Essay Examples - Teaching Essays
The Role of Play and Learning for Year One Children.
Research and commentary on early childhood education has increasingly recognised both the importance of children's need to play and that play is the dominant and most natural way in which children learn (Bruce, 1987, p.5; Bennett et al, 1997, 14).
Despite this recognition, an ongoing ambivalence seems apparent in the UK pedagogical arena around the nature and value of play and its relationship to learning, particularly for children finding themselves in Year One at school. Most of the available research spanning the last twenty years on play and education has tended to concentrate on pre-school children with scant attention being paid to children in the early years of Primary School.
This review focuses upon those few studies which have addressed the transition from the Foundation Stage, defined as the period from three years to the end of reception at five or six years (QCA/DfEE, 2000, p.2) and Key Stage 1 (relevant to children aged 5 to 7 years) itself. It will begin by situating the issue of play and learning within the present educational climate and move on to highlight the apparent discontinuities between the two stages in terms of curricula philosophy with particular reference to studies which examine the nature of learning through play.
Article 31 of The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 asserts the right of the child to rest and leisure and to engage in play and recreation activities appropriate to the age of the child. It has also long been acknowledged that play has an important role in the social, emotional and physical as well as the linguistic and cognitive development of children (Isaacs, 1933, pp.3-5; Piaget, 1951, p. 25; Curtis, 1998, p.2). Isaacs (1933, p.3), for example, saw play as the medium through which the child comes to understand his or her world and, as such, is an integral part of learning.
Much of the debate around the nature and purposes of play appears to be rooted in the contention between advocates of a child-centred approach to early learning and those who believe that children need adult direction and guidance in their play and learning. Young-Ihm cites the view of Chris Woodhead, former Chief Inspector of Schools, who argued for the use of a formal approach to early years education, both in the pre-school and reception class, suggesting that direct teaching is crucial at this age as it is at every other age(2002, p.1). Others, such as David (2003, p.23), cites the High Scope Initiative research in the United States which concluded that schooling which stressed the contextual experience of learning through play was more effective, in terms of later retention of what was learnt, than formal, teacher-led schooling.
Many commentators have discussed the relationship between play and learning within the context of government concerns to raise standards in literacy and numeracy (Ofsted, 1995, whole document) and the introduction of national targets for pupil achievement in these areas in recent years. Broadhead (2003, p.12) notes that although large sections of the school week focused upon literacy and numeracy have long been a feature of British primary schooling, this tradition has become increasingly emphasised within the context of public accountability and concerns about 'failing schools'.
Broadhead (2003) cites a breadth of research which has shown that although reception teachers might espouse the principles of play as crucial to development and learningthese principles are often absent in practice within the classroom (p.13). Broadhead (2003, pp.13/14) describes the concerns expressed by teachers that young children's learning needs were not being met by formal teaching styles and many teachers felt they could not justify play-based learning within the prevailing climate of standards and tests. In similar vein, Keating et al (2000, p.445) and Moyles and Adams (2000, p. 25) report the dilemma facing teachers who are required to provide recorded evidence of learning and achievement to parents and professionals. Do they encourage quality learning through active play, often difficult to formally quantity as readily as written tasks, or do they choose more formal work which may sacrifice the quality of the child's learning experience?
The focus on standards has thrown into the spotlight perceptions of play as somehow inferior and supplementary learning regarded as a reward for completion of 'work' rather than an important medium of learning in its own right. Keating et al (2000, p.442) observed that play, especially in its recreational form, may not directly lead to better cognitive competencies as measured in SATs tests, however, it can foster other important abilities, such as task-orientation, self-esteem, persistence, positive attitudes to learning and creativity.
Researchers (BERA, 2003, p.12) have acknowledged the enduring influence of early theorists Vygotsky and Piaget upon pedagogical thinking and practice in terms of their emphasis upon the social orientation of cognitive development and the importance of shared schematic understandings of children and their peers. This thesis has been extended by subsequent researchers, Schaffer (1996, p.11) Ogden (2000, p.211) for example, who have stressed the centrality of the child's social and cultural environment for the development of literacy and numeracy.
Broadhead (2003, p.89) notes that emerging insights from work on multiple intelligences by Gardner (1993) and Handy (1997), for example, are underlining the need for breadth and balance in curricula provision. Literacy and numeracy are seen as just two among many facets of human intelligence. Handy (1997), cited by Broadhead (2003, p.89), identifies eleven categories of intelligence, including spatial, athletic, emotional, linguistic, musical and practical. It could be argued that play is the most powerful forum for multiple, simultaneous engagement with the diverse forms of human intelligence that we currently acknowledge (Broadhead, 2003, p.89).
Some see the distinctions between play and work, notably school work, as somewhat blurred, especially in the eyes of children themselves (Keating et al, p.444; Bruce, 1987, p.36). Moyles and Adams (2000, p.366) argue for an urgent need for different terminology in order to change the perception of play as the polar extreme to work and as trivial and inferior. They suggest that it may be useful to differentiate between free and directed play, or redefine play, as many practitioners have done, as experience, exploration or discovery. Bruce (1996, p.57) extends this theme, suggesting that adults and children together develop shared meanings of play and learning. In her earlier commentary, Bruce (1987, p.23) also highlights the importance of the physical environment for the facilitation of learning through play and reports on the contrast between most early years settings and many reception classes in this respect.
The controversy over perceptions of play in relation to 'real' learning is, however, clearly evident in the literature. The research findings of Wood and Attfield (1996, p.9), for example, albeit from small-scale studies, highlight the perceptions of many parents who have become increasingly resistant to seeing 'play' in the classroom and asking to see children 'doing the National Curriculum'. Wood and Attfield (1996, p.9/11) further record early years practitioners' increasing concerns that play was being given reduced status as the National Curriculum emerged. Similarly, Siraj-Blatchford described how the essential character of children's learning in the primary phase had been ignored by the introduction of a subject-based curriculum (1993, p.4). Such criticisms, however, have not been confined to the primary phase. Dowling (2000, p.2) raised concerns that the introduction of the concept of 'early learning goals' at the Foundation Stage would render some children failures at five years old and put unnecessary pressure on all children in terms of their later educational attainment.
Miller (2001, p.107) acknowledges the growing belief, in recent years, that the earlier children 'got started' on formal learning, the better their potential performance on Key Stage 1 tests later. She nevertheless presents a compelling argument in her own research, albeit relatively small-scale, on how activities which develop literacy and numeracy are intricately woven into the fabric of children's ongoing play. Miller (2001, p.107/14) describes the Foundation stage curriculum guidance as a more optimistic document than the National Curriculum frameworks and guidance for Key Stage 1, for example DfEE/SCAA (1996, whole document).
She suggests that the former recognises opportunities to develop a more learner-centred curriculum, more in keeping with a growing support for a holistic approach to children's education. Broadhead (2003), however, is more cautious, stating that the learner-centred curriculum remains a profound challenge in terms of enabling children to combine their worlds and simultaneously co-construct the early years curriculum (p.119).
In conclusion, then, this review has illustrated the strong consensus that exists in the literature on the importance of the role of play for children's learning, not just for the physical and emotional well-being of children but also its interconnections with the cognitive competencies of literacy and numeracy. Contemporary commentary has highlighted the contrasting pedagogical philosophies which have emerged in the UK, essentially dividing the 'early years' phase from the early formal schooling, or Key Stage 1, phase which many see as a false and inappropriate division in terms of young children's educational needs.
Back to: Example Essays...
Drummond (2003, p.2) summarises this apparent contention neatly by calling for a re-acknowledgement of the value of play, already embedded in most early years educational philosophy and practice, to be continued into the first formal year of schooling. She states that in a good childhood, children engage in sustained, shared, purposeful talk; they are absorbed in complex, divergent, imaginative play. They are recognised and appreciated as accomplished, passionate learners and meaning-makers (Drummond, 2003, p.2). She suggests that since all this happens in the first year of the Foundation stage there is no good reason why it cannot happen in the second year of the foundation stage, in the reception class
References
Bennett, N, Wood, E and Rogers, S (1997) Teaching Through Play: Teachers' Thinking and Classroom Practice, Open University Press, Buckingham
BERA (British Educational Research Association: Early Years Special Interest Group) (2003) Pedagogy, Curriculum and Adult Roles, Training and Professionalism, www.bera.ac.uk/pdfs/BERAEarlyYearsReview31May03.pdf, pp.1-60, accessed 20th January 2006
Broad head, P (2003) Early Years Play and Learning: Developing Social Skills and Co-operation, Routledge Falmer, London
Bruce, T (1987) Early Childhood Education, Hodder and Stoughton, LondonCurtis, A (1998) A curriculum for the pre-school child, Routledge, London
Bruce, T (1996) Helping Young Children to Play, Hodder and Stoughton, London
David, T (2003) 'What do we know about teaching young children?' British Educational Research Association (BERA) www.bera.ac.uk/publications/pdfs/EYYRSP~1.PDF
DfEE/School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (1996) Desirable Outcomes for Children's Learning on Entering Compulsory School, DfEE/SCAA, HMSO, London
Dowling, M (2000) Young Children's Personal, Social and Emotional Development, Paul Chapman, London
Drummond, M.J (2003) 'Breathe Life into Childhood', Times Educational Supplement, 28th November 2003, pp. 1-2
Isaacs, S (1933) Social development in young children, Routledge, Kegan and Paul, London
Keating, I, Fabian, H, Jordan, P, Mavers, D, Roberts, J (2000) 'Well, I've not done any work today. I don't know why I came to school. Perceptions of play in the reception class', Educational Studies, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp.437-454
Miller, L (2001) 'Shaping early childhood through the literacy curriculum', Early Years, Vol. 21, No.2, pp.107-116
Moyles, J and Adams, S (2000) 'A Tale of the Unexpected: Practitioners' Expectations and Children's Play', Journal of Inservice Education, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.349-369
Ofsted (1995) Guidance on the Inspection of Nursery and Primary Schools, HMSO, London
Ogden, L (2000) 'Collaborative tasks, collaborative children: an analysis of reciprocity during peer interaction at Key Stage 1', British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 26, No.2, pp.211-226
Piaget, J (1951) Play, dream and imitation in childhood, in Manning, K and Sharp (Eds) Structuring Play in the Early Years, pp.22-30, Ward Lock Educational, London
QCA/DfEE (2000) Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage, QCA/DfEE, HMSO, London
Schaffer, H (1996) Social Development, Blackwell, Oxford
Siraj-Blatchford, I (1993) 'Objectional Objectivity', Early Years, Vol. 13, No. 2, Spring, pp.50-53
Wood, E and Attfield, J (1996) Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum, Paul Chapman, Lodnon
Young-Ihm, K (2002) 'Changing Curriculum for Early Childhood Education in England', Early Childhood Research and Practice, fall 2002, Vol. 4(2) www.isaacsuk.co.uk/resource_bank/aey.html
More Free Teaching Essays...
Get free teaching essays from our extensive online resource library. Hundreds of example essays available from all the major essay topics to help you with your research...
Please note: The above essay was written by a student and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted work to us.
