Category: Play

This essay will outline the history, functions and definitions of play. It will both evaluate and explore two differing types of play which enhances a young child’s learning whilst including ages and stages levels which can be critiqued. Additionally, playful pedagogy will be evaluated through the Early Years settings in Britain.

Overall, play is a long historical construction within childhood with society having a high influence of this over time. Play is impossible to define in one definitive concept. This is due to the fact both play and creativity is seen and viewed differently through many professional ‘lenses. As an example, it has been suggested that “Play can be considered as a flexible self-directed experience which serves needs of an individual child and future society s/he will live adulthood” (Jarvis 2009:11) where as another definition views it as “the link between the innate animal and human way of thinking and behaving, working out instincts” (Stanley Hall: 1920) . Though these views are both argued for and against, play and creativity is formed of all different perspectives. Being told to do something isn’t in fact play as there is a duality of personal expectation vs social adaptation; If you’re told that you’re not good enough- this will constantly reflect on a child’s actions and feeling towards concepts. Play is vital for the generation of learning and NHS (2016) state that “children learn from everything that they do and everything that is going on around them”.

Darwin (1859) classical theory of evolution proves that play is evolutionary even through debate. More specifically ‘Darwin’s Idea’ suggests children are biologically preprogramed through monkey evolution. His ideas come at the classical period when ‘recapitulation theory’ states creatures inhabit features in their environment, allowing them to follow through to the ‘survival of the fittest’. (Hall, 1920) claims that behaviours of this type are no longer a necessity; children don’t need to build dens or climb trees any more (outdoor play) as these traits were only vital for human survival. Linking to this classical approach Schiller created the energy surplus theory which overall views play as ‘aimless’. Believing that children build up excess and un-needed energy which must be released in the form of active play. Furthermore, the theory outlines that the more surplus energy obtained results in a higher complexity of play; meaning a child is highly evolved. Such behaviour is perceived as cathartic.

Piaget (1936) theory explains a child’s construction of their ‘mental model of the world’. Though he has isolated milestones which explains how children should develop universally; it is thought that Piaget (1936) ‘views the child as a solitary learner’ yet shows a ‘natural progression from one conceptual framework to another’. His milestones and schemas apply to both primary and secondary socialisations but is not ‘pure’ in the EYFS ( ).

Furthermore In a modern perspective, Freud ( ) psychodynamic theory links that the theory of object relation plays a big part of development for later life. Freud (1920) also views ‘play as an expression of inner conflict’. With avoidant patterns at infancy, a child goes on to have lower expectations of others. This is showed through expression in the ‘conscious’ and ‘unconscious’ mind where play can be used as a natural healing/therapy method. If emotional development is ‘arrested’ and restricted in any form it can affect other developmental areas. This may lead to a child receiving play therapy where a specific relationship is formed between a therapist and a child in order to boost and maximise future development. Play therapy ‘aims to help children and young people suffering from a range of psychological difficulties including depression, anxiety and aggression.’ (British Association of Play Therapists, 2011). This allows the child to come to terms with potential issues whilst feeling as though they are in a warm, safe and confidential environment involving play.

Moving on, this essay will now evaluate inclusion and two types of play in the Early Years setting. Forest school, being one example, is learning through a naturalistic environment. Equally, it is a unique equivalent to outdoor play but aims to provide an educational and innovative setting for the child. “Without opportunities to explore, the child has a limited knowledge of the materials and the possibilities of use. Exploration allows children to develop their knowledge, skills and understanding. When these are in the place children can progress to more creative or conventional responses” (Hutt et al 1989). Forest school is a different lens to a ‘normal’ educational setting, including nurseries and primary institutions. Exclusively working with a set goal, to obtain repeatable behaviours through positive, natural and fulfilled experiences.

The experience of forest school is evaluated through Knight (2009) set of aspects and ethos. Knight (2009) states in the first ethos that “the setting is not the usual one”. This is evident through personal experience of being sat round an open campfire engaging and talking to peers. Though certain ‘safety nets’ were placed into context such as only being allowed to walk in one direction and sitting a set distance away; this causes potential concern on self-awareness. This is primarily down to the fact, if a child is young and extremely curious of unfamiliar surroundings, harm could be caused. Though this positively does promote concepts of self-awareness; self-motivation and empathy was also displayed through the activity of building dens. Both these points, link to Knight (2009) fifth and sixth ethos. “Trust is central” and “The learning is play-based and, as far as possible, child initiated and child-led”. Beneficially, co-operative play was the superior leader in this activity through communication and through helping others. Thinking through a child’s lens, the branches would be heavy, proving that trust was a central factor in ensuring struggle would be prevented. Additionally, from first-hand experience, this was strongly child-led with minimal help from the leader; showing the freedom in which the children had intellectually; supporting self-regulation.

Considering the views of progressive theorists, Steiner (1919) states children are to be in touch with nature. Through theory, Steiner (1919) aims to engage with universal human rights. Founder of anthroposophy; spiritually, the theory aim is for children to find clarity with the use of natural science and physical investigation of the world. Linking to his concepts of the ‘head’, ‘heart’ and ‘whole body’ ages and stage levels; Steiner (1919) proposes three levels of development. These transition through independence, spirit/feeling and the involvement of craft and arts. Overall, this views the ‘whole child’ as a spiritual, physical and academic learner; focusing on imagination. Critically, this was a theory un-relative to the 21st century and inappropriate due to being outdated. Though, purposeful and child-led play is encouraged in EYFS, technological approaches were not considered at this time.

(USE I) WAS IT INCLUSIVE? SENSE OF BELONGING

Overall, through personal reflection, I strongly believe the forest school setting was highly inclusive- considering a child’s perspective. Through the ability of having self-directed activities alike ‘creating five developmental stages out of nature’- gave equal opportunity to take leadership whilst boosting self-esteem, confidence and creativity. There was a clear intention of this within the setting which agrees with Darwin (1859) idea of this being an innate phenomenon need. Understanding that play is inducive and a lifelong process; the environment was thoroughly engaging and supportive with this- giving many ‘experimental’ and practical opportunities.

How accessible for SEN

Though displaying many positive aspects towards ‘typical’ and SEN children’s development; this is not always the case. As a practitioner, it is hard to assess to what extent this specific environment will benefit a child. Remembering that every child is unique (EYFS, 2017); with requirement of individualized needs towards holistic development.

A child observed playing will be evaluated through a systematic process which includes developmental schemas, milestones and theorists. Proposed by Hughes (1999), Alice evidently displayed a socio-dramatic typology through her use of enactment of real and ‘pretend’ experience. Through recognising this typology, Alice visibly was in a solitary social stage of play. As proposed by Parten (1932) six types of play, children begin to master abilities with one-self in this type typically between 0-2years. Closeness and interaction are not evident yet. Though encouraging this type of play, enables a child to build upon independent skills; with opportunity to explore. Looking at the play of Alice through the lens of schemas; I observed her with a transportive schema (Athey, 2007) when the ironing board (table) was moved horizontally from its original position. Observing through a different professional lens, Alice additionally displayed cognitive concepts through equilibrium and adaptation, Piaget (1936??). This was displayed through the initial evident struggle of counting; though the knowledge was there, Alice confidently expressed this in a later stage. This was evident in the observation due to new knowledge being replaced and improved upon in the existing schema. Focusing on physical holistic development, Alice’s actions can be linked to age and stage theories. Critique Piaget

How inclusive?

Through observing Alice’s play, it is evident that the experience was highly inclusive. The practitioner can use these age and stage milestones however it is important to understand that every child is unique. In order to treat this fairly, it is essential to observe the child as a practitioner so that the results are inclusive. Contemporary Childhood Book.

Finally, this essay will now evaluate the pedagogical approaches of play In Early Years Curriculum. Pedagogy is the professional term and link used towards learning and teaching. Educationally, the concept sets the curriculum in what is learnt and the phycology as to how children learn. As addressed in the EYFS (2017), play is an essential contribution to learning; underpinned by Bruce (1987:2015). Play is the tool in which practitioners use to give learning an educational perspective. Bruce () defines play as processes with no product. To wallow in ideas, feelings and relationships is the way in which free flow is explained. One-sidedly Bruce ( ) states that this typology of play is where children are thoroughly in their ‘deepest’ levels of learning through the high technical prowess. Encouraged by the EYFS (2017); free-flow brings a rich learning environment for the child through the environment enabling them to have high independence and own progression rate. Positively, this supports the EYFS (2017) statement of every child being unique and enhances inclusion through recognition of differing learning styles and abilities. Opposing to other types of play, free flow is seen to exert minimum pressure to conform to rules.

Quality play is a factor observed by the practitioner, typically these can be compared against Bruce ( ) identification of twelve features of play. For play to be labelled as ‘quality’, Bruce ( ) states acquiring seven of these are a necessity. Essentially, these factors expand the practitioners understanding to engage with the deep level of learning children display.

Both indoor and outdoor play should be promoted in the setting in order to facilitate a child’s needs and emerging abilities.

Inclusion: Sustained Shared Thinking

Understanding that play is a key element of learning; as a practitioner, facilitation is essential for domains of development. With the educational curriculum constantly changing and adapting is it vital to keep up to date. Siraj- Blatchford, (2002) promotes the idea of ‘sustained share thinking’ in the pedagogical environment. Supporting the EYFS, the thinking methodology stimulates creativity; allowing children to be attentive and responsive to questions. Two or more individuals must work together with a child for this to lead a positive outcome, intellectual thinking is a necessity as open-ended questions can encourage playful learning and build interest. Critically, the EYFS has a high staff to children ratio; typically, between 1:8 or 1:13. Whilst this is vital, individualised attention is less favourable and minimal- this could cause a potential concern if a child was to develop a high attachment with a key-worker- as confidence could drop and a child may perceive to be less interested. Supporting this, Bowlby ( ) idea of social releasers favours the fact children display behaviours that our drawn from their caregiving. Through monotropy, secondary attachments are formed for emotional security- showing how important it is for the Early Years to additionally act as a secure base.

Encountering a diverse range of children can cause preconceptions; in the early years setting accommodation of the diversity and inclusivity is essential. This is so that the environment can be purposeful for the ‘unique child’. (Booth et al., 2006) draws on the fact Early Years settings drive to maximise participation whilst causing minimal exclusion. Positively, this allows engaging and responsive pedagogy for both prime and specific areas of development.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Article 31 states the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights [OHCHR] | Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2019).

Play is one of the critical aspects of children lives and as described by Froebel it is the highest development in their childhood (Shree & Shukla, 2016). And I think it is one of the innate qualities that children are born with, and families and their closed ones have been using it to teach children intentionally and unintentionally since ages. In early childhood education, there is a long history of the use of play and it has been a central element of it for some time, although, the way it has been used varies throughout times and settings (Arthur, Beecher, Death, Dockett, & Farmer, 2018). It can also be referred to as the language of children because through play they can communicate or express their thoughts and feelings (Shree & Shukla, 2016).

Although the term ‘play’ can have simple to complex meaning, finding an exact definition might be hard. However, it can be defined as “a behavior that is distinguished by specific features that represent a unique way of being: a way of perceiving, feeling and acting in the world. The act of playing, where a children appropriate time and space for their own needs and desires, has value for developing a range of flexible and adaptable responses to the environment” (Lester & Russell, 2010 as cited in Arthur et.al., 2018, p. 102).

Importance of play and learning

“Play is central to how children learn: the way they make sense of their world; the way they form and explore friendships; the way they shape and test hypotheses about their intellectual, social, emotional, and physical environments” (Pedagogy of Play | Project Zero, 2019). It creates joy, pleasure, triggers imagination, and stimulates the brain and body beyond their normal activities. It is more than a mere indulgence and is essential to children’s physical and mental health, overall well-being and development (Lester & Russell, 2010). It helps in the development of physical, social, cognitive skills and even helps children to learn a language.

Play offers the possibility to enhance adaptive capabilities and resilience among children and can be viewed as a self-protecting process (Lester & Russell, 2010). They learn how to adapt to a different situation, negotiate among others, express and control emotions, make friends or connection, follow rules, solve problems and so on. According to Vygotsky, play like socio-dramatic or make-believe help children create an imaginary situation, set rules and follow those and act out roles (Bodrova & Leong, 2015). Form interactionist perspectives, these sorts of play also help in the language development of children as they experiment with it while taking on different roles in a different context (Fellowes & Oakley, 2010). Good quality play also helps to organize neuronal systems which will ultimately mediate more complex psycho-motor, social, emotional, cognitive skills and positive learning outcomes including literacy and numeracy strategies (Anning, Cullen & Fleer, 2004). It can be through simple tasks like playing with colorful balls by numbering them and passing to other friends and others can tell colours. Not only they will learn the name of colours and how to count them but will also social skills by sharing and motor skills by passing to their friends.

They can also learn the concept of cause and effect (Shree & Shukla, 2016). For instance, the simple action of clapping hands creates sound can help them understand the concept. However, if there is a persistent absence of play, it may interrupt emotion-regulation systems, diminishing children’s physical, social and cognitive competence in the long run (Pellis & Pellis, 2006 as cited in Lester & Russell, 2010). There are plenty of researches, theories, and practical examples, that can prove that play is essential to help children learn in various ways and develop multiple skills.

Play in EYLF Principles and practices

Teaching through play has been recognized worldwide and also in Australia. Play-based learning is an essential part of Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) where it has been described as ‘a context for learning through which children organize and make sense of their social worlds, as they engage actively with people, objects and representations’ (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace [DEEWR], 2009). Learning through play and intentional teaching has been recognized as one of the elements of EYLF. It has also been emphasized that educators should be responsive and should take children’s ideas and play as an important basis for curriculum decision making. The idea has been drawn from various theoretical perspective including development theories and theorists like Piaget encouraging educators planning play-based experiences and providing an environment appropriate for children’s unique and holistic development. It has also been linked to all the outcomes and elements and how those can be achieved through play has been outlined.

Play as a teaching method in early childhood

Children are and should be central to everything when it comes to early childhood education and care. And as an educator to be, I think there is no one right way of teaching. To use play as a teaching method is an innate quality of human beings. Even animals are found to be using play as a method to teach survival skills to their small one (Shree & Shukla, 2016). And as mentioned earlier, I think play has been part of teaching since ages and that people have been using regardless of perspectives and theory and unintentionally. As an example, from my personal experience, I have built structures with everyday objects just to have play with my nieces and nephew without any knowledge of how it has been helping them in their fine motor skills.

Rather than focusing on one approach and theory, I think an educator should use a holistic approach and draw on ideas from various theories and use different approaches as per requirement. To begin with, learning should always be progressive and drawing on the concept of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), as an educator I think one should always seek a way to collaborate children with more experience or capable children or even own self (Bodrova & Leong, 2015) (DEEWR, 2010). It can be done in child-initiated and child-led play, for instance, even in pretend play one can always ask questions about roles they are playing, what one particular character should do, etc. and intentionally scaffolding on their ideas by introducing new ideas or way. Scaffoldings by adults or even by other children provide support to children’s learning or independent understandings or skills as stated in socio-cultural theories (DEEWR, 2010) (Jordan, 2004). By being part of the play an educator can monitor and even can set boundaries if needed. These practices not only help children learn but also help gain secure, respectful and reciprocal relationships (DEEWR, 2009).

Similarly, physically active play allows children to develop different kinds of motor skills promoting significant health and well-being benefits (Barblett, 2010). It can be done through daily schedule including active indoor and outdoor physical play, integration of music, movement, creative expression and using symbolic languages as outlined by Reggio Emilia approach (Edwards, 1993). As play happens in a physical and social context, it helps with the development of social skills among children. It also helps in the emotional intelligence of children such as empathy as they begin to understand other points of view, social skill as they start negotiating rules, resolve conflict, self-regulation as they act as their own agents and make their own choices.

And when it comes to outcomes of EYLF, pretend play and group play which have been mentioned above can help achieve all five of them (DEEWR, 2009). For instance, during play they can learn to interact in relation to others with care, empathy, respect contributing to outcome one which is children having a strong sense of identity. Similarly, they develop sense of belonging to groups of their peers linking to the second outcome of connection. Furthermore, during physically active play or risky play such as educator monitored tree climbing activity, they develop a sense of responsibility for their physical well-being contributing to the third outcome. In the same way, games and play boost their enthusiasm, imagination, creativity, cooperation, problem-solving skills leading to the achievement of outcome four of children being a confident and involved learner. And finally, outcome five can be achieved as throughout play they interact verbally and non-verbally to convey their messages and thoughts.

And in order to do this, educators can plan the environment intentionally such as physical environment, social and emotional environment, the intellectual environment and the temporal environment (Barblett, 2010). This includes a physical layout of space, furniture, and resources arranged in such a way that it provokes, invite and encourage children to explore, learn and enquire about what they see and feel. And also by assisting children to make connections with others, develop friendships and regulate behaviors which would set the emotional and social tone of the environment. And in other times children should be left to develop their themes and ideas and play freely where they can develop their conversation, question, and queries which will extend children’s learning.

As EYLF is based on sound proven early childhood pedagogy and practice principles, educators should know what play is, its importance, how to implement, assess a play-based program and their role in it, and how to develop play-based learning curriculum that suits the need of the children (Barblett, 2010).

Play is commonly understood as an activity performed by children for the purpose of self-amusement, despite the fact that the term play is far more didactic than just an activity, and cannot be conceptualised by a single idea. Children require prospects for unstructured and structured play, in order to advance the development of social and creative skills. Play is an essential medium that enables children to develop new skills. The freedom enabled by play allows limitless experimentation of the objects in a learning environment. This idea is further exemplified in the play scenario, where a small group of children aged four to five years are engaged in a group activity in the block corner. The scenario exhibits play in a number of variations. The activity in the scenario prompts creative thinking, whilst also presenting forms of social play that enable social skills to be formed amongst the children. Through analysis of the collaboration amongst the group, there is evidence of creativity and communication, revealing progress in their social development. The didactic value of the play scenario is depicted through creative thinking and social development. This essay will elucidate the importance of play on the development of social and creative skills in early childhood.

Creative thinking is an unrestricted form of self-expression. In early childhood, creative thinking is a skill that is developed through problem solving and imagination. Creative thinking is imperative to the cognitive development of the child, as it is the basis for symbolic thinking. The ability of understanding symbolic transformations is crucial as the skills developed are required for a child’s education in schooling years such as maths and linguistic symbols (Van Hoorn, Monighan Nourot, Scales & Alward, 2019c). Play supports development by permitting children to play via their ideas, similarly to the manner in which adults discuss solutions to problems that they may encounter and through imagining consequences from an array of perceptions (Van Hoorn, Monighan Nourot, Scales & Alward, 2019c).In the play scenario, creative thinking is portrayed through Freya when she discovers cellophane and utilises it by deciding to make her own window. Similarly, Shukla used a basket full of wooden blocks as treasure. The children demonstrated the skill of symbolic transformation by displaying their creative thoughts. Extensive research demonstrates that play is vital to the development of symbolic thinking, language and social development, reasonable-mathematical thinking, and problem-solving by children (Van Hoorn, Monighan Nourot, Scales & Alward, 2019c). There is ample evidence supporting play regarding the encouragement of imagination and creativity, although, in recent years, it has come to light that this component has in some occasions been ignored in the curriculum (Van Hoorn, Monighan Nourot, Scales & Alward, 2019c).

Pretend play fosters cognitive and adaptive processes that are vital for the development of creativity (Saracho, 2002). Divergent thought is an essential human cognitive ability, that supports the development of multiple ideas and opportunities to solve problems. In the play scenario, a dilemma arises regarding how to secure the cellophane in place. The children collaboratively think of ideas to secure the cellophane. Lin suggests that they glue it, although Guo Jin brings to his attention that the glue has a permanent nature of sticking, then Thale discusses the idea of using sticky tape. Play activities that are inclusive of collaborative activities further enrich the diversity and intensity of the play forms. Dramatic play encourages children to observe the range of roles in society and value them. It can also give them endless opportunities to learn social skills. Children progressively learn to take into account the needs of each other via dramatic play and share their different values and perspectives. This is exemplified in the exchange between Shukla and Craig, Shukla strategically places the basket full of blocks in the centre of the light pattern on the floor, Craig asked her to move it although Shukla explains her perspective to him and eventually, the children continued participating in pretend play. Craig displayed progress into considering the needs and perspectives of others during play.

Nature Play

Children have the most wonderful natural sense of wonder and the most effective way for young children to learn about themselves and the world around them is through play (Wilson, 2018). Children play instinctively with natural elements; they are natural experts and combining nature and play in the lives of young children has many benefits (Lester & Maudsley, 2007). Nature play provides children with a connection to the natural world and the freedom to the purposefully engage and learn in play through their instincts to move, explore, invent, create, make and experiment (Robinson, Treasure, O’Connor, Neylon, Harrison & Wynne, 2018). There is substantial evidence that supports the wide-ranging values and benefits arising from children’s play in natural settings (Lester & Maudsley, 2007); physical health, emotional, personal, social, cognitive, language and spiritual benefits are all linked to nature play (Wilson, 2018; Lester & Murphy, 2007; Robinson et. al, 2018; Rushton, Juola-Rushton & Larkin, 2010; O’Connor, 2014; Kappos, 2007.)

Supportive Policy Frameworks

Nature Play WA has been at the forefront of the movement to reconnect our children with nature (Robinson et. al, 2018) as children’s free play time has been continually declining and more so their time to play in nature causing increasing in sensory and mental health issues (Francis, Paige & Lloyd, 2013 and Agate & Clark, 2011). Although Nature Play is not a new concept, there is now a strong push for educators to focus on the development of Nature play in their planning (Robinson et. al, 2018) and the policy frameworks support it.

In the National Quality Standards (2020), Standard 3.1/ 3.2/ 3.2.1/ 3.2.2/3.2.3 in Physical Environment discusses quality experiences in natural environments and supports children to become environmentally responsible. Furthermore, the Early Years Learning Framework quotes ‘Practice in play and intentional teaching ‘. Each outcome describes links to Nature Play; Outcome 1- Children have a strong sense of identity – Confidently explore and engage with social and physical environments through relationships and play. Outcome 2 – Children are connected with and contribute to their world – Develop an awareness of the impact of human activity on environments and the interdependence of living things. Outcome 3 – Children have a strong sense of well-being- Use their sensory capabilities and dispositions with increasing integration, skill and purpose to explore and respond to their world. Outcome 4 – Children are confident and involved learners – Express wonder and interest in their environments. Outcome 5 – Children are effective communicators – Begin to sort, categorise, order and compare collections and events and attributes of objects and materials, in their social and natural worlds (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR] (2009).

Australian Curriculum also has supportive documentation; the following examples are Pre-Primary focused and are possible curriculum links to Nature Play and the Nature Pedagogy; Science- Science as a Human Endeavour: Science involves exploring and observing the world using the senses (ACSHE013); Humanities-Geographical Inquiry and Skills: Observing, questioning and planning and make observations about familiar places and pose questions about them (ACHGS001); Mathematics- Measurement and Geometry- Using units of measurement and use direct and indirect comparisons to decide which is longer, heavier or holds more, and explain reasoning in everyday language (ACMMG006); English- Language: Language for interaction by understanding that language can be used to explore ways of expressing needs, likes and dislikes; English- Literacy: Interacting with others by using interaction skills including listening while others speak, using appropriate voice levels, articulation and body language, gestures and eye contact (ACELY1784) (Wynne, S. & Gorman, R. 2015 and Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. 2013). Lastly, The United Nations Convention of the Rights of a Child article 31 states ‘the right of the child to rest, leisure, play, recreational activities, cultural life and the arts.’ All these policy frameworks have integrated links to Nature Play and hope to increase Nature Play at school.

Different types of play

Natural environments have traditionally been a place for children’s play. Numerous studies have highlighted the rich potential in natural spaces to engage children across the full range of play types, such as Sensory, Risky, Imaginative and Movement Play (Lester & Murphy, 2007).

Risky Play, also known as ‘deep play’, is a type of play which supports children to encounter and overcome challenges (Robinson et. al, 2018). Recent research indicates that risk competence and perception can be improved through the learning environment (Lavrysen, Bertrands, Leyssen, Smets, Vanderspikken & De Graef. 2017 & Gill, 2007). Children approach the world around them through play; they are driven by curiosity and a need for excitement; they rehearse handling real-life risky situations through play and they discover what is safe and not (Gill, 2007). Through experiencing risk situations, children gain a broad perceptual memory of both the level of risk involved in different situations and what actions are necessary to handle the risk in an appropriate way (Waller, Ärlemalm-Hagsér, Sandseter, Lee-Hammond, Lekies, & Wyver, 2017).Through risk-taking in play, children show increased physical activity, improved motor and spatial skills, as well as learning risk assessment and risk mastery (Waller, 2017).

The natural environment also lends itself as a rich back drop to a child’s imagination and fantasy, and there is a multitude of affective opportunities for engagement, surprise and discovery to be found in children’s stories, myths and fables (Lester & Murphy, 2007). The research suggests the diverse, dynamic and flexible features that can be found in natural spaces afford opportunities for extensive intentional play behaviours (Robinson et. al, 2018). Through Imaginative Play in natural spaces they are possibilities for control and mastery, construction of special spaces, manipulating loose parts and different ways of moving (Lester & Murphy, 2007). Childhood experiences of playing with nature also instil a sense of wonder, stimulating creativity, imagination and symbolic play (Lester & Murphy, 2007 & Wilson, 2012).

Children’s opportunities to playfully access their immediate natural environments support the development of a sense of place and attachment (Lester & Murphy, 2007). Playing in natural spaces also supports a child’s sense of self, allowing children to recognise their independence (Robinson et. al, 2018). The powerful combination of a diversity of play experiences and direct contact with nature has direct benefits for children’s physical, mental and emotional health (Wilson, 2018). Playful, experiential and interactive contact with nature in childhood is directly correlated with positive environmental sensibility and behaviour in later life (Lester & Murphy, 2007).

Discovery learning, experimentation, inquiry and problem solving

Children really need opportunities for creative, exploratory play in stress-free environments, especially in nature without restrictions on time or freedom (Lester & Murphy, 2007). Our students learn almost everything they need to know about life through play, from physical coordination, decision-making and problem solving to empathy and social and emotional skills (Gibson, 2007 & Lester & Murphy, 2007). There is clear and consistent evidence about the many benefits for children and the wider community from exposure to and engagement with nature (Lester & Murphy, 2007). Ability to engage in greater diversity of exploratory actions predicts greater success in problem solving. (Gibson, 200).

Supporting Pedagogies

Evidence suggests that the return to nature-based playgrounds will enhance children’s sense of belonging in our world in a deep and profound way (Wilson, 2018; Lester & Murphy, 2007; Robinson et. al, 2018; Rushton, Juola-Rushton & Larkin, 2010; O’Connor, 2014; Kappos, 2007). Mental illness has a core layer of separation, and spiritual intelligence can be nurtured by a strong connection to Nature (Robinson et al, 2018 & Lester & Maudsley, 2007).To create a sustainable world where all individuals value and take care of our natural resources, we need to firstly have a relationship to nature and the real world ourselves (Zimmerman & McClain, 2016).

The supporting pedagogies of Nature include Rushton, Juola-Rushton & Larkin’s (2010) study ‘Supportive neuroscience’, Singer, Golinkoff & Hirsh-Pasek, (2006) research in ‘Higher level of thinking’ and O’Connor’s (2014) ‘Creativity and Mental Benefits’ all suggest the value children in nature. This compiled with Garvis & Pendergast’s (2014) study into ‘Stress and social interactions’, Elkind’s (2012) ‘Societal changes’ research and Gibson’s (1986) report into ‘Afforandances’ link Nature as an incredibly important factor in pedagogies to support our children’s wellbeing. The notion of ‘affordance’ features prominently in environmental research into relationships between humans and their environments and leads into the relational pedagogies.

The most current Relational pedagogies link to the Rights-based perspective, Socio-cultural theory, Reggio Inspired practices all in association with the policy frameworks discussed earlier, such as the Early Years Learning Framework, the National Quality Standards, the Australian Curriculum and The United Nations Rights of a Child documents. Furthermore, these documents are all linked to the play pedagogy which can be seen highlighted through all Nature and Relational pedagogies and is the main driver on children’s wellbeing in Early Childhood.

Evaluation of Playground

Hammond Park Catholic Primary School has two outdoor classrooms, surrounding bush play areas and multiple playgrounds. I am privileged to be working in a play-based learning environment with a Bush Play program. The students love it and learn how to respect and care for their environment as sustainability as a large focus of the school. The principal has introduced two nature play areas one for K-2 and one for Years 3 and above.

The Play spaces are in natural environments which include plants, trees, edible gardens, sand, rocks, mud, water and other elements in nature similar to Robinson et. al (2018) suggestions for surfaces, textures and opportunities for messy play and supported by (Department of Education and Training, 2020). Elliot, S (editor) 2008. These spaces invite open-ended interactions, spontaneity, risk-taking, exploration, discovery and connection with nature, all reinforced by Lavrysen, Bertrands, Leyssen, Smets, Vanderspikken & De Graef (2017), Gill (2007), Waller (2017) and Wilson (2018). They foster an appreciation of the natural environment, develop environmental awareness and provide a platform for ongoing environmental education which is highly recommended by Nature Play WA (Robinson et. al, 2018).

We found students playground behaviour has improved noticeably with students playing together more, cooperating in their play, being more engaged in their play, taking more risks and being calmer in classrooms similar to Lester & Maudsley (2007) studies. As Lavrysen et. al (2017) discussed this physical activity actually improves self-regulation and concentration and so learning is improving. Another great gift that has happened is that parents and teachers have worked together positively to create these playgrounds and so school culture has also become more cohesive and cooperative.

The key characteristics of the Hammond Park Catholic Primary School natural playground are the use of natural products like sand, water, logs and rocks which links to Robinson et. al (2018) suggestions. There are differing heights and levels of the ground – the students love the hills as they allow children the opportunity to investigate and explore freely. There is no fixed purpose to achieve as supported by Wilson (2018) and some of the areas are hidden behind shrubs and small barriers again suggested by Robinson et al (2018) ideas of secret spaces. There are also bridges, walkways and tunnels that take children from one place to another.

The waterways are purely magical to children, not just to look at but to interact with and opportunities for children to climb and to swing with their body weight which is recommended in Wilson’s (2018) study. There are spaces to run freely and the students have the ability to move things around with no pressure to keep things neat and tidy which is highly endorsed by Francis, Paige & Lloyd, 2013 and Agate & Clark, 2011. The whole school curriculum is woven closely with the natural world and real experiences as Nature Play WA’s movement suggests (Robinson et. al, 2018). This massive immersion in the natural world not only allows the students to grow healthy on all levels, it allows them to develop a respectful consciousness around the environment and their place in it, as discussed in a multitude of studies (Wilson, 2018; Lester & Murphy, 2007; Robinson et. al, 2018; Rushton, Juola-Rushton & Larkin, 2010; O’Connor, 2014; Kappos, 2007; Zimmerman & McClain, 2016).

Extensive research indicates that opportunities for children to access and play freely in natural spaces are currently seriously compromised, due to a variety of interconnected factors including adult influences (Lester & Murphy, 2007, Francis, Paige & Lloyd, 2013 & Agate & Clark, 2011). Hence, I would enhance the Hammond Park Catholic Primary School in five new ways to encourage more interactions in these already amazingly designed outdoor playgrounds; Bush Sustainability, Affordance in Nature Play, Risk Taking, Exploration and more Natural Elements.

Bush sustainability

Lester & Murphy (2007) suggest poor environmental quality can negatively affect children’s play behaviours and may distort the ways in which children instinctively interact with natural elements and environments. As discussed in the Victorian Department of Education and Training (2020) teacher must support children to connect and contribute to their world. This requires educators to help children to develop an awareness of the impact of human activity on the environment and the interdependence of living things (Munoz, 2009). Hence, Hammond Park CPS sustainability focus should be allocated to not only particular year levels but as a whole school initiative, which is supported by Zimmerman & McClain (2016).

Affordance in Nature Play

The affordance of the natural environment is notably through trees and bushes which are highly flexible and present a complexity of possibilities (Lester & Murphy, 2007). Gibson (2000) suggest the ability to engage in greater diversity of exploratory actions predicts greater success in problem solving. Hence, an affordance of student’s ability to problem solve in their Bush Play program in more spaces then currently allocated. Each year level has an area, however, I feel with a more flexible approach to areas these settings may offer different opportunities and affordances for risky play (Lavrysen et. al 2017 & Waller, 2017). For example, in Kindy, the negotiating of a sloping surface by backing and sliding rather than just mud area and sandpits. The varieties of these environments, along with the lack of close adult supervision can provide greater potential for creative and constructive play rather than the current over supervised and allocated environments (Lester & Murphy, 2007).

Risk Taking

Waller (2017) suggest children gain many benefits as a side-effect of being given the chance to undertake activities with a degree of risk. For instance, risks that are greatly outweighed by the health and developmental benefits should be advocated for in outdoor playground environments (Waller, 2017). Similar arguments are made by teachers who call for a greater degree of self-directed learning opportunities, especially in the early years and in the school curriculum (Waller, 2017). Gill (2017) describes risks are what children build their character and personality through. They face up to adverse circumstances where they know there is the possibility of injury or loss are this creates resilience and self-reliance (Waller, 2017). An example of this could be a part of the Hammond Park CPS Bush Play where an the affordance can be to climb trees. Climbing can be judged by the children as fun and exciting and when they know that they could fall or hurt themselves they can accept this risk or choose a safer route (Lavrysen, 2017 & Waller, 2017).

Exploration

Lester & Murphy (2007) state exploration helps children develop wayfaring skills and provides time and space away from adults. Children develop positive attitudes towards the places they explore because these are places in which they are least inhibited (Lester & Murphy, 2007). Our current natural play spaces provide rich opportunities for children to explore new ideas and to develop their interests and understanding like gaining a sense of freedom and the ability to explore and to learn the skills required to manage self-risk (Department of Education and Training, 2020). However, I feel an extension of this could be exploration into ‘wild areas’ which provide a rich developmental landscape. These natural environments can be dynamic, complex and often disorderly with protruding rocks and tree roots, fallen trees, low-hanging branches, streams without bridges, and many geologic variations providing exciting psychomotor challenges (Lester & Murphy, 2007).

Natural Elements

Currently our natural environments including sandpits for sensory, symbolic and physical play, vegetable gardens, digging patches where children can use garden equipment, small pits of pebbles, gravel, course sand and smooth river rocks for fine motor and imaginative play, trees which provide shade, water play areas for sensory play and worm farms and compost areas for environmental education. These are all amazing outdoor playground spaces and I would like to increase the amount of natural elements by affording a range of planting opportunities, chosen by the students and conducted by them, of planting plants for smelling and picking or planting plants that encourages birds, butterflies and other insects as suggested by the Department of Education and Training (2020) and Elliot (2008).

The aim of this essay is to discuss a quote from Whitebread(2012), “Play is spontaneous, self-motivated and controlled by the child. Play is not created by adults but by children themselves” from The importance of play, A report on the value of children’s play with a series of policy recommendations, London. TIE/University of Cambridge. This will also include a reflection on the role of the adult, the impact of digital technologies and gender differences in Childrens play.

To look at spontaneous play, first there must be a definition for both terms. Various theorists, philosophers and academics each hold their own definition for play however the oxford dictionary says that play is to engage in activity for enjoyment and recreation instead of having a serious or practical need for doing so. From this, it is perceived that play holds no purpose other than for fun, however this can be argued by Moyles (1989) who says that children do their real learning during play, from this there can be a depiction that there is more than one purpose. opposing this, Maria Montessori believed that play was an insult to children as they were unable to search for real life within play.

The oxford dictionary definition of spontaneous states: “performed or occurring as a result of sudden impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus” – from this we are told that there is absolutely no prompt involved. Combining these two definitions provides the idea that play can occur without any prompt or stimulus at all and that there is no use in play other than fun. Moyles(2003) challenges this by saying that spontaneous play is an essential part of children’s social and intellectual development, including their creative and personal growth too. From the definition of spontaneous, the question can be presented of ‘does spontaneous play exist? Is it possible?’

An extract from Contemporary Perspectives on play in early childhood education, (Olivia Saracho, Bernard Spodek. 2003), tells the following:

“children’s play is a spontaneous activity whose benefits are well documented in the realm of intellectual development, language and literacy development, and social development. However all human behavior occurs within a particular sociocultural context, and play is influenced by the characteristics of the environment in which it is found. While it may be spontaneous in that it is generated by the player, play is dependent on the sociocultural context for support. There is reason to believe that the social and cultural conditions that support spontaneous play are less in evidence today than they were in the past, because of the increasing complexity and specialization in children’s play materials, increasing organization in childrens games and a growing tendency to characterize rough and tumble play as a symptomatic of pathology” – there are several points that can be taken from this, the most important being that spontaneous play is not possible! this is because play is prompted by the environment and the resources in it (sociocultural context)– although the child may have a sudden idea, the idea would have been formed by an influence within the setting, for example: a child will be in a room(the setting) with paper and a pen(the influence which has been provided by an adult) with no instructions or verbal prompt,– the child forms a paper airplane and draws on it – this is the “spontaneous” part, however they were influenced by the paper to create something and probably had a memory of seeing a plane which also had an input in the activity.

An example of adults having a form of control over play, is within the EYFS. The adult must follow the curriculum but can set up various methods of learning for the child. For example: setting up a drawing table, story table, and writing table within their setting, the child will “play” with the resources that are available at each station spontaneously and will be learning without even realizing – however the adult will understand the reason behind each resource and how it develops children’s learning, this means that the play is not “spontaneous” as the adult would have had specific intentions. The adult will also set limitations which does not allow the play to be spontaneous, for example: on the table there are 2 pieces of paper, a pen and scissors – the child may want to cut the curtains that are in the room, and draw all over the walls, but the adult will more than likely prevent them from doing this. This is not allowing their “spontaneous mind” to have free rein, it is a restrictive setting. Despite this, play within Early years is considered to be guided by spontaneity due to the lack of organisation they display.

Often, a child will want to learn, explore and play. They usually have motivation to want to join in and investigate however this is also influenced by the adult as encouragement or prompting will increase the child’s motivation. The national mental health and education center says that children have intrinsic motivation which they form themselves subconsciously. They also develop extrinsic motivation which is provided by adults, or others around them prompting them to join in. If the child enjoys the activity, it will increase their intrinsic motivation next time the same or a similar activity is available. However, allowing a child to use their intrinsically motivate themselves to do their own play and make their own decisions is more rewarding as they feel more successful. Adults can have an impact on motivating play, however it is better for the child if they are able to motivate themselves, they are more involved in their own education and development. The role of the adult here is to assess which children need to be motivated and supported, and how to ensure the intrinsically motivated children are increasing their motivation.

The role of the adult is merely to provide a safe environment, with age-appropriate resources (that adhere to the curriculum within an educational setting) for children to use for their own benefit. The Adult must also set guidelines for the child for their own safety and wellbeing. Frobel considered the adult to “gift” the children with educational materials, which had activities (lessons) based around each “gift”. The activities were developed in natural ways, however in the developing world, children are now using digital technology more often. The adult should take a step back and not interfere within children’s play, and should not put their opinion forward as to what a child is doing in their play, for example, if a child is drawing a picture the adult should not suggest what they are drawing, as it is whatever they believe it to be, not the adults interpretation.

The various types of play are necessary in early years to provide the child with new knowledge and ways to develop each area of themselves, including physically, mentally, spiritually, emotionally and academically. depending on the setting/curriculum, the adult should monitor the child’s progress in whichever way they see fit for the child. This could be through a learning journey (EYFS) or by using photographic evidence to document that the child has participated in something (Te Whariki), the adult should log the child’s development and create activities or “gifts” to help extend the child development across all areas. To develop socially, the adult should provide the child with experiences to interact with others and work as a group to ensure they are able to develop their communicative skills. This will enable them to pick up new information and form opinions considering those around them. Vygotsky’s theory of social learning tell us that we learn from each other by copying, therefore giving children a chance to socialize and learn together, sharing ideas and knowledge. The adult should promote Play and the learning that is done during play as a quality and inclusive activity –this can be done by forming a bond with each child as an individual, and by encouraging, supporting and praising their play. to allow children to get the best out of their play, they must be allowed to explore, interact and take the lead with their resources and play. Every Child Matters documents state that children should be treated equally, meaning that the adult must make play inclusive so that the children are fairly considered regardless of their abilities. Adults must promote inclusive play by allowing all children to play together in activities that suit all abilities and can support development for all children. The needs of all children should be considered when planning play, those with additional needs should never be an afterthought.

In response to the opening quote, play is created by children however is influenced by adults and the resources and environment they provide. It is also controlled by the adult, without the child being aware. The control is formed of the environment, resources, time and any restrictions that are in place. Despite this, the child will feel as though they are in control of the play.

In modern times, digital technology is becoming used more often in everyday life, this has an impact on how children learn through play as the resources are more advanced with new opportunities, which is allowing children to understand new things by learning in a new way, however are “traditional learning” methods being pushed aside? The technology in education report says that technology is supporting teachers and giving children new opportunities with whichever path they take in life. It states that “digital skills are essential for success” as once 6 key skills are learnt, children can teach themselves and develop their knowledge further. These skills are now essential due to the rate that technology is being introduced to each aspect of our lives, however there are multiple issues with the need for understanding technology. Some children do not have access to technology or broadband due to various issues such as finances, living conditions, family’s restriction etc. The report informs that those who do not have access to a computer at home are at risk for underperforming, therefore causing a negative impact on their education. Schools may also struggle to fund the upkeep for technology and the additional fees for other required extra’s (accessories, repairs, educational programs) This may cause schools to appear outdated by other schools in the surrounding area, giving the perception that they are not a good school. Another issue that schools must face is that their teachers may not understand new technology, meaning they will struggle to pass on the necessary knowledge. Another concern with digital technologies are the health risks that are posed upon children. The Digital Childhood: the Impact of Using Digital Technology on Childrens Health, a report by Nehad Amed Ibrahim Zahra and Ahuad Abdulazaq Alanazi highlights these concerns. a major issue with technology is the lack of face to face contact with friends and family due to the ease of social media. This can cause issues with social skills in later life. The access that children have to the media via technology can also impact their education by altering their behavior and advertising false expectations of people and their lifestyles which can cause pressure and stress upon children from a young age. In addition to social and mental impacts, there is a link between the overuse of technology and various physical health issues such as obesity, diabetes speech disorders, sleep disorders and even neurological conditions such as autism and sensory disorder. Despite digital technology being a major advantage to current times, allowing people to learn and work more efficiently at a faster rate, it is also a major hindrance to modern society.

Another problem that is mentioned in the report is that parents are encouraging their children to use technology, by doing so they are limiting their time for playing outside, or with educational toys that will help them holistically develop. Children appear to seek comfort in technology instead of wanting affection from their carers. Fortunately, schools are becoming more aware of the technology related issues and are including more natural resources and outdoor learning in the curriculum. The study included in the report showed a high percentage of children were using advanced technology and that a large percentage were moderately attached to technology. The study went on to investigate the health impacts upon the children which concluded that a high percentage suffered physically, psychologically and emotionally due to the attachment to technology. To conclude, technology in modern age can provide various benefits to education and offer new opportunities for young people, however can also cause ailments which can damage their mind and body, leading to complications that may limit their future and damage their chances to succeed.

Introduction

Garry Landreth has been quoted as saying, “In play therapy toys are viewed as the child’s words and play as the child’s language – a language of activity. Play therapy, then, is to children what psychotherapy is to adults.” (Landreth & Bratton, 1999). This is the very basis of play therapy, describing a therapy modality in which kids can use play and toys to work through traumas and disruptions in functioning. Play therapy is especially crucial because oftentimes children cannot voice what is going on in their heads; they aren’t cognitively able. But to be able to play out their various thoughts and emotions using toys, art supplies, and various media, they can show us their world.

Modalities

Within the realm of play therapy, there are a few different ways to conduct a play therapy session. There are different fields of study dedicated to directive approaches, and nondirective approaches. Directive approaches, or structured approaches, consist of therapist-directed activities in the playroom (Landreth, 2012). This approach is used to have children face their anxieties and traumas more head on, but this can be harder for a child to work through. Landreth (2012) recommends letting the child play freely afterward in order to recover from any potential discomfort. This is much like a debriefing at the end of a research study. Directive play therapy is useful in certain cases. Some children crave more structure in their lives, particularly if they are used to a more rigid lifestyle. This could be due to authoritarian parenting. While a goal of play therapy could be to have the child work through their need for structure, at first it may be overwhelming for the child to have to go from their norm of pure structure, to suddenly a completely self-directed session. Working a child up to a non-directive session would be ideal in this case. Another instance where directive play is ideal is in sand tray therapy. While the children pick their own figures and assign meaning to them on their own, sand tray itself is a directed activity in which the therapist prompts the child to show them something through the figures and the sand tray.

On the other side of the play therapy coin lies nondirective approaches. This approach is more popular and allows children to play freely with the toys and work through their traumas at their own pace. Ahuja and Saha (2016) bring up an excellent point in their journal that children do not need to be taught how to play. They know how to play at birth, and their play develops along with them. That being said, it isn’t a surprise that children use play to voice what they cannot through words. Certain traumas are hard for a child to cognitively process, especially if they happen early on in the child’s development. Play helps the child work through what they cannot process cognitively and turn to words. Letting a child play freely in a playroom as the counselor reflects and tracks what they are doing can be very telling on how the child is dealing with their trauma, whatever it may be.

Separate from directive and nondirective play, there is group child play therapy. Group play therapy can be so developmentally nurturing for children. An article by Jones (2002) showed the effects of group therapy on children who had experienced sexual abuse. The children played through their traumas, and they also got to experience social interaction. This helped the children know that they weren’t isolated in their experience, and this can help with feelings of shame and blame (Jones, 2002). There’s something very powerful about knowing you aren’t alone in your experience completely. while the other person may not have experienced exactly what you have, they’ve experienced something of the same type and a relationship can form. In a study by Kwon and Lee (2018), refugee children from North Korea joined a play therapy group once they had fled to South Korea and sought asylum. Positive outcomes were reported from this study, as the refugee girls experienced more empathic behavior and play, as opposed to the aggressive play they had previously exhibited (Kwon & Lee, 2018).

Non-directive Play Therapy

While there is valid research for each side of the play therapy coin, I tend to lean more towards non-directive play therapy. Giving the child a safe environment free of judgement gives them an opportunity to truly grow and to do it at their own pace (Ahuja & Saha, 2016). Giving them a sense of independence can be so important to children. Garry Landreth (2012) has spoken at length about the benefit of giving children choices. For some children, this could be the first time they’re given a choice; when they enter the playroom and are told ‘you can play with all of the toys in here in many ways that you like’. This of course extends to our concept of limit setting, and the ACT model (Landreth, 2012).

Some who value other methods of child therapy consider non-directive play therapy as an easy modality (Lebo, 1953). Lebo (1953)’s study mentions the vast amount of research that had already been conducted regarding non-directive play therapy. The journal gives various examples of these studies and mentions the benefit to the world of non-directive play therapy. This journal was published more than 50 years ago, it’s gratifying to see the research has mostly stayed the same regarding non-directive play therapy. If there were a lot of journals and research published already by that time, then the amount we have now is surely considered vast and plentiful.

The article by Ahuja and Saha (2016) examined resilience in children through non-directive play therapy. They acknowledge that oftentimes, children are touted for having this affinity for resilience, and that they can so easily bounce back. This of course is not true for all children. They cite a study that had been done previously that focused on children who had lost a parent or close family member, and how beneficial play therapy was to them. The children were free to let out their emotions, deep anguish and anger, through the modality of play and it proved fruitful for the children (Ahuja & Saha, 2016).

Non-directive play therapy is also useful for issues outside of trauma and grief. A study by Cogher (1999) looked into children who were attending speech and language therapy. While play is the language for the child, there is another method of speaking going on in the play room; the therapist’s tracking. As the therapist tracks, they’re putting the words to the child’s play, and the child often is listening. This can help facilitate language development, as they are learning words to represent what they are playing out (Cogher, 1999). This goes hand in hand with reflecting feeling and content. When the child does speak in session, the therapist paraphrases it or puts a feeling to their words and tone, and this facilitates language development as well (Cogher, 1999). Cogher (1999) introduces a concept called linguistic mapping. Linguistic mapping is a sort of paraphrase, wherein the therapist uses more adult language and structure to reiterate what the child has said. Cogher (1999) points out that this is especially useful in cases where a child shows issues in language, as well as their pre-verbal skills. Danger and Landreth (2005) published a journal as well with a group of children who experienced speech difficulties. It reiterates how crucial play is to a child and their language development. Play will put words to what the child cannot communicate verbally (Danger & Landreth, 2005).

Parents and Play Therapy

Wilson and Ryan (2001) published a journal pertaining to how play therapy is for parents. They point out how distressing it can be to a parent to take their child to counseling. Feelings of disappointment, defeat, uselessness can plague a parent’s mind. The study goes into detail about each child’s case, and how the parents played into the role of why the child was there. Their results showed that 10 out of 11 cases they examined had an improvement on the parent’s behalf, in handling their children and relating to them. More than one of the children seemed to experience some sort of attachment issue, and there was improvement at the end of the sessions (Wilson & Ryan, 2001). The cases showed different ways the parents were empowered, some accepting that their child was ready to be more independent, while other parents showed less of those feelings of disappointment and guilt over their children. Finally, some parents merely gained the confidence to be successful parents, and that was what they needed (Wilson & Ryan, 2001).

High levels of stress in parents correlate to higher levels of stress in children (Ray, 2008). It’s no mystery why this occurs; even in our adult lives if we are around someone who is in a highly anxious state, we can easily find ourselves picking up on their anxiety and feeling some within ourselves. Children are often looked at as sponges; they are used to looking to their parents for guidance, so if their parent is anxious and stressed, the child will be aware of it. An article by Ray (2008) shows the results of their conducted study and shows that play therapy can not only reduce stress for child and parent, but also positively impact the parent/child relationship. By bringing the stress levels down for both parent and child, a clear benefit was shown, and it was done through non-directive play therapy.

Conclusion

While there are benefits to both directive and non-directive play therapy, I found far more articles and research that use non-directive play therapy. The effects of these studies were profound, and positive. While non-directive play therapy may prove to be a longer process, it certainly seems worth the wait. Giving the child the freedom to work through trauma and diagnoses is a precious gift in their development, and if we can give them that gift it can yield incredible results.

When looking for articles pertaining to directive play therapy, and structured play therapy, the results were very sparse, so much so that many of the results that popped up were for non-directive play therapy instead. To me this showed just how many play therapists and researchers value an unstructured session. This was exciting to me, as often I think of research as something very clinical, something to be studied, and when thinking of studies one usually thinks of structure. The versatility of a non-directive study was so apparent in the volume of research that I found.

Personal Statement

I chose this as my topic of choice because there was just such a volume of research dealing with so many different traumas and diagnoses. I was so interested in everything I read I wanted to incorporate it all. It truly is amazing to watch a child in the playroom, and I was so grateful for the micropracticum experiences. I have done micropracticum in the past when I took adolescent play therapy, and the experiences were so vastly different. It was remarkable to watch other sessions and then to be in my own and get to be hands on with the children.

When thinking about potential limitations to non-directive play therapy, there were only a few that I could come up with. One limitation I considered was that a non-directive approach may not work as well with a child who is very rigid and anxious. The lack of structure may be too much for them, at least in the initial few sessions. Working toward unstructured play could be a goal, but at first, they may need a more directive approach until they are more comfortable lowering boundaries. Another limitation could lie in the parent’s perception of play therapy. Non-directive play therapy may just sound like play time to laymen. It could be hard for a parent to understand the therapeutic benefits of unstructured play, and how things will play out in the play room. This is why it’s crucial to educate the parents in intake and give them resources to help them better understand play therapy. Given these limitations I still believe that in most cases, a nondirective stance is what I will employ when I am doing play therapy with future clients.

References

1. Ahuja, S., & Saha, A. (2016). They lead, you follow: Role of Non-Directive Play Therapy in Building Resilience. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 11(1), 167–175.
2. Cogher, L. (1999). The use of non-directive play in speech and language therapy. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 15(1), 7–15. doi: 10.1177/026565909901500102
3. Danger, S., & Landreth, G. (2005). Child-Centered Group Play Therapy with Children with Speech Difficulties. International Journal of Play Therapy, 14(1), 81–102. doi: 10.1037/h0088897
4. Jones, K. D. (2002). Group Play Therapy With Sexually Abused Preschool Children: Group Behaviors and Interventions. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 27(4), 377–389. doi: 10.1080/714860200
5. Kwon, Y. J., & Lee, K. (2018). Group child-centered play therapy for school-aged North Korean refugee children. International Journal of Play Therapy, 27(4), 256–271. doi: 10.1037/pla0000077
6. Landreth, G. L. (2012). Play therapy: the art of the relationship. New York: Routledge.
7. Landreth, G., & Bratton, S. (1999). Play Therapy. ERIC Digest.
8. Lebo, D. (1953). The Present Status of Research on Non-Directive Play Therapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 17(3).
9. Ray, D. C. (2008). Impact of play therapy on parent–child relationship stress at a mental health training setting. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 36(2), 165–187. doi: 10.1080/03069880801926434
10. Wilson, K., & Ryan, V. (2001). Helping parents by working with their children in individual child therapy. Child Family Social Work, 6(3), 209–217. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2206.2001.00206.x

In this essay I am going to be reflecting on the role play when I was a General practitioner and meeting a patient who is 55 years old , self-employed and has type 1 diabetes . I will be demonstrating the working skills with one-to-one client. It will also look at the effective communication, listening and good technique of asking questions when working with the individual letting them express what is wrong with them . Gibbs (1998) reflective cycle will be applied as it gives a clear layout for the reflective which includes the six main stages; description of the event, feelings, evaluation, analysis conclusion and action plan. Baird and winter (2005) states the reasons why the reflective is so important in practice. This is because when the professional reflects, they will gain more knowledge on what they have done, which will also help to be able to cope in a new situation and develop self-esteem and satisfaction as well as the values of professionalizing practice.

In the role play I was a General practice meeting with a 55-year-old man, self-employed who has Type 1 diabetes complaining of feeling more and more tired and his sleeping pattern is very poor. According to NHS Choice (2011) a General practice they have role and responsibility to the patients which, are to be able to give advice on treatment and educate on the disease to help with preventable. They also put the patients first and give quality of practice and care; Good Medical Practice, (2013). Their responsibility is to check for the long-term health issues and help the patients by the way in which they can manage their condition long-term, while with the other medical health professionals. However, as a General practitioner they look at the whole person physical, mental, social, spiritual, cultural and economic aspects. All the General practice they follow the NHS code of practice (2003) which is the document that all the staff need to agree on. This is used to treat all the patents with respect and care to everyone regardless of their ethnicity. It also helps to avoiding the harassment and maintaining confidentiality and respecting patient rights to accept or reject the advice from the General practice.

I was meeting a 55-year-old man, self-employed who has been Type 1 diabetes, so he has been feeling more tired and his sleeping pattern is poor over the past four months. His wife has insisted for he should see the doctor as he is becoming forgetful when taking his medication and he has also gained some weight. As a Type 1 diabetes patients requires a life time insulin treatment to live long and when it is not well managed, and the levels of glucose are high it is a life threatening; Clark (2004).

Looking at the medical history he his hypertensive and he smokes and his Habc1 from the recent blood test it has increased from 8 to 9.5 %. When he came, I check his blood pressure which was 145/85 mm/Hg which was higher for his age. When I was communicating with the patient, I have made sure that I have made the eye – contact and sate on a relax position for they to feel free to express how they are feeling. reference

During my role play as General practice, I was feeling nerves because I was afraid of getting things wrong. However according to reference being nerves is normal especially it Is the first time. However, I was always being involved in working with the elderly in a care home, so I have used my communication skills and my listening skills which help me to be able to find a way in which I can encourage the patient in managing their diabetes. On the one- to – one some of the working skills where to effectively communicate and active listening so that I can give enough feedback and empathy. This was so important as I will need to speak slowly and clearly that the patients have understood the ways in which they can take their medication. For example some of the guidance in managing his diabetes was to have a food diary so he can keep track of the food and the one which one he need to cut down more off. I have also explained to him that having the reading of higher blood sugar for a long time can lead to the development of complication such as diabetes ketoacids. I referred him for the therapy to help with managing his diabetes and also encourage him to try and avoid food which ae higher in sugar and to keep a food diary with him so he can keep track of the food which he has eaten. (Reference. I was able to maintain the confidentiality to the patients using the NMC Code of conduct (2008). I have used the some of the theory such as converging https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html

The General Medical Council (2013) suggested some of the ethical and values that we came across on the role play. These are having the confidentiality for the patien. This is very important as the professional I don’t have to share the information of my patients with anyone. However, confidentiality can only be broken when the patient and other people around at risk of harm. The other ethical that I have came across was the informed consent to the patient. Informed consent is giving the patient choice to make decision about their treatment of care. when a person is giving consent to have their family involve in their care, they can decide to say no after they have agree with it. It is very important for the individual values to be understood as it helps the professional to improve patients centred care.

One of the strengths that I had in role play was that I managed to prepare myself with the real-life scenario and the second strength was that I was able to meet up and communicate effectively with my peers during role play. However, during the role paly I had some weakness which fear of was getting thigs wrong. In future, I will be aiming to be more prepared and practice more of the professional role with the patients.

To conclude, this experience of having the role play has taught me a lot that it’s not always easier that I would met the patients you will have much confident. I have made sure that I am engage in the patients to be able to help him. It’s also shows me the effective relationships that patients and health care professional allow information to be covered.

In this essay I will be looking at definitions of play, aiming to reflect on a variety of views and opinions on what play is. It is difficult to find a singular definition of play as it is so broad, not only in the different types and forms of play, but also in the reasons a child will play and the child’s own view on playing. The purpose of reflecting on definitions of play is so that we can build upon our own personal definition, and to further understand the purpose of play through thinking about how other people define it. I will first be looking at how most definitions of play ignore the fact that some forms of play can have a purpose other than entertaining the child. I will then go on to look at the importance of play in children’s development and learning. I plan to conclude this essay by going back over the purposes of play I have found and why we should involve them in our own views and actions regarding play, as well as going back over why play forms such a large part of a child’s development, and what it can do for them in adulthood.

Some definitions of play ignore the fact that not all play is enjoyable and purposeful. Play Therapy UK (2018) defines play as “A physical or mental leisure activity that is undertaken purely for enjoyment or amusement and has no other objective” This definition of play almost seems to ignore part of the work that this organisation does. They themselves define play therapy as “a variety of play and creative arts techniques (the Play Therapy Tool-Kit) to alleviate chronic, mild and moderate psychological and emotional conditions in children”, this definition itself gives play the purpose of helping to alleviate distress from a child. However, as play is so broad, it would be hard to make a correct explanation on the purpose of it.

First thoughts of what play is would usually be a thought of something like a game of football or playing with dolls, generally something which doesn’t have any purpose to the child other than entertaining themselves. However, there can be other purposes for play, such as playing with blocks to help the child to learn and understand counting or playing with craft supplies to make a present for a family member. These forms of play have more purpose than just enjoyment and amusement. Learning through play can be extremely useful to a child, as it is generally something they enjoy doing, so having them do something they otherwise may find boring like learning, through play, they will be much more engaged in it and will therefore learn more efficiently. If we do not use play to help children to learn, then we will likely be failing to completely engage the child in the teaching we are expecting them to gain understanding of. There is also play which has an alternative purpose from enjoyment or amusement, for example, if a parent is going to a friend’s house and taking their child with them, that child may be expected to play with the friend’s child who, in this case, they don’t like or get on with as they are controlling and aggressive. The purpose of this play would not be for entertainment, the purpose would just be obeying their parent.

It could also be argued that, since these activities have different purposes, could they really be considered as play if they are not enjoyable, or have a purpose other than enjoyment? “It looks and sounds like play, yet we properly call this play the work of children. Why?” (Mraz, Porcelli & Tyler, n.d.) in today’s world, children do not have jobs like they would have years ago, so play taking place in a learning environment could be considered their work. The definition Play Therapy UK gave would back up this point by not including the purpose of learning and work into their definition.

Play is an extremely important part of how a child develops and learns. It creates scenarios where children must use their own knowledge and educate themselves on how to further the game they are playing, or where to go next with the craft activity they are doing. It also helps the child to use knowledge they already have, to reinforce the skills they learn by reinforcing the synaptic pathways they develop through play and making them permanent. The knowledge they gain through doing this can then be used in other scenarios. Mandy Andrews is a lecturer at the University of Plymouth and runs play activities and events with her husband. She defined play by saying “…play crosses boundaries and creates challenges. It is a deep process that has a rhythm of integer space, flow and not flow bordering on chaos.” (2012, p.2). Andrews’ own experiences with play have led her to be interested in how it works, and how it shapes a child’s development. In her case, play makes up a large percentage of her memories as a child, so going into her adult life continuing to be interested in working in this area shows that the things she learned and developed as a child carried on over into her adulthood. She mentions this herself by saying “Thanks to my early experiences I am not scared to fiddle and look at how things work. I know how to make things such as a den or a go-kart and value the smells and sounds of the natural environment.” (2012, p.2). this shows that her experiences playing and what she learned from doing so have carried over and she now uses those skills in her career. This would also apply to people in other fields of work, for example if a child enjoys playing a sport, they may start playing it a lot, which would build and improve upon the skills needed for playing that sport, and they may go on to play that sport professionally in adulthood. This can be seen when children are asked what they want to be when they grow up, they often say a job which is close to their favourite type of play, e.g. if a child enjoys playing with crafting items they may say they want to be an artist, or if they enjoy playing with fairytales they may want to be a princess or a king.

In conclusion, play can, and should, have many purposes. Restricting its purpose to being only for enjoyment and amusement restricts the uses it can have for children’s development. Reflecting on Play Therapy U.K.’s definition brought me to conclude that we must include the developmental purposes of play in our work. If we kept to the view that play is purely for entertaining a child and absolutely nothing else, then we would be losing a huge resource in teaching, we would not use play to teach children how to count, read and write, and to even just develop their own life skills. Play creates a challenge to make the child continuously use knowledge they already have, reinforcing it, and to force them to build on that knowledge to overcome the challenge they are faced with. Looking at the way Andrews defines play brought me to conclude that not only is play important in development as a child, but it can also shape the way we are in adulthood. It creates challenges that make the child reuse knowledge they already have which then reinforces that knowledge through synapses in the brain, to then make the skills and behaviours they learn permanent. Playing can also have an even bigger effect on a child and go on to form their career in adulthood.