play as a vehicle for learning in the foundation stage
Sally Hyne
Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Student Conference, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 10 September 2003
Introduction
The foundation stage in England encompasses children from age three to five years and thus includes children in pre-school provision – childminders, private playgroups and nurseries, state nursery schools and classes - as well as pupils in their first year of compulsory schooling in the reception classes of infant and primary schools. This is a wide field of research and it was decided, for the purposes of this study, to limit the variables to provision for pupils in the reception class of my own primary school in West Kent. The research questions for the study were based on how children learn in the foundation stage in England and looked specifically at three key issues: a. Do children learn through play? b. If so, how is this achieved? And c. What is the role of the adult in this learning process? The design for the mini-project was an action research, qualitative study and the Method section describes how this was undertaken and the sample that was chosen.
A review of literature related to the field suggests that play is an essential element of the learning process of young children but that this needs to be structured by the adult in order that the child gains maximum benefit from play. In other words, it is not enough just to offer pupils a range of experiences where they can explore familiar and new concepts, but rather that these experiences should be carefully planned for and structured according to the learning needs of individual pupils in order that they can build on previous knowledge.
Literature review
In order to understand the importance of play as a vehicle for learning in the foundation stage, we must turn to a study of the relevant literature to underpin the statements made in Margaret Hodge's forward to the Curriculum guidance for the foundation stage (QCA, 2000) where she states that the early years are critical in children's development and that the foundation stage of education will make a positive contribution to children's early development and learning.
Play has been variously defined by different theorists. Research such as that by Rubin, Fein and Vanderberg (1983) looks at 'pretend play' and its links with the theories of Jean Piaget (1951), while that of D. and J. Singer (1990) suggests that pretend play becomes subsumed in the more complex, 'sociodramatic play' as the child gets older. This type of activity, in which the child interacts with others in social situations, enacting roles that they may have seen in real life or on television, or have heard about from books and stories, is easily recognised in most early years settings and is frequently referred to as 'role play'.
Sheridan (1990) describes what she terms 'spontaneous play', being a natural activity ‘as soon as a child is released from the impositions of his primary neonatal reflexes’ (p.15). She describes the ‘orderly developmental sequence’ – moving from the infant’s use of basic sensory and motor equipment towards more sophisticated and creative communication as a toddler and beyond – as being dependent on ‘continuing adult encouragement and the provision of suitable toys and other equipment’.
She describes this sequence as: 1) active play; 2) exploratory and manipulative play; 3) imitative play; 4) constructive (or end-product) play; 5) make-believe (or pretend) play; and 6) games-with-rules; the stage of Sheridan's play most relevant to the foundation stage is that of make-believe play.
Bretherton (1984) makes the distinction between ‘self-representation’ and ‘other-representation’, suggesting that ‘pretending at a behaviour that is unambiguously that of another person can be regarded as the beginning of role-play…’ (p.10). He speaks of the need, in collaborative role-play, for an infant or young child to ‘co-ordinate his or her event schemata or scripts with those of another person’ (p.13), using as his evidence earlier studies by Piaget, Garvey and Wolf. He discusses a child’s use of mime, where an imaginary or ‘substitute’ object or set of objects is used in the role play, alongside ‘realistic’ toys (p.20).
This is taken up by Goldman (1998), who describes ‘development trajectories’ in play, where ‘the use of replica objects – performed out of their normal context – is at its height between four and five years and seems to decline thereafter’ (p.31). He discusses research by Piaget and Vygotsky that suggests ‘fantasy play’ (his term) is ‘clustered within at least three distinct approaches to the phenomena – that is, cognitive, psychoanalytic and communicational’ (p.35), and uses his anthropological study of the Huli people of Papua New Guinea to illustrate these earlier theories.
Piaget (in Bruner, Jolly & Sylva, 1976) describes a ‘pole of accommodation’ and one of ‘assimilation’, which he says are essential adjustments that a child has to make in order that ‘schemata’ are evolved; these schemata ‘constitute the functional equivalent of concepts and of the logical relationships of later development’ (p.166). He suggests that play is used by a young child as a means of demonstrating his/her mastery of a new situation that has already been accommodated into his/her schemata, but not yet fully practised and thereby assimilated.
Unlike Piaget, Lev Vygotsky (1978) believed that pretend play provides children with an important mental support system that allows them to think and act in more complex ways. In real life, children rely on adults to help them by providing the rules and by filling in for them in little ways, in what Vygotsky called the zone of proximal development. In Bruner, Jolly & Sylva (1976), Vygotsky talks of play being ‘invented at the point when unrealizable tendencies appear in development’ (p.538)…’play is essentially wish fulfilment, not, however, isolated wishes but generalized effects…in finding criteria for distinguishing a child’s play activity from his other general forms of activity it must be accepted that in play a child creates an imaginary situation’ (p.540).
Drake (2001) draws on earlier research by Isaacs (1929) and Hurst (1991) to emphasise the value of ‘play’ as a prelude to ‘work’ at a child’s later stages of development. She identifies the outside play area as a valuable resource that should be viewed as ‘an extension of the whole setting in which all other areas of provision can be set up…’ (p.31), rather than an area of provision in its own right. She sees provision for early years as ‘a structure that scaffolds children’s learning but allows them the freedom to experiment, investigate and pursue personal interests’ (p.3) and clarifies this by offering suggestions for suitable activities.
Tamburrini (in Roberts & Tamburrini, 1981) speaks of four major teaching styles in which teachers ‘can and do provide for play and relate to children in the context of their play’ (p.138). These she terms: 1) the non-intervening style; 2) the pre-structuring style; 3) the redirecting style; and 4) the extending style. Of these, she suggests that it is clearly the extending style that seems ‘to reflect the greatest valuing of play in terms of its relationship to intellectual development’ (p.140). This style encourages spontaneous play with a range of materials provided by the teacher.
In 2000, the Qualifications and Assessment Authority (QCA) introduced curriculum guidance for a new stage of learning to precede Key Stage 1 - termed the 'Foundation Stage'- and published jointly with the then Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) a document entitled Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage. This new document laid down clear guidelines as to what should be taught and how the curriculum for this stage of education should be implemented. It offered a rationale for learning in the early years and a structure for teaching and assessing against criteria. It built on the former concept of ‘desirable outcomes’ and suggested 'early learning goals’ that had to be met, using ‘stepping stones’ as the structured learning outcomes. It explained how ‘the foundation stage begins when children reach the age of three…[it] prepares children for learning in key stage 1 and is consistent with the national curriculum.’ (QCA/DfEE, 2000, p.7) The document aimed to ‘help practitioners plan to meet the diverse needs of all children so that most will achieve and some, where appropriate, will go beyond the early learning goals by the end of the foundation stage.’ (ibid, p.5)
The curriculum for the foundation stage is organised into six areas of learning:
· Personal, social and emotional development;
· Communication, language and literacy;
· Mathematical development;
· Knowledge and understanding of the world;
· Physical development; and
· Creative development.
Although play as a vehicle for learning is implicit throughout the guidance, there is only half a page - in a document that runs to 128 pages – that specifically refers to play:
‘Well-planned play, both indoors and outdoors,’ it states, ‘ is a key way in which young children learn with enjoyment and challenge…The role of the practitioner is crucial in:
· planning and resourcing a challenging environment;
· supporting children’s learning through planned play activity;
· extending and supporting children’s spontaneous play;
· extending and developing children’s language and communication in
their play.’ (p.25)
It then lists eight areas in which a child can learn through play ‘in a secure environment with effective adult support…’ (p.25).
Further guidance for early years practitioners has been provided in the form of a new document entitled Planning for Learning in the Foundation Stage (QCA/DfES, 2001). Here, the section on play (p.5) is more specific, stating that ‘spontaneous play is often based on important events in young children’s lives’ and that teachers should ‘encourage play that is emotionally, intellectually, physically and socially challenging…’. It recommends the provision of appropriate equipment, the use of which ‘can encourage children to engage in role-play that is based on a story you have read to them or on one of their own’. In the sample lesson plans for one week, out of twelve ‘themed activities’, two are devoted to play: ‘imaginative play’ and ‘role play’. There is no detail about how these are different, although it may be assumed from the key words that the former uses real objects such as toy cars, dolls and zoo animals while the latter involves the child acting out the part of a bus driver, supermarket shopper or customer at a travel agency. Such examples reflect the constructive and make-believe play from Sheridan’s sequence and also offer a link with Bretherton’s discussion on a child’s use of mime, described earlier.
The role of the adult in the learning process
David (1998) speaks of how, in future, it is likely that early years education research will move away from a focus on play and learning towards aspects of the education agenda (164). Aubrey (2000) looks at current research into early childhood education, in the UK, the European Union and the US, and makes reference to the High/Scope longitudinal study of 1993, which looks at young children leaning independently from adult intervention. Hurst (1997) describes the importance of ‘the active participation and support of practitioners’ (46) who must ‘relate the experiences and activities provided to the children’s pre-existing understandings…’(45).
Anning and Billett (in Broadhead, 1996) describe their research into four year olds in infant schools, both in small village schools and large urban primary schools. They found that, in all the schools studied, value was placed on the role of adults in class, whether they were teachers, support assistants or parents; in fact, parents were important facilitators in their child’s learning, both in school and out.
‘Learning through play’ versus teacher-directed learning
This dichotomy is central to my research: my experience of young children learning suggests that, unless there is appropriate adult intervention (and, at times, teacher-directed activities) pupils will not move forward in any of the six key areas of learning. David (1998) cites studies by Newson and Newson (1965) which attempted to provide information of young children ‘co-constructing their worlds together with their families…’ (158) but does not extend this to adult-directed learning within the foundation stage. Hurst (1997) discusses whether ‘in general, play [is] far more structured in practice than teachers’ theoretical accounts indicated.’ (42) and suggests that ‘play is seen as separate from the high quality learning that is aimed for.’ (43). Aubrey (in Broadhead, 1996) describes a study of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge as related to the teaching of mathematics subject matter in reception classrooms. Observations found that ‘a structure of mathematical lessons emerged which, on the one hand, supported lesson organisation and which, on the other hand, served classroom instruction.’ (134). In her own work (Aubrey, 2000), she states firmly that ‘Direct teaching in itself will not ensure early progress and a child-centred way is essential.’ (Introduction, xiii).
Method used for the study
It was necessary to ensure validity and reliability, and for the data to be triangulated; this was achieved through the collection and analysis of data from a sample of pupils, staff working directly with them and other adults in school. Textual data was obtained from four instruments: observation of the pupils in the reception class of a primary school, using firstly, tape recording and later, field notes; questionnaires administered to all staff in the infant department; and two interviews undertaken with other adults working within the school community.