Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
President’s Message
Thank you for your interest in this issue of the IPA/USA online journal. We are dedicated to promoting
and advocating for the child’s right to play through publications, workshops, and media. You can get
involved in our organization in many ways; becoming a state representative, hosting a play day, joining
a committee, and attending conferences. You can join through the IPA World website. Membership to
IPA/USA includes reduced rates at conferences, the IPA magazine PlayRights, and more.
The IPA/USA executive board works in collaboration to support the fundamental right to play and to
ensure members are linked to resources and new research. The IPA/USA board includes: LaDonna Atkins, President
Dorothy Sluss, Past President
Deborah Lawrence, Vice President
Marcy Guddemi, Treasurer
Joanna Cemore Brigden, Secretary
Kathy Fleming, Membership Chair
Vivien Geneser, Journal Editor
John Sutterby, Journal Editor
D. Reece Wilson, Representative: Article 31
Kay Hanson, Member at Large
Lisa Murphy, Member at Large
We would also like to say a special thank Vivien Geneser and John Sutterby, our co-editors, for working
so hard on this journal. If you are interested in becoming more active in IPA/USA, please contact me
I am excited to experience IPA/USA from this role and look forward to advocating for play with you.
Let’s Play,
LaDonna Atkins
International Play Association USA President
Editors’ Column Dear Readers,
Welcome to the IPA/USA eJournal! Whether you are a parent, teacher, or other community
stakeholder who is interested in the study of play as well as the child’s right to play, we welcome
you to our IPA/USA community.
In our first article, Elizabeth Harper and Joanna Cemore Brigden address the topic of family
play in “Is Happiness Linked to Family Play?” and offer insight into the ways that playing together
as a family supports mental health. Relatedly, Reece Wilson delves into gender issues in play with
“Cultural Considerations Regarding Gender Issues in Play” and takes us around the world to
investigate gender norms in play.
Next, the authors Michelle Grantham-Caston, Mistie Perry, and Cynthia F. DiCarlo have
collaborated to bring us insight into emergent curriculum with “Playful Reggio Emilia” in which
they describe a teacher’s perspective as she adjusts to this approach to early learning.
In the subsequent two articles, the authors address the challenge of teaching English as a
Second Language with playful activities. First, Mara Rubio and Rebekah Piper provide suggestions
for establishing relationships with parents and providing them with playful activities to promote
language and literacy skills in “Word Play: Increasing Bilingual Parent Engagement.”
Additionally, Esther Garza, Patsy J. Robles-Goodwin, Elsa Anderson, and Lisa Dryden report
on the endeavors of their summer camp in the article “Bilingual Science Play” that describes how
their playful lessons helped to bridge the language gap. The professors merged students who were
enrolled in a teacher preparation program at their university with 200 English language learners
from a local elementary school to implement a hands-on curriculum for teaching science. As you
peruse the article and images, you will agree that their project was a success!
In “The Preservation of Childhood,” Lis Krimbill shares reflections from her experiences as an
elementary school principal and parent educator. She reminds us that a playful approach to
parenting invites cooperative behaviors and that childhood is brief, so we all need to play.
Lastly, Marcy Guddemi and Joe Frost provide an overview of the history of IPA/USA.
Enjoy!
Sincerely,
Vivien Geneser & John Sutterby
Co-Editors of IPA/USA eJournal
IPA/USA CO-EDITORS
John Sutterby Vivien Geneser
John A. Sutterby is an Associate Professor of Early Childhood at the University of Texas-San
Antonio. His research interests include outdoor play environments, play, and working with
families of English language learners. He co-authored The Developmental Benefits of Playgrounds
(ACEI, 2004). Dr. Sutterby is a member of the board for the Joe L. Frost Play and Play
Environments Research Collection and the IPA/USA Executive Board. Additionally, he has served
two terms as the president of The Association for the Study of Play (TASP).
Vivien Geneser is an Associate Professor of Early Childhood in the College of Education and
Human Development at Texas A&M University-San Antonio. She is a member of the board for the
Joe L. Frost Play and Play Environments Research Collection and the IPA/USA Executive Board.
Dr. Geneser has contributed to research on play through the years with publications and
presentations, as well as her contributions as a co-editor to the journal Early Years, which is
published by the Texas Association for the Education of Young Children. Additionally, she served
as the lead editor for the 2014 special issue of Early Years on PLAY.
Table of Contents
President’s Message
LaDonna Atkins…..………………………………………….………….….…..…2
Editors’ Column
Vivien Geneser and John Sutterby……………..……………………………………...3
Is Happiness Linked to Family Play?
Elizabeth Harper and Joanna Cemore Brigden...……………….…...……….……6
Cultural Considerations Regarding Gender Differences in Play
D. Reece Wilson………………………………………………….…………...…16
Playful Reggio Emilio
Michelle Grantham-Caston, Mistie Perry, and Cynthia F. DiCarlo………………20
Word Play: Increasing Bilingual Parent Engagement
Mara Rubio and Rebekah Piper……………………………………….…….…...26
Bilingual Science Play………………………………………………..…………30
Esther Garza, Patsy J. Robles-Goodwin, Elsa Anderson and Lisa Dryden
The Preservation of Childhood………………………………….......................36
Elisabeth M. Krimbill
International Play Association (IPA) and the American Affiliate
IPA/USA: A Brief History
Marcy Guddemi and Joe Frost…………………………………..…………..…...…40
Is Happiness Linked to Family Play?
Elizabeth Harper & Joanna Cemore Brigden
Today’s families are experiencing increased amounts of
stress and need healthy ways to cope. Family play has been a
proven method for families to not only deal with stress, but also
help them improve communication, resulting in stronger, happier
relationships. In this study, the researchers conducted an online
survey with university students to examine their experiences with
familial play as well as their perceptions on the relationship
between family play and perceived family happiness and cohesion.
The researchers found a statistically significant relationship
between family play, happiness, and cohesion.
ab
str
act
Introduction
In today’s society, individuals are faced
with multiple responsibilities and stressors
that can take a major toll on their health,
happiness, and overall wellbeing (Boehmer,
2012). To cope with the stress, they often
partake in mindless activities such as
watching television, surfing the Internet, or
scrolling through Facebook when they arrive
home from work. As a result, they are less
likely to engage in playful activities with
children and other family members.
Unfortunately, avoiding interaction leads
to breakdowns in familial relationships. As
Henggeler, et al (1991) found, as family
stress goes up, the amount of television
viewed daily increases. Furthermore, they
found an association between high television
viewing and maternal reports of family stress
as well as low marital satisfaction in fathers.
At a time when families are experiencing
increased levels of responsibilities and stress,
it is essential to find ways to help foster and
support relationships. Playful activities can
have numerous benefits. Hutchinson, Afifi,
and Krause (2007) found that family play can
promote feelings of connectedness, create
feelings of belonging, foster respect, and can
help families better manage stressful events.
Duff (1996) also found that family play is an
effective tool to help improve family
communication and relations.
It is vital for families and those working
with families to know the impact that play
can have on everyone. Unfortunately, when
family relationships first begin to break
down, no one notices until it is too late. But is
it really too late? Relationships begin to fall
apart because people forget how to relate to
one another and they lose interest in each
other, forcing them to seek activities that do
not require any interaction, such as television
viewing (Henggeler et al., 1991).
Communication that takes place as part of
engaging in play with one another serves to
build stronger and happier relationships.
Thus, for the sake of family cohesion, it is
important to find ways to enjoy each other in
a playful context. Family play can include
activities such as board games, walks,
vacations, cooking, art classes, or any other
engaging activity that the whole family will
mutually enjoy.
In this study, we examined students’
experiences with familial play as well as their
perceptions on the relationship between
family play and perceived family happiness
and cohesion. The relationships and dynamics
involved in family play are complex and
changing – reflecting changes in the society
itself. Recognizing that play activity is a
central aspect in family life affecting
interactional patterns as well as individual
happiness and felt cohesion, we examined
the effect play has on family relationships
including but not limited to communication,
negotiation, and cooperation.
Family’s Effect on Happiness
When looking at the happiness of
individuals, it is important to consider all of
the possible factors that influence a person’s
level of happiness. One factor to consider is a
person’s family. To what extent do family
members affect individual members’
happiness? Can individuals be happy by
simply being around others who are?
Matteson, McGue, and Iacono (2013)
conducted a study to see if happiness was
contagious by comparing 615 families;
consisting of both adoptive and nonadoptive
families, in order to test if happiness was
affected by genetics or simply shared space,
making happiness truly contagious. To
measure happiness, Matteson et al. (2013)
measured the wellbeing of the participants
two times over a 3-year period using the scale
from the Multidimensional Personality
Questionnaire for participants 16 years of age
and older and the Personality Booklet-Youth,
abbreviated for those younger than 16.
After analyzing their data using Mx
statistical software for correlational and
biometrical modeling analyses, Matteson et
al. (2013) found that their results did not
support the contagion theory, but did find
“significant similarity of well-being scores
among biological but not among adopted
relatives- and thus no evidence for shared
environmental influences on happiness” (p.
95). Because they found no evidence to
suggest that happiness is something that can
be “caught” by simply being around other
happy individuals, it is important to take a
closer look at other factors that can contribute
to a person’s wellbeing and happiness.
Important things to consider when looking
at families as possible factors are the forms of
different families as well as their interactions
with each other. North, Holahan, Moos, and
Cronkite (2008) surveyed 274 married adults
four times over a 10-year period. They looked
at family income and family support to see
which factor was more predictive of
subsequent happiness.
North et al. (2008) used the Family
Relationships Index which contains three
subscales; Cohesion, Expressiveness, and
Conflict. After analyzing their data using the
hierarchical linear modeling, it was found
that income had a small but positive effect on
happiness and family support had a
significant positive effect on happiness.
When looking at family support more
closely, they found that all three of the tested
components (cohesion, expressiveness, and
(low) conflict) resulted in more happiness,
but cohesion had the greatest effect on
subsequent happiness.
While North et al. (2008) found that more
family support and cohesion was positively
related to happiness, Ellison (1990) found
that there might be a threshold for positive
effects when it comes to contact with
relatives (especially extended family). This
study evaluated previously collected surveys
of 2,107 black Americans. Ellison found a
negative association between geographical
proximity and both happiness and life
satisfaction, suggesting moderate levels of
contact promotes wellbeing, while over-
integration can be cause for stress. Ellison
also found that divorced and separated
respondents reported lower levels of both life
satisfaction and happiness than married
respondents.
To get a better picture of how family
form can affect happiness, Weston and
Hughes (1999) compared the well-being of
adolescent children ages 11-19 in terms of the
structure of their families. Family forms
consisted of intact, divorced (separated into
houses consisting of stepfather or
stepmother), and single parent (separated into
houses consisting of sole-mother or sole-
father) households. They found that children
and adults from intact families were the most
satisfied with life as a whole, including their
relationships and abilities to handle stress.
In contrast, sole-mothers and sole-fathers
were the least satisfied with life as a whole
and children from sole-mother households
reported the lowest levels of happiness and
wellbeing. Weston and Hughes concluded
that this result could be due to the fact that
sole-mothers were more likely to live below
the poverty line.
In the articles by Weston and Hughes
(1999), Ellison (1990), and North et al.
(2008), they emphasized the importance of
family and how the different forms can easily
affect individuals’ happiness. Because
families in today’s society are far more
diverse and complex, it is important to
understand the varying effects that family
structure can have on the individual family
members. As stated above, some family
forms are more at-risk than others for the
individuals to be unhappy and unsatisfied
with life as a whole. So, can the way a family
interacts create negative or positive habits?
To answer this question, we will also look
at how interactional patterns can affect
responses to others and their environment.
Starting at a very young age, unpleasant
family interactions can have negative effects
and consequences. Gagnon and colleagues
found a link between parenting style, child
temperament, and child peer play behavior.
They found that both reactivity and
authoritarian parenting placed children at a
higher risk for difficulties with social
development. Children who were rated as
highly reactive to their environment and who
experienced more authoritarian parenting
displayed fewer positive play behaviors and
increased levels of play disruption (Gagnon,
et al., 2014). Can these patterns of interaction
continue into adulthood?
To answer this question, Larkin, Frazer,
and Wheat (2011) examined the role of
family environment and its effects on
individuals’ responses to interpersonal
conflict. To do this, two role-playing
scenarios were set up where the participants
had to find ways to get a playmate to comply
with the goal of the scene; one was a noise
scene (participant had to get the playmate to
turn down their music) and the other was a
mess scene (participant asks playmate to
clean up after themselves).
The participants consisted of 38
volunteers who were previously rated as
being from balanced families (characterized
by moderate ranges of cohesion and
flexibility) (21 participants) and extreme
families (characterized as disengaged-
chaotic/rigid or enmeshed-chaotic/rigid) (17
participants) using the Family Adaptability
and Cohesion Evaluation Scale. When
observing interactions between the playmate
and the participants, Larkin et al. found that
participants from balanced families exhibited
significantly more positive verbal behaviors
than their extreme counterparts and extreme
participants had significantly higher rates of
negative nonverbal behavior and state anger.
Together, both studies conducted by
Larkin et al. (2011) and Gagnon et al. (2014)
show how family interactions beginning at a
very early age can have lasting effects on
response rates and social interactions lasting
from childhood to adulthood. Because family
relations can have such strong influences on
how individuals interact with their
environment, it is essential to find ways to
help families change their interactional
patterns to be more supportive, encouraging,
and more positive overall. The previous
research has emphasized why it is important
for families to implement positive means of
interaction and communication. The positive
interactions not only set good examples for
children, but also help to improve family
relations and happiness. Duff (1996) found
family play to be an effective method for
helping families make these improvements.
How Play Affects Families
To examine the effectiveness of family
play, Duff (1996) conducted a research study
consisting of 52 families in Tarrant County,
Texas. The study took place in three churches
where the experimental groups were exposed
to family play activities over a 7-week period.
Duff used the Beaver’s Self-Report Family
Inventory, which measures family health and
style and places families into one of five
styles ranging from severely dysfunctional to
optimal. After analyzing the data using a one-
way analysis of variance, Duff found that
families who had participated in the 7-week
group play sessions had significantly
improved their scores (became more
functional) while families in the control
groups scored worse, proving to become
more dysfunctional over the 7-week period.
The families in the treatment group also
reported improved communication, problem
solving skills, increased sensitivity and
awareness, fewer arguments with teens, and
more negotiation. Duff found that play helped
families focus on more positive values such
as shared family time, mutual enjoyment of
activities, and cooperation (Duff, 1996).
Siyahhan, Barab, and Downton (2010)
also found that family play was productive
and helped families to acknowledge each
person’s point of view. Their study showed
that during play situations, parents and
children were able to take turns being the
“expert” and the “novice” allowing each to
impart their knowledge and opinions. Play
between parents and children can diminish
the sometimes-strict parental barriers,
allowing them to relate on levels that are not
common during the normal daily activities.
When examining daily interactions between
parents and children, both Gordon (2008) and
Sirota (2010) studied how parents employed
play as a means of increasing cooperation and
reducing stress and friction.
Both studies found that parents will entice
children to do tasks that would normally be
met with resistance by creating games,
imaginary realms, singing, and role-play.
In these ways, play can help ease daily
trials and improve family interactions.
When parents use playful interactions to
solicit cooperation, it is also serving another
purpose; it is showing children that they
value and support play and physical activity.
O’Dwyer, Fairclough, Knowles, and Stratton
(2012) found that children whose parents
were more supportive of play and physical
activity and who were active themselves had
children who engaged in more play and
physical activity.
Many factors affect how parents and
children play, as well as the duration of their
play. It is important to look at these factors in
order to better understand how and why
families do or do not play, as this will
improve the way we work with families.
Factors Affecting Play
Several studies have found that families
can affect the amount and types of play that
take place. Through an interview with an
autistic young man and his family members,
Lieber, Lieber, Lieber, and Anderson (2012)
found that when family members support and
encourage play, children feel more
comfortable and at ease when engaged in
play activities. When adults support their
play, children feel free to be themselves,
which helps them grow and thrive. Play can
be used as a means of expression, a way to
relax, learn new things, be creative, and to be
physical. While Lieber et al. found that
families can promote and encourage play
behaviors, it is important to also look for
factors that can inhibit play. Are there factors
within the family that may reduce the
amounts of play that take place?
Upon closer examination of families and
their play habits, Kenny (2012) identified
numerous factors that affect play both
positively and negatively. Some of the factors
that were considered were household income,
education, language, mother’s mental health,
amount of daily television viewed, and
neighborhood conditions and amenities.
To examine the national play patterns,
“bivariate and multivariable analyses of
cross-sectional data on 22,797 children aged
1-5 years from the National Survey of
Children’s Health 2007 were performed to
determine child, family, and neighborhood
factors associated with four parent-initiated
activities” (Kenny, 2012, p. 87).
Through these analyses, Kenny found
that there were multiple factors that were
associated with the amount of time parents
spent playing with their children, but one
trend was apparent and stayed consistent;
children that came from less educated, poorer
minority families that lived in neighborhoods
deemed “at-risk” spent significantly less time
in play activities (Kenny, 2012).
Because play has so many benefits to
both the child and the family as a whole, it is
important to be able to identify families who
might be seen “at-risk” when it comes to play
deprivation. These factors are important
because the families are usually living in
heightened levels of stress, which can affect
overall happiness and well-being.
Play and Difficult Times
As many researchers have found, family
play can help to improve family
communication and relationships and so it
has become a popular technique during
family therapy sessions. In a study by
Thompson, Bender, Cardoso, and Flynn
(2011), the researchers interviewed 19
families who sought assistance for difficulties
with their adolescents after they participated
in family play therapy. They found that the
activities served as distracters, allowing the
families to feel more comfortable talking
about difficult issues. The families also
reported talking about issues without
realizing it because they had other ways of
expressing themselves.
The youths reported that they looked
forward to the sessions because the play
therapy created a new kind of atmosphere
that made them feel safe to be themselves and
to express themselves as well as provided an
opportunity for their families to have fun
without arguing. Families also reported that
the play therapy sessions helped to highlight
their strengths resulting in more positive
conversations and interactions.
Although these benefits were seen
through family play that was used as therapy,
the same results could be experienced for
families outside of therapy because play in
general allows people to feel more
comfortable and relaxed in their setting
(Lieber et al., 2012), which would ultimately
help families open up to each other allowing
stronger or even new relationships to form.
Through examinations of shared family
time and family resiliency following a
divorce, Hutchinson, Afifi, and Krause
(2007) found that play can facilitate stronger
and closer relationships. After interviewing
51 post-divorce families and analyzing their
responses using interpretive analysis
methods, results showed that play can be used
as a coping mechanism, can promote family
cohesion and help mend relationships.
Play was found to be especially beneficial
for blended families because it helped them
find mutual interests, build respect and create
feelings of belonging. Play helps people deal
with stress, and is effective for families
facing hardships. (Hutchinson et al., 2007)
When families work on communicating
with each other, many of the other problems,
which a result of poor communication and
lack of interaction, quickly dissolve. While it
has long been believed that family happiness
is closely related to family income, North et
al. (2008) found that income only had a slight
positive association with happiness, while
family support showed a substantial positive
association with happiness.
Since family support is so closely related
to happiness, families need to be aware of
options for improving their relations and in
turn increase their family support and
happiness. Family play can help families to
improve communication skills and help them
focus on more positive values, which would
help to improve the ways they interact with
one another (Duff, 1996). Although family
play has been shown to be highly effective in
helping families deal with difficulties,
Hutchinson et al. (2007) found that many
parents reported not spending quality time
with their children prior to a divorce.
Play may not be the cure-all for family
problems and it may not make even the most
distant families become happier and more
cohesive, but there is an overwhelming
amount of evidence supporting family play.
Play provides a time for families to be
together in mutually enjoyable activities
(Duff 1996) enabling them to build closer
more trusting relationships (Hutchinson et al.,
2007) increasing and strengthening family
cohesion, which North et al. (2008) found to
have a positive effect on familial happiness.
Methodology
In order to gather the information of interest,
a descriptive cross-sectional survey study was
the best and most appropriate method. The
survey was conducted on a Midwestern
university campus in a city with 86.8%
identifying as White (non-Hispanic or Latino)
and African American identification as the
second most prevalent at 4.1% (United States
Census Bureau, n.d.). At the time of the
survey, the university undergraduate student
body consisted of 18,027 students, with 57%
females and 43% males. The overwhelming
majority of the university’s population (82%)
identified as being ethnically White. Blacks
make up 4%, and Hispanics make up 3% and
other races and ethnicities comprise the
remaining percentages making up less than or
equal to 1% each.
The Family Play and Happiness Survey, is
a self-constructed survey that consists of 18
questions, five of which are demographic.
The remaining questions pertain to personal
happiness and family happiness, as well as
the frequency and types of familial play that
took place in their families of origin. The
variables were studied in order to make
comparisons of the current trends in family
play to family and individual happiness, and
family cohesion.
What factors do individuals believe lead to
happiness in families?
The majority of participants (82%)
reported that shared family time was the most
important factor for happiness in families.
Twelve percent reported that family structure
was the most important, 4% believed that
income was the determining factor and 2%
reported possessions as being the most
important factor for family happiness.
(M = 3.72; SD = .701; N = 50)
How does individual happiness reflect family
happiness?
Participants were asked to report their
perceived familial and individual happiness
using a 5-point equal-interval rating scale
ranging from very unhappy to very happy.
Individuals who reported themselves as being
happy also perceived their family unit as
happy, resulting in a significant correlation
between family happiness and individual
happiness, spearman rho = .436, p = .002
While there is a significant relationship, it
could be present for an unexpected reason.
That reason is the fact that the majority of the
participants reported themselves and their
families as being happy and very few
reported being unhappy.
What is the relationship between family play
and perceived family happiness/cohesion?
Participants who reported spending more
time playing with their families also reported
having happier families: spearman rho = .448,
p = .001. Respondents who also reported
spending more amounts of time engaged in
weekly family play, reported feeling like their
families were more cohesive, spearman rho =
.441, p = .001. While the relationship
between family play and family happiness
and cohesion is significant, the determining
factors are still unclear. Perhaps happier and
closer families play more, or perhaps families
who play become happier and more cohesive.
What is the perceived importance of family
play for individuals in a family?
Participants were asked to report how
important shared family time and family
playtime are in their families using a 5-point
equal-interval scale ranging from extremely
unimportant to extremely important. Only
one of the 50 participants did not answer this
question. The majority of participants (72%)
rated shared family time and playtime as
either important or extremely important.
M = 4.02, SD = .901, N = 49
Exploratory Analysis
Participants who reported growing up with
parents who were married rated shared family
time as more important for their families than
did those who reported growing up in
divorced or single parent families, t (47) =
2.84, p = .007, d = .88. Participants that
reported growing up with married parents
also reported spending more time weekly in
family play activities, t (47) = 3.49, p = .001,
d = 1.08 (Table 1).
Table 1. Descriptive Data for Parental Marital Status and
Importance and Frequency of Family Play Growing up my
parents were:
N
M
SD
Importance
of family
play
Married
Divorced/Separated
34
15
4.26
3.53
.75
.99
Amount of
weekly
family
play
Married
Divorced/Separated
34
15
5.41
3.27
2.04
1.83
There was also a statistically significant
relationship between family cohesion and
family happiness. Participants who reported
feeling like their families were more cohesive
also rated their families as being happier;
spearman rho = .321, p = .023.
The perceived barriers to play as well as
ideas for increasing family play time were
analyzed by the researcher for common
themes. Many participants reported that work
and school created conflicting schedules and
that they lacked of support from the
community and for family play. Some of the
common suggestions that were offered to
help increase the frequency of family play
were to reschedule family time so that it
would become part of the routine and to
synchronize play schedules.
Family Play
Family play was defined as any mutually
enjoyable activity that the family participates
in such as playing games, biking, and going
on vacations. When families take the time to
play together and explore new activities, it
creates a safe space for family members to
interact without the boundaries and friction
that can be present in normal everyday
activities. As the results of this survey show,
there is a statistically significant relationship
between family play and family happiness
and cohesion. This is an important finding
because it shows that families who play
together more often see themselves as happier
and more cohesive than those who do not
spend much time playing together. Familial
and individual happiness may not be as
simple as making time to play, but it has a
positive relation.
The finding that participants who grew
up in families with married parents believed
family play to be more important than those
from divorced or separated parents and also
reported more time spent in family play is
particularly important. One explanation is
that children who grow up in divorced or
separated families, whether their parents
remain single or remarry, have a harder time
finding time to play due to an even greater
increase in responsibilities and stress. If these
families would prioritize time for play, they
could alleviate their tensions and improve
family communication, which in turn would
help strengthen their relationships
(Hutchinson, Afifi, & Krause, 2007).
Barriers to Play
There are multiple factors that can affect
the frequency and types of play that families
take part in and the reported factors vary with
each individual. But when participants in this
survey were asked what the biggest barriers
to play were for their families, the responses
were very similar to the results that Kenny
(2012) had identified in her research. Many
participants wrote that work and school
created conflicting schedules that interrupted
family play time and there was a limited
availability of community activities.
Because today’s families have many
obligations outside of the home and less time
to spend with their loved ones, it is crucial to
help find ways for families to get the most
out of family time. Families need to find
effective ways to improve happiness and
cohesion amongst its members. Family play
seems to be one simple way for this to
happen. Based on previous research and the
results of this survey, families who take the
time to play together become more open with
each other and will find new ways to relate
with each other. This in turn could help them
become closer and happier.
Limitations of This Study
While the results of this survey are
consistent with previous research in this field,
it is worth noting that the participants in this
survey all reported themselves and their
families as being happy. This limited the
types of analyses that could be run on the
data due to lack of variation in the answers,
this could have also potentially created false
relationships and correlations amongst other
variables.
Another limitation is the sample size and
the makeup of participants because there
were only 54 participants and four had to be
eliminated since they did not answer the
majority of the questions. Of the 50 survey
respondents that were analyzed, only 47 of
them answered every question. Furthermore,
he makeup of these participants were mostly
white females in their twenties, which also
limits the generalizability of the results.
Significance of the Study
The results of this study yielded helpful
information for school counselors, family
therapists, and families in general. Because
this study assessed the current trend in the
amounts of time families spend together in
meaningful and mutually enjoyable activities
as well as the student’s perceived personal
and familial happiness, the resulting data
could be used to help families understand the
value of family play.
Further Research
Future studies could utilize the Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire or the Subjective
Happiness Scale in conjunction with the
Family Play and Happiness Survey in order
to acquire a precise view of the participants’
true happiness instead of leaving it open to
interpretation. With this additional data, the
researchers could obtain a more normal
distribution on perceived familial and
individual happiness.
Additionally, a future study could examine
technology and ask, to what extent does the
increased use of technology within family
play effect perceived family happiness and
cohesion? The use of technology is relevant
because it may have an effect on the amount
of interaction between family members.
Conclusion
The results of this research study are
significant because we obtained evidence to
validate the importance of family play. When
families need help and guidance and want to
improve their happiness and cohesion, family
play is a solution that could have a powerful
impact. Since play is often abandoned once a
person reaches adulthood, people can lose
contact with the playful side of themselves
and forget how great it feels to play and be
set free, even if just for a few minutes, from
the monotony of daily life.
If people are encouraged to play with
their families, they can rediscover their
passions, find new activities, and develop a
more tolerant and loving family. So, when
family members play, it helps them to feel
happier as individuals and as a unit. The
family that plays together stays together!
Rachel Hartman is a Missouri State University
graduate who currently teaches kindergarten.
Joanna Cemore Brigden is an Associate
Professor at Missouri State University.
References Boehmer, G. (2012). Today's stress is different.
Retrieved 11/0/14 from http://www.heartmath.org/templates/ihm/e-
newsletter/publication/2012/summer/todays-stress-is-different.php Duff, S. E. (1996). A study of the effects of group
family play on family relations. International
Journal of Play Therapy, 5(2), 81-93. doi:10.1037/h0089348
Ellison, C. G. (1990). Family ties, friendships, and
subjective well-being among Black Americans.
Journal of Marriage & Family, 52, 2, 298-310. doi:10.2307/353027 Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012).
Educational research: Competencies for analysis
and applications (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson-Merrill Prentice Hall.
Gagnon, S., Huelsman, T., Reichard, A., Kidder-
Ashley, P., Griggs, M., Struby, J., & Bollinger, J.
(2014). Help me play! Parental behaviors, child
temperament, and preschool peer play. Journal of
Child & Family Studies, 23, 5, 872-884.
doi:10.1007/s10826-013-9743-0
Gordon, C. (2008). A(p)parent play: Blending frames
and reframing in family talk.
Language In Society, 37, 3, 319-349. doi:10.1017/S0047404508080536
Henggeler, S. W., Cohen, R., Edwards, J. J., &
Summerville, M. B. (1991). Family stress as a
link in the association between telev
ision viewing
& achievement. Child Study Journal, 21, 1, 1-10.
Hutchinson, S. L., Afifi, T., & Krause, S. (2007). The
family that plays together fares better: Examining
the contribution of shared family time to family
resilience following divorce. Journal of Divorce
& Remarriage, 46, 3/4, 21-48.
Kenney, M. (2012). Child, family, and neighborhood
associations with parent and peer interactive play
during early childhood. Maternal & Child Health
Journal, 1688, 101. doi:10.1007/s10995-012-0998-7
Larkin, K., Frazer, N., & Wheat, A. (2011). Responses
to interpersonal conflict among young adults:
Influence of family of origin. Personal
Relationships, 18, 4, 657-667. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01334.x
Lieber, A., Lieber, K., Lieber, D., & Anderson, L.
(2012). A parent-child-sibling perspective on the
importance of play. Social Advocacy & Systems
Change, 3,1, 14-21.
Matteson, L. K., McGue, M. K., & Iacono, W. (2013).
Is dispositional happiness contagious? The
impact of the well-being of family members on
individual well-being. Journal of Individual
Differences, 34, 2, 90-96. doi:10.1027/16140001/a000103
Missouri State University College Portrait. (n.d.).
Retrieved October 30, 2014 from http://www.collegeportraits.org/MO/MSU/characteristics North, R., Holahan, C., Moos, R., & Cronkite, R.
(2008). Family support, family income, and
happiness: A 10-year perspective. Journal of
Family Psychology, 22, 3, 475-483. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.22.3.475
O’Dwyer, M., Fairclough, S., Knowles, Z., & Stratton,
G. (2012). Effect of a family focused active play
intervention on sedentary time and physical
activity in preschool children. The International
Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical
Activity, 9. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-9-117
Sirota, K. (2010). Fun morality reconsidered:
Mothering and the relational contours of
maternal-child play in U.S. working family
life. Ethos (00912131), 38, 4, 388-405. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1352.2010.01157.x
Siyahhan, S., Barab, S., & Downton, M. (2010). Using
activity theory to understand intergenerational
play: The case of Family Quest. International
Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative
Learning, 5, 4, 415-432.
Thompson, S., Bender, K., Cardoso, J., & Flynn, P. (2011). Experiential activities in family therapy:
Perceptions of caregivers and youth. Journal of
Child and Family Studies, 20, 5, 560-568. doi:10.1007/s10826-010-9428-x
United States Census Bureau. (n.d.). Retrieved 11/04/14
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/29/2970000.html
Weston, R., & Hughes, J. (1999). Family forms –
family wellbeing. Family Matters, 53, 14-20.
Cultural Considerations Regarding Gender Differences in Play
D. Reece Wilson
ab
str
act
Pretend play allows children to create imaginary situations
and act out roles. Play often differs according to gender and this
contrast has been reported in many cultures around the world.
Are the gender differences in play mandated by culture? In this
study, which provides insight from the literature about cross
cultural perspectives of gender and play, the differences in the
content of child play as well as their narratives are explored for
information about the origins of gender identity and the
influence of culture on play.
A child carefully cradles a doll baby in
her arms, as her friend pretends to wash the
doll with an imaginary cloth and water.
“Don’t forget to wash the hair,” she says to
the boy as he washes the baby. “I am
washing the hair with soap,” replies her
friend. When they have completed the task of
giving the doll a bath, they take it to the
sandbox area of the playground. Once there,
they begin to “dress” the doll with imaginary
clothes. “Let’s put on her shirt and pants,”
says the boy. “I will give her the bottle when
we are done.” offers his playmate, while they
dress the baby together. Next, as both
children complete the task, the teacher
announces that it is time to go inside.
When you read this description of an
observation of a play episode at a Head Start
program, what differences in gender do you
detect? Are the gender differences in play
mandated by culture? The author explores
these and other questions about gender
differences in play.
Through the years, many scholars have
investigated the topic of children’s play. In
simple terms, according to Scales, et al.,
(1991), “play is that absorbing activity in
which healthy young children participate with
enthusiasm and abandon” (p. 15). Fromberg
(1992) describes play as being both
pleasurable and intrinsically motivated.
Between the ages of eighteen to twenty-
four months, children will begin to engage in
pretend play by acting out routine activities
such as talking on the phone. Gradually, they
become more imaginative and add a narrative
so, for example, the pretend play with a
phone would involve a script and characters.
Pretend play allows children to create
imaginary situations and act out roles. Play
materials, such as blocks and small
classification toys (cars, animal/person
figurines) facilitate pretend play and
enhances their imagination.
As children move into the 3 to 5 year old
age range, their ability to engage in symbolic
play becomes more apparent. Morgenthaler
(2015) explains that when children use
objects as story vehicles in dramatic play,
their use becomes dramatic and then
transforms the object into the story prop.
During this time, children use props in
their dramatic play as they create stories and
scenarios involving themselves and other
children. For example, a banana from the
housekeeping area may be used as a phone,
or a block could represent a television remote
control. Role enactment is another facet of
pretend play. Children take on roles of
various people and utilize objects. The roles
can be based in reality (housekeeping,
cooking, mowing the lawn) or fantasy
(superheroes, fictional characters from media
sources). In these play scenarios, the objects
imply gender norms, and play an important
part in play themes (Morgenthaler, 2015).
Many theorists have explored the
concept of symbolic/pretend play. In fact, it is
central to Vygotsky’s Cultural-Historical
theory. He theorized that children develop
cognitive skills as a result of interacting with
their environment in many ways, including
through play. Vygotsky believed that
preschoolers engage in mainly make-believe.
The pretend scenarios are manifest in three
ways; by children creating imaginary
situations, taking on and acting out roles, and
following a set of rules determined by these
specific roles. Ultimately, Vygotsky’s dictum
is that play is a vehicle for learning (Bodrova,
et al., 2013; Vygotsky, 1978).
Children become aware of gender at a
young age, perhaps even as young as age two.
Children may have absorbed stereotyping by
this age because the clothing and toys they
receive are often chosen by adults ‘with an
eye toward gender’” (Flatter, as cited in
Hinitz & Hewes 2011, 25–26).”
Additionally, according to Kohlberg’s
theory of gender identity development,
children label people according to gender
between the ages of three and four. By the
age of three, children know if they are male
or female (Martin and Rubble, 2004).
How does gender influence play?
Research shows that the toy preferences
also indicate gender identity. Both boys and
girls tend to play with toys considered
stereotypical for their gender (Snow,
Macklin, and Jacoby, 1983). Girls prefer
kitchen items and dolls, while boys engage
with transportation and construction toys
(Berenbaum and Hines, 1992).
Erikson (1963) observed children using
blocks during free play and found that boys
created scenes that were grand and tall, while
girls’ creations were more compact and
domestic. It is clear that gender affects how
children play.
Martin and Fabes (2001) found that boys
who played mostly with boys became more
dominant and aggressive, while girls who
spent more time with girls engaged in
activities more typical of females. In their
study they found that children spent most of
their time interacting with their same gender.
Preschool teachers note that differences in
children’s play behaviors become evident
around three years of age. For example, boys
are more active and need larger spaces to
play, while girls play in smaller spaces and
play closer to adults (Maccoby, 1998).
Mathur and Parameswaran (2015) give us
another example of gender differences when
they explain that girls usually draw houses
and flowers, but boys are more likely to draw
fire engines and dinosaurs.
How are gender norms linked to culture?
Children’s play can be observed in almost
every culture the world over. Roopnarine
(2010) writes that children have been
observed playing in Gypsy communities in
Europe, the beaches of the Marquesan
Islands, the city of New Delhi, and areas of
the Amazon in Brazil. Play is universal, and
is affected by cultural context. Haight and
Cho (2015) observed that pretend play
“broadly supports children’s socialization
into and elaboration of the meaning systems
of their cultures.” They explained that actions
during play must follow cultural “rules”.
Adult opinions of play vary by culture.
For example, adults in Taiwan, Turkey, and
the United States believe play is important for
young children, and feel that they are suitable
partners for their children while they are
engaged in play. Conversely, Mexican and
Italian mothers often do not see the
importance of play in the development of
their children (Haight and Cho, 2015).
How does culture influence play?
The importance of play, and how play
manifests itself in various cultures, is
determined by the beliefs, attitudes, values,
and knowledge of these cultures (Mathur,
2015). When looking at play through these
cultural lenses, we can see how play is
shaped by these influences. In European and
Western societies, play is often seen as a tool
for teaching, and necessary for the cognitive,
physical, social, and emotional development
of children. It is a central part of the day. In
developing cultures, play is seen as an escape
from the daily routine.
What does culturally driven play look
like? Edwards (2000) conducted the Six
Culture Study that gives us insight into play
in India, Kenya, Mexico, Okinawa, the
Philippines, and United States. Fantasy play
(playing horse, sword fighting, playing
house) was observed in India, Japan, Kenya,
the Philippines, and the United States
(Roopnarine, 2010).
In the Philippines, older children taught
younger children how to play tag and hide-
and-seek. Children in India had few toys, and
boys played jacks and hockey. Mexican
children played tag and girls preferred play
that involved role-play (Roopnarine and
Krishnakumar, 2015).
Similar studies of play in non-Western
cultures have shown the direct link between
play behavior and the events and routines in
everyday life. For example, Martini (1994),
reported that Marquesan children spent
almost 60% of their playtime involved in play
that involved acting out scenarios involving
fishing and hunting or gathering leaves.
Play of Brazilian children included
hunting with bows and arrows (boys),
weaving baskets (girls), and gathering water
from the river and washing items which
represented dishes (Roopnarine et al., 2015).
As the literature suggests, girls and boys
have definite play differences. These
differences seem to be influenced by cultural
norms, which in turn determine gender scripts
of children’s play. If this is the case, it seems
logical that studying specific cultures, and the
effects of cultural context on both gender
identity and play behavior are worthy of
further research. Many of the gender studies
in the literature have been conducted in Euro-
American or Western cultures.
How does cultural context affect the play
of children who are not part of this
population? By conducting research that
incorporates observations of specific cultures,
differences in the content of children’s play,
as well as how and with whom they play,
important information could be gathered.
This information could be used to inform
practitioners as they engage in best practices
to guide the young learners in their care.
D. Reece Wilson is an Assistant Professor at
James Madison University in W. Virginia.
References
Bodrova, E., Germeroth, C., & Leong, D.J. (2013). Play and
self regulation: Lessons from Vygotsky.
American Journal of Play, 6,1, 111-123.
Berenbaum, S.A. and Hines, M. (1992). Early androgens are
related to childhood sex-typed toy
preferences. Psychological Science, 3(3), 203-206.
Erikson, E. H. (1963).Childhood and society. NY: Norton.
Fromberg, D. P. (1992). Play. In C. Seefeldt (Ed.), Early
childhood education: A review of research (pp. 42-
84). New York: Teacher College Press.
Garner, B. and Bergen, D., (2015). Play development in birth
to age four. In Fromberg, D. P. and Bergen, D.
(Eds). Play from birth to twelve: Contexts,
perspectives and meanings. (pp. 11-19). New
York: Routledge.
Haight, W. L. and Cho, M. (2015). The cultural contexts of
caregiver support for children’s pretend play. In
Fromberg, D. P. and Bergen, D. (Eds). Play from
birth to twelve: Contexts, perspectives and
meanings. (pp. 11-19). New York: Routledge.
Hinitz, B.F. and D.W. Hewes. (2011). Practical applications
from the history of gender and early childhood
education. In Jacobson, T. (Ed.). Perspectives on
gender in early childhood. (pp. 21-37). St. Paul:
Redleaf.
Maccoby, E.E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart,
coming together. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Martin, C.L. and Fabes, R.A. (2001). The stability and
consequences of young children’s same-sex peer
interactions. Developmental Psychology, 37 (3),
431-446.
Martin, C., and Ruble, D. (2004). Children’s search for
gender cues: Cognitive perspectives on gender
development. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 13(2), 67-70.
Martini, M. (1994). Peer interactions in Polynesia: A view
from the Marquesas. In Roopnarine, J. L., Johnson,
J. and Hooper, F. (Eds.). Children’s play in diverse
cultures (pp. 73-103). Albany: SUNY Press.
Mathur, S. and Parameswaran, G. (2015). Gender neutrality
in play of young migrant children: An emerging
trend or an outlier? American Journal of Play,
7(2), 174-200.
Morgenthaler, (2015). The Meanings in Play with Objects. In
Fromberg, D. and Bergen, D. (Eds). Play from
birth to twelve: Contexts, perspectives and
meanings. (65-74). New York, NY: Routledge.
Roopnarine, J. L. (2010). Cultural variations in beliefs about
play, parent-child play, and children’s play:
Meaning for childhood development. In Pellegrini
A. D. (Ed.). The Oxford handbook of the
development of play. (pp. 19-40). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Roopnarine, J. L. and Krishnakumar, A. (2015). Parent-child
and child-child play in diverse cultural contexts. In
Fromberg, D. P. and Bergen, D. (Eds). Play from
birth to twelve: Contexts, perspectives and
meanings. (pp. 283-300). New York: Routledge.
Scales, B., Almy, M., Nicolopulou, A. and Ervin-Tripp, S.
(1991). Defending play in the lives of children. In
Scales, B., Almy, M., Nicolopulou, A. and Ervin-
Tripp, S (Eds.). Play and the social context of
development in early care and education, (pp. 15-
31). New York, NY: Teachers' College, Columbia.
Snow, M.E., Jacklin, C. E. and Maccoby, E. E. (1983). Sex-
of-child differences in father-child interaction at
one year of age. Child Development, 54,1, 227-232.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development
of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press. (Original work
published 1930).
Playful Reggio Emilia
Michelle Grantham-Caston, Mistie Perry, & Cynthia F. DiCarlo
The Reggio Emilia approach is based upon an emergent curriculum
model, which means that the young learners guide the process of selecting and
developing topics to study. The teachers are guided by the belief that children
are naturally curious and interested in investigating the world around them, so
they support students’ curiosity through play, which helps them to expand their
knowledge and understanding of the content. In this environment, teachers
carefully observe students during play and follow their lead for topics to
explore. Thus, the curriculum emerges as students delve into subjects that
pique their curiosity. The teachers facilitate the explorations with appropriate
materials and supportive verbal feedback to scaffold their progress.
ab
str
act
Ms. Sally was anxious when she
heard that her center was adopting the
Reggio Emilia- inspired approach. Her
director visited a school that was Reggio-
inspired and seemed convinced it would
be good for the children. In preparation,
the administration had made several
videos explaining the new approaches to
designing the classroom, interacting with
children and families, and the curriculum.
Oooooh, the curriculum; that was the
most stressful part!! How was she
supposed to plan for children to play and
learn if she had to wait for the children to
get interested in something?
The Reggio Emilia approach is based
upon an emergent curriculum model,
which means that the young learners
guide the process. Teachers observe
students during play and follow their lead
for topics to explore. Thus, the curriculum
is emerging as students delve into
subjects that pique their curiosity and the
teachers facilitate their explorations with
appropriate materials, books, and
opportunities to expand their knowledge.
Children are naturally curious and
interested in investigating the world
around them, which is why the Reggio
Emilia approach makes sense for young
children. It is this curiosity that drives a
child to play. Ideally, the only job in early
childhood is for little ones to expand their
knowledge and understanding of the
world around them (Thornton & Brunton,
2014; Edwards, Gandini, & Forman,
2012; Rinaldi, 2006; Malaguzzi, &
Gandini, 1993).
The key to the Reggio Emilia
approach is for children to learn by doing,
which enhances play skills (Jie, Fallon, &
Eun-Joo, 2010). These play skills are not
linear, but a spiraling progression within
authentic situations in which “knowledge
is actively constructed by the learner, not
passively received from the outside”
(Sjoberg, 2010, p. 3).
Play, particularly child-initiated play,
is highly valued by those who embrace a
Reggio-inspired philosophy, as it is
based on specific fundamental values of
the naturalistic learning styles of children
and the ability to promote development
(Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 2012).
Children naturally learn through
spiraling investigations, which builds
upon their background knowledge and
experiences, gained from teachers or
more experienced others. Investigations
arise from conversations, images, items,
parents or other means depending on the
children’s interest.
Once the teacher identifies the
children’s interests, she must be reflective
and plan challenging “opportunities to
develop their creative skills and
expression” (Thornton & Brunton, 2014,
p. 33). These expressions of play, as
referenced by the book, Hundred
Languages of Children (Edwards,
Gandini, & Forman, 2012), allow children
to voice their curiosity with thoughts,
constructions, development, negotiations,
and symbols as they begin to question and
unearth answers to conclusions about a
topic or concept (Fraser, 2007).
Rather than planning her lessons,
Ms. Sally’s challenge now is to listen to
what the children are saying and to notice
where they might be interested in taking
the investigation. “Investigation”. Funny
how she now used that word, which had
once been so foreign to her. Now, her task
is to provide interesting materials in the
classroom that will inspire the children -
‘provocations’. As she watched and
listened to the children, this process
began to guide the decisions she made on
which materials she should add and how
she could support their interests. The
children really were engaged in
investigations now that she was following
their lead on the things they were truly
interested in. She was beginning to
discover how the children’s interest
motivated their in-depth study in of their
investigation. She truly felt that this
approach would foster the disposition of a
life-long love of learning in her
preschoolers.
The Environment as the Third Teacher
The Reggio Emilia approach is one
of collaboration among all learners in the
classroom – including the teacher
(Malaguzzi & Gandini, 1993). The
teacher designs her classroom to spark
children’s interests and acts as a guide in
her role of ‘teacher-researcher’ to support
children’s learning. In this philosophic
approach, there is recognition that a well-
planned environment can serve as a third
teacher (the child and adult being the first
two) (Danko-McGhee & Slutsky, 2017).
The Reggio Emilia environment
strives to incorporate calm and tranquil
open-ended spaces with natural lighting
and materials to promote personable and
collaborative social interactions, and to
further understand one’s own personal
perceptions of the world.
As children explore their right to play
and create their own life’s knowledge, teachers act as a guide within daily
activities (Dahlberg, Moss, & Pence,
2013),. The teachers are not direct
instructors, but provide naturalistic
opportunities for children to develop their
own ideas about the world and connect
them with similar ideas of their peers.
The teachers arrange the classroom
into various areas that offer open-ended
materials for investigative discovery.
Within these areas, every material is
consciously considered and organized,
making materials easily accessible,
inviting, and natural, to convey a sense of
calmness, serenity, and tranquility for
both children and adults.
In her readings on the philosophical
approach of Reggio Emilia, she learned
about the importance of the aesthetic
aspects of the classroom environment.
Her goal was to create a space that
was both functional and beautiful; one
that would inspire creativity without
being overwhelming. She slowly began to
add materials, but also removed things
from the wall, items which she had once
deemed as ‘decorative’, but now saw as
distracting. Her revised classroom now
included lamps, twinkle lights, soft
curtains, plants, and other natural
materials. Now that all of the bold colors
were removed, the ambience of the room
was breathtaking. Ms. Sally was delighted
with the transformation, particularly as it
related to the engagement and behavior
of the children. The children seemed
quieter and calmer as they explored the
inviting, tidy, and beautiful spaces.
Ms. Sally told her partner teacher,
“I love my classroom space more than my
home. Who would have thought allowing
for natural light and natural elements
organized in a classroom space would
make thing run smoother while promoting
curiosity and learning?”
In a Reggio-inspired environment, all
materials lend themselves to expression.
After learning about the interests of the
children, the teacher consciously prepares
every surface of the classroom with
relevant materials to promote a variety of
playful but purposeful situations that will
allow their natural curiosity to emerge.
The environment should allow for
spontaneous play that promotes social
interaction, problem solving, storytelling,
fantasy, conflict and resolution, and
communication, in order for children to
further their understanding of the world
(Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 2012).
One Hundred Languages of Children
Within the Reggio-inspired
philosophical approach, there is a strong
emphasis on expressive arts such as
sculpture, dramatic play, shadow play,
puppetry, painting, dancing, music,
ceramics, construction and writing
(Swann, 2008). The outstanding standard
of work produced by children in these
programs are widely acknowledged and
have caused educators to rethink their
beliefs on early childhood arts education
(McClure, Tarr, Thompson, & Eckhoff,
2017).
The learning experiences children
partake in come in various formats
including, small group field experiences,
individual learning, and whole group
activities. Each learning format provides
opportunities for children to engage in
expressive dialogue to critique, compare,
negotiate, hypothesize, and problem solve
while continuing to develop within the
classroom, as well as in the atelier.
Ms. Sally learned that there would be
an atelier in the common space between
the classrooms and she was perplexed as
to the purpose of another instructional
space. She wondered if she would have to
plan for more lessons in the common
space where anyone might be involved.
What would children do there? How
would this fit into the existing class
schedule?
Reggio-inspired classrooms include an
atelier, which is a workshop or studio
space (Moss, 2016) where children can
playfully explore open-ended materials
that feed whatever artistic creation their
mind craves. In this space, children
generate complex thoughts using open-
ended materials, which allows for a rich
combination of creative possibilities
among the children. These open-ended
materials are available to create costumes,
tools, toys, and other objects using a
variety of materials, including
recyclables, materials from nature, clay,
beads, etc. The teachers must make sure
to have inviting items that inspire the
children and draw them in so that they
will want to explore and investigate.
Examples of Reggio preschool
ateliers include, Light and Shadow
Studios where children can experiment
with lights and shadows in various forms
or a Maker’s Space that is dedicated to
the encouragement of enhancing
imagination and bringing ideas to life
through curiosity (Edwards, 2012).
Ms. Sally’s fears were eased when her
administrator provided more direction
about how the atelier could be used. It
would be a co-constructed space that
would evolve, based on the children’s
interest. Classes would have scheduled
access to the atelier throughout the week,
similar to the way outdoor time was
scheduled.
The teachers came together and
determined what types of materials might
be of interest to the children. The idea of
a ‘maker space’ evolved – a space where
children could have opportunity to create
3-D projects using a variety of materials.
The teachers assembled a variety of
materials on low shelves and lined the
walls with shelves to hold ‘in-progress’
pieces children were working on.
Displays of colorful completed works
lined the halls.
The city of Reggio Emilia has received
a great deal of attention among early
childhood circles due to the framework of
play through investigative discovery.
Each year, early childhood educators
from around the world visit the Loris
Malaguzzi center in Reggio Emilia,
Italy in an effort to replicate the tenets of
this approach within various instructional
settings. Founder, Loris Malaguzzi stated,
“We value space because of its power to organize,
promote pleasant relationships.... All of this
contributes to a sense of well-being and security in
children. We also think as it has been said that the
space has to be sort of aquarium that mirrors the
ideas, values, attitudes, and cultures of the people
who live within it.” (Edwards, Gandini, &
Forman, 2012, p. 177).
Conclusion
The Reggio-inspired philosophical
approach provides a framework to direct
teachers in creating playful environments
that are supportive of children’s interests
while also considering child development.
Educators who promote children’s
learning by listening to their interests,
crafting engaging spaces, and providing
access to a variety of expressive arts will
observe children’s interests and in-depth
understandings emerge, allowing children
to delve deeper into their personal
perception of the world (New, 2007).
Michelle Grantham-Caston is an Adjunct
Professor at Louisiana State University.
Mistie Perry is an Assistant Professor at
Nicholls State University.
Cynthia F. DiCarlo is a Professor at
Louisiana State University.
References Branscombe, N., Castle, K., Dorsey, A., Surbeck,
E., & Taylor, J., (2003). Early childhood
curriculum: a constructivist perspective.
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Constructivist Design and the 21st Century
Student. (2010). http://bb.plsweb.com/SASPD_08/m8/m8topicb_key1.html
Dahlberg, G., Moss, P., & Pence, A. (2013).
Beyond quality in early childhood education
and care: languages of evaluation. UK: Routledge.
Danko-McGhee K., Slutsky R. (2017) Empowering
preservice teachers to design a classroom
environment that serves as a third teacher. In: Narey
M. (eds) Multimodal Perspectives of Language,
Literacy, and Learning in Early Childhood. Educating
the Young, 12. New York, NY: Springer, Cham.
Edwards, C. P., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. E. (2012).
The hundred languages of children: The
Reggio Emilia experience in transformation. Santa
Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Fraser, S. (2007). Play in Other Languages.
Theory Into Practice,46,1,14-22.
doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4601_3.
Jie, Z., Fallon, M. & Eun-Joo, K. (2010). The
Reggio Emilia curricular approach for
enhancing play development of young
children. Curriculum & Teaching
Dialogue, 12 (1/2), 85-99.
Kogan, Y., & Pin, J. (2009). Beginning the Journey:
The Project Approach with Toddlers. Retrieved
July 27, 2016, from
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v11n1/kogan.html
Malaguzzi, L., & Gandini, L. (1993). For an
Education Based on Relationships. Young
Children, 49,1, 9-12. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.libezp.lib.lsu.edu/stable/42725534
McGee, A. (2012). Early Childhood Education
Theory Comparison. Educational Portfolio,
Retrieved October 25, 2016: https://allisonmmcgee.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/early
-childhood-education-theory-comparison/
McClure, M., Tarr, P., Thompson, C.M., & Eckhoff, A.
(2017). Defining quality in visual art education for
young children: Building on the position statement
of the Early Childhood Art Educators. Arts Ed.
Policy Review, 118, 3, 154-163.
Moss, P. (2016). Loris Malaguzzi and the schools of
Reggio Emilia: provocation and hope for renewed
public educations. Improving Schools, 19, 2, 167-176.
New, R.S. (2007). Reggio Emilia as cultural
activity theory in practice. Theory Into
Practice, 46, 1, 5-13.
Doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4601_2
Performance Learning Systems. (2010). Constructivist
Design. Retrieved from http://bb.plsweb.com/SASPD_08/m8/m8topicb_key1.html
Rinaldi, C. (2006). In dialogue with Reggio
Emilia: listening, researching and learning.
London, UK: Routledge.
Seitz, H. (2006, March). The Plan: Building on
Children’s Interests - NAEYC. Retrieved July 27,
2016, from http://www.naeyc.org/files/yc/file/200603/SeitzBTJ.pdf
Sjøberg, S. (2010). Constructivism and learning.
International Encyclopedia of Education.
Retrievedhttp://www.academia.edu/download/366
81913/Constructivism_and_learning_Sjoberg.pdf
Swann, A.C. (2008). Children, objects, and relations:
Constructivist foundations in the Reggio Emilia
approach. Studies in Art Education, 50,10, 36-50.
Thornton, L., & Brunton, P. (2014). Bringing the
Reggio approach to your early years practice
(3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wong, H., Wong, R., & Seroyer, C. (2009).
The first days of school: How to be an
effective teacher. Mountain View, CA:
Harry K. Wong Publications.
Word Play: Increasing Bilingual Parent Engagement
Mara Rubio and Rebekah Piper
ab
str
act
Young bilingual children develop language skills through
interactions at home and school. By encouraging families to increase
their participation in skill development with playful learning activities,
two education professionals offer a model for a successful school-to-
home literacy connection. They encourage parents to engage by sharing
games and strategies that serve to increase phonemic awareness,
phonics, and fluency. Families are motivated to participate in learning
literacy skills by engaging in playful activities.
Children with well-established oral
language and early literacy skills can
decipher a broad range of communication
in their homes and at school. The challenge
of developing these skills is especially
critical for bilingual students who must
continually code-switch as they transition
daily between the two environments. At
home, they learn their native language,
arguably the more essential one. After all,
“Family is the primary system, and because
it is generally a lifelong resource, it is the
most important” (Sheridan, Knoche,
Kupzyk, Edwards, & Marvin, 2011, p.
362). However, at school, they must
conquer a new language in order to
communicate with teachers and peers.
Thus, parents who are well-informed
and engaged in their children’s education
can help them develop these skills in two
languages effectively. When students hear
stories, songs, poems, and nonsense verse
in either language, they will develop
recognition for the sounds, patterns, and
key words of that language (Honig, 2001).
Parental involvement is extremely
valuable in the development of reading and
oral language skills for the early childhood
and elementary bilingual student. Although
parents who are new to the school system
may be hesitant to interact with their
child’s teacher, teachers must strive to form
a partnership for the benefit the child’s
language and literacy development. By
sharing playful language activities, teachers
can encourage families to strengthen skills.
The Importance of Oral Language
Oral language is the way in which we
communicate and understand the world and
people around us. “Oral language
proficiency with others is an awesome
social skill that our ancestors developed
less than 130,000 years ago” (Honig, 2007,
p. 581). Furthermore, oral language skills
precede all of the other skills for becoming
literate. “The development of oral language
is crucial to a child’s literacy development,
including listening, speaking, reading and
writing” (Kirkland & Patterson, 2005, p.
391). In order to communicate effectively,
one must master oral language skills. “Oral
language skills include vocabulary,
syntactic knowledge, and narrative
discourse processes that have an effect on
reading achievement during the early stages
of decoding and later stages when the focus
is on comprehension” (Whorrall & Cabell,
2015, pg. 340).
By the time most American children
enter kindergarten, they have amassed a
vocabulary of approximately 14,000 words.
A parent or caregiver often provides their
first exposure to language, speech, and
vocabulary when they speak, sing, and read
with them and also mutually participates in
the language patterns that reinforce the
development of language skills. Since most
instruction in preschool is oral, children
with a large vocabulary will understand
more of what is being said and read to them
in the classroom, which enables them to
develop skills for succeeding in elementary
school (Honig, 2001).
However, Bilingual students enter the
educational setting with different levels of
oral language exposure and different
experiences than their English-speaking
counterparts. Additionally, Spanish
speaking and recently immigrated students
are often quieter and native English
speakers (Lindsey, Manis, & Bailey, 2003).
In order to understand the cultural
differences in language development, it is
helpful to consult research studies. For
example, Hart and Risley (2003) conducted
a decade long study on the importance of
parent-child talk. First, they identified 42
families from Kansas and then divided
them into three categories: the welfare
group, the working-class group and the
professional group. All of the families had
children under the age of one year. Next,
the researchers visited the families for one
hour a month for two and a half years.
During that time, they recorded their
conversations and transcribed and
categorized every conversation, sentence
and word that was uttered.
When they analyzed the data, they
discovered an interesting discrepancy in the
number of spoken words that were
recorded from each category of family.
From their study, they concluded that a
four-year-old child from a professional
family would hear over 45 million words,
while the working-class child heard 26
million and a child from a welfare family
only heard 13 million words. Although
these children will enter kindergarten at the
same time, one child will have heard 32
million fewer words (Hart & Risley, 2003).
Now known as the “30 Million Word
Gap,” this study found a direct correlation
between the number of words that a child
hears and their future academic success.
The first key finding in this study is that the
variation in children’s IQs is relative to the
amount of spoken words that they hear
during early childhood. The second key
finding was that their later academic
success, at ages nine and ten, is also
directly linked to early language
experiences. Lastly, they discovered that
the parents of the advanced children
engaged in more complex language
interactions than the parents of the low
achieving students (Hart & Risely, 1995).
Since bilingual children tend to come
from underserved backgrounds, the results
from this study indicate they may lack
sufficient exposure to early language
experiences.
Engaging Parents with Early Literacy Play
Parent involvement has been shown to
have a significant impact on a student’s
academic success (Epstein & Salinas,
2004). Since parents are the educator’s
most effective allies, they must prioritize
communication from the beginning of the
school year. One of the most important and
impactful ways to enhance the home to
school connection is simply to create a
welcoming environment so that parents will
be eager to offer activities at home.
Phonemic Awareness
Phonemic awareness is the ability to
hear, identify, and manipulate individual
phonemes in spoken language. Mastery of
this skill is necessary for children to
increase their literacy development (Chall,
1983). One means of helping children to
focus on phonemic awareness is to sing
silly songs that manipulate sounds in words
and create new lyrics and rhymes in songs
such as Apples and Bananas (lyrics below)
and change the vowel sounds.
I like to eat eat eat apples and bananas.
I like to eat eat eat apples and bananas.
I like to ate ate ate aypuls and baynaynays.
I like to ate ate ate aypuls and baynaynays.
I like to eet eet eet eeples and beeneenees.
I like to eet eet eet eeples and beeneenees.
I like to ote ote ote opples and bononos.
I like to ote ote ote opples and bononos.
I like to ute ute ute upples and bununus.
I like to ute ute ute upples and bununus.
In addition to silly songs, parents and
children can play rhyming games. Start by
creating a rhyming game with index cards
and follow the rules of concentration.
Identify pairs of rhyming words and write
them on index cards. Then place them face
down in an open space and take turns
flipping the index cards over in search of a
pair of words that rhyme. such as fish/dish,
crop/drop, and test/pest.
Phonics
Phonics is the relationship between the
sound and written letter correspondence.
Parents may hear teachers refer to this as
the phoneme and grapheme relationship.
Phonics is vital to the reading success of
young children as they are in the learning
to read stage (Chall, 1983). As children
begin to identify the relationship between
the letter name and letter sound, there are
multiple activities that parents and teachers
can utilize to increase awareness of this
important relationship.
For example, provide children with
various multisensory items to play with
such as clay, sand, or play dough and
encourage children to create letters and
then combine them to form words. This
engaging activity will incorporate both the
recognition of the letter shape, name, and
sound and also increase their literacy
development while reading the words. As
their skills improve, children can write
letters, birthday messages, or grocery lists.
They will be applying their phonics skills
to written form, thus continuing to develop
their strong literacy foundation.
Fluency
Fluency refers to the ability to read with
speed, accuracy, and expression. Classroom
teachers are tasked with measuring student
mastery of reading fluency by determining
the number of words they can read per
minute. While this assessment can be used
to understand student literacy development,
it can also pose a challenge as it relates to
comprehension. Fluent readers must be
able to read with speed, accuracy, and
expression and do so at a level that still
allows them to comprehend the text.
For example, using environmental print,
parents can play the game I Spy! They say,
“I spy with my eye…something that has all
capital letters”. Then the children can begin
to look around the environment and see
signs and labels that fit this description. A
child might guess a word they see on a
juice box, road sign, or the name of a store.
The important factor is that the students
are reading the environmental print. As
children engage in this activity, their
literacy development is strengthened and
they recognize words outside of the
traditional texts. Fluent readers can
increase their awareness by playing with
phrases and reading them in a specific tone
or voice. For example, parents could create
sentence strips from stories, articles, or
written letters. Then, they ask the child to
select a sentence strip and also the tone or
voice for reading the sentence. Thus, they
create a playful setting as the children read
sentences like characters such as a monster
or wild animal.
Each activity can be adapted for parents
to use with various grade levels and early
literacy target skill areas. Furthermore,
educators can encourage parents to engage
in playful learning activities at home.
Parents value their children’s education
and strive to see their children succeed, so
when parents and schools stay connected
and function in cohesion, they are capable
of facilitating a successful educational
experience. Teachers should be receptive to
the needs of parents of early learners in
order to involve them in their child’s
academic learning from the start.
Conclusion
Since teaching strategies and pedagogies
may change, it is important to keep parents
informed about the new trends in education
and provide them with support to increase
student learning. Parents are the teachers’
most powerful allies, so maintaining a
strong partnership is critical for developing
successful learning in early childhood
classrooms. Finally, it is powerful when
parents understand that play is in fact a part
of learning and has the potential to increase
the development of young learners.
Mara Rubio is an elementary classroom
teacher in San Antonio, Texas.
Rebekah Piper is an Assistant Professor at
Texas A&M University-San Antonio.
References Chall, J.S. (1983). Stages of reading development,
New York: McGraw-Hill
Dickinson, D. K., & Porche, M. (2011). Relation
Between Language Experiences in Preschool
Classrooms and Children’s Kindergarten and
Fourth-Grade Language and Reading
Abilities. Child Development,82, 3, 870-886.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01576.x
Durgunoğlu, A. Y., Nagy, W. E., & Hancin-Bhatt,
B. J. (1993). Cross-language transfer of
phonological awareness. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 85, 3, 453-465.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.453
Epstein J.L., & Salinas K.C. (2004). Partnering with
Families and Communities. A well-organized
program of family and community partnerships
yields many benefits for schools and their
students. Schools as Learning Communities, 61,8, 12-18.
Hart, B., & Risely, T. (2003). The Early
Catastrophe. American Educator,27, 4, 6-9.
Honig, A. (2001). Language Flowering,
Language Empowering for Young Children.
Montessori Life, 13, 4, 31-34.
Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M. J., &
Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting reading
comprehension in early elementary school: The
independent contributions of oral language and
decoding skills. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 101, 765-778.
doi: 10. 1037/a0015956.
Kirkland, L. D., & Patterson, J. (2005). Developing
Oral Language in Primary Classrooms. Early
Childhood Education Journal,32(6), 391-395.
doi:10.1007/s10643-005-0009-3
Lindsey, K., Manis, F., & Bailey, C. (2003).
Prediction of first-grade reading in Spanish-
speaking English-language learners. Journal of
Educational Psychology,95(3), 482-494.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.3.482
Manis, F. R., Lindsey, K. A., & Bailey, C. E.
(2004). Development of Reading in Grades K-2
in Spanish-Speaking English-Language
Learners. Learning Disabilities Research and
Practice,19(4), 214-224. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
5826.2004.00107.x
National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development Early Child Care and Research
Network. (2005). Pathways to Reading: The
Role of Oral Language in the Transition to
Reading. Developmental Psychology,41(2),
428-442. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.428
Proctor, C. P., Carlo, M., August, D., & Snow, C.
(2005). Native Spanish-Speaking Children
Reading in English: Toward a Model of
Comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology,97, 2, 246-256.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.246
Sheridan, S. M., Knoche, L. L., Kupzyk, K. A.,
Edwards, C. P., & Marvin, C. A. (2011). A
randomized trial examining the effects of parent
engagement on early language and literacy: The
Getting Ready intervention. Journal of School
Psychology, 49, 3, 361-383.
doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2011.03.001
Storch, S. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Oral
language & code-related precursors to reading:
Evidence from a longitudinal structural model.
Developmental Psychology,38,6, 934-947.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.38.6.934
Whorrall, J., & Cabell, S. Q. (2015). Supporting
Children’s Oral Language Development in the
Preschool Classroom. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 44, 4, 335-341.
doi: 10.1007/s10643-015-0719-0
Bilingual Science Play Esther Garza
Patsy J. Robles-Goodwin
Elsa Anderson
Lisa Dryden
ab
str
act
Playful learning can occur in every content area and is especially
helpful for students for whom English is a Second Language (ESL)
since it involves a multi-modal model of instruction. In this account, the
authors describe how an urban school district’s Elementary English
Center and a nearby university collaborated to support preservice
teachers in the development of 5E lesson plans for culturally and
linguistically diverse (CLD) students. Both groups participated in a
two-day Science and Reading Camp, where pre-service teachers
attended professional development and then implemented 5E science
lessons with the 200 students. The outcome of the collaboration was
successful because it provided an opportunity for pre-service teachers to
apply ESL strategies and for elementary students to learn science
concepts by engaging in playful lessons.
Introduction
Due to a variety of linguistic demands
that are inherent with science learning,
learning science can be difficult for
culturally and linguistically diverse
(CLD) students. Particularly challenging
for CLD students are the language
components such as discourse of
instruction and vocabulary, as well as the
cultural underpinnings of science.
Although a common practice has been
to teach English separate from academic
science content, teachers who effectively
implement active learning segments in
their science instruction can support the
development of science vocabulary
(Silva, 2008).
Thus, incorporating an abundance of
playful, hands-on activities helps to
bridge the language gap and facilitates the
development of science literacy. In
science learning, the discourse is highly
decontextualized because of the
dependency on specialized vocabulary
that leads to scientific thought and
understanding, so active learning
experiences are essential to facilitate
understanding among ESL students (Diaz,
et al, 2010).
For science learning, the process of
language acquisition becomes even more
critical because many ESLs are often
placed in science classes where basic
literacy skills are emphasized rather than
rigorous science instruction.
Additionally, since science instruction
contains fact-based content that is often
correlated with cultural explanations,
students’ use of their own connections
with their culture to comprehend science
can either assist with scientific thought
and reasoning or lead to possible
misconceptions in science (Roseberry &
Warren, 2008).
The Role of Culture in Science
Drawing from the research conducted
in science, culture plays an important role
in science learning for culturally and
linguistically diverse students (Roseberry
& Warren, 2008, Lee & Buxton, 2010,
Luykx et al, 2007). When culture is
integrated into the learning of science, the
connection yields higher engagement for
CLD students who possess a home
knowledge of how science works in
everyday life (Wong-Fillmore, 2000).
Such knowledge is comprised of
vocabulary, concepts, perceptions,
misperceptions, hypotheses and
conclusions based on students’ past
experiences with science.
Teachers can tap into these funds of
knowledge from the home and
neighborhood environments and utilize it
to scaffold for higher cognitive
engagement in science learning (Moll, et
al,1992). Garcia and Lee (2018) also
encourage teachers to create culturally
responsive learning environments to
connect the knowledge developed in the
home environment to the scientific
lessons in elementary classrooms. Thus,
it is important for teachers to establish
connections and relationships between
science learning in the home and school.
Due to the increase in linguistic
diversity among the student population,
many educators are seeking ways to
communicate with their students and also
prepare lessons that provide appropriate
content. To support the continued efforts
of teacher preparation, our Science and
Reading Camp prepared pre-service
teachers by sharing effective practices
that support science learning for CLD
students. In the training, they utilized
information from the course work, field
assignments, and a hands-on, minds-on
component with playful activities.
The Science and Reading Camp
provided pre-service teachers an early
context for implementing effective
strategies gleaned from university teacher
preparation courses. The university
professors began by sharing information
on the lesson structure and modeling
instructional methods for content using a
sheltered instructional teaching approach.
The sheltered instructional approach
has been adopted by many educators to
exclusively teach content while at the
same time developing proficiency and
literacy in the English language
(Echevarria, et al, 2014).
The Science and Reading Camp
provided learning opportunities for the
ESL students that integrated all of the
language skills (Echevarria et al, 2014).
In addition to the language and literacy
strategies that support speaking, listening,
reading, and writing, the camp addressed
thinking, reasoning, and artistic visual
representation with pictures and diagrams
(Ariza, et al, 2015). During the
professional development phase, the
university professors demonstrated
lessons that exemplified effective
strategies for teaching ESL learners.
The professors provided a sample of
the lesson to the pre-service teachers (see
Figure 1) so that they could implement
the activities. They modeled each section
so that the preservice teachers could
develop an experiential understanding of
the lesson. They also provided materials
to create the ESL strategies found in the
science lesson such as sentence frames
and 4-frame storyboard and answered
questions about the lesson presentation.
The pre-service teachers discovered
that sentence frames could provide an
opportunity to engage in the academic use
of vocabulary and English grammar
sentence structure while also developing
scientific thought. The 4-frame story
board graphic organizer was divided into
four squares. In each square, the ESL
student recounted the events from a story
based on their comprehension and
recollection of the story.
The ESL students in the beginning
proficiency level or preproduction and
emergent level of English were instructed
to use visuals (drawings) and familiar
language to express their comprehension
of the story structure.
Following the completion of the
professional development session, the
pre-service teachers presented their
lessons to 200 ESLs/Science and Reading
Campers. The prewriting activity was
used to activate prior knowledge to help
the students connect to the lesson’s
theme. In the engage phase of the Science
5E model, the professors had modeled the
ESL strategy and then asked the pre-
service teachers to employ it during the
development of the inquiry process.
Prewriting activities, such as activating
prior knowledge, are critical to ESLs’
conceptual development of science
literacy concepts being introduced.
Cummins (1979) found that ELs prior
knowledge “…lays an important
foundation for their learning of English
and scientific knowledge” (as cited in
Dong, 2013, p. 52).
Conclusion
Teaching science is content specific
and language development can be
enhanced in science teaching when
teachers provide playful, hands-on
learning opportunities as an integral part
of their science instruction. With the
implementation of appropriate strategies,
ESL students can derive meaning from
science. Science in many ways is an ideal
forum for using play to promote
curiousity while also supporting English
language development. Teachers who
provide hands-on lessons offer
opportunities for ESLs to actively engage
in science learning. As the students
participate in the playful science
activities, teachers can reinforce new
vocabulary and facilitate the development
of science literacy skills.
Guidelines for Teaching ESL:
1. Use real objects or models.
2. Use cooperative groups.
3. Use hands-on science activities.
4. Create word walls.
5. Think-pair-share (pair students
and have them talk to each other).
6. Use graphic organizers to help
with comprehension.
Teachers of ESL students can use a
variety of tactics to express and represent
their science ideas: pictures, sentence
strips, gestures, and drawings. The
preservice teachers utilized methods to
address the complexity of working with
ESL students such as connecting to prior
knowledge and differentiating instruction
to accommodate various language levels.
By participating in the Science and
Reading Camp experience, they were able
to develop a foundation for bridging
theory to practice that will serve as a
valuable simulation before they embark
on their teaching careers.
Esther Garza is an Associate Professor at Texas
A&M University-San Antonio.
Patsy J. Robles-Goodwin is a Professor at Texas
Wesleyan University.
Elsa Anderson is an Assistant Professor at Texas
Wesleyan University.
Lisa Dryden is a Professor at Texas Wesleyan
University.
Table 1: 5E Lesson Plan
Lesson Objectives Students will connect to the topic of force and motion.
Language Objectives Students discuss books & ideas, & write responses.
Sheltering Strategies
ENGAGE Read aloud: If I Built a Car Prewriting – Respond to the book by either drawing, writing, or acting out your ideas for building an item such as a car. Next, create a table of ideas. Materials: Kindle, projector, paper, markers, chart.
Pair/ Share: Offer a prediction about what will happen in the story. In sentence frame to respond to partner: I think…
EXPLORE Provide books about cars and force and motion. Next, develop a list of findings. Materials: books, chart tablet, markers How Can I Experiment with Force and Motion? by Cindy Devine Dalton Stop and Go, Fast and Slow. by Buffy Silverman Forces and Motion by Lisa Greathouse Forces and Motion at Work by Shirley Duke
Students write questions about the books and record ideas for answers based on the text and prior knowledge. Use during discussion part of the 5E.
EXPLAIN Create a 4-frame storyboard with visuals of the 4 most important things you learned from exploring the books. Pair/share Materials: Paper & markers
Highlight vocabulary and read the key words aloud.
ELABORATE Write about and/or draw what you learned. Use your storyboard to get your writing done.
Use key vocabulary and visuals.
EVALUATE Share your writing with others and give specific feedback to each other.
Share/pair your work: I enjoyed listening to your story______
Illustrations
The students deepened their
comprehension of the stories with
prewriting activities. If I Built a Car
supported the science concept of force
and motion.
In the next examples, pre-service
teachers used the sentence frame strategy
to assist the students in providing their
predictions from the story. “My car will
be________” to present their ideas after
hearing the story: If I Built a Car.
References
Ariza, E. W., Yahya, N., Zainuddin, H., &
Morales-Jones, C., A. (2015).
Fundamentals of teaching English to speakers of
other languages in K-12 mainstream classrooms
(4th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
Diaz Z., Esquierdo, J., De Leon, L, Almaguer, I.,
Curts, J. (2010) Teaching content to Latino
bilingual-dual language learners: Maximizing
their learning. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
Dong, Y. (2013). Powerful learning tools for ELLs:
Using native language, familiar examples,
and Concept mapping to teach English language
learners. The Science Teacher, 80, 4, 51-57.
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2004). Making
content comprehensible for English learners: The
SIOP model. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Garcia, E., & Lee, O. (2008). Creating culturally
responsive learning communities. In A.
Rosebery & B. Warren (Eds), Teaching science to
English language learners.147-150. Arlington,
VA: NSTA Press.
Kendall, J., & Khuon, O. (2005). Making Sense:
Small-Group Comprehension Lessons for English
Language Learners. Portland, ME: Stenhouse
Publishers.
Lee, O. & Buxton, C. (2010). Diversity and equity in
science education: Research, policy, and
practice. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Luykx, A., Lee, O., Mahotiere, M., Lester, B., Hart,
J., Deaktor, R., (2007). Cultural and home
language influences on children's responses to
science assessments. Teachers College Record, 109, 4, 897-926.
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N.
(1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using
a qualitative approach to connect homes and
classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31, 1, 132-141.
Roseberry, A. S. & Warren, B. (2008). Teaching
science to English language learners: Building on
students’ strengths. Arlington, VA: NSTA.
Silva, C., Weinburgh, M., Smith, M. H., Barreto, G.,
& Gabel, J. (2008/2009). Partnering to develop
academic language for English language learners
through mathematics and science. Childhood
Education, 107-112.
Wong-Fillmore, L. (2000). Loss of family languages:
Should educators be concerned? Theory into
Practice, 39, 203-210.
The Preservation of Childhood
Elisabeth M. Krimbill
ab
str
act
The early years in a child's life are foundational and their experiences
will directly impact how they develop skills and form relationships.
Children learn more rapidly during these early years than at any other
time in life, so it is crucial for adults to understand the role of play in
child development. As an administrator in a parent education program,
my colleagues and I share research that reveals how play can shape the
child’s world. We encourage parents to allow time for their children to
engage in free play and suggest a playful approach to family activities.
Honor developmental stages
In educational parlance, the term
developmentally appropriate practice is
utilized to describe teaching methods that
consider all aspects of children’s growth
and development. Although some of the
DAP principles may seem obvious,
parents who are unfamiliar with child
development might not realize the
importance of realistic expectations. For
example, it is unlikely that any parent
would allow a six-year-old child to drive
a car, yet they might assume that the child
is capable of other mature abilities, such
as advanced emotional self-regulation
skills (Bailey, 2015).
Thus, it is important for parents to
acknowledge the natural unfolding of
stages and to support their child’s optimal
development in the cognitive, physical,
social, and emotional domains (Copple
and Bredekamp, 2009).
Cognitive development
Beginning in infancy, children absorb
stimuli from their surroundings and
interpret these environmental components
to make sense of their world. Parents can
scaffold cognitive development by
providing playful activities that increase
the young child’s awareness of the events,
people, and objects in their lives. Even
simple games such as peek-a-boo enhance
the child’s ability to engage and form a
foundation for future interactions.
As they participate in this serve and
return model of communication, the
caregiver can add additional sounds,
words, and gestures to up the game
(Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2013).
After establishing a precedent for
playful interactions, parents can build
upon this rapport with hide and seek
games with toys to increase observation
skills, inventing silly songs to encourage
expressivity, and offer read-aloud
sessions to support emergent literacy
skills (Goldberg, 2018).
As they grow, the complexity of the
games and the level of reading material
may increase, but the basic foundation of
connecting through playful interactions
remains consistent.
In addition to playful engagement,
children need unstructured time to
explore, observe, and think. Children
learn through play, so providing ample
opportunities for them to self-select their
activities is an important key to
facilitating cognitive development.
During free play, they can dream of new
possibilities, expand their imaginations,
and develop innovative ideas (Frost,
Wortham & Reifel, 2011).
Physical development
By allowing children time and space to
explore, they will naturally progress
through the developmental milestones of
crawling, walking, running, and climbing.
Parents can encourage their early attempts
to crawl by placing toys just out of reach,
and then continue to promote the
attainment of gross motor skills by
offering helping hands and verbal
support. Freedom of movement is vital
for building strong muscles and nimble
movements, so try to limit the amount of
time that a child spends confined in a car
seat or high chair. Designate an area for
free play and enjoy observing the
development of physical abilities that will
enable them to participate in many future
activities (Levine & Munsch, 2018).
Similarly, children need to develop
fine motor dexterity in preparation for
many related skills. According to Wilson
(1999), the human hand and brain
coevolves, so it is imperative for young
children to have opportunities to
strengthen these delicate muscles and
learn to manipulate their fingers. As they
move from early activities such as
grasping toys and twirling beads to more
challenging tasks such as holding utensils
and crayons, they advance from
rudimentary skills to more advanced
abilities that are precursors for writing.
Additionally, fine motor dexterity is
associated with essential life skills such as
tying shoes and buttoning clothing.
As their skills increase and children
learn to draw, weave, and play musical
instruments, they experience the benefit
of corresponding cognitive development
that is associated with dexterity. An ideal
way to promote fine motor development
and executive function is to engage young
children with hand rhymes that promote
oral language, auditory memory, and
imaginative skills. Also known as
fingerplays, they can be integrated with
math and literacy standards to align with
academic goals (Feldman, 2000).
Social and Emotional Development
Social and emotional skills are
essential to building relationships and can
be embellished by adding a playful
dimension to interactions. Relationships
serve as the foundation for your child’s
social development and helps them learn
about how to interact with others. By
learning about the research that supports
best practice, parents and educators can
facilitate the development of social and
emotional skills (Davies, 2011).
Children thrive in emotionally safe
environments in which they are allowed
to express themselves and be heard.
Although the authoritative parenting
style, which emphasizes high
expectations along with strong support for
achieving goals has become more
prevalent, many children continue to live
in unhealthy emotional environments
(Davies, 2011; Roggman, et al, 2008).
Parents who maintain composure and
seek creative ways to approach the daily
challenges of raising children will model
appropriate behaviors for children to
emulate. For example, think about the
difference between chanting “Whoa,
whoa, up you go!” before picking up a
child vs. commanding, “Come on, hurry
up, it’s time to go!” In these contrasting
ways to communicate a transition, you
can easily guess which one will be more
effective for fostering a positive
relationship (Bailey, 2015).
Furthermore, young children need
time to engage in sociodramatic play for
the sake of developing cooperative skills.
While children are immersed in the
scripts that they co-create, they must
negotiate their roles and narratives in
order to stay in the play episode. They
form relationships through their shared
activities, joint attention, and mutual
conversations, all of which are building
blocks to future school success (Frost,
Wortham, and Reifel, 2011).
Provide predictable routines
A playful approach to parenting and
caregiving does not preclude the necessity
of providing the security of a safe and
predictable environment. Children
experience many changes in their daily
lives and we cannot protect them from
many of the capricious events that we all
must endure. However, to the extent that
you can control the schedule, it is helpful
to provide a foundation of predictability
in daily life (Cutchlow, 2018).
The structure of a familiar routine is
helpful for children because it alleviates
their fear of the unknown. Children who
have been raised with the constructive
habits and sense of order that are inherent
in an organized life will be able to
internalize the ability to structure their
own lives. The predictability will
facilitate a sense of control, which
strengthens their resilience and helps
them cope with the challenge of
incremental changes. Each milestone in
life calls for the courage to master new
challenges, so the child who is
encouraged to enter school by herself will
eventually be ready to walk alone to the
neighbors’ house (Cutchlow, 2018).
Support the development of life skills
One of the hallmarks of the world-
renowned, highly respected Montessori
educational program is the emphasis on
self-regulation skills. Implementation of
the Montessori approach involves
providing an environment that
emphasizes order, purposeful activity, and
spontaneous exploration for learners.
Children are encouraged to self-select
playful activities but they must carefully
put away each set of materials before
embarking on their next project.
Additionally, they participate in all of
the chores that comprise daily life such as
preparing food, setting the table, washing
dishes, and folding linens. It is a program
that allows children to act freely when
choosing their projects yet also
cooperatively by working together to
maintain cleanliness and order (Lillard,
2005).
Some of the skill projects such as the
lacing board facilitate the development of
self-reliance with young children, while
others such as the sandpaper letters
prepare them for academic achievement.
Older children are challenged to complete
complex map puzzles and learn about
plants in the school garden.
Overall, the focus is on learning how
construct a productive life. The learners
engage in daily tasks to sustain a sense of
order by tending to the environment and
increase their knowledge and skills with
projects that expand with ever-increasing
complexity.
Scaffold language skills
Human infants are prepared to
communicate with their caregivers and
are responsive to the attempts that adults
and older children make to connect with
them. Research reveals that we can
actually quantify language acquisition
skills and that the verbal productivity of
the early environment is predictive of
later success in school (Hart and Risley,
1995, Suskind, 2017).
One impressive program, the Thirty
Million Words project was founded by a
pediatric surgeon who observed the
language development of patients who
had received cochlear implants. When she
realized that children who came from
homes with an abundance of conversation
demonstrated greater improvements than
the patients whose environments were
less talkative, she was inspired to develop
the TMW program to promote language
development.
The TMW program invites
participants to attend training sessions
that provide research-based rationale for
increasing home language during playful
interactions as well as directives on how
to intentionally increase the number of
words that their child hears each day. To
summarize this program, the author says:
Tune in, Talk more, Take turns.
Provide time for play
One of the benefits of a playful
approach to parenting is that it is truly
more enjoyable for everyone involved.
Think of a person who consistently
brightens your day and you will probably
think about a person who laughs easily, is
fun-loving, and…playful. As parents, it is
important to make time to play together
as a family and to provide time for your
child or children to play on their own.
Additionally, it is important to limit
screen time and carefully monitor the
shows that your children watch on
television. By thinking of screen time as
an occasional pastime, rather than a daily
habit, children will have time to read,
play, and develop their creative abilities.
When children have unstructured play
time, they are allowed to let their
imaginations soar because free play
cultivates innovative though. In the words
of Albert Einstein, play is the highest
form of research (Isaacson, 2007).
Conclusion
Each child is unique and deserves a
loving and caring home life which will
allow him or her to flourish. Keep in
mind that childhood is not a race to see
how quickly they can develop the skills of
reading and writing, nor a contest
between your children and others. Rather,
it offers a small window of time for them
to learn and develop at their individual
pace. Thus, a strong foundation of support
through the early years will allow your
child to feel safe and secure as they learn
through play and playful activities about
the world around them.
Lis Krimbill is an Assistant Professor
of Educational Administration at
Texas A&M University-San Antonio.
References Bailey, B. (2015). Conscious discipline: Building
resilient classrooms. Melbourne, FL: Loving
Guidance, Inc.
Copple, C. & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally
appropriate practice in Early Childhood
programs: Serving children birth through age
eight. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Davies, D. (2011). Child development: A practitioner’s
guide (3rd ed). New York, NY: The Guildford
Press.
Feldman, J. (2009). Transition tips and tricks for
teachers. Lewisville, NC: Gryphon House.
Frost, J., Wortham, S. & Reifel (2011). Play and child
development. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson.
Goldberg, S. (2018). Fun baby learning games.
Lewisville, NC: Gryphon House.
Hart, T. & Risley, B. (1995). Meaningful differences in
the everyday experience of young American
Children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes
Publishing Company.
Hirsh-Pasek, K. & Golinkoff, R. (2004). Einstein never
used flash cards: How our children really
learn – and why they need to play more and
memorize less. New York, NY: Random
House, LLC.
Isaacson, W. (2007). Einstein: His life and universe.
New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Levine, L. & Munsch, J. (2018). Child development:
An active learning approach. Los Angeles,
CA: Sage.
Lillard, A. (2008). Montessori: The science behind the
genius. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Roggman, L., Boyce, L., & Innocenti, M. (2008).
Developmental parenting: A guide for early
childhood practitioners. Baltimore: Brookes
Publishing Co.
Suskind, D. (2015). Thirty million words: Building a
child’s brain. New York, NY: Dutton.
A Brief History
Of
IPA/USA
Marcy Guddemi and Joe Frost
The origin of the International Play
Association and its affiliates in nearly 50
countries is close to 100 years old. In 1923,
Save the Children founder Eglantyne Jebb
drafted The Declaration of the Rights of the
Child. Jebb believed that the rights of a
child should be especially protected and
enforced. These ideas were adopted by the
International Save the Children Union, in
Geneva, on February 23, 1923 and endorsed
by the League of Nations General Assembly
on November 26, 1924 as the World Child
Welfare Charter.
These proclamations, however, were not
enforceable by international law, but rather
only guidelines for countries to follow.
Consequently, on November 20, 1959 the
United Nations General Assembly adopted
a much expanded version as its own
Declaration of the Rights of the Child,
adding ten principles in place of the original
five. Principal Nine of the 1959 Declaration
of Rights addresses the child’s right for
“full opportunity to play and recreation…”
November 20th has been adopted as the
Universal Children's Day as ongoing
celebration of that event.
Interest in providing quality play
opportunities for children had been
gradually increasing over the decades
before the signing of the Declaration of the
Rights of the Child and in 1955 a major
seminar on playgrounds was held in
Europe.
The need for international action was
evident. In 1961 IPA was born in
Scandinavia and held its first conference in
Copenhagen that year.
IPA has held eighteen (18) International
Conferences
1961– Copenhagen
1964 – Zurich
1967 – London/Liverpool: Recreation and
Play
1969 – Paris: Creative Play
1972 – Vienna: Play and Creativity
1975 – Milan: Adventure Playgrounds and
Children’s Creativity
1978 – Ottawa: Play in Human Settlements
1981 – Rotterdam: Growing up in an Adult
World – Beyond Play & Recreation
1984 – Ljubljana: Innovation –
Participation – Action
1987 – Stockholm: Creativity through Play
1990 – Tokyo: Play and Education
1993 – Melbourne: World Play Summit
1996 – Espoo: Dimensions of Play
1999 – Lisbon: The Community of Play
2002 – Sao Paulo: Culture and Play in
Urban Spaces
2005 – Berlin: Play: Learning for Life
2008 – Hong Kong: Play in a Changing
World
2011 – Cardiff: Playing into the Future –
Surviving and Thriving
2014 -- Istanbul
The United Nation’s International Year of
the Child in 1979 injected IPA with new
energy. Though IPA began its life with an
emphasis on adventure playgrounds it
gradually changed its focus to play itself
and to the child’s right to play. In the 1980’s
IPA was effective in establishing the word
“play” in article 31 of the UN Convention
on the Rights of the Child
Thus, in 1989, the Convention on the Rights
of the Child, which strengthened the
Declaration of Rights of 1959, was adopted
by UN General Assembly. On September 2,
1990 it became international law with one
notable exception: the US signed the
Charter but has not ratified it. The
Convention consists of 54 articles that
address the basic human rights to children
everywhere are entitled. Article 31
specifically addresses the child’s right play.
The American Association for the Child’s
Right to Play (IPA/USA) was formed in
Philadelphia in 1973 as the USA affiliate of
the International. The beginning of
IPA/USA started with playground creator
and author Paul Hogan’s 1967 trip to
Europe. Hogan was checking out adventure
playgrounds in London with Lady Allen of
Hurtwood when he first learned about IPA
and began attending their meetings.
Actually, the United States had IPA
members before the affiliate was formed by
Hogan. Mrs. Thomas Hess of Greenwich,
Connecticut, was the first American
member and Pacific Oaks College and
Children’s School in Pasadena, California,
was the first American organization
member, having joined in 1969.
By the early 1970’s IPA/USA membership
had grown to the point that a national
representatives was selected to send to IPA
World Council meetings which are held at
the triennial IPA meetings. The first USA
representative was Paul Hogan who
attended the 1975 Milan meeting two years
after IPA/USA was formed. The first
president of IPA/USA was not “elected.”
While attending that 1975 conference,
Hogan met Muriel Otter, the IPA secretary.
She “cornered him and made him president
of IPA/USA.” He consequently started
PlayPlans magazine and began to secure
subscribers and more members for
IPA/USA.
Elaine Ostroff followed Paul as USA
Representative to International. Donna
Seline attended the Ottawa IPA conference
in 1978 and was appointed USA national
representative by IPA President, Polly Hill
of Canada. Seline organized a regional
IPA/USA conference in 1980 at the
University of Minnesota with keynote
speakers Polly Hill and Brian Sutton-Smith.
A subsequent national IPA/USA conference
was held in 1983 at the University of
Minnesota with keynote speakers Janet
McLean and Joe Frost.
In June 1983, The International Conference
on Play and Play Environments; sponsored
by IPA/USA and twelve other state,
national, and international organizations;
was held at the University of Texas. This
was reputed to be the largest gathering of
play scholars ever convened, with more
than 500 participants from twelve nations.
At this conference, plans were initiated for
a more formal organization of IPA/USA
and for the 1986 national conference in
Cincinnati. In July, 1985, Donna Seline
submitted her resignation as national
representative, effective April, 1986.
In February 1986, Donna Seline initiated
calls for nominations for a formal Board of
Directors for IPA/USA and a mail election
was held. Elected for two-year terms were
Joe Frost (President and U.S.
Representative), Sue Wortham (Treasurer
and Membership Coordinator), Marcy
Guddemi (Newsletter Editor), and Board
members Jay Beckwith, Harris Forusz,
Roger Hart, Robin Moore, and Barbara
Sampson.
An USA/IPA national conference was
organized by Harris Forusz in 1986 and was
hosted by Adventure Playgrounds, Inc. and
the University of Cincinnati. Formal
resolutions were agreed upon, including a
pronouncement of support for the IPA 1977
Declaration of the Child’s Right to Play
adopted in Malta in 1977 and revised in
Vienna in 1982. Additional details for
modifying Incorporation and Bylaws
documents were addressed. Robin Moore
and Joe Frost participated in the 1986
World Council IPA meeting and special
International Year of Peace seminar in
Birmingham, UK. During this period a
number of adventure playgrounds were
developed in the U.S. By 1987, IPA
included members from fifty countries.
Thirty-five Americans attended the 1987
World Congress in Stockholm. By 1988
IPA/USA membership had grown to 165. In
1988 Tom Jambor was elected president
and in that year the national conference was
held in Washington, D. C., directed by
Barbara Sampson, Robin Moore, and
Donna Seline. Board members were Tom
Jambor (President), Helge Stapel
(Treasurer), Marcy Guddemi (Newsletter
Editor), and Board Members Duraid Da’as,
Robin Epstein, Harris Forusz, Paul Hogan,
Lulu King, Mary Lillie, Ruth Morrison,
Jack Pentes, Donna Seline, Randy Smith,
Frank Rudloff, and William Weisz. In
January 1989, this expanded Board met in
Cincinnati and made plans for expanding
revenue, newsletter, membership, and
creating a clearinghouse on information. At
the Tokyo conference in 1990, Robin
Moore of IPA/USA, already an IPA
international officer, was the first American
to be elected IPA president.
With these patterns in place, IPA/USA
programs continued to expand to the present
time, including community PlayDays,
annual play advocacy presentations at
national conferences, semi-annual national
IPA/USA conferences, promoting the
international IPA conference, preparing and
distributing materials for parents and school
administrators promoting advocacy and
reinstatement for school recess, media
campaigns for recess and outdoor play, and
multiple efforts to support and gain
awareness of the value of play and the
child’s right to play. National conferences
were held jointly with The Association for
the Study of Play conferences at the Strong
Museum of Play in 2007 and at Georgia
State University in 2010. In 2010, Olga
Jarrett was the outgoing President and Tom
Reed was the newly elected president.
Play Resources
o Book Reviews
o IPA Brochures
o IPA Working Paper on
Children’s Play
o PlayRights Magazine
o Resources and Links
IPA/USA is the American Affiliate of the
International Play Association: Promoting
the Child's Right to Play. The purpose of
this organization is to protect, preserve,
and promote play as a fundamental right
for all humans. Membership is open to any
individual, group, or organization which
endorses the right of children to play,
stated in the United Nations' Declaration
of the Rights of the Child (1959), Article
7, paragraph 3: "The child shall have full
opportunity
for play and recreation which should be
directed to the same purposes as
education; society and the public
authorities shall endeavor to promote the
enjoyment of the right...” and in the
Convention on the Rights of the Child
(1989), Article 31:
1. States Parties recognize the right
of the child to rest and leisure, to
engage in play and recreational
activities appropriate to the age of
the child and to participate freely
in cultural life and the arts.
2. States Parties shall respect and
promote the right of the child to
participate fully in cultural and
artistic life and shall encourage the
provision of appropriate and equal
opportunities for cultural, artistic,
recreational and leisure activity.
IPA/USA holds a national conference
every three years and sponsors or
cosponsors workshops and symposia from
time to time. A quarterly newsletter,
available on the website, features articles
on play environments, safety, toys and
materials, play leadership, and the role of
play in child development. IPA
International publishes an international
journal called PlayRights and hosts a
World Conference every three years.
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT:
• Play, along with the basic needs of
nutrition, health, shelter, and
education, is vital for the
development of the potential of all
children, Family participation
needs to be strengthened by
support systems such as a play
leadership, and
• Environments and programs to meet
children's real needs should be
created.
IF YOU ARE CONCERNED THAT:
• Society is indifferent to the
importance of play,
• Schools are indifferent to the
importance of play,
• Children are increasingly living with
inadequate provision for survival
and development,
• Children are increasingly living in
inappropriate housing settings
with less spaces to play,
• Children are neglected in
environmental planning,
• Cultural traditions are deteriorating
and that children are Increasingly
exploited commercially,
• Children are constantly exposed to
war, violence, and destruction,
• "Winning at all costs” dominates
children's sports and play,
THEN PLEASE CONSIDER
BECOMING A MEMBER OF IPA/USA
and become a part of an international,
interdisciplinary organization that
supports and works for the Child's Right
to Play.
IPA is an international NGO,
non-governmental organization founded
in 1961. It provides a forum for
exchange and action across disciplines
and across sectors.
IPA’s purpose is to protect, preserve and
promote the child’s right to play as a
fundamental human right. ~Article 31 of
the United Nations Convention on the
Rights of the Child
“That every child has the right to rest and
leisure, to engage in play and recreational
activities appropriate to the age of the child
and to participate freely in cultural life and
the arts.
That member governments shall respect
and promote the right of the child to
participate fully in cultural and artistic life
and shall encourage the provision of
appropriate and equal opportunities for
cultural, artistic, recreational and leisure
activity.”
Marcy Guddemi, PhD, MBA, is the former
Executive Director Gesell Institute of Child
Development. She is the current Treasurer
of IPA/USA, Past President of IPA/USA,
and Past Secretary of IPA. She has also
served as Newsletter Editor and Secretary
of IPA/USA.
Joe Frost, EdD. L.H.D., is the Parker
Centennial Professor Emeritus at the
University of Texas at Austin, where he
taught for 34 years. He has authored or co-
authored 18 books, several having been
translated into other languages, as well as
six volumes of original papers, reports and
articles. Dr. Frost has also served as editor
for many texts. He is known all over the
world for his more than 30 years of work on
early childhood and children’s play
environments. He has also served as a
consultant for playgrounds worldwide and
is a past president of both the Association
for Childhood Education International and
International Play Association/USA
