The Value of Play for Young Children with Special Needs - Term Paper Example

?The Value of Play for Young Children with Special Needs It is very natural for children to indulge in play. It is the sort of activity that can summon various emotions, from glee to serious reflection. Research on play has identified it as a central part of growth of development in children and that engagement in it brings about productive outcomes. Play is an avenue where one can be free to be oneself without anyone imposing rules or restrictions to conform to society’s standards. According to Nutbrown (1999), first introductions of play for most children are in a ‘home-based pedagogy of play’. It is believed that such pedagogy enables young children to begin the process of early learning (Open University, 2009). During play, “children demonstrate improved verbal communications, high levels of social and interaction skills, creative use of play materials, imaginative and divergent thinking skills and problem-solving capabilities” (Wood, 2004, p. 21). Play offers many benefits. It engages the mind to actively imagine various scenarios for fun or for problem-solving. Babies and toddlers display play in motion and we observe that they do it to get to know their world – how things work, how people react, etc. They get to explore and discover things that otherwise they will not learn about if they do not actively engage in play. Free exploration is considered Heuristic play by Holland (2003). It is encouraged without adult intervention. Adults simply provide simple materials and allow the child to just be and let his imagination take off . “The child learns from observing directly what these objects will ‘do’ or ‘not do’, in sharp contrast to much of the ‘educational’ equipment which has a result predetermined by the design which has been devised by the adult maker (Holland, 2003, p. 142). Heuristic play will not only stimulate a child’s thinking, but it also develops his creativity as he will see in his mind endless possibilities in imaginatively transforming ordinary objects into various things with various functions. Play has value in all the developmental areas of children (Macintyre, 2003). Unwittingly, children delight in games that stimulate thinking. Such cognitive benefits extend to their real lives as they make decisions, compare and contrast things, use their imaginations and thinking critically and creatively. Play also engages the body. Certain games involve gross and fine motor coordination. It also helps to expend the stored energy within them, willing to be set free. Running around, jumping, tumbling and other physical activities help them be physically fit as well as release tension. Active play develops their muscles, agility, flexibility and endurance. It is the foundation of one’s potential for certain sports. Socially, play coaxes a shy child outside his shell. Play fosters the development of friendships. As children play with other children or adults, they get to know about how other people behave, think and feel. They also get to learn socially acceptable behavior like not hurting others and playing fair. Most importantly, they get to know themselves better- how they react to certain situations in the play setting. Vygotsky (1978) believed that children’s intellectual development is influenced more by social context than by individual experiences. His theory places a great deal of emphasis on effective social interaction. Bingham (2008) cites Vygotsky (1978) as he writes: “Play creates a zone of proximal development of the child. In play the child always behaves beyond his average age, above his daily behavior; in play it is as though he were a head taller than himself." He defined the ZPD as the distance between a child’s independent problem-solving level and that obtained under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers (Wertsch, 1985). A young learner’s exposure to peers, teachers and other adults and learning materials greatly influences his development. “Such cognitive apprenticeships are, of course, inherently reliant on a mentor or guide who effectively uses “scaffolded instruction.” (Bonk & Cunningham, 1998 p.40). As the term implies, scaffolds are temporary supports in the process of learning which are gradually taken away when the student is already capable of learning without them. “Within the ZPD, a skilful adult minimises the risk of failure for the child, encourages high aspirations, encourages independence, and so leads the child towards the outer limits of his competence.” (The Open University, 2009). Much research has been conducted on the play behavior of regularly developing children, but in contrast, less research focused on the play of children with special needs. Thus, knowledge of how such children play has been limited (Pollock et al., 1997). This paper attempts to extract such limited information from research literature on the play of children with special needs and what adults can do to facilitate it so the children will derive much benefit from it. Due to their atypical development, physical and cognitive limitations, children with special needs are presumed not to engage in productive play as much as normal children (Burke, 1993). Some of the previous studies on play of such children have included boys with sensory integrative dysfunction (Bundy, 1989), children with delayed play skills (Tanta et al., 2005), speech-language delays (Shepherd, Broillier & Dandrow, 1994) and children with autism (Ziviani, Rodger & Peters, 2005). Allowing children with special needs is not enough. They often need to develop play skills that enable them to play with other children and materials in appropriate ways, so adults around them must develop strategies not only for using play as a context but also for planning its occurrences. Responsive early childhood special education teachers know how play can be a rich opportunity to gain cognitive, communicative, social, motor, adaptive and pre-academic skills from (Bingham, 2008). The responsive early childhood special education (ECSE) teacher responds to the special needs child by ensuring that there is purpose behind every play situation so that goals for his individualized educational program (IEP) are addressed. Teachers should be patient enough to understand that these children take more time to engage in the play activity as compared with children with typical development because of their unfamiliarity and uncertainty in the play activity. In view of this, provision of extended time for play is essential in encouraging their play development (Bingham, 2008). Children with special needs may need direct intervention on how to play appropriately. Simply providing physical proximity, encouragement, shared attention and verbal reinforcement go a long way in facilitating their play (Bingham, 2008). When the teacher engages in the play for at least a portion of the play activity, asks questions and makes suggestions and models the appropriate play behaviors for the special needs child, it encourages his participation and get ideas on how to play effectively (Bingham, 2008). Sandall and Schwrtz (2002) also offer other kinds of support apart from direct guidance – peer supports, environmental supports and invisible supports. Bingham (2008) explain that teachers use peer supports by grouping special needs children with typically developing children with more sophisticated play levels. These children will serve as play models for the special needs children who will encourage, initiate, comment and enjoin them within their zone of proximal development. Environmental support is by way of arranging the physical and social environment to accommodate the needs of the special needs children. These include sticking footstep markers on the floor to show flow patterns towards play areas and using pictures or symbols on shelves and toy containers so the children can identify the contents. Social environmental support may be by way of assigning a socially adept child to play with another child who has difficulty transitioning form one play activity to another. Invisible supports may not be easily determined by teachers with no adequate ECSE training, but such supports are effective in encouraging the play success of the special needs child. An example is planning events in an order that increases children’s success from easy tasks to more difficult ones. Incorporating challenging tasks such as including motions that promote gross motor skills in an obstacle course or requiring children to dig deep in the sandbox for a hidden “treasure” will encourage children to employ more motor skills (Bingham, 2008). Like in any curricular area, the teacher needs to modify some play materials or to simplify some play activities for children with special needs to feel successful. An example would be using tabletop easels to paint on instead of upright easels so children with limited mobility can still paint while sitting down rather than standing up during creative activities. Modifying rules or breaking activities into steps at a time will help a challenged child not to feel overwhelmed and to be able to concentrate on each task at hand. Picture cues greatly assist children in following steps in an activity as shown in the pictures, such as steps in washing dishes in the pretend play kitchen – washing the dishes in the sink with a sponge, setting them out to dry on a rack and then placing them back in cupboards (Bingham, 2008). The responsive early childhood special education teacher considers the interactions between various factors such as the physical environment, number of toys or children in the environment with other factors such as the attitudes and actions of the adults present, the children’s temperament and previous experiences in the play activity in order for play-based programs to be effective (Malone, 1999). Burke (1993) concludes that environments truly support or restrict children’s play. Children with special needs are usually put in special education environments which have higher educator-student ratios and a more structured approach, and there are more opportunities for individual play time (Wolpert, 2001). Sometimes, they are also found in mainstream education environments which have more students and a lower educator-to-student ratio and group instruction is more common (Ivory & McCollum). Thus, this setting encourages more self-directed social interactions and less educator-directed interactions (Hestenes & Carroll, 2000). Bay & Cooper (2007) observed how children with special needs behaved in both environments and reported that in mainstream settings, the children engaged in slightly more developmental pretend/ symbolic play. Stagnitti & Unsworth (2000) remarked that pretend play is important in facilitiating children’s social awareness and allows children to experiment with various roles while learning social norms and rules of behavior. Kellegrew & Allen (1996) add that learning pretend play skills with other children is crucial to the full inclusion process so social learning must be encouraged. DiCarlo & Reid (2004) also approve of independent pretend-play interactions of children with disabilities in mainstream environments and suggest that it improves when teachers implement responsive teaching programs that provide verbal and physical cues to the children coupled with provision of pretend-play-enhancing toys. This implies that both the environment and provision of additional support with external cues improve children’s pretend play skills within the inclusive setting. Copland (1995) endorses play-based programs over more conventional directive methods of learning to improve the social as well as motor skills of children with special needs and that play can be an effective developmental predictor as well as a medium for therapy and teaching. Play has been used in transdisciplinary assessments in early childhood special education (Myers, McBride and Peterson, 1996). Typical early childhood play activities are employed in ascertaining a special needs child’s strengths and weaknesses using a checklist of criterion-referenced skills. In contrast with standardized assessments which used more standardized materials and activities facilitated by a psychologist or therapist, transdisciplinary assessment methods may involve parents as they facilitate their children’s performance in the play setting by physically supporting them and actually eliciting behaviors or providing information about their child in more familiar settings and normal situations. This collaboration with parents greatly assists in planning and implementing interventions for young children with special needs. Play serves ALL children regardless of age, gender, ability or disability. Adults should be knowledgeable on how to exploit play in order to bring out the best in children and use it as a tool to help them develop and optimize their potentials in a fun and engaging way. References Bay, P. & Cooper, R. (2007) The play of children with special needs in mainstream and special education settings, Australian Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 32, No. 2. Bingham, A. (2008)The Value of Play Interventions in Special Education Classrooms, Principal, May/June 2008 Bonk, C.J. & Cunningham, D.J. (1998) “Searching for Learner-Centered, Constructivist, and Sociocultural Components of Collaborative Educational Learning Tools” in Electronic Collaborators. Retrieved on April 8, 2011 from www.publicationshare.com/docs/Bon02.pdf Bundy, A. C. (1989). A comparison of the play skills of normal boys and boys with sensory integrative dysfunction. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 9(2), 84-100. Burke, J. P. (1993). Play: The life role of the infant and young child. In J. Case- Smith (Ed.), Pediatric occupational therapy and early intervention (pp.198- 224). Boston: Andover Medical. Copland, I. (1995). Developmentally appropriate practice and early childhood special education. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 20(4), 1-4. DiCarlo, C. F., & Reid, D. H. (2004). Increasing pretend toy play of toddlers with disabilities in an inclusive setting. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 37, 197-207. Hestenes, L. L., & Carroll, D. E. (2000). The play interactions of young children with and without disabilities: Individual and environmental influences. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 229-246. Holland, R.(2003) ‘‘‘What’s it all about?’’–how introducing heuristic play has affected provision for the under-threes in one day nursery ’in Devereux,J. and Miller,L.(eds) Working with Children in the Early Years, London, David Fulton in association with The Open University Ivory, J. J., & McCollum, J. A. (1999). Effect of social and isolate toys on social play in an inclusive setting. The Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 238- 243. Kellegrew, D. H., & Allen, D. (1996). Occupational therapy in full-inclusion classrooms: A case study from the Moorpark model. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50(9), 718-724. Malone, D. M. (1999). Contextual factors informing play-based program planning. International Journal of Disability, Developmental and Education, 46(3), 307-322 Macintyre, C. (2003) “Studying play from a developmental perspective” ’in Devereux,J. and Miller,L.(eds) Working with Children in the Early Years, London, David Fulton in association with The Open University Myers, C.L., McBride, S.L. & Peterson, C.A. (1996) Transdisciplinary, Play- Based Assessment in Early Childhood Special Education: An Examination of Social Validity, Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 16(1), 102- 126 (1996) Nutbrown, C. (1999) Threads of Thinking: Young Children Learning and the Role of Early Education (2nd edn), London, Paul Chapman. Pollock, N., Stewart, D., Law, M., Sahagian-Whalen, S., Harvey, S., & Toal, C. (1997). The meaning of play for young people with physical disabilities. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64(1), 25-31. Sandall, S.R. & Schwartz, I.S. (2002) Building blocks for teaching preschoolers with special needs. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing. Shepherd, J. T., Brollier, C. B., & Dandrow, R. L. (1994). Play skills of preschool children with speech and language delays. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 14(2), 1-20. Stagnitti, K., & Unsworth, C. (2000). The importance of pretend play in child development: An occupational therapy perspective. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63(3), 121-127 Tanta, K. J., Deitz, J. C., White, O., & Billingsley, F. (2005). The effects of peer- play level on initiations and responses of preschool children with delayed play skills. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 437-445. The Open University (2009) Early years practice: Practitioners and Children. Walton Hall, Milton Keynes. The Open University. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wolpert, G. (2001). What general educators have to say about successfully including students with Downs Syndrome in their classes. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 16(1), 28-38. Wood, E. (2004) ‘Developing a pedagogy of play’ in Anning, A., Cullen, J. and Fleer, M. (eds) Early Childhood Education, London, Sage Publications. Ziviani, J., Rodger, S., & Peters, S. (2005). The play behaviour of children with and without autistic disorder in a clinical environment. New Zealand Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52(2), 22-30. Read More