Researchers from Temple University and the University of Delaware have found a major disconnect in the beliefs of American mothers and child development professionals about the link between play and learning. For mothers, the perceived learning value of play increased for structured and goal-oriented activities. On the other hand, professionals consider structured activities to be outside the realm of play and attribute less learning value to those activities compared to unstructured activities. Parents tend to think that playing with an educational focus better prepares children for school. According to study authors Fisher, Hirsh-Pasek, Colinkoff and Gryfe, from ancient times to modern research, play has been viewed by young people as a time of flexibility and intellectual exploration that promotes learning and development.
Coined in a 1987 study by Irving Spiel, “housing” is the term used to describe the practice of forcing infants and young children to acquire knowledge that is usually acquired at a later stage of development. The change in the meaning of the game has come with wide changes in social values. We have higher expectations for children to achieve and cope with technological change. Part of this stems from anxiety about the uncertain future our children face. Some have argued that there has been a change in the nation’s view of children and the idea of childhood. Rather than being considered an important and special time that requires a particular cultivation (as is the case with each phase of childhood), the focus of early childhood is preparation for modern adulthood. The deviation between policy and research is evident in kindergartens and elementary schools, where recess and playtime have been shortened and replaced with lessons that emphasize memorization and learning of facts. For early childhood specialists who advocate active parental involvement in learning, the greatest frustration has been that parents are avidly supportive of reducing play and focusing early on structured activities for young children when preschool should be a moment of recreation and socialization.
Ironically, excessive preparation or enrichment activities at very young ages can stunt development. According to a Tynette Hills report in the ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education on greenhouses for young children, “Those who advocate greenhouse programs pay too little attention to theory and research.” To be successful in primary education, children must use concepts and skills that emerge from complex developmental processes, such as the organization and application of knowledge, relating ideas about time, space, number, and people. Accelerated programs often emphasize lower-level processes, such as memorization and visual recognition of letters and numbers.
Part of the problem is that the very notion of play varies across time, culture, and place. Even within the American context, researchers differ on the nature of the game. However, there are some constants in research on specific gaming activities and several benefits to development. For example, daily spontaneous play and exploration of shapes and spaces among very young children sets the stage for mathematical thinking. The consensus is that play, in its diversity, allows children to learn about themselves and the world around them. More importantly, it is self-directed play, where children are active learners and explorers, that produces the greatest benefit in terms of social and academic development. More than two decades ago, Sigel pointed out that highly structured learning environments work in opposition to children’s natural learning processes.
What we believe influences our interaction with our children, which affects developmental outcomes. Fisher et al’s (2008) study found that mothers share the belief in the link between play and learning advocated by theorists and supported by research. However, what mothers consider to be play is not the type of play discussed in academic research. Unstructured play, as conceived by researchers, includes free play, pretend or symbolic play, and social play. An interesting finding from the study is that parents also differ from experts in their definitions of structured play. For the modern American mother, structured play includes goal-directed activities such as playing with electronic toys, computers, and television, life skills activities such as trips to the library or store, and the use of flash cards. As the newest form of gaming, based on cutting-edge technological advances, most research has yet to explore the use of media in structured learning. Overall, the findings indicate that parents define play more broadly than experts and value structured play much more highly than unstructured play.
What are the consequences? Structured play in educational toys such as e-books or consoles that encourage memorization by requiring children to “fill in the blank” are efficient but promote less learning than traditional books. The bottom line is that reading with children, where children and caregivers or parents can have playful interaction, leads to the acquisition of new knowledge and skills. The authors emphasize that unstructured play leads to problem solving, literacy, creativity, and social skills. In the end, they point out that just as the public is educated about the dangers of lead, the use of car seats, or the dangers of secondhand smoke, “parents may need to be educated about what constitutes play and its benefits if we are to create a generation of creative and emotionally healthy children who love to learn.
