Facilitators: A Practical
Guide to Getting Work Done in a
Changing Workplace. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
13