Young Childrens Learning and Development. The Role Of Play - Essay Example

CLD259712 A Theoretical examination of role of play in young children's learning and development including reflections on the practitioners role Introduction: The young child's development is closely associated with play. Jones & Reynolds (1992) state that children below three years engage in exploratory play, they poke, taste, dump, stroke, and pull to feel the world around them. It is at 3-7 years of life that their activities are organised as play as a sensory experience. Want and Harris (2002) state that young children learn only what actions to perform via observation and they simply imitate or mimic. Children do not perform observed actions because these are effective (emulation). Our understanding of child development and learning is facilitated by the theories of two psychologists pivotal to this field, Piaget and Vygotsky (Lloyd and Fernyhough 1999). Vygotsky found somewhat wider support probably due to his focus on sociocultural aspect and proximal development (Woolfolk 2004). He is sympathetic and affectionate towards youngsters and favour adults' guidance and hints in solving problem while Piaget finds child not yet ready for solving problems mentally if he can not do so all by himself. The article also caution educators/practitioners who rely on guidelines alone while evaluating young child's learning. Theories Linking play and child development Melhuish & Moss (1991) observed that play develops in the stages in first three years of life. It begins as nonspecific manipulation for young infant and becomes creative in the end of third year. According to the Piaget model practice play is the first to appear and is dominant during first 18 months of age. It involves repetition of well-established sequences of actions and manipulations. Not for practical or instrumental purpose but for mere pleasure derived from motor activity. Piaget says that play arise from almost all sensorimotor schemes acquired by the child and centers mainly on the child's use of the object (Lloyd & Fernyhough 1999). Around one year, these practice exercise transform. The child passes from mere repetition to purposive combinations of actions and manipulations. The child sets definite goals and practice games are transformed into constructions. The symbolic play begins during second year of life with the onset of representation and language. Pretend play is solitary symbolic play while dramatic play involves multiple symbols, which does not appear until later part of third year. In fact it was Smilansky (1968) who emphasised and added the constructive play and social dimension to Piagetian model. He stated that constructive play is not a pretense while in sociodramatic play the child pretend to be someone, say, A doctor, mother etc. The Piagetian model of pretense play shows decontexualised behaviour viz. doing eating, sleeping in void or shifts from self to other references viz. In place of putting self to sleep making a toy/doll go to sleep, use of substitute object e.g. using chair for a doll, sequential combination instead of a single action viz. the child construct a whole scene in make believe. The psychology of symbolic play, according to Piaget, is to achieve fantasy satisfaction through compensation, wish fulfillment, liquidation of conflicts etc. to assimilate external reality to ego (Piaget 1962; Nicolopoulou 1999). As the child grows the reality overtakes ego and symbolic play declines. Play with rules originates at 4-7 years of age and develops upto 11 years. Rules require the interaction between two. There is genuine satisfaction in victory over others which is made legitimate by the rules of game and respect for fair play. Vygotsky is credited with bringing a sociocultural message central to the development. In the early years of life, the play is a source of proximal development (Lloyd & Fernyhough 1999). It provides an imaginative opportunity for self-empowering internalization of social rules. The voluntary intentions and formation of real life plans and motives all occur in play. During preschool years play is leading activity which during a particular phase of child's life becomes new source of developmental advance. "In a play child is above his average age, above his daily behaviour. In play, it is as though he is a head taller than himself. As in the focus of a magnifying glass, play contains all developmental tendencies in a condensed form" (Vygotsky 1978, p74).. Thus play expands one's world and hence Vygotsky saw cognitive- developmental benefit of play in preschool age child. Vygotsky feels that it is through pretend play that the child first learns to organise his thoughts in a coherent way. The child learns to differentiate between meaning and perception, meaning and object. When adults say a word to the child, he looks around to find that object (Lloyd & Fernyhough 1999). Vygotsky differs from Piaget in stating that culture and language are important for cognitive development of a child while Piaget felt that child passes to cognitive maturation through play and activity. No wonder Vygotsky advise adult's guidance in problem solving (scaffolding) unlike Piaget who thinks that child may not be able to solve problem now (Woolfolk 2004). Bronfenbrenner (1979) found a link between development the changing environment stating that human development is a joint task of person and his context. He divided environment into a microsystem or the immediate environment that changes to macrosystem or expanded environment as happen in later years of child's life. The microsystem included social, physical and symbolic aspects of immediate setting. Bronfenbrenner (1979) and Moore (1987) explain that environment affects a child in many ways, it develops personal qualities and differential responses to stimuli. By the six months the child start using vocals and gestures to attract parents' attention or begins to rearrange the environment and finally the child connect to environment with self, by realising the goals and moving towards these (Brofenbrenner 2004). Brofenbrenner seems greatly influenced by Vygotsky but uses a complex scientific language. As a result, confuses the reader who finds it a little difficult to associate his views with the sociopsychological language of human development. Play and child development: role of adults Rogoff (2003) feels that child development is not only a biological and psychological but a cultural process as well. She discusses the realities from different perspectives to bring about her points regarding 'in context' and 'out of context' learning. According to her in some communities children learn by observing and participating into mature activities. They watch adults keenly and listen closely the narratives and discussions and contribute their views. Their caregiver and companions provide them with access to shared community activities. This cultural pattern contrasts with a model in which children are separated from adult community activities and instead learn exercises at school and at home which groom them for entry at later stage into the adult world. Rogoff (2003) and Melhuish & Moss (1991) point out that adults thus in the later case, organise children's learning using lessons 'out of context'. They praise children to motivate them and ask known answer questions to engage child in an activity. They provide appropriate environment and toys for child's age, interest and abilities. Instead of children engaging in adult activities, adults join children in child-focused activities such as play. The children are put into batches according to their age in the school. This places individuals in competition to pass developmental milestones rapidly. Rogoff (2003) observes a third contrasting pattern also, in children's learning. She finds that human relations are either organised in hierarchical way where one person controls activities of others or horizontally when mutual responsibility provide for mutual autonomy in decision-making. This contrast , according to Rogoff, relates to discipline in the family and school. Adults support and reinforce child's creative initiatives and provide opportunity to observe. Adults should also respect child's decisions and show sympathy. Melhuish & Moss (1991) state that adults either participate directly in the child's play or provide a model. The child gets variations in the play and learns the social meanings viz. A doll or toy animal acting as mother. The authors put their findings for engaging different age children to play. The 6-18 months old infant watches the activity with narration conducted by his educator. The child himself then tries the activity with a trusted educator. For the age group 19-36 months, child's own initiatives are encouraged. Though the younger children require support, they should not be given it immediately since it may restrict individual initiatives. The educator should take care to set realistic goals depending on child's ability. Play and child development: Role of educator/Practitioner: McDonald & Parke (1984) consider parents as first teacher and state that the parent- infant attachment help the child to develop social competence such as initiating and maintaining interactions and resolving conflicts. They found that Mothers verbal behaviour and father's physical play are related to child's better peer relations. David (1996) suggest practitioners to give time to a child who is recently shifted from one setting to the other. The child may play in his/her experienced way for time being and consider other children as intruders but soon he may be a part of their play and share his own play with them. The educator should neither force other children to keep away from new boy nor force the latter to involve other children in his play. Nutbrown (2002) Advise the practitioners and educators to be careful while assessing very young children. Melhuish and Moss (1991) declare that for a very young child play and learning are 'symbiotic' or one facilitates the other. The creative activities start in infancy and a child should be encouraged to develop these but not forced to attain something fit for older children. Morrow (1990) also feels that physical setting of class room has active and pervasive influence on children's leaning and teachers attitude. In a carefully arranged room children show more creative productivity, better language abilities and social interaction and cooperation and remain less withdrawn. For e.g. storing toys in open area facilitated easier selection, more time in spent in play with greater involvement (Moore 1987). For an educator Melhuish and Moss (1991) advise to motivate the child, reinforce child's perception and understand what gives a child joy ,fear etc. It is also necessary to read a child's verbal and non-verbal communication viz. Language, imitation, laughing. Usually what the child has not learned is focused strongly rather appreciate what the child has learned in short time. Educators should not use strictly formulated 'stepping stones' or 'goals' to judge a child's learning. Since these fixed criteria may overlook the great spontaneity and creativity of very young children. The child may be innovative and use provided material in alternative and unexpected way (Eddington as in Nutbrown 2002, p29). Nutbrown highlights the recommendation in guidelines (QCA 2000as cited in Nutbrown 2002) stating that assessment begins the moment parents bring the child to the setting and narrate an account of its development and learning. She points out that the practitioner should work in partnership with the parents in assessment. The assessment should consider all aspect of a child's interest, achievements and difficulties. The assessment should be both as provided and also judging spontaneity of child from its initiatives (EYFS 2008). The EYFS formative assessment is continuing assessment based on observations of babies and children's activities. It is a flexible assessment without any predesigned protocol. The summative assessment on the other hand has a purpose to apprise parents of an understanding about child previously unknown. Summative assessment is a time for focused conversation with the parents and possibly children if their age permits it. Nutbrown (2002 & 2006) emphasises that the next step for child's learning should be based on the assessment. She further suggests that observation of a child during play tells much about the child as a whole person and learner than narrow targets and outcomes. Conclusion: Play is linked to a child's learning and development. Play is enjoyable to a child and it keeps him engrossed hence play gives a child abilities to solve problems that interrupt his enjoyment. The 'in context' child development as is prevalent in some communities may differ from the usual school and child - centred upbringing as child is part of a adult group since very young age (Rogoff 2003). Still the role of play is applicable in these settings also. The child keenly watches adults, pretends and provides inputs when it suits him. The child remains interested in the activities around him while the difference may be that it crosses the milestones to adulthood somewhat faster. The development of children is best explained by combined theories of Piaget and Vigotsky. Later researchers have given different dimensions and other perspectives to these two pioneers work. Foe e.g. Rogoff has added a cultural dimension while Bronfenbrunner (1979,2004) saw human development in very scientific ecological perspective. These views have no doubt enhanced our understanding of child development but originality of thought still remains prerogative of Piaget and Vygotsky. Lastly, Nutbrown's (2004) advise to the educators and practitioners is worth giving serious thought that rather than always sticking to guidelines to judge a child's development, they should evaluate its initiatives and spontaneity by observation. The young mind may use play material in most unexpected yet constructive way and provide alternative idea. REFERENCES: Bronfenbrenner, U. 1979, The ecology of human development: Experiment by nature and design, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. 2004, Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development, SAGE. Jones, E & Reynolds, G. 1992, The play's the thing: Teacher's role in children's play, New York: Teachers college Press. Linden, J. (2008 Oct 22), 2008, 'Analysis: EYFS assessment isn't about paperwork,' Children and young people, available: http://www.cypnow.co.uk/Archive/855655/Analysis-EYFS-assessment-isnt- paperwork/ Lloyd, P. & Fernyhough, C. (eds.) 1999, Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessment, Taylor & Francis. McDonald, K & Parke, RD. 1984, 'Bridging the gap: parent child play interaction and peer interactive competence', Child Development, 55, pp 1265-1277. Melhuish, EC & Moss, P. 1991. Day care for young children: International perspectives, Routledge. Moore, G. 1987, 'The physical environment and the cognitive development in child care centres',In C. Weinstein & T. David (Eds.) Spaces for Children, pp41-72, New York Plenum Press. Morrow, LM. 1990, 'Preparing the classroom environment to promote literacy during play, Early childhood research Quarterly, 5, pp537-554. Nicolopoulou, A.1999, 'Play, cognitive development and social world: Piaget, Vygotsky, and others, in Lloyd, P. & Fernyhough, C. (eds.), Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessment, Taylor & Francis. Nutbrown, C 2002, Research studies in early childhood education,Trentham Books. Piaget, J. 1962, Play dreams, and imitation in childhood, New York: Routledge. Rogoff, B. 2003, Cultural nature of human development, Oxford University Press. Smilansky, S. 1968, The effect of sociodramatic play on disadvantaged preschool children, New York: John Wiley. Vygotsky, L 1978, Mind in society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Want, SC & Harris, PL.2002 'How do children ape Applying concepts from the study of non-human primates to the developmental study of 'imitation' in children', Developmental Science, 5,1, pp1-14. Woolfolk, A. (2004). Educational Psychology. (9th ed), Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Read More