Play and Practice in the Early Years Foundation Stage

Natalie Canning, Natalie Canning

• Editorial: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Año: 2010
• ISBN:
  9781473903333
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Education
• Categoría: Early Childhood Education

Play is an underlying theme of the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) but it is often a challenge for practitioners to provide a play based curriculum. This book investigates the values and beliefs that underpin play and demonstrates through case studies how play opportunities can be observed, planned and assessed in a meaningful context for the child.

Organized into four sections that mirror the EYFS, this book takes you through the curriculum framework demonstrating how play underpins each of these principles and is the common thread that links them together.

Chapters include:

- celebrating children?s play choices

- ways to work with parents

- inspiring environments for inspirational play

- the role of play in supporting key relationships

- creative play for flexible learning

Incorporating the voices of Early Years practitioners, this book takes the unique approach of analysing the academic theory, showing how this can be put into practice and then suggesting activities to facilitate reflective practice and professional development.

Useful to all those studying on any Early Years course, the book is particularly relevant to those leading practice in early years settings and those working towards Early Years Professional Status (EYPS).

Section 1

A Unique Child

‘A unique child recognises that every child is a competent learner from birth who can be resilient, capable, confident and self-assured. The commitments are focused around development, inclusion, safety and health and well being.’ (DCSF, 2008f: 9)

A Unique Child

Case Study: Playing with Cardboard Boxes

Natalie Canning

The children in this case study are aged between three and a half and five years old. It is based on a non-participant narrative observation of play in a preschool.

Cherry is the manager of a preschool in a church hall which means that all of the equipment has to be brought out and packed away at the end of each session. Recently she has noticed that the children have become predictable in relation to their play choices and she wants to make a few changes. With the support of her staff and over a period of a few weeks she has collected a range of cardboard boxes that differ in size and large cardboard tubes. She was lucky that one of her staff had just bought a new fridgefreezer so they could provide one really large box. Cherry planned the morning session so that when the children arrived there would be nothing in the hall apart from the cardboard boxes. The staff agreed that they would not suggest to the children what to do with the boxes or become involved in the play, unless they were specifically asked to take on a role or if the play became dangerous.

The children came into the play space and at first did not know what to do. They looked expectantly at the practitioners who initially busied themselves with other matters so that the children had time to figure out what they should do without looking to an adult for support. Some of the older children took the lead and started to move a few of the boxes that had been piled up. The biggest box was at the back of the pile so Michael opened one end and crawled inside. More children started to join in, some taking boxes off to the side of the room and playing their own imaginary game, and others putting boxes on top of each other to see how high they could go before they fell down. Eva was one of these children. She collected some of the smaller boxes and took them to one side of the room and began to build a tower. When it reached a certain height the tower started to lean and eventually fell over. Eva repeated this process again and again. She started to become frustrated, kicking one of the boxes. Shona came over and helped her begin to build the tower again. She put two of the boxes together on the floor to make a base and then proceeded to build the tower. Eva was pleased that they could build to a greater height before it finally lost its balance and collapsed to the floor.

James stayed on the fringes of the play, hoping to be invited in by the other children. He has a speech delay and usually has Sarah, his key worker, nearby to support him. He looked around the play space, picked up a spare cardboard box and went across to Peter who was playing to one side of the main game. James offered the box to Peter who looked like he was making a car out of one of the boxes. Peter shook his head and proceeded to ignore James. James backed away from him and seeing that William was now watching, James moved towards him and other children who were organising themselves to start a new game. William then put the cardboard box that James was holding onto James’s head, which gave him a signal that he could join in the game.

A few of the other children put smaller boxes on their heads and ran around the room pretending to be firemen, making a ‘ne-nar’ sound. A commotion broke out when Michael, who had claimed the largest box as his ‘den’, was invaded by the children who were firemen. They quickly turned into pirates, complete with newly identified pirate helmets, to claim their ‘ship’. A series of battle lines were then drawn, with the children who had been building towers now offering to build a defence wall to keep the pirates out. The game brought all of the children together, with each of them taking on a role and participating in the play, and eventually with Michael’s den being ‘captured’ and turned into a pirate ship. Michael, who was a confident and vocal child, expressed his anger at this and was slightly disconcerted by so many children descending into his space. Daniel saw Michael’s dismay and patted him on the arm saying, ‘don’t worry, play with me’. Michael, recovering from the initial shock of his ‘den’ being taken away, shouted to the others that if it was going to be a ship then he should be captain. The children, busy with their other roles, ignored this demand and did not really object. Apart from the noise level rising by a considerable amount, the play evolved naturally and the practitioners were not asked to join in. Neither did they need to intervene as minor conflicts seemed to reach a natural resolution.

1

Identifying Unique Qualities in Play

Natalie Canning

Chapter Objectives

This chapter locates the child at the centre of play and practice and analyses the concept of play as an intrinsic motivator for children to initiate and develop play opportunities. It explores why play is so difficult to define and how this impacts upon practitioners’ ability to provide children with opportunities to express their ‘unique qualities’. It also examines the EYFS in terms of ‘a unique child’, specifically emotional, social and spiritual development and how this translates into interpretive and subjective practice.

What is play?

The term ‘play’ has been used and interpreted in many ways in the early years. The pioneers of play, such as Froebel (1782–1852), McMillan (1860–1931), Isaacs (1885–1948), Steiner (1861–1925) and Piaget (1896–1980), placed an emphasis on different elements of play depending on their research interests and experiences, and over the last ten years there have been significant contributions from researchers on the implications for play and practice. What they have said about children’s play has influenced what practitioners believe and do in practice. Researching different perspectives about play not only helps practitioners to develop a view about its importance as part of a child’s social world, but also supports practitioners in becoming aware of the value of play to build up children’s interests, explorations, curiosity and skills. However, the challenge inherent in the term ‘play’ is that it is often misinterpreted by practitioners within the same setting let alone within the wider early years community. How one person defines play may conflict with someone else’s view, but more often than not there will be subtle differences in what practitioners believe about what constitutes a play experience. This in turn contributes to what Sutton Smith (1997) describes as the ambiguity of play, where the diverse nature of play means that it is interpreted differently and is difficult to define.

A particular view of play may be promoted in your setting which as a result influences your practice in how it is organised, the resources you provide, and the general ethos of the setting. This is significant when applied to the EYFS because the documentation refers to ‘play as underpinning practice’ (DCSF, 2008e: 7) but is less clear on what this means in practice or how it may be achieved. The majority of practitioners will observe what children are interested in, plan a series of activities, record the outcomes, and then assess the children’s progress. This is a clear procedural format, but when the scale of control is tipped in the favour of the practitioner the child’s autonomy may be marginalised, with play then becoming something that is organised around the child rather than emerging from their own explorations. The following examples are from a range of settings that have been described by practitioners as play:

• children making identical ‘Father Christmas’ faces from specified craft material supplied by the practitioners;
• children having a choice of four tables with different materials on them (such as plasticine, Lego, sand and crayons) where they are not allowed to transfer items to different tables and there is a limit on the time that can be spent on each table;
• children being asked by a practitioner to count the number of cups and plates they have laid out whilst in the middle of a ‘tea party’ role play.

These examples illustrate the way in which play can sometimes be seen as a set of ‘activities’ with measurable learning outcomes. They do not however place the child at the centre of the process, as each is led by the nature of the environment, the final outcome, or the value a practitioner places on the content of an activity. To reflect a more child-centred ethos, Skills Active (2004) suggest that play should be freely chosen, personally directed, and intrinsically motivated. The three examples above could have gone some way to achieving a more child-centred approach by:

• providing a range of craft material for children to explore with the practitioner, perhaps by making a ‘Father Christmas’ face and supporting those children who also wanted to do this;
• allowing children to move freely between the four tables, taking with them various materials to support their curiosity, and also by allowing children to play with other things that were not laid out on the tables;
• for the practitioner to observe quietly unless invited into the role play by the children and then to follow their lead into imaginative play.

This widens the debate surrounding what play is. Perhaps one starting point in answering this question is to say that there is no common agreement as to its definition. However, in order to support children’s early experiences and nurture their unique qualities it is important to consider what does constitute play. Then to try and consider what it is that does not constitute play. This may then provide you with more definite parameters to work within and ease your frustration in trying to find a concrete definition. One Children’s Centre manager commented:

One day you think you have defined what it is, how it operates in your setting, what the benefits are to the children in your care, and then something happens which completely alters your perspective. I guess this is the reflective process that you have to go through, but I never thought play was so complex! (Interview, May 2009)

Such complexity is not hard to understand. Working towards a definition of play relies not only on your own values and beliefs about childhood, but also on your ability to be reflective and engage with the debate surrounding play. Often this will trigger a subjective and emotive response rather than a rational analysis of the situation. Hughes (2001) argues that this is because play has two main inter-locking characteristics:

• Play has an immediate impact for the child involved. It is something that children engage in to make sense of their own situation and the context they are in.
• Play has a wider influence which is a transpersonal characteristic. It is something that practitioners are able to recognise and identify with to a certain extent as adults. They are able to see the consequences of the play, for the children involved, and speculate as to where that play may end. They can identify that the play will create a ‘history’ for the child; that they will remember the experience, try to recreate it again, and also try to draw meaning from it.

These characteristics are dependent upon subjective experiences. They concentrate on the processes that play initiates and the complex web of emotional responses that play can evoke. It is essential that as a practitioner you develop your own critique of play so that you are able to evaluate children’s experiences in order to provide a supportive structure to facilitate the development of their own play choices and the consequences of these. Play should not be seen simply as a mechanism for socialisation. It is a journey of self discovery of which the child at the time may not particularly be aware, but it develops their play experiences through repeated behaviours and dealing with emotional responses. All of these qualities contribute to building a picture of a unique child. It is important to view this EYFS principle as a layered interrelationship between children’s autonomy to reveal aspects of who they are, what is important to them, and what they feel. The most effective way in which children can demonstrate these unique qualities is through freely chosen and personally directed play (Skills Active, 2004).

Unique qualities

Play and emotional development are connected by the way in which children engage in social interaction (Vygotsky, 1978) and the choices they make within their play, for example the roles they take on and the decisions they make. Cassidy et al. (1992) refers to play as a vehicle for emotional expressiveness where children can be themselves, pretend to be someone else, or ‘play out’ something that has happened or might happen in the future. Through play children are able to explore not only their own feelings but also the feelings of their peers. Denham et al. (1990) explained this as a socialisation of emotional understanding, where children involved in play develop empathy towards each other based on the play they are engaged in. This is evident in the case study at the beginning of this chapter, when Michael’s den is captured and Daniel consoles him and invites him into his game. By this Daniel is demonstrating unique qualities in his actions and reactions within the play.

Smith et al. (2003: 183) suggest that children can understand other people’s emotions, desires and beliefs by around three to four years of age, but also that there are important precursors for children to be able to understand what another person may be experiencing. These consist of:

• self-awareness where the child knows what they are doing in play and what the consequences may be;
• the capacity for pretence and to suspend ‘real world’ events;
• being able to distinguish reality from pretence.

Children’s natural disposition towards self-motivated play stimulates these skills, for example, using a cardboard box ‘as if’ it was a shield to protect them from pirates. In pretend play children are able to conjure up characters with emotions and desires of their own. This reflects, to some extent, part of their own feelings as they project this into their play to test out or rehearse different emotions and responses from others. In self-directed play children will naturally involve emotions into the play. They will watch each other’s reactions, and, at around four years old, can take account of someone’s actions and from this predict their emotional state (Smith et al., 2003). For example, in the case study the children were aware of Michael’s anger on finding that his den had been commandeered as a pirate ship and were also sympathetic to his rather demanding request that he must then become the captain of the ship.

Emotional development has also been defined by Thoits (1989: 318) who highlighted three components which contribute to emerging unique qualities. She has argued that emotional responses can consist of one or a combination of these and here these are related to children’s play:

• children’s ability to appraise a play situation or context; for example when Michael found the biggest box, opened it up and crawled inside;
• their ability to understand a physiological sensation; for examp...