The use of play at my placement
There are many forms of play within the practice of early years. The concept of play
has been developed over the years and is used by many institutions including
primary schools, nurseries and pre-schools. There are varying definitions as to what
play is and what constitutes play. Many different frameworks and curriculums see
play as a very important aspect in the development of an early years child. Ofsted
(2015) have discussed the importance of play within a setting, explaining that:
‘Play provides the natural, imaginative and motivating contexts for children to
learn about themselves, one another and the world around them. A single
moment of sustained play can afford children many developmental
experiences at once, covering multiple areas of learning and reinforcing the
characteristics of effective learning. When learning for our very youngest
children looks so different to elsewhere in the education system, a fixed,
traditional view of teaching will not suffice’ (Ofsted, 2015, p. 8).
Within a reception classroom play is what shapes the day for the children, however,
there is no absolute definition of play amongst practitioners in education; which is
why the concept is often disputed and viewed in many different forms. Gura and
Bruce (1992, p.17) explain that ‘children need to play alone and they need to play in
groups.’ This is why the use of a variety of different types of play is beneficial for
early years children. Reception classes therefore find value in using free-flow,
playtime, Forest School and a number of other play activities in a standard school
week. The range of play activities used in a school week potentially allow for
cognitive and physical development to be stimulated.
Play has many definitions, some practitioners would feel that every aspect of a
child’s life in and out of a foundation class is play, including home, social and family
life. Bronfenbrenner (1979) explains the effects that different ecosystems can have
on one another and how they all relate to the amount and type of play a child
engages with. Sometimes play can be regarded in different levels especially when
considering engagement with an adult during play. A teacher or adult’s role during a
child’s play is very important, some forms of play can be adult lead, supervised or
guided. The zone of proximal development is a key feature in defining the level of
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
actual
and
potential
development,
these
abilities
are
measured
through
communication and interaction with others (Vygotsky, 1978).
The subject of play has been discussed and deliberated over the years. Ofsted
(2015, p.5) have recognised that ‘setting up teaching and play as opposites is a false
dichotomy.’ During this essay I will discuss and critically evaluate the different
definitions of play through relevant literature including a wide range of interlinked
issues and theories. I will also examine the use of play at my placement and show
how a particular primary school reception class utilises play. I will also be carrying
out a critical analysis including potential future development points for this particular
school. Throughout the essay I will link back to relevant literature and theories, this
will allow for reflection, analysis and personal view points to be portrayed.
Literature Review
Context and background of play
Play has been a key part of foundation level education. Many key theorists have
used play as a basis to describe the development of children and some of these date
back to the 18th century. Bruce (2015) explains that in the 18th century Rousseau
adopted a nativist approach, this approach encourages the use of play to allow
children to learn naturally from their actions. This model of play encouraged the
guidance of adults, however, did not insist upon it. A contrasting approach was the
empirical view, in which the child is seen as an empty vessel which can be moulded
or shaped to the requirements of an adult; this approach was derived from Locke’s
philosophy (Bruce, 2015). An integrated view of both of these approaches was called
an interactionist view, where a child is both an empty vessel and pre-programmed,
both approaches synergise with each other. These approaches have had a
significant influence on the traditions of early foundation level in the 18th century and
can still be seen in the practices of schools and nurseries.
Philosophy from the 18th century carried through to the 19th century, however, was
developed further with the inclusion of school subjects, with necessary work such as
agriculture. Hughes (2010, p.18) explains that ‘emphasis was on strong parental
authority, with little empathy for the child.’ Even though play was very prominent
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
during this time, the values of Victorian schooling were still at the forefront of
education.
During the 19th century Frederick Froebel’s philosophy of children’s
development revolved around indoor and outdoor activities, with experience and
discovery at the heart of learning (Tassoni and Hucker, 2005). In the 19 th century,
theories around child development were very much child centred learning through
exploration. Maria Montessori believed that children needed the freedom to move
and that a child’s natural will to learn should be encouraged to foster lifelong
motivation (Tassoni and Hucker, 2005). However, during this time Montessori did not
encourage spontaneous or imaginative play, explaining that it could hinder the child’s
understanding of reality (Hughes, 2010). Theories from the 19th century were centred
on the opportunity for natural exploration and freedom, these aspects can be
provided by an adult or teacher.
Ideas from the 19th century progressed into the 20th century. Hughes (2010, p. 19)
states that ‘early childhood educators moved away from the highly structured use of
play in the classroom to a more flexible approach.’ During this time the theory of
behaviourism was set forth by John Watson. This idea very much agreed with an
empirical view of a child in which they are a blank slate to be shaped by their
environment (Hughes, 2010). The use of different theories shows how ideas can be
carried through the centuries and the way in which many concepts can be
developed. A key theorist from the 20th century was Vygotsky, he believed that play
introduced and created a zone of proximal development; having a unique influence
on oral development, metalinguistic awareness and developmental imagination.
Bruce (2004) explains that in this view, children are intrinsically motivated to learn
and that children are biologically motivated to learn. Through Vygotskian philosophy,
play in school and the help from a significant other is a positive thing. Piaget another
theorist, explains that ‘action, motivation and co-operation with others are
inseparably intertwined and linked to thinking (Furth and Wachs, 1975, p. 61).
Piaget’s philosophy was compiled alongside Vygotsky’s, in the belief that social
interaction and communication was a key part of play and development.
From a 21st century perspective the use of previous theories in practice is still
accepted and is regularly used in educational institutions. New philosophies and
ideas are now challenging the theories of the past such as the work of Howard
Gardner, Ferre Laevers and Chris Athey.
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
Laevers (1994) created the ‘Leuven
Involvement Scale’ to which a child is measured and rated in terms of involvement
with play. ‘When children show high levels of involvement there is deep satisfaction
and a strong flow of energy at the bodily and spiritual level’ (Laevers, 1994, p. 5).
These recent theories and continuation of research into play shows the importance
and relevance it has in education. However, the contextual history and background
of theories around play must be seen as helpful frameworks and tentative models
which are outlets to an improved understanding of child development (Hughes,
2010). Athey’s (2007) theory of play is based around constructivism, this concerns
itself in the process of acquiring knowledge, which revolves around the learner.
Athey’s (2007) theory explains that teachers have a good opportunity to encourage
independent and self- sufficient play from pupils. The opportune moment for
independent discovery is when students can relate to previous schema, this allows
them to be reflective and autonomous learners.
What constitutes play?
There are many types of play. One of which includes outdoor play, this is normally
used through playtime, free-flow and Forest School.
‘The introduction of the Foundation Stage has emphasised the value of outside play
and learning and most early years practitioners now recognise that experiences
which stem from being outside are every young child’s entitlement.’ (Dowling, 2005,
p. 150).
Outdoor playtime is the perfect opportunity for children to play individually without
intrusion from adults or teachers. The health and fitness of children is improved
when playing outdoors (Park and Riley, 2015). During playtime children are able to
use up energy that may build up in the classroom; in 20-30 minute breaks in the
morning; up to an hour at lunch time and a further 20 minutes in the afternoon
children are able to run, jump, skip and play games with friends. Outdoor play can
also take form in free-flow play after lesson time. Einarsdottir (2014, p.95) explains
that ‘the role of the teacher is to connect the curriculum and play and introduce new
possibilities.’ In the Early Education (2012) non- statutory framework it is explained
that children must foster the correct characteristics of effective learning by playing
and exploring. Using a guideline framework that uses play as a main component of
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
learning is very beneficial, as other parts of the framework can be linked to the use of
play and the way practitioners teach.
Forest School is a developing concept in education, especially in the early years of
primary school. Forest School revolves around the belief that young children should
be educated to appreciate the natural world (Dowling, 2005). The introduction of
Forest School into primary education has brought about autonomy and
independence in the way children learn outside the classroom. Risk and safety is
also a very important factor, however, this only teaches children what it means to be
safe and responsible. Dowling (2005) has explained that it is a rich opportunity for
the growth of confidence and personal development; this can be seen through risk
taking, exploration and curiosity.
Indoor play is used very often in a reception class. Role play, free choice and games
can be very advantageous as they can be carried out in all weathers, in a safe and
enclosed environment. When considering the choices of a child and what they
choose to do, they become more autonomous and demonstrate their strengths
(Bruce, Louis and McCall, 2015). Free choice and free-flow in a classroom allow
children to interact socially and choose for themselves, showing the teacher their
talents and abilities. However, there is always an element of control from the teacher
due to beliefs and values in the way the classroom is set up (Sherwood and Reifel
(2010). Role play is also a very positive type of play, it encourages the use of
schema, social interaction and assumption of societal roles. Bruce (2004) has
explained that play does not conform to the rules of society and it is a good
opportunity for children to experiment with previous ideas, master skills and
consolidate learning. The concept of indoor play carries many different positive
aspects, however, it can often be defined negatively depending on the practitioner in
authority or the framework in which the year group lays.
Discussion of the use of play at my placement
The following section of the essay will include a deliberation of the use of play in
reception at a local urban primary school. This part of the essay will discuss the
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
relation of policy to practice and planning; it will also link the variety of different
definitions of play and how they relate to the current practice in that school. Here I
will also be using theory from the literature review to link to practice. Observations,
lesson planning and teaching have allowed for examination and analysis of this
reception class. The different ways in which play can be used from the literature
review will also be discussed, relating to the different experiences in and out of the
classroom. I will also be linking the school’s own curriculum to the practice
demonstrated in the reception class.
From the school’s online curriculum it is explained that ‘the curriculum is well
structured in which play is seen as a valuable learning tool’ (Appendix 1). In terms of
theory, this statement is very much based around an interactionist and nativist
approach, in which play is seen as an important aspect and ‘tool’ of learning. This
curriculum statement has been witnessed and demonstrated throughout the
placement in a regular school day, both in and out of the classroom. Whether in the
classroom during lesson application from phonics, English or mathematics, the use
of play has been influenced by the classroom teacher, who has a heavy
responsibility in the ensuring play is implemented in lesson planning.
The Department for Education (2014, p. 9) have explained that ‘Play is essential for
children’s development, building their confidence as they learn to explore, to think
about problems, and relate to others.’ This statement is part of the national statutory
framework, meaning it is essential in reception classes around England. Confidence
building is a key element in reception education. Often pupils find it difficult to leave
their parents or guardian in the morning as they have a strong reliance on their
significant other in their safety and well-being. Play and reading can be used as a
way to ease children into the classroom in the morning and build self-assurance in
the classroom.
The general use of play is used in the afternoon at my placement school. Here it is
called ‘choosing time’, as the children are able to choose their activities and type of
play. An example of a typical afternoon in the classroom would include a solid
teacher centred approach to begin with, in a subject such as PSHE, design
technology or science. This would include discussing ideas as a class and explaining
concepts and different topics in a teacher led and directed way. This would then be
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
followed up by subject based activities and a choosing time. Often subject-based
activities were available, linking directly back to the lesson that was taught. Free flow
is a tool used very frequently in the afternoon; it enables children to apply what they
know by exploring, experimenting and reflecting on their learning (Bruce, 2004).
Consolidating learning through tabled activities in groups allows for social interaction
and application of learning (Vygotsky, 1978), this can be through play orientated
activities like games or role play.
A certain technique towards incorporating play into the framework of a lesson was
observed through an English lesson. The story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears
was used as an outline in integrating phonetical pronunciation, actions and play. The
lesson revolved around a story map which was written with pictures as actions, this
allowed the children to act out the story, aiding memory, linguistic ability and
involvement. All students of all abilities took part and enjoyed the actions of the story,
so much so that they were able to recall the whole story purely by memory.
The second half of the lesson introduced interactive learning through roleplay. The
children used props, dress-up and social interaction which reinforced the story
mapping process of Goldilocks and the Three Bears. Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of
social interaction explains that make-believe play allows children to develop and
master prerequisites of academic skills. During this time children used props to act
out parts of the story, this allowed them to go ‘off-script’ and innovate their own
scenes. The unique experience of roleplay has a major influence developmental
imagination, metalinguistic awareness and oral development (Vygotsky, 1978). This
type of activity is valuable in developing social interaction and communication in
which the Early Years (2012) non-statutory framework explains is ‘fundamental’.
Practitioners at my placement school use play as a key criterion for development and
use this through other lessons as well.
As explained in the literature review, the application of Forest School in the early
years is very beneficial. Forest school is a good opportunity to allow children to
become autonomous learners (Dowling, 2005). Every other Friday Class 1 visited
Forest School, I was lucky enough to observe their first experience of Forest School
during the start of the year. The class teacher first carried out a risk assessment of
the area by forming groups of children with an adult to assess the different potential
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
dangers around the site. This was a lesson in itself for the children by educating
them in responsibility and what it means to be ‘safe’. After this the teacher explained
that unless the children were in danger or actively wanted us to take part you were
not to intervene in the learning process. This was obviously very difficult as a
practitioner, as being a significant other in the process of learning is part and parcel
of teaching. However, Athey’s (2007) theory of schemas would explain that previous
learning in the classroom would aid the process of play at Forest School.
During Forest School children built bridges with wood across holes, roleplayed in the
kitchen area, made see-saws and rolled logs amongst many other activities. Dowling
(2005, p. 158) explains that Forest School is an opportunity for children ‘to become
physically independent, explore themselves and not be afraid to get dirty.’ Through
outdoor independent play the process of learning was evident as children explored,
discovered and experimented. After Forest School had finished the children were
very enthusiastic about their learning saying: ‘I love Forest School’ and ‘I can’t wait
for the next Forest School’. Even though the weather was almost into the minus
numbers, most children felt the benefits of this lesson and were enthused to return.
Referring back to the literature review, the Leuven involvement scale would say that
the children who were highly involved would experience deep satisfaction and high
energy levels (Laevers, 1994), which almost all children did. Only one child out of the
thirty did not gain the concept of Forest School and looked lost through-out as it was
an unfamiliar setting. The teacher only intervened when she felt the time was right,
during this she talked to the pupil, gave comfort and security.
Another type of play was outdoors at playtime, lunchtime and in the afternoon.
Firstly, the fact that almost every single day of reception includes three different
‘playtimes’ dispersed throughout the day just indicates how important this concept is.
Froebel encouraged outdoor play clarifying that children can create a community of
relationships and emotions with others (Tassoni and Hucker, 2005). This type of
‘community’ was evident at playtimes with children socially interacting, turn-taking
with different toys and using the natural environment as a playground for physical
release of energy, that was sometimes built up in the classroom. In spite of the good
practice that has been apparent during my time of placement, there are certain areas
for development concerning play. Through a deep analysis future recommendations
can be suggested from these observations.
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
Recommendations for future practice
Considering the practice of play in my placement school I have seen areas which
could potentially be improved or adapted to suit the needs of the learner. An in-depth
discussion of play in the school with the classroom teacher and several smaller
informal talks with teaching assistants have formed reflections for possible
improvements and development points for the future.
The EYFS Early Years (2012) non-statutory framework explains that rich learning
opportunities must be present through play and playful teaching. The school’s
curriculum has made a direct link to the framework by creating learning opportunities
for play. However, I feel that there is a certain underlying common theme in which
ability groups are creating a divide within the classroom. After a teacher led lesson
such as English, often higher ability groups will choose to do an activity which relates
directly to the lesson to consolidate and develop skills learnt whilst being taught.
Whereas, lower ability groups choose to remain on the carpet to play with toys such
as Lego and cuddly animals.
With such a divide in the classroom it is difficult to monitor progress, which is why
many of the students in the lower ability groups have intervention with a specialist
who often takes out groups of children to ask questions, go through phonics and
generally develop their character. However, I believe that a different approach
towards this issue can resolve the gap that may be appearing. The introduction of a
regulation that ‘activities come before play’ is a simple but effective rule in that it
includes all abilities in subject activities. This can amount to extra work being created
for the teacher (creating different activities) that suit the abilities of different children;
however, offers an opportunity for children to move up to higher ability groups and
socially interact with children in groups other than their own.
Whilst carrying out group work or playing outside during choosing time, children
often have a strong reliance on an adult to ‘do it for them’. As explained in the
literature review, children sometimes look for a significant other in a zone of proximal
development which seeks help when a task is too difficult (Vygotsky, 1978). I believe
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
that in such an urbanised setting some children may not have had the experience of
playing at home or in an outdoor environment; especially in an age which is so
technologically developed (ipads, ipods, xbox etc). Bruce, Louis and McCall (2015,
p. 143) disclose that ‘the way the room and the garden are set up will have an
influence on the child’s ability to learn maximally.’ Culture and background can often
have a strong influence on a child’s ability to play in the classroom.
Some children don’t know how to ‘play’ as their upbringing did not include
imaginative play, role play or even general play. This is a difficulty which teachers
can face and is part of the role of a teacher in inspiring imagination and developing
personality. Recent philosophy on play encourages autonomy and independence in
children (Athey, 2007), which poses a real challenge in today’s society. After
discussing with the class teacher, especially in reception the development of
character and personality is a process which starts from day one of reception no
matter what stage of development a child is at. However, in terms of developing
autonomy in the classroom further, I believe that the school’s curriculum would
benefit from an additional ‘learning goal’ (Appendix 1) in ‘autonomous development.’
Wood (2014) indicates that children should be free from adult intrusion meaning they
can take ownership of learning through self-regulation and control. A future
recommendation for practice at this school would be the increased use of Forest
School.
In my opinion, I believe that Forest School is very beneficial for early years. As
discussed in the literature review, Forest School has a heavy emphasis on
developing autonomy and physical independence (Dowling, 2005). My placement
school only use Forest School once every two weeks, I think Forest School should
be used at a minimum of once a week. It offers rich opportunities for growth and
development not just in autonomy, but physical development, social interaction and
understanding of the natural world.
Conclusion
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
To conclude, the experience of placement in a reception class has been invaluable
in observing the practice of an early years setting. The placement has allowed me to
see the importance of play and how it is integrated into the Early Years Framework.
The historical overview discussed how early empirical and nativist views have
progressed over time and have influenced other theorists through constructivism and
cognitivism. Whereas recently the focus of play is mainly on the encouragement of
independence and autonomy. The literature review also demonstrated the many
different types of play in and out of the classroom. These aspects of play have
allowed me to make inextricable links to theory and show how play has developed.
From observation and practice in the classroom I have discovered that the use of
play can shape the way lesson plans are written and the way a lesson is taught.
After spending time in another reception class and a few days in a nursery nearby, I
have concluded that play is the foundation on which practitioners build their lessons
to motivate children. It is evident that theory plays a big part in early years settings
as play encourages social interaction and engagement with others which Vygotsky
(1978) has explained is very important. On the whole, the use of play in the school
was seen as very important. Dryden et al. (2005, p. 82) explain that ‘play is essential
for healthy growth and development, and central to all young children’s learning.’
Play is used in a reward based system through golden time on a Friday afternoon for
the junior section of the school showing the essentiality of outdoor play and play
through games and activities in the classroom.
Continued Professional Development (CPD) was very apparent as a training session
was held after school for all staff on Forest School. This demonstrates the school’s
constant efforts for improvement as there is an increasing recognition of the value of
environmental outdoor learning (Dowling, 2005). Theory has a large influence on
policy makers and practitioners which is shown through practice. As far as
recommendations for the future are concerned, I believe that the autonomous
advancement
is a relevant
topic for consideration. The development of
independence through play is ultimately crucial in preparing pupils for later years as
older students are expected to be more independent.
Word Count- 4,238
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
References
Athey, C. (2007) Extending thought in young children: a parent- teacher partnership.
London: Paul Chapman.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979) The Ecology of Human Development: experiments by
nature and design. United States of America: Harvard University Press.
Bruce, T. (2015) Early Childhood Education. 5th Edn. London: Hodder Education.
Bruce, T. (2004) Developing Learning in Early Childhood: 0-8 years. London: Paul
Chapman.
Bruce, T., Louis, S. and Mc Call, G. (2015) Observing young children. London:
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Department for Education (2014) Early Years (under 5s) foundation stage framework
(EYFS).
Available
at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/33550
4/EYFS_framework_from_1_September_2014__with_clarification_note.pdf.
(Accessed 20th January 2016).
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
Dowling, M. (2005) Young children’s personal, social and emotional development.
2nd Edn. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
Dryden, L., Forbes, R., Mukherji, P. and Pound, L. (2005) Essential Early Years.
London: Hodder Arnold.
Early Education: The British association for Early Childhood Education. (2012)
Development
matters in
the
early years foundation
stage.
Available
at:
http://www.foundationyears.org.uk/files/2012/03/Development-Matters-FINALPRINT-AMENDED.pdf. (Accessed 5th January 2016).
Einarsdottir, J. (2014) Play and literacy: a collaborative action research project in
preschool. Scandanavian Journal of Educational Research. 58 (1) pp. 93-109. Doi:
10.1080/00313831.2012.705321.
Furth, H. G. and Wachs, H. (1975) Thinking goes to School: Piaget’s theory in
practice. New York; London; Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Gura, P. (1992) Exploring learning: young children and blockplay. London: Paul
Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Hughes, F. P. (2010) Children, play and development. United States of America:
SAGE Publications Inc.
Laevers, F. (1994) Defining and Assessing Quality in Early Childhood Education.
Belgium: Leuven University Press.
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
Park, M. H. and Riley, J. (2015) Play in natural outdoor environments: a healthy
choice. Dimensions of early childhood. 43 (2) pp. 22-28. Doi: 110467450.
Sherwood, S. A. S. and Reifel, S. (2010) The multiple meanings of play: exploring
preservice teachers’ beliefs about a central element of early childhood education.
Journal of early childhood teacher education. 31 (4) pp. 322- 343. Doi:
10.1080/10901027.2010.524065.
Tassoni, P. and Hucker, K. (2005) Professional Development: Planning Play and the
Early Years. 2nd Edn. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers.
The Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (OFSTED).
(2015) Teaching and play in the early years – a balancing act? A good practice
survey to explore perceptions of teaching and play in the early years. London:
Crown.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) The role of play in development. In Cole, V., John- Steiner, S.,
Scribner and Souberman. Mind in Society: Development of higher psychological
processes. Pp. 92- 104. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wood, E. A. (2014) Free choice and play in early childhood education: troubling the
discourse. International Journal of Early Years Education. 22 (1) pp. 4-18. Doi:
1080/09669760.2013.830562.
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
Appendices
Appendix 1:
Linden Primary School
Our Curriculum
Early Years
In our Reception Classes our school promotes the six Early Learning Goals:
communication; language and literacy; mathematical development; physical
development; creative development; personal, social and emotional development;
knowledge and understanding of the world. The curriculum is well structured in
which play is seen as a valuable learning tool. The atmosphere is busy yet relaxed
and provides a secure environment for the children to extend their learning and
make progress.
At the beginning of the school year, the Reception children build up their attendance
over their first few weeks. Typically children initially will attend school either each
morning or afternoon, this is then extended to cover the lunch hour and then children
will start full time. This allows them to get used to the routines of the school day in a
relaxed way, whilst building up their stamina ready for a full day at school. The staff
at Linden Primary School aim to develop a partnership with parents, and are always
happy to discuss any issues that may arise. In particular, when dealing with such
very young children we would encourage parents to discuss any concerns they may
have with the class teacher.
For the EYFS we use LCP, Jolly Phonics and Floppy Phonics.
Linden Primary School follows the National Curriculum for England as set out by the
Department for Education.
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)
Wellington, J., s1300193, ES6011, (001)