The Role of Play in Literacy Learning Essay

Explain the role of play in literacy learning and examine its position in relation to society, the National Curriculum, and cultural issues. In what ways should early playful learning encounters be built upon in the context of schooling? Within this essay, I shall explain the following; • a definition of play, • the role of culture, • play interactions within a classroom setting, the predominant focus on speaking and listening within a play literate environment, • examples of playful opportunities that arise within such a setting, • the introduction of making childrens into storytelling through using their own experiences, and lastly, • the oppositional views voiced regarding the ‘play versus work’ debate. Throughout, I shall examine plays position in relation to society, culture and within the National Curriculum. In addition, the ways that early playful learning encounters can be developed within the school learning context shall be analysed, examples illustrated and reasoning discussed.

But the principal question of why play has become such an important factor within a child’s learning, and thus be deemed to need building upon and fostered within the school environment will be clarified and discussed. What is Play? Children’s play has been acknowledged by many early years’ practitioners, educational researchers and Key Stage One teachers such as myself, as being the foremost important learning stimulus in a young child’s social, cultural and linguistic development and education. I strongly elieve that it is through play that one could consider that children learn about all of the roles of society; its norms, its irregularities and, its values. Whilst undertaking research for this essay, I found it increasingly obvious, particularly within the early years education, that the recognition of the importance of a child’s need to play and that this need is the most inherent way in which children learn; one that overrides all other activities. It has long been acknowledged that play has not only an important role in the social, emotional and physical but also in the linguistic and cognitive development of children.

We will write a custom essay sample on
The Role of Play in Literacy Learning Essay
or any similar topic only for you
Order now

For example, studies have formulated that play is seen as “the medium through which a child comes to understand his or her world and, as such, is an integral part of learning”. (Isaacs 1933, p. 3). Amongst many other descriptions, play has been depicted as an “enculturative mechanism” (Schwartzman, 1978, p. 49), meaning that it is an inbuilt methodology for children to master, no matter what their culture or ethnicity. Play is significant to every child in every society, but it differs slightly dependant on cultural ethnicity and economic status. Roopnarine & Johnson (1994, p. ) proposed that play is “‘biologically based” and flourishes as an evolutionary contribution to human development. One could state that it is a dominant activity of a child’s daily life, no matter what cultural background they belong to. Children’s play continually portrays and reflects their own social values and family ethnic practices. As a vital concept for developmental practice, teachers like myself and other practitioners, need to understand the dynamics of influence and child development on children’s play, particularly in the contexts of a child’s culture.

As an introduction to these ideals, I shall firstly define what I believe a culture is, and then discuss the inseparable and culturally bound relation between childrens’ development and their play connecting these issues through looking at the aspects of play, its position within the school society and its relationship to learning particularly in terms of literacy curricula philosophy within the current educational climate. A definition of Culture. I believe that Culture, is the basis of many aspects which shapes an individual.

Culture, may be defined as the product of socially conveyed beliefs, customs, practices, and social behaviours belonging to a particular nation or people. These groups of people share beliefs and traditions which identify their particular place of abode, their class, or even time to which they belong. As culture differs from nation to nation; how we interpret child’s play and development also differs from culture to culture. Children’s play always imitates and mirrors their own collective values and family’s ethnic traditions. Children play out personally meaningful xperiences through their physical environment in their own way, while at the same time their ‘social and cultural environment influences children’s play’ in its unique way. (Erickson, 1963; Vygotsky, 1977, chapter 2). Play is an expression of a particular culture, including the child’s own ethnic family ethos; it is also, as Schwartzman (1978, p. 5) established, an important “context or vehicle for cultural learning and transmission”, as well as a pointer towards the developmental changes of a child and a reflection of their personal experiences.

The Role of Play within a Classroom Setting. Whilst examining the many theories, research and thoughts regarding play, a main question regarding my own teaching philosophy kept re-occurring. What is the nature and purpose of play within the classroom society? Upon further research, it was apparent that there appeared to be a deeply rooted debate between those who advocated a child-centered approach to early learning and those who believed that children needed adult direction and guidance in their play and learning.

Concerns were, and still to this present day are still being expressed by teachers, that young children’s learning needs were not being met by formal teaching styles, with many feeling that they cannot justify play-based learning within the prevailing climate of standards and tests pressed upon them by the Government. Similarly, Keating et al (2000) reported the dilemma facing teachers who are required to provide continual recorded evidence of learning and achievement to both parents and professionals.

So, should teaching professionals encourage quality learning through active play, which is often difficult to formally assess compared to the readily assessable written tasks, or should we choose more formal work which may sacrifice the quality of the child’s learning experience? The current focus on the expectations of achievement that I have observed, and have suffered scrutiny of, has highlighted a perception of play being somehow inferior and supplementary to learning rather than as an important medium of learning in its own right.

Keating (2000) believed that through observing child initiated play, especially in its recreational form, play may not directly relate to better cognition as measured in SATs tests, but conversely, can foster other important abilities, such as persistence, self-esteem, task-orientation, creativity and positive attitudes to learning. Then, if play highlights so many important learning aptitudes within the classroom, what does or should good practice entail? Within any classroom, whether Foundation Stage or the beginning of Key Stage One, every child must be placed at the centre of their own learning.

This approach means that each practitioner can begin to ensure that each individual has an opportunity to learn through high quality play, which is planned and tailored to them. This in turn, allows each child to develop at their own pace, in a playful and meaningful way, whilst making friends and learning as they do so. This empowerment enables the children to become more confident, secure and independent entities. They are not pushed, or pressured, but are ready to reach their maximum potential.

Upon the starting of a child’s education, whether at nursery school or formal schooling, a major way that practitioners can build a child’s confidence is through the use of language. The Basic Skills Agency undertook a poll in 2003, which revealed that half of the United Kingdom’s teachers thought that children start school unable to speak audibly, be understood by others or respond to simple instructions. This language decline was thought to be the cause of over-stretched parents, excessive viewing of television, even the lack of language stimulus from mother to baby since the trend of using forward-facing pushchairs.

Whatever the causes, many educationists believed that if we were to see a sustainable improvement in standards, children had to be taught to talk. The national primary strategy, introduced in 2003, introduced a framework for speaking and listening, a feature that had been missing from its forerunner, the national literacy strategy. This strand has since been interwoven throughout the Foundation Stage Guidance, National Curriculum and also the Renewed Literacy and Numeracy frameworks. There is now evidence that the shift in giving speaking and listening priority is helping to boost achievement across the board.

Sue Horner, lead consultant for English at the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2008) indicated that where local education authorities had prioritised this, it has begun to make a difference. This focusing upon the speaking and listening aspect of literacy within learning, I believe is key, and it is this aspect that shall be the focus regarding the many areas of development that are used by the teacher and are accessible to the children within actual practice. Developmental uses of Speaking and Listening in the classroom, including opportunities for play.

A teacher’s use of modeling the correct use of key words, rather than correcting what children say is an important factor in aiding their pupils learning and understanding. A young child might often be heard to say “I buyed sweeties”, the adult is aware of the meaning of the child’s discourse, but may model the correct tense through repeating back, “That’s great, you bought some sweets. ” Language theory research informs us that a young child’s language development is influenced by many factors. These include having sensitive adults and other children around them who will listen nd attend to their expressions, and who will use and model appropriate language themselves. Many contemporary researchers and theorists recognise that children have ‘agency’; this means that they are active learners co-constructing their worlds. Their language development is part of their overall development, emerging from cognitive, emotional and social exchanges. This social and cultural environment, the people in it, their interactions, and how children come to represent all these in their minds, are absolutely fundamental to language development.

It is a child’s agenda, and the interactions generated by the child, that promote language learning. However, this does not mean that the adult’s role, actions and speech are considered of less importance. But, it should be borne in mind that adults need to be able to ‘mind read’ and adjust their side of the co-construction to relate to an individual child’s understanding and interpretation. Another awareness that must be known by the educator is that of the child’s own dialects and accents.

Children begin school from many varied backgrounds and cultures and a particular sensitivity needs to be addressed when modeling the correct use of key words and not correcting what they say specifically if it is to re-address the way a child speaks due to an accent or dialect. The forceful imposition of the use of Standard English within group or school settings may not only confuse and distress the child, but may also have a damaging impact on the family and community that they belong to, too. Playful encounters; Examples of opportunities for play

It is of utmost importance that teachers allow opportunities to explore and talk about things that interest young children indoors and out of doors. Whilst working alongside many early years children, I became increasingly in awe of their natural disposition to wonder, be curious, ask questions, experiment, suggest, invent and explain. With this in mind, I believe that teachers have an essential role in providing opportunities to extend and develop this through play, all the time considering which skills we might like to develop within our children’s possibilities.

We might consider including one or more of the following characteristics: imagination, humor, emotional expression, novelty seeking, curiosity, openness, communicativeness, flexibility and persistence. Unremarkably, all of these qualities and traits have been connected to play and playfulness in previous research, reported in Childhood Education, Vol. 74, 1997. Athey (1984); Barnett (1990) and Lieberman (1977)). These supported the relationship amongst play, imagination and creativity, and dubbed them ‘first order’ elements in human functioning.

It could be said that these first order elements lead to a style of play that attracts, preoccupies and enhances children’s intrinsic motivation to learn. This mode of play that can be applied to areas of work and academic operation has been identified as ‘playfulness. ’ Thus, playfulness provides children with the opportunity to freely discuss and explore personality features and personas, discover different strategies for handling daily worries, and ‘use their senses to sample the world in a healthy, but structured manner. (Fineman, 1962; Freyberg, 1973; Glickman, 1984; Singer, 1973; Singer & Singer, 1977: Vol 74). Children’s playfulness is an intrinsic, self motivating skill, used many times to enhance future decisions. Sometimes, it may be appropriate to allow the environment and resources alone to encourage and extend the learning activities of individuals and groups. For example, such as some childrens decision to initiate a ‘Find Percy’s Wood’, that took place within my own setting after reading and sharing Nick Butterworth’s Percy the Park Keeper texts in September 2009.

A group of children decided to look for a sign of Percy’s wood that they had seen in the book and set off around our school environment in the Key Stage One area. (See Photographs 1 & 2 below. ) This enabled many varied opportunities for listening and speaking to be made available and shared with their peers. Upon completion, many chose to discuss their experiences, whilst others drew their findings, some making marks to represent writing, others making maps and a few making phonic attempts at recording their encounter in writing.

All of these learning encounters being child initiated, all valued and all made through replaying their experiences from prior knowledge. [pic] Photograph 1 & 2: Child initiated Play; “Finding Percy’s Wood”. Therefore, it is evident that opportunities for playful encounters of experimentation, discovery and self exploration in and outside of the classroom are valuable in countless ways. As teachers, it offers us the opening to take time to listen to the children and take account of what they say.

If necessary, we can give clear directions and help children to deal with those instructions that are more complicated, and then help children to expand on their thinking, introducing and reinforcing the use of more complex structures. During activities, we can comment and talk about what is happening, describe what we can see by providing a running commentary alongside the children, and clarify this by using careful thought-out open questions. But this advancement of seeking knowledge and learning needs not just be permitted for younger children.

As they grow, they continue to need ample opportunity to playfully investigate and create in their own ways and at their own pace. This is what Froebel(1837, pg11) meant by ‘self activity’. This frequently leads to the discovery of meaningful hobbies. Allowing children to be free to follow their individual interests allows them to learn to think for themselves. Using shared rhymes, songs and stories. As discussed earlier, educators know how important it is for them to model a rich variety of language with young children.

Storytelling, nursery rhymes, songs, chants, rhymes, poems and tales allow the opportunity to offer flexible, inclusive and spontaneous ways to promote child participation, enjoyment of texts and other learning media; whilst encouraging valuable two-way communication. With a provision of a range of props, materials and an enticing and stimulating environment the children are helped to predict, order events, retell and subsequently re-invent stories and events. Margaret Meek (1986, P108. ) suggested that childrens’ language is at its richest in their ‘imaginary worlds’.

Despite many teachers feeling that they might need to facilitate some aspects of the childrens’ play regarding drama, storytelling and imaginative play, the children on the contrary do not need adult intervention to initiate story making, particularly when they are engaged in imaginative play. In order for this type of play to be of value we need to reflect on this and consider how we can support it. One such initiative that has been introduced, again within my own school setting, is that of ‘Writing in the Air’.

Writing in the Air was a new initiative trialed originally in 2004 and compiled by Colleen Marin, an early years advisor to the Advisory Service Kent. Teachers were encouraged to leave props, construction blocks, or other interesting known and unknown objects, in an easily accessible place within the classroom. As a group of children interacted with each other and explored using these props, the teacher would observe, photograph and record the language used throughout the play scenario. (See Figure 1). [pic] Figure 1. Each child’s spoken contribution would then be written as a transcript, with each being recorded in a different colour. See transcript 1). When the children’s play had ended, the teacher would read back the transcript for the children to share, evaluate and thus take ownership. Transcript 1 These transcripts and photographs are then made into a book for the whole class to share. This type of sharing leads to the children valuing their ‘work’ and ideas, and begins the understanding of what is to be a storyteller, and how important the sharing of experiences and sequences are in becoming a learner. These contributions I believe, as did Piaget, (1962, p. 13) permits ‘children to fit the reality of the world into their own interests and knowledge’. Dramatic and role play could be seen as an uncorrupted way of representative thought to be made available to young children, and hence, it is an increasingly major benefactor towards their intellectual development. But can adult intervention ruin or remove the children’s ownership of learning if too much interaction is given? The answer I believe is ‘yes’. Meek(1986) concurred with this view when she claimed that the key role as a practitioner is to become skilled at observing children’s play and know when to step back.

This in turn allows the children’s language and story making to develop unaided, and therefore, we could regard this as an opportunity for the children to have a better understanding of their knowledge regarding stories and storytelling. This, I believe, is play at its uppermost. Opposing research: Work or play? Since the earliest influences of theorists such as Vygotsky and Piaget upon pedagogical thinking and practice, there have been opposing elements regarding the emphasis for the need for breadth and balance in curricula provision, especially within the Early Years classroom.

It has been argued that play is the most powerful forum for ‘multiple, simultaneous engagement with the diverse forms of human intelligence’ that we currently recognise (Broadhead, 2003, p. 89). However, many view the division between play and work, especially school work, as being somewhat blurred, this is particularly perceived in the eyes of children themselves (Keating, Bruce, 1987). The transition point from Foundation Stage to Key Stage One predominantly needs to be altered in order to ease this view of play being undermined and not of value.

Moyles and Adams (2000) argued that there was an urgent need for different terminology to be applied in order to change the perception of play as being the opposite extreme to work; indiscriminately viewed as trivial and inferior. It was suggested that it may be useful to differentiate between free and directed play, or even redefine play, as many practitioners have done, as experience, exploration or discovery.

Within many educational facilities, the two types of play have now become teacher led activity and child initiated play, however, my current experience still sees this as a ‘quick fix’ relabeling function and does not alter the view of play being ‘not work’. Bruce (1996) further extends this theme, suggesting that adults and children together develop shared meanings of play and learning. In her earlier observations, Bruce (1987) also stresses the importance of the physical environment to facilitate learning through play.

Within the school environment there is a huge contrast between most early year’s settings, many reception classes and Key Stage 1 classes in this respect. The controversy over perceptions of play in relation to ‘real’ learning is, however, as I have encountered clearly evident in literature. The research findings of many researchers such as Wood and Attfield (1996), emphasise the perceptions of many children’s parents whom have become progressively more resistant to seeing ‘play’ in the classroom and asking to see children actually working or ‘doing the National Curriculum’.

Through discussion with experienced Early Years practitioners’ within school settings, a major shift of apprehension was voiced regarding their increasing concerns that play was being given reduced status just as the National Curriculum emerged. Similarly, Siraj-Blatchford(1993) depicted how the crucial nature of childrens’ learning in the primary phase had been ignored by the introduction of a subject-based curriculum. These criticisms, however, were not only confined to the primary phase.

Many practitioners raised concerns that the introduction of the ‘early learning goals’ at the Foundation Stage would cause some children to be seen as failures at five years old and hence put unnecessary pressure on all children in terms of their future educational attainment. Contrary to my own views regarding play as being the corner stone to develop language and learning, some research such as that undertaken by Miller (2001,) acknowledged the growing belief, that the earlier children commenced on formal learning the better their potential accomplishment within the Key Stage 1 tests.

She did, however, in her favour, present a persuasive argument regarding her own research, although on a small-scale, on how activities which develop literacy and numeracy are intricately woven into the fabric of children’s ongoing play. One might suggest though that the former play-based opportunity of learning gives rise to better opportunities in developing a more learner-centered curriculum, and one that is more in keeping with a more nurturing holistic approach to children’s education.

As a result however, caution must be made particularly to the range of quality learner-centered curriculum opportunities found within differing education establishments across the country. My own experience suggests that there still to this day remains a profound disparity in terms of enabling children to combine their worlds and simultaneously co-construct the early years curriculum in meaningful and valuable contexts.

So, in conclusion, although the arena of the nature of play has received much acclaimed and commended acknowledgment, an ongoing uncertainty still seems apparent within the British pedagogical field surrounding the value of play; especially within its relationship to learning, particularly for Key Stage One and higher school pupils. Through observing both Foundation Stage and Key Stage One phases whilst researching pedagogical values for this essay, I have openly seen the dividing of the ‘early years’ phase from Key Stage 1.

This, I believe, can only be viewed as an inappropriate division in terms of young childrens’ educational needs. Upon review, the Foundation Stage Guidance illustrates the undeniable consensus that exists for the importance of the role of play for children’s learning, not only with regards to the physical and emotional well-being of children; but also within its interconnections with the cognitive competencies of literacy and other National Curriculum subjects.

So, surely with such compelling evidence regarding the importance of play within a child’s education, a re-acknowledgement of the value of ‘play’ and ‘playful’ encounters, specifically one embedded in early years educational philosophy and practice, must be continued into the first formal year of schooling. Drummond (2003) suggested that in a “good childhood”, children engage in sustained, shared, purposeful talk; meaning that they become absorbed in complex, divergent, imaginative play. Here, the children are recognised and appreciated as ‘accomplished, passionate learners and meaning-makers’ (Drummond, 2003).

It is my belief, just as Drummond implied, that since all this happens in the first year of the Foundation stage there is, and can be, no good reason why it cannot happen in their second year of schooling and continue further up their school learning journey, and that perhaps it is the term “play” that needs to be continually redefined as the act of “playing” continually evolves as the individual grows. Bibliography Bennett, N, Wood, E and Rogers, S (1997) Teaching Through Play: Teachers’ Thinking and Classroom Practice, Buckingham: Open University Press.

Boreman, K. M (1982) The Social Life of Children in a Changing Society ,London: Psychology Press. Broad head, P (2003) Early Years Play and Learning: Developing Social Skills and Co-operation, London: Routledge Falmer. Bruce, T (1987) Early Childhood Education, London: Hodder and Stoughton. Corden, R. (2000) Literacy and Learning through Talk, Buckingham: Open University Press Curtis. A (1998) A curriculum for the pre-school child, London: Routledge. Bruce, T (1996) Helping Young Children to Play, London: Hodder and Stoughton.

DfEE/School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (1996) Desirable Outcomes for Children’s Learning on Entering Compulsory School, London: DfEE/SCAA, HMSO. Dowling, M (2000) Young Children’s Personal, Social and Emotional Development, London: Paul Chapman. Froebel, Friedrich. 1896. The Education of Man, trans. W. H. Hailman. New York: Appleton. Grainger, T. (2004) Language and Literacy: A Routledge/Falmer Reader, London: Routledge/Falmer Isaacs, S (1933) Social development in young children, London:Routledge, Kegan and Paul Matthews,J. ( 2003) Early Years, London, Paul Chapman

Publishing Meek. M (1986) Learning to Read, London, Bodley Head. Meek. M (1991) On being literate, London, Bodley Head. Ofsted (1995) Guidance on the Inspection of Nursery and Primary Schools, London:HMSO. Pellegrini,A. D, Sutton-Smith. B( 1995)The Future of Play Theory, London: Psychology Press. Piaget, J (1951) Play, dream and imitation in childhood, in Manning, K and Sharp (Eds) Structuring Play in the Early Years, pp. 22-30, London:Ward Lock Educational. QCA/DfEE (2000) Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage, London: QCA/DfEE, HMSO. Roopnarine, J. L, Johnson. J.

E, Hooper, F, Schaffer, H (1996) Childrens Plai in Diverse Cultures, Oxford: Blackwell. Wood, E and Attfield, J (1996) Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum, London: Paul Chapman, Journals Boyer, W. A. R (1997) ‘Playfulness Enhancement through Classroom Intervention for the 21st Century’ Childhood Education,1997, Vol. 74. Drummond, M. J (2003) ‘Breathe Life into Childhood’, Times Educational Supplement, 28th November 2003, pp. 1-2 Keating, I, Fabian, H, Jordan, P, Mavers, D, Roberts, J (2000) ‘Well, I’ve not done any work today. I don’t know why I came to school.

Perceptions of play in the reception class’, Educational Studies, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 437-454 Miller, L (2001) ‘Shaping early childhood through the literacy curriculum’, Early Years, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 107-116 Moyles, J and Adams, S (2000) ‘A Tale of the Unexpected: Practitioners’ Expectations and Children’s Play’, Journal of Inservice Education, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 349-369 Ogden, L (2000) ‘Collaborative tasks, collaborative children: an analysis of reciprocity during peer interaction at Key Stage 1’, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 211-226 Shepherd, A. 2005) ‘Speaking and Listening’,Times Education Supplement Magazine, July 2005. Siraj-Blatchford, I (1993) ‘Objectional Objectivity’, Early Years, Vol. 13, No. 2, Spring, pp. 50-53 Young-Ihm, K (2002) ‘Changing Curriculum for Early Childhood Education in England’, Early Childhood Research and Practice, fall 2002, Vol. 4(2) Websites BERA (British Educational Research Association: Early Years Special Interest Group) (2003) ‘Pedagogy, Curriculum and Adult Roles, Training and Professionalism’, www. bera. ac. uk/pdfs/BERAEarlyYearsReview31May03. pdf, pp. 1-60 David, T (2003) ‘What do we know about teaching young children? British Educational Research Association (BERA) www. bera. ac. uk/publications/pdfs Hyun, E. (1998). Making sense of developmentally and culturally appropriate practice (DCAP) in early childhood education. New York: Peter Lang. Chapter 2 http://ruby. fgcu. edu/courses/ehyun/10041/culture_and_development_in. htm ———————– Child A: “Look! Look! Bear marks…” Child B: “Its foot has been here” Child A: “Is it watching? ” Child C: “I can hear it…its noises” Child B: “We go back through the grass” Child C: “Swishy swishy, swishy” Child A: “Run back home! ”

×

Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out