Benefits of role play in the Classroom

adults role in supporting children's play and analyse how play is necessary for the development of children
Dr.DaisyWatson Profile Pic
Dr.DaisyWatson,France,Professional
Published Date:03-07-2017
Your Website URL(Optional)
Comment
THE POWER OF A Research Summary on Play and Learning PLAY Dr. Rachel E. White forINTRODUCTION Virtually every child, the world over, plays. The drive to play is so intense that children will do so when they have no real toys, when parents do not actively encourage the behavior, and even in the middle of a war zone. In the eyes of a young child, running, pretending, and building are fun. Researchers and educators know that these playful activities benefit the development of the whole child across social, cognitive, physical, and emotional domains. Indeed, play is such an instrumental component to healthy child devel- opment that the American Academy of Pediatrics (Ginsburg, 2007) issued a white paper on the topic, the National Associ- ation for the Education of Young Children (2009) named play as a central component in developmentally appropriate educational practices, and the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights (1989) recognized play as a fundamental right of every child. Yet, while experts continue to expound a powerful argument for the importance of play in children’s lives, the actual time children spend playing continues to decrease. Today, children play eight hours less each week than their counterparts did two decades ago (Elkind, 2008). Under pressure of rising academic standards, play is being replaced by test preparation in kindergartens and grade schools, and parents who aim to give their preschoolers a leg up are led to believe that flashcards and educational “toys” are the path to success. Our society has created a false dichotomy between play and learning. This paper presents an overview of the scientific research that guides the educational philosophy that play is learning, While experts continue to discussing many overlapping forms of child-centered play, including social, object, pretend, physical, and media play. expound a powerful argument for Through play, children learn to regulate their behavior, lay PLAY, the actual time children the foundations for later learning in science and mathe- spend playing continues to matics, figure out the complex negotiations of social relationships, build a repertoire of creative problem solving decrease. skills, and so much more. Finally, this paper also addresses the important role for adults in guiding children through playful learning opportunities. 5WHAT IS PLAY? Despite the fact that adults can intuitively identify play (Smith & Vollstedt, 1985), full consensus on a formal definition continues to elude the researchers and theorists who study it. Definitions range from discrete descriptions of various types of play such as physical play, construction play, language play, or symbolic play (Miller & Almon, 2009), to lists of broad criteria, based on observations and attitudes, that are meant to capture the essence of all play behaviors (Burghardt, 2011; Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983). The Play Continuum A majority of the contemporary definitions of play focus on several key criteria. The founder of the National Institute for Play, Stuart Brown, has described play as “anything that spontaneously is done for its own sake.” More specifically, he says it “appears purposeless, produces pleasure and joy, and leads one to the next stage of mastery” (as quoted in Tippett, 2008). Similarly, Miller and Almon (2009) say that play includes “activities that are freely chosen and directed by children and arise from intrinsic motivation” (p. 15). Often, play is defined along a continuum as more or less playful using a set of behav- ioral and dispositional criteria (Krasnor & Pepler, 1980; Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983): PLAY IS PLEASURABLE. Children must enjoy the activity or it is not play. PLAY IS INTRINSICALLY MOTIVATED. Children engage in play simply for the satisfaction the behavior itself brings. It has no extrinsically motivated function or goal. PLAY IS PROCESS ORIENTED. When children play, the means are more important than the ends. PLAY IS FREELY CHOSEN. It is spontaneous and voluntary. If a child is pressured, she will likely not think of the activity as play. PLAY IS ACTIVELY ENGAGED. Players must be physically and/or mentally involved in the activity. PLAY IS NON-LITERAL. It involves make-believe. 6According to this view, children’s playful behaviors can Guided play takes two forms. At a very basic level, adults range in degree from 0-100% playful. A behavior that can enrich the child’s environment by providing objects or meets three of the above criteria would be considered more experiences that promote aspects of a curriculum. In the playful than one that meets only two, but importantly, a more direct form of guided play, parents or other adults can degree of playful behavior is acknowledged even if only scaffold children’s play by joining in the fun as a co-player, two criteria are met. Rubin and colleagues did not assign asking thoughtful questions, commenting on children’s greater weight to any one dimension in determining discoveries, or encouraging further exploration or new playfulness; however, other researchers have suggested that facets to the child’s activity (for a review, see Fisher et al., process orientation and a lack of obvious functional 2011). Although playful learning can be somewhat struc- purpose may be the most important aspects of play (e.g., tured and adult-facilitated, it must also be child-centered Pellegrini, 2009). (Nicolopolou, McDowell, & Brockmeyer, 2006). Play should stem from the child’s own desire. Both free and guided play are essential elements in a child- PLAY builds the foundation for a centered approach to playful learning. Intrinsically motivated free play provides the child with true autonomy, while lifetime of learning. guided play is an avenue through which parents and educators can provide more targeted learning experiences. In either case, play should be actively engaged, it should From the perspective of a continuum, play can thus blend be predominantly child-directed, and it must be fun. with other motives and attitudes that are less playful, such as work. Unlike play, work is typically not viewed as enjoyable and it is extrinsically motivated (i.e., it is goal- oriented). Researcher Joan Goodman (1994) suggested that hybrid forms of work and play are not a detriment to learning; rather, they can provide optimal contexts for learning. For example, a child may be engaged in a difficult, goal-directed activity set up by his teacher, but he may still be actively engaged and intrinsically motivated. At this mid-point between play and work, the child’s motivation, coupled with guidance from an adult, can create robust opportunities for playful learning. The Role of Free and Guided Play Critically, recent research supports the idea that adults can facilitate children’s learning while maintaining a playful approach in interactions known as “guided play” (Fisher, Hirsch-Pasek, Golinkoff, Singer, & Berk, 2011; Hirsch- Pasek, Golinkoff, Berk, & Singer, 2009). Guided play also falls on a continuum based on how much adults set up the environment and participate in play. The adult’s role in play varies as a function of their educational goals and the child’s developmental level (Hirsch-Pasek et al, 2009). 7PLAY AND DEVELOPMENT Over the past few decades, researchers in the fields of jumping all contribute to the development of fine and gross education and child psychology have amassed significant motor skills. When children have the chance to direct their evidence for the necessity of play in children’s lives. There own learning through play, they are able to address their is no denying that play is fun, and certainly fun is its biggest own immediate and developmental needs and find activities draw for children. However, as children play, they also that are most conducive to their individual learning styles. develop critical cognitive, emotional, social, and physical skills. Play even contributes to proper brain development In play, children develop a lasting disposition to learn. (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). In this way, play is an Having control over the course of one’s own learning, as in important end in itself; it is also a means to other ends. The free play, promotes desire, motivation, and mastery skills children learn through play in the early years set the (Erikson, 1985; Hurwitz, 2003). Children also learn how to stage for future learning and success from the kindergarten seek out knowledge; play involves exploration, hypothesis classroom to the workplace. testing, and discovery. What is more, all this is done in a safe, anxiety- and risk-free environment where children are Play presents children with a particularly strong opportunity free to test the limits of their knowledge and abilities with for growth because it meets the needs of the whole, relatively few repercussions (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff, individual child. All domains of children’s development – 2003). They learn to have confidence in their ability to solve cognitive, social, emotional, and physical – are intricately a problem, and they become resilient in the face of a intertwined. Play benefits each of these skills in direct and challenge (Erikson, 1985; Hurwitz, 2003; Pepler & Ross, indirect ways. Children learn and practice cognitive skills 1981). Play builds the foundation for a lifetime of learning. including language, problem solving, creativity, and self- regulation. Socio-emotional growth can be seen in children’s In PLAY, children develop a ability to interact with others, negotiate, and compromise. lasting disposition to learn. They also practice strategies to cope with fear, anger, and frustration. Moreover, block building, drawing, running, and 8Many of these skills, first developed through play, are SOCIAL PLAY crucial for success in the 21st century. There is no doubt Social play is defined as play that occurs in the interaction that amassing knowledge of the world around us continues of children with adults or other children. Typically, social to be important in our society – and playful learning can play is not classified as a unique category of play because help children to learn content-based lessons, too (for a any type of play – object play, pretend play, and physical review, see Fisher et al., 2011). Increasingly, however, to play – has the potential to be enacted alone or with others. achieve success in a global economy, the individuals that Interactions within play scenarios, however, provide great make up our workforce must also be socially adept benefits to children whether their partners are adults or and highly creative. The “6Cs” – Collaboration, strong peers, and are therefore worthy of note. Communication, knowledge of Content, Critical thinking, Creative innovation, and Confidence to fail and try again – will be essential to our children’s future success. Many of these skills are not easily taught in the classroom; PLAY with parents sets the stage however, they are readily learned through play (Hirsch- for children’s ability to successfully Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003; Hirsch-Pasek et al., 2009; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2008). play with peers. Social Play with Adults Parents, especially mothers, are often children’s first play partners. Starting in infancy, parents initiate play with children through simple games like peek-a-boo. By the second year of life, parents and children regularly engage in more complex forms of play such as pretending to race cars or care for a baby doll. Early involvement from parents as initiators, directors, and partners in play serves to scaffold young children’s abilities so that play struc- tured by an adult is more sustained and sophisticated than the child would be able to achieve alone or with peers (Bornstein, The benefits of play begin to accrue early in infancy and Haynes, Legler, O’Reilly, & Painter, 1997; Escalona, though play gradually decreases over childhood, it never 1968; Feise, 1990; Stevenson, Leavitt, Thompson, & really ends. It changes forms according to the needs and Roach, 1988). skills of children (and adults) at a given age. Some benefits are fairly universal and cross play types; some are more As children mature, they begin to take initiative in gener- specific to one type or simply stronger in certain types of ating their own activities (e.g., Fein & Fryer, 1995), but play than others. Yet, the benefits of play nearly always parents remain involved on the sidelines through comments overlap in some combination to serve the needs of the and prompting (Haight & Miller, 1993). Play with parents whole child. The following sections will describe some of sets the stage for children’s ability to successfully play with the most relevant benefits of social, object, pretend, peers (Haight & Miller, 1992). physical, and media play. 9years of age, but when children are in the company of a Social Play With Peers familiar peer, they can cooperate in play through games like With age and increasingly mature social capacities, peek-a-boo or running and chasing after one another as early children’s interactive play with peers becomes progres- as 18 months (Brenner & Mueller, 1982). Around this same sively more common and complex. Mildred Parten (1932) time, children reliably interact during play by showing each established four levels of social play that are still used today other their toys, occasionally offering to share, inviting peers as a broad framework to describe increasing social maturity to play, expressing disapproval of their playmate’s behavior, in play over the early years (typical age of appearance, and communicating their feelings (Hughes, 1999). At two according to Parten, in parentheses): years of age, children can engage in joint activities with 1. Solitary play (2 – 2½ years): The child plays alone. shared goals, such as making a bridge out of blocks or having a tea party. By around three years, they can engage 2. Parallel play (2½ – 3½): Children may be engaged in in cooperative play with a shared purpose between players similar activities but they play separately. and clearly differentiated, complementary roles (e.g., leader- 3. Associative play (3½ – 4½): Children are playing follower, or mother-baby; Howes, Unger, & Seidner, 1989). separately but may share, pay attention to others, and/or communicate with others about their play. By providing children with the opportunity to exert greater control over their situation, play with peers sets 4. Cooperative play (4½): Children are engaged in play up a robust context for the development of the whole with a common goal and they work cooperatively to child, including benefits to cognitive, social, and achieve the goal. emotional development. In contrast to parent-child relationships in which parents are typically in charge, peer interactions have a relatively even distribution of power. Although the frequency of social Thus, in play among peers, children must jointly establish interaction does increase over time, the rules of the game (e.g., “We’re building a bridge,” “I’ll be the princess, you can be the dragon,” “This towel is children are quite capable of social the moat”), and in doing so they practice the skills of interaction from a very early age. Parten found that children followed a developmental progression through each of the four levels, exhibiting less solitary play from ages two to four in favor of more interactive forms of play. This description implied that solitary play at older ages is a sign of social immaturity. However, solitary play is, in fact, a common occurrence into the school years, and the quality of children’s solitary play increases with age (for a review, see Johnson, Christie, & Wardle, 2005). Moreover, Parten’s research has also been criti- cized for underestimating children’s ability to engage in social play at younger ages. More recent research provides a revised account of the development of social interaction in play settings. Although the frequency planning, negotiation, and cooperation (Hughes, 1999). of social interaction does increase over time, children are Importantly, play with peers is rife with conflict, as when quite capable of social interaction from a very early age. both partners want to be the mommy or one child takes a Parten described the onset of cooperative play around 4½ block the other wanted. As they navigate their way 10through such situations, children learn how their own Exploratory Play desires may differ from those of another child, how to Exploratory play is the first form of object play and typically advocate for their own ideas, how to deal with frustration, begins around five months of age. By the second year, how work in a group, and how to respond in socially children begin to combine objects in play (e.g., put play food appropriate ways (Berk, Mann, & Ogan, 2006; Hirsch- on a plate or build a tower of a couple of blocks). Around Pasek et al. 2009; Pellis & Pellis, 2009; Tepperman, 2007; this time children also start to treat objects according to their Vygotsky, 1978). The diverse skills that children gain intended function (e.g., blocks are for stacking). Then later through social play with peers help them feel competent within the second year, children begin to treat objects in social situations (e.g., Connolly & Doyle, 1984; symbolically; for example, a block may represent a piece of Hirsch-Pasek et al. 2009; Singer & Singer, 2005), while cake (Hughes, 1999). Over the following few years, also contributing to cognitive and emotional growth. children’s use of objects in play continues in large part through the use of objects in pretend play and the creation OBJECT PLAY of increasingly complex and representationally realistic structures in construction play (Reifel, 1984). They also use As soon as children acquire the physical capacity to pick art materials to create symbolic representations of their up and manipulate objects, they begin to play with those thoughts and the world around them (DeLoache, 2004). By objects (Hughes, 1999). Throughout childhood, object play age four, construction play may account for as much as half remains a large part of the daily routine, occupying approx- of children’s free-play time in preschool classrooms (Pelle- imately 10-15% of children’s waking hours by conservative grini & Bjorklund, 2004; Rubin et al., 1983), and children’s estimation (Smith & Connolly, 1980). interest in building extends well into the elementary school years (Christie & Johnsen, 1987). Object Play Children can use PLAY to Play with objects is believed to make significant contributions scientifically reason about novel to children’s physical, social, and cognitive development. Manipulation of small objects gives children the chance to objects and test hypotheses about practice fine motor skills, and play with larger loose parts how those objects operate. Object play can be formally defined as the active, playful manipulation of objects (Bjorklund & Gardiner, 2009). Examples of object play include throwing a ball around or building a racetrack out of blocks. Although debates exist as to whether children’s exploration of objects or construction play (i.e., organized, goal-oriented play, in which children use various materials to build symbolic struc- tures) can rightly be considered play (see Pellegrini, 2009; Hughes, 1999), several notable researchers have recently included these interactions with objects as examples of playful involves gross motor skills. As discussed earlier, interactive learning (e.g., Fisher et al., 2011; Hirsch-Pasek & object play with adults and peers benefits children’s social Golinkoff, 2003). Thus, this paper will also take a liberal development. Object play also contributes to cognitive devel- view on the inclusion of exploratory and construction play opment, including learning about the nature of objects, within the overarching category of play with objects. problem-solving, creativity, and foundational skills for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. 11played with, but also about a category of objects. Through Cognitive Benefits exploratory play, children are able to learn about the properties of and uses for objects that they can touch, Conceptual Knowledge through hear, and see, but they can also make inferences to learn Exploration about properties that are not so easy to ascertain. Piaget believed children to be little scientists, who were driven to perform everyday “experiments” that would Problem-solving and Creativity reveal the nature of their world. Through solitary object Given the imaginative and flexible nature of play, special play and exploratory play, children are introduced to the attention has been given in child development research to ways objects work (“What does it do?”) and how they can its contributions to creative problem-solving. When exert control over those objects (“What can I do with it?”; children play, they experiment with different behaviors – Bjorklund & Gardiner, 2011, p. 154). Research has shown build new block towers, create new shapes in sculpting that children can indeed use play to scientifically reason clay – which help them develop the creativity and about novel objects in their environment and to test strategies necessary to successfully tackle novel problems hypotheses about how those objects operate. Studies have (Johnson et al., 2005). demonstrated that when young children are presented with a puzzling new toy, their first instinct is to engage in Convergent and Divergent Problem exploratory play, touching and manipulating parts of the Solving toy to figure out how it works (Schulz & Bonawitz, 2007). Convergent problems require children to organize pieces of disparate information to arrive at one correct answer. The ability to solve convergent problems has been linked PLAY has been described as to children’s performance on standardized intelligence and classroom tests where there is a single solution to practice in divergent thinking, each question (Guilford, 1967). A classic study illustrates because in play, children are the impact of play on children’s ability to generate solutions to convergent problems. Sylva (1977) directed constantly coming up with new ideas and recombining them to create novel scenarios. Amazingly, children’s play with objects not only teaches them about the particular objects with which they personally interact, but the knowledge gained through exploratory play can help children generalize about broad categories of similar objects. In a study conducted by Baldwin, Markman, and Melartin (1994), 9-16 month-old babies were presented with novel toys such as horns or castanets that children to retrieve an object that was placed out of their had non-obvious properties (i.e., honking, clacking). After reach, without moving from their seat. The experimenter only a brief exposure to the toy, the researchers showed provided each child with two short sticks that could reach children a similar toy. Upon receiving the new object, the faraway object only if they were connected to one children immediately tried to produce the non-obvious another to form a longer stick. Children who had an property; they had learned not only about the toys they 12opportunity to play with the sticks before this task were of an adult or had no prior exposure to the objects (Dansky 1 better at finding the correct solution to this convergent & Silverman, 1973 ). problem (i.e., connecting the two sticks) than children in a control group who previously had not seen the sticks. Research also indicates that the characteristics of Although children in a third group who observed an adult children’s play materials impacts divergent problem- model the solution also correctly solved the problem more solving ability. Pepler & Ross (1981) assigned often than the control group, they were not as motivated preschoolers to play with a single-solution puzzle (i.e., a or persistent in their problem solving as children in the convergent toy) or a multiple-option block set (i.e., a play group. They often gave up if they failed to immedi- divergent toy). On later tasks, children who played with ately solve the problem, whereas children in the play the divergent toy were more innovative and flexible in group were more likely to keep trying new strategies until their approaches to solving problems than their peers who they solved the problem. played with convergent toys. While the benefits of experience with convergent toys were limited to problem Divergent problems seem to call upon creativity to a greater solving in similar convergent tasks, the benefits of extent (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003), since they divergent experiences transferred more broadly. Children require problem solvers to consider a range of possible who played with the divergent toys were generally solutions; there is no single right answer to a divergent successful on a range of both divergent and convergent problem. Play has been described as practice in divergent problem solving tasks, suggesting that engaging in thinking, because in play, children are constantly coming divergent playful activities might instill the idea that there up with new ideas and recombining them to create novel can be numerous creative solutions to a problem. scenarios (Pearson, Russ, & Spangel, 2008; Singer & Singer, 1990). Experimental evidence supports this claim. 1 While this study remains one of the most commonly cited pieces of exper- For example, children who were given 10 minutes to freely imental evidence for the effect of play on divergent problem solving in play with paperclips, matchboxes, or other small everyday recent years, it is important to note that the results are controversial. objects were subsequently able to produce more creative When Smith & Whitney (1987) tried to control for possible experimenter bias through a double-blind experimental paradigm, these effects of play uses for those objects than children who imitated the play on divergent thinking did not replicate. 13PLAY lays the foundation for higher-order thinking and later learning of formal STEM concepts. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Recently, the field of education has experienced a push to Moreover, research has linked early object play with develop the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and positive math and science outcomes. Object play, including Math) skills that are important to success in the 21st century. play with art materials, has been shown to be related to Through play with objects – blocks, sand, balls, crayons, better visuo-spatial skills (Caldera et al., 1999; Hirsch, and paper – children begin to understand logical scientific 1996). Wolfgang, Stannard, & Jones (1996) followed a thinking, such as the concept of cause and effect. They also group of 37 children over 16 years and found that the practice mathematical skills such as measurement, quantifi- complexity of their play with blocks as 4-year-olds was cation, classification, counting, ordering, and part-whole significantly and positively related to their level of relations (Gelfer & Perkins, 1988; Ginsberg, Inoue & Seo, achievement in mathematics during middle and high 1999; Piaget, 1962; Ness & Farenga, 2007). The informal school, even controlling for IQ and gender. This research understanding children gain through experimentation, suggests that complex object play could provide children observation, and comparison in play lays the foundation for with the early mathematical understanding that supports higher-order thinking and later learning of formal STEM later learning in formal contexts. concepts (Bergen, 2009; Ginsberg, 2006; Shaklee et al., 2008 as cited in Fisher et al., 2011; Tepperman, 2007). In summary, research on object play suggests it can benefit children’s cognitive development in the short- and long- Free play provides rich opportunities for children to exper- term. Giving children the chance to freely experiment with iment with mathematical concepts. Ginsburg, Pappas and diverse objects provides information about the world and Seo (2001; see also Sarama & Clements, 2009) found the child’s place in it, allows them to create and express evidence of mathematical activity during almost half of themselves by making new objects or art, encourages their observations of preschoolers’ play. Specifically, they creative problem solving, and builds the foundation upon noted that children spent 25% of their time exploring which formal math and science training can be built. As patterns and shapes, 13% comparing the magnitude of discussed in the section on social play, interactive object objects, 12% on enumeration, 6% exploring transfor- play also builds children’s social, emotional, and mation, 5% on spatial relations such as direction and regulatory skills as they learn to cooperate with one distance, and finally 2% on the classification of objects another and regulate their own behaviors in order to jointly into groups. Even without specific adult guidance in the plan play activities. moment, children’s free play is rich with STEM lessons. 14Gradually from toddlerhood to preschool age, pretending PRETEND PLAY becomes increasingly decontextualized so that play can Pretend play is a hallmark activity of early childhood. occur independent of tangible objects, and children can Pretending involves creating alternate realities to the real create imaginary characters and situations. By preschool, world. Children can enact different people, places or times, children have reached the “high season” of pretend play and objects become symbols for what is imagined (Fein, (Singer & Singer, 1990), and up to two-thirds of the time 1981; Lillard, 2011). Here, pretend play refers to a range they spend in make-believe play is interactive (i.e., socio- of behaviors including symbolic play (i.e., mentally trans- dramatic play; Rubin, 1982, 1986). Overt pretending is forming objects to represent pretend entities, as when a thought to wane in middle childhood as children become child pretends a banana is a telephone) as well as socio- more interested in organized games, but reports indicate that dramatic play (i.e., pretend play with a group in which older children are most likely to engage in fantasy privately children cooperate and take on complementary characters). or in the context of technological media (Bergen & Williams, 2008, as cited in Bergen, 2009; Singer & Singer, 1990). The Timeline for Pretense The Benefits of Pretend Play The developmental timeline for pretense is well established (Carlson & Zelazo, 2008; Fein, 1981; Garvey, 1991). Pretend The benefits of play are perhaps best addressed in the area play first appears around 12 months of age. At this point, it of pretend play, both theoretically and empirically. Several is typically directed toward the self, as when children pretend eminent scholars (e.g., Erikson, 1950; Freud, 1958; Piaget, to sleep or eat (Piaget, 1962). Later, children begin to direct 1962) of the last century spoke of the significance of this their play toward other people and objects. By the middle of type of play in cognitive, social and emotional development. the second year, children transform objects in their Vygotsky was perhaps most resolute in his belief that pretend environment by giving animate characteristics to inanimate play is a “leading factor in development,” noting that in play objects like dolls or stuffed animals. Shortly thereafter, they children develop a range of skills and learn culturally valued also assign new, pretend identities for objects (e.g., a banana competencies (Berk, Mann, & Ogan, 2006). becomes a telephone). Two-year-olds can understand pretend actions by adult play partners and respond appropriately Research over the past few decades has supported within the pretend context. For example, if an adult pretends Vygotsky’s bold claim, underscoring the ability of pretend that a cardboard box is a bathtub, the child can then fill the play to serve the development of the whole child. The bathtub with “water” (Harris & Kavanaugh, 1993; Lillard & following sections will review several ways in which Witherington, 2004). pretend play impacts children’s growing abilities in the social, cognitive, and emotional realms. The benefits of play are perhaps best addressed in the area of pretend PLAY. 15Cognitive Benefits Creativity Language and Literacy Pretending and language are each, at their core, modes of As in play with objects, pretend play has been linked to symbolic thought. Just as a block can stand in for a car in creativity, and creative problem solving in particular (e.g., pretense, in language, letters and words represent Dansky, 1980; Russ, 1993, 2004; Saracho, 2002). A meta- concepts, objects, or events in our world. Pretend play analysis of play studies found that one of the strongest links allows children to practice creating symbols as they among a long list of correlates of pretend play was to mentally transform objects within a play scenario. As divergent thinking, a key component of creativity (Fischer, such, pretending contributes to children’s understanding 1992). In one study, Dansky (1980) assigned children to of symbols and their meaning, which is essential for one of three conditions (1) free play, (2) imitation of an counterfactual thinking, empathy, and formal learning adult’s actions, or (3) problem-solving experience, and (consider using numerals in math or diagrams to represent found engaging in free play increased performance on a atomic structures in chemistry). It is also particularly later divergent problem-solving task. However, this relation relevant to literacy-related learning. Hanline, Milton and held only for children who were observed to display high Phelps (2010) found that preschoolers who had high levels of pretense in their play, suggesting that there might levels of representation in their block constructions had be something special about the nature of pretend play, over higher reading abilities and a faster rate of growth in and above other forms of play, for promoting flexible and reading in early elementary school. creative problem solving. Pretend PLAY has been linked to creativity, and creative problem solving in particular. The large amount of time children spend pretending also Although these and similar studies related to object play provides opportunities to practice language use. During together are suggestive of positive effects of play on pretend play, children talk more, speak in lengthier utter- divergent thinking, the research on pretend play and ances, and use more complex language (e.g., future tense, divergent problem solving is correlational. Without interrogative clauses, conditional verbs, descriptive further experimental study it is premature to assume that adjectives, mental state verbs) than when they are pretending causes increased divergent thinking; the engaged in other activities (Fekonja, Umek, & Kranjc, relation could also be due to a third factor such intellectual 2005 as cited in Fisher et al., 2011; Singer & Singer, flexibility, which is believed to be a prerequisite for both 1981). Moreover, in their research, Dickinson and constructs (Carlson & White, 2012). 16Early pretense is related to later literacy outcomes including reading comprehension and the ability to communicate clearly through speech and writing. Moreton (1991, as cited in Fisher et al., 2011) found that kindergarteners’ vocabulary was positively related to the amount of time they spent talking with other children during pretend play sessions at three years of age. In addition to oral language proficiency, dramatic play contributes to children’s developing narrative abilities (i.e., thinking in stories). In jointly creating a story with a partner or group, children must communicate their own ideas in ways that others can understand and integrate each partner’s ideas into a single coherent narrative (for a review, see Fisher et al., 2011). Fisher and colleagues (2011) suggest that children may be better prepared to understand narratives when they have experienced similar concepts through play, such as identifying and acting out characters or creating contextual descriptions to support a fantasy scenario. Pretense and narrative ability do appear to be related in the preschool years: Trionfi and Reese (2009) reported that children with imaginary companions tended to produce richer narratives than their peers who were not so fantasy prone. Moreover, pretense in the early years is related to later literacy outcomes including reading comprehension and the ability to communicate clearly through speech and writing (for a review, see Nicolopoulu, 2006 and Tepperman, 2007). Bergen and Mauer (2000) found that children with who engaged in more play with literacy materials (e.g., pretend reading to stuffed animals, making shopping lists) at age four had more advanced language abilities and reading readiness in kindergarten. Finally, experimental research has repeatedly shown that when children listen to and reenact a story, they comprehend and remember more about the story than children who did not play out the scenes (Pellegrini & Galda, 1982; Saltz, Dixon, & Johnson, 1977; Williamson & Silvern, 1984). 17Executive Function Noted Russian psychologist, Lev Vygotsky, believed that In psychological terminology, the cognitive abilities behind “a child’s greatest self-control occurs in play (1978, p. conscious self-control of thought, action, and emotion are 99).” He proposed that pretend play, in particular, could known as executive function. They involve a group of be a leading factor in the development of the child’s ability related processes including inhibition of impulses, working to self-regulate. Indeed, pretending provides practice in memory, planning, and cognitive flexibility. Executive many aspects of executive function: for example, children function develops rapidly in childhood, concurrent with must be able to flexibly view an object both as what it truly maturation of prefrontal brain regions (for a review, see is and as its pretend identity, inhibit their own desires in Carlson, Zelazo, & Faja, 2012), and continues to strengthen order to follow the rules of the group, and plan elaborate into the mid-20s (Zelazo, 2012). Early executive function story scenarios. abilities have been implicated in school readiness, (Blair & Razza, 2007) as well as the development of memory, Playful preschool curricula can improve children’s attention, intelligence, morality, and emotion regulation (for executive function skills. Following Vygotsky’s theory, a review, see Zelazo, Carlson, & Kesek, 2008). Moreover, the Tools of the Mind preschool program (Bodrova & measures of executive function at age four have been Leong, 2006) was developed with the goal of improving shown to predict a host of long-term outcomes including physical health, substance dependence, personal finances, and criminality (Shoda, Mischel, & Peake, 1990; Moffitt et al., 2011). Such research is contributing to a strong case Early executive function abilities that building a child’s executive function skills should be a have been implicated in school priority in early education. readiness, the development of memory, attention, intelligence, morality and emotion regulation. 18Stepping into the shoes of a character and imagining what he pretend play on children’s self-regulatory abilities. Saltz, Dixon, and Johnson (1977) developed a pre-tense training would say, do or feel might help program for low-income preschoolers. After a full year of children to develop an under- participation in the program, children who were trained in thematic pretense (i.e., fairy tales) tested higher on standing of other people. executive function than children who received socio- dramatic training in realistic roles, those who heard fantasy young children’s self-regulatory abilities. Through the stories without enactment, and the regular curriculum training of mature pretend play, children learn to use toys control group. Researchers concluded from these findings and props symbolically, develop consistent and extensive that the abstract or symbolic nature of imaginative activities narratives, maintain rules and roles, and plan play could be responsible for the improvements seen in scenarios from beginning to end (Bodrova, Leong, Atwill, executive function. Ko, & Saifer. 2009). Several evaluation studies have found the Tools of the Mind program to be effective in Recent research shows that even a small dose of pretend improving participants’ executive function relative to play – less than 10 minutes – improves children’s control groups (Barnett, Jung, Yarosz, Thomas, Hornbeck, performance on a subsequent executive function task, et al., 2008; Bodrova & Leong, 2006; Diamond, Barnett, further suggesting that pretending may encourage the Thomas, & Munro, 2007). flexible thinking required for children to overcome impulses and successfully control behavior (White & Within the field of child psychology, studies have estab- Carlson, 2011). Taken as a whole, this line of research lished consistent links between executive function and indicates that encouraging children to engage in pretend pretense abilities (Albertson & Shore, 2009; Carlson, play, and furthermore cultivating more mature forms of White, & Davis-Unger, 2012; Elias & Berk, 2002; Kelly pretend play, could be a natural vehicle by which we can & Hammond, 2011; Taylor, Carlson, & Shawber, 2007). promote executive function within and outside of formal Experimental studies have further shown direct effects of educational environments. 19Social and Emotional Benefits Navigating Interpersonal Interactions Social pretense has been discussed at length above, but still, it bears repeating here that socio-dramatic play is particu- larly well-suited to teaching children to navigate complex social interactions with peers and adults because it is, by definition, so intensely interactive in nature. In addition to the negotiation and cooperation that takes place in planning a pretense narrative in collaboration with another and jointly determining the rules of engagement, children frequently engage in problem-solving and conflict resolution during socio-dramatic play (Russ, 2004). Within the intricate negotiation process that takes place during and before complex socio-dramatic play, children can learn to persuade one another and resolve disagreements in socially appropriate ways (e.g., de Lorimier et al., 1995; Doyle & Connolly, 1989; Doyle et al., 1992). That play can foster the development of early friendships (Singer & Singer, 1990), may be related to the fact that children’s ability to successfully negotiate with their peers during play is related to peer social acceptance (Doyle & Connolly, 1989). In fact, training children on socio-dramatic play has been shown to increase perspective taking abilities, positive peer interaction and cooperation (e.g., Rosen, 1974). Socialization Play is a way for children to learn about the realities and expectations of their culture. During play, children inter- nalize scripts for how to act in society and how things are done (Carlson, Taylor, & Levin, 1998; Farver & Howes, 1993; Vygotsky, 1967). In dramatic play, a child can exper- iment with a variety of different roles; one day he is a fireman, and the next day a baby. Stepping into the shoes of a character and imagining what he would say, do or feel might help children to develop an understanding of other people (Hughes, 1999). Another socialization benefit of dramatic play is that it allows children to master scripts for events in their lives. Hirsch-Pasek and Golinkoff (2003) use the example of the supermarket at the Please Touch Museum of Philadelphia to illus- trate this concept. As Through conflicts and negotiations children play in the with other children or the creation market, they shop for canned goods and of characters, children become produce, place their aware that other people have goods in miniature carts and wheel them intentions and desires that may not up to a register where match their own. they check out. Similarly, children 20could rehearse the events of going to the doctor’s office or being a teacher. They are pretending to adhere to the rules of the society they live in (albeit, often with creative PLAY can help children to regulate modifications or misunderstandings). their emotions by providing an outlet to deal with stress in the moment. of mind ability. She showed that children were able to Social Understanding understand that a character could hold a belief that the child Play could be a major factor in developing an under- knew to be false (a common test of theory of mind) when standing of one’s self and others (e.g., Taylor & Carlson, the scenario was situated in the context of pretend play, but 1997; Lillard, 1993). Through conflicts and negotiations not in a “real” context. As Vygotsky (1978) noted, a child with other children or the creation of characters, children often shows her highest level of functioning in pretend play, become aware that other people have intentions and desires and skills applied in pretense may gradually transfer to that may not match their own (de Lorimier, Doyle, & other contexts. Tessier, 1995; Kavanaugh & Engel, 1998). Within the realm of pretend play, role play may be partic- The ability to attribute mental states – beliefs, intent, desire ularly well-suited to help children appreciate mental states – to oneself and others and to understand that others’ mental (Harris, 2000) as it may promote perspective-taking and states could be different from one’s own is an ability known help children to understand how others think and feel (de as theory of mind. Research into the link between play and Lorimier, Doyle, Tessier 1995; Kavanaugh & Engel, 1998). theory of mind has revealed a robust relation between Numerous studies have revealed that the amount and pretending and the frequency and nature of children’s talk quality of a child’s role play is related to their theory of about mental states (e.g., thoughts, beliefs, memories; mind abilities (Carlson & Taylor, 1997; Hughes & Dunn, Hughes & Dunn, 1997). 1997; Jenkins & Astington, 1996; Youngblade & Dunn, 1995), but arguably the best evidence for role play’s impact Furthermore, Cassidy’s (1998) research suggests that the on mental state reasoning comes from a study by Dockett make-believe context may give children a boost in theory (1998, as cited in Kavanaugh, 2011 and Pellegrini, 2009). 21Four-year-old children were trained in role playing over they will go. Moreover, young children may lack the three weeks. Compared to children who did not receive this cognitive and linguistic abilities to verbally work through training, the role-play group performed better on theory of problems or difficult emotions. Play can help children to mind tasks both immediately after the program and again regulate their emotions by providing an outlet to deal with after three weeks. Similarly, after a year of acting classes, stress in the moment, allowing children to revisit and children and adolescents showed increased empathy, and understand disturbing experiences after the fact, and giving adolescents showed increased theory of mind (Goldstein them the tools to cope with distress in the future (Johnson & Bloom, 2007). et al., 2005). PLAY and fantasy give children means to exert control over their environment and to regulate their thoughts and feelings. Notably, this ability to successfully take the perspective of another person – to understand what they are thinking and feeling – is necessary to establish close interpersonal communication (Harter, 1983), and is related to altruism Several studies have found pretend play to be positively (Froming, Allen, & Jensen, 1985), empathy (Bengtsson related to coping (e.g., Cristiano & Russ, 1996) and & Johnson, 1992), and social popularity (Kurdek & emotion regulation (Gayler & Evans, 2001; Russ, 2004). Krile, 1982). Theorists have suggested that play offers children the opportunity to master negative feelings in a risk-free Coping and Emotion Regulation context by exploring and modifying their emotional experi- Play and fantasy give children means to exert control over ences (Bretherton, 1989; Fein, 1989). A study by Barnett their environment and to regulate their thoughts and and Storm (1981) supports this idea. The researchers feelings. Play is an especially important outlet in this sense randomly assigned preschoolers to watch a movie clip with because young children are often at the mercy of others to a stressful ending or one with a positive ending. As one determine rules of behavior, what they will eat, or where might expect, the children who watched the stressful clip 22were more anxious and unhappy following the movie than their peers who watched the positive clip. When given the opportunity to play following the movie, children in the negative group spent more time enacting events related to the movie clip than children in the positive group, and they were able to attenuate their anxiety and negative emotions. Another study shows that play is related to children’s repertoire of emotion regulation and coping skills during a distressing situation: of a group of seven to nine year- old children undergoing an invasive dental procedure, those who expressed more affect and fantasy in their play reported implementing a greater number and variety of coping strategies and felt less distress during the Pretend PLAY is a powerful tool for learning in childhood. procedure than children who were not as advanced in their play. Some have suggested that the symbolic nature of art may have similar effects on coping, as children can represent and deal with thoughts and feelings via artistic media in a similar fashion to what they do in dramatic play (Russ, 2004). Russ (1988) has proposed that divergent thinking skills may play a role in helping children to come up with various ideas on how to regulate their emotions. Benefits to the Whole Child Although, the lists of benefits to specific areas of play are long, the most impressive evidence for the impact of pretend play comes from those studies that consider influences in multiple domains of development. Studies in which researchers have trained children to engage higher quality pretend play have shown improvements in verbal fluency, vocabulary, language comprehension (Smilansky, 1968), IQ, ability to distinguish fantasy from reality, controlling impulsive behavior (Saltz, Dixon, & Johnson, 1977), story interpretation, memory (Saltz & Johnson, 1974), verbal comprehension, story sequencing, creativity, causal reasoning (Dansky, 1980), and empathy (Saltz, Dixon & Johnson, 1977; Saltz & Dixon, 1974). Of course, the benefits revealed by these studies likely underestimate the reach of play in development because of a lack of resources to measure all possibilities. Still, together with the benefits described above in the areas of creativity, language, social skills, socialization, social understanding, coping and emotion regulation, this research makes a clear statement: Pretend play is a powerful tool for learning in childhood (cf., Lillard et al., 2012). 23