THE POWER OFPLAY A Research Summary on

Play and Learning

Dr. Rachel E. White for

2

Dr. Rachel White earned her doctorate in Child Psychology at the Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota. Dr. White’s research focuses on how children can benefit from play and imagination in early childhood. She has also studied youngchildren's creation of imaginary companions, and how pretending relates to early social understanding, cognitive development, and school readiness in diverse populations of preschool-aged children. Research for this paper was collected in fall 2012.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter from the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5What is Play? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

The Play Continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6The Role of Free and Guided Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Play and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Social Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Social Play with Adults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Social Play with Peers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Object Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Exploratory Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Object Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Cognitive Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Conceptual Knowledge through Exploration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Problem-solving and Creativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Convergent and Divergent Problem Solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Pretend Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15The Timeliness for Pretense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15The Benefits of Pretend Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15Cognitive Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Creativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Language and Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Executive Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Social and Emotional Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Navigating Interpersonal Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Socialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Social Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 Coping and Emotion Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 Benefits of the Whole Child . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Physical Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Benefits of Physical Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Physical Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Cognitive/Academic Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Media Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25Cognitive/Academic Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Facilitating Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Facilitation Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

With a mission to spark children’s learning through play, Minnesota Children’s Museum provides hands-on learningexperiences to more than 400,000 visitors each year in Minnesota, as well as millions of children around the countrythrough the leading traveling exhibit program for children’s museum. While recognizing that children learn in many ways,the Museum focuses on the learning that occurs through child-centered play.

Play may seem simple, yet it is profound to a child’s development. Play makes learning something that happens naturallyand joyfully, when a child laughs and wonders, explores and imagines.

For more than 30 years, Minnesota Children’s Museum has embedded research on play and child development into inter-active learning environments through its exhibits and programs. As the Museum embarks on an ambitious expansion, weare presented with a pivotal opportunity to strengthen our connection to child development and high-quality research onthe role of play in early learning.

The following research summary is a unique and robust compilation of published research on the major types of play foryoung children and related learning benefits. We are deeply grateful for the dedication of Dr. Rachel White in amassing,synthesizing and digesting the breadth of research that has been conducted in this field.

A special thank you to the University of Minnesota’s College Readiness Consortium, under the leadership of Kent Pekel,for making Dr. White’s work possible through persistence and funding grounded in the belief that college readiness beginsin early childhood. We also thank the numerous researchers and experts who reviewed and advised on the summary,including Dr. Stephanie Carlson, Dr. Megan Gunnar, Dr. Sara Langworthy, Barb Murphy, Dr. Amy Susman-Stillman, and Julie Sweitzer. An additional thank you to Dr. Gunnar, University of Minnesota Regents Professor and Director of the Institute of Child Development, for chairing the Museum’s Research Advisory Council that continues the researchpartnership started with this summary.

Minnesota Children’s Museum’s staff is eager to apply this research, building on our strengths of engaging children inlearning experiences and extending the insights to parents and all the caring adults in a child’s life. We hope you find thisresearch as inspiring as we do.

Playful learning is fun – and it’s powerful. Please join us in fostering the undeniable, incredible, exceptional power of play,wherever the setting.

Dianne KrizanPresidentMinnesota Children’s Museum

PLAY IS SIMPLE, YET ALSO PROFOUND

3

4

In play it is as though [the child] were a headtaller than himself. As in the focus of a magnifyingglass, PLAY contains all developmentaltendencies in a condensed form and is itself amajor source of development.

— Lev Vygotsky

INTRODUCTIONVirtually every child, the world over, plays. The drive toplay is so intense that children will do so when they haveno real toys, when parents do not actively encourage thebehavior, and even in the middle of a war zone. In the eyesof a young child, running, pretending, and building are fun.Researchers and educators know that these playful activitiesbenefit the development of the whole child across social,cognitive, physical, and emotional domains. Indeed, play issuch 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) namedplay as a central component in developmentally appropriateeducational practices, and the United Nations HighCommission on Human Rights (1989) recognized play as afundamental right of every child.

Yet, while experts continue to expound a powerfulargument for the importance of play in children’s lives, theactual time children spend playing continues to decrease.Today, children play eight hours less each week than theircounterparts did two decades ago (Elkind, 2008). Underpressure of rising academic standards, play is beingreplaced by test preparation in kindergartens and gradeschools, and parents who aim to give their preschoolers aleg up are led to believe that flashcards and educational“toys” are the path to success. Our society has created afalse dichotomy between play and learning.

This paper presents an overview of the scientific researchthat guides the educational philosophy that play is learning,discussing many overlapping forms of child-centered play,including social, object, pretend, physical, and media play.Through play, children learn to regulate their behavior, laythe foundations for later learning in science and mathe-matics, figure out the complex negotiations of socialrelationships, build a repertoire of creative problem solvingskills, and so much more. Finally, this paper also addressesthe important role for adults in guiding children throughplayful learning opportunities.

5

While experts continue toexpound a powerful argument forPLAY, the actual time childrenspend playing continues todecrease.

Despite the fact that adults can intuitively identify play(Smith & Vollstedt, 1985), full consensus on a formaldefinition continues to elude the researchers and theoristswho study it. Definitions range from discrete descriptions ofvarious 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 ContinuumA majority of the contemporary definitions of play focuson several key criteria. The founder of the NationalInstitute 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 stageof mastery” (as quoted in Tippett, 2008). Similarly, Millerand Almon (2009) say that play includes “activities thatare freely chosen and directed by children and arise fromintrinsic motivation” (p. 15). Often, play is defined alonga 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 theactivity or it is not play.

PLAY IS INTRINSICALLY MOTIVATED. Childrenengage in play simply for the satisfaction thebehavior itself brings. It has no extrinsicallymotivated 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 andvoluntary. If a child is pressured, she will likely notthink 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.

6

WHAT IS PLAY?

According to this view, children’s playful behaviors canrange in degree from 0-100% playful. A behavior thatmeets three of the above criteria would be considered moreplayful than one that meets only two, but importantly, adegree of playful behavior is acknowledged even if onlytwo criteria are met. Rubin and colleagues did not assigngreater weight to any one dimension in determiningplayfulness; however, other researchers have suggested thatprocess orientation and a lack of obvious functionalpurpose may be the most important aspects of play (e.g.,Pellegrini, 2009).

From the perspective of a continuum, play can thus blendwith other motives and attitudes that are less playful, suchas work. Unlike play, work is typically not viewed asenjoyable and it is extrinsically motivated (i.e., it is goal-oriented). Researcher Joan Goodman (1994) suggested thathybrid forms of work and play are not a detriment tolearning; rather, they can provide optimal contexts forlearning. For example, a child may be engaged in adifficult, goal-directed activity set up by his teacher, but hemay still be actively engaged and intrinsically motivated.At this mid-point between play and work, the child’smotivation, coupled with guidance from an adult, cancreate robust opportunities for playful learning.

The Role of Free and Guided PlayCritically, recent research supports the idea that adults canfacilitate children’s learning while maintaining a playfulapproach in interactions known as “guided play” (Fisher,Hirsch-Pasek, Golinkoff, Singer, & Berk, 2011; Hirsch-Pasek, Golinkoff, Berk, & Singer, 2009). Guided play alsofalls on a continuum based on how much adults set up theenvironment and participate in play. The adult’s role in playvaries as a function of their educational goals and thechild’s developmental level (Hirsch-Pasek et al, 2009).

Guided play takes two forms. At a very basic level, adultscan enrich the child’s environment by providing objects orexperiences that promote aspects of a curriculum. In themore direct form of guided play, parents or other adults canscaffold children’s play by joining in the fun as a co-player,asking thoughtful questions, commenting on children’sdiscoveries, or encouraging further exploration or newfacets to the child’s activity (for a review, see Fisher et al.,2011). Although playful learning can be somewhat struc-tured and adult-facilitated, it must also be child-centered(Nicolopolou, McDowell, & Brockmeyer, 2006). Playshould stem from the child’s own desire.

Both free and guided play are essential elements in a child-centered approach to playful learning. Intrinsically motivatedfree play provides the child with true autonomy, whileguided play is an avenue through which parents andeducators can provide more targeted learning experiences.In either case, play should be actively engaged, it shouldbe predominantly child-directed, and it must be fun.

7

PLAY builds the foundation for alifetime of learning.

Over the past few decades, researchers in the fields ofeducation and child psychology have amassed significantevidence for the necessity of play in children’s lives. Thereis no denying that play is fun, and certainly fun is its biggestdraw for children. However, as children play, they alsodevelop critical cognitive, emotional, social, and physicalskills. Play even contributes to proper brain development(Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). In this way, play is animportant end in itself; it is also a means to other ends. Theskills children learn through play in the early years set thestage for future learning and success from the kindergartenclassroom to the workplace.

Play presents children with a particularly strong opportunityfor growth because it meets the needs of the whole,individual child. All domains of children’s development –cognitive, social, emotional, and physical – are intricatelyintertwined. Play benefits each of these skills in direct andindirect ways. Children learn and practice cognitive skillsincluding language, problem solving, creativity, and self-regulation. Socio-emotional growth can be seen in children’sability to interact with others, negotiate, and compromise.They also practice strategies to cope with fear, anger, andfrustration. Moreover, block building, drawing, running, and

jumping all contribute to the development of fine and grossmotor skills. When children have the chance to direct theirown learning through play, they are able to address theirown immediate and developmental needs and find activitiesthat are most conducive to their individual learning styles.

In play, children develop a lasting disposition to learn.Having control over the course of one’s own learning, as infree play, promotes desire, motivation, and mastery(Erikson, 1985; Hurwitz, 2003). Children also learn how toseek out knowledge; play involves exploration, hypothesistesting, and discovery. What is more, all this is done in asafe, anxiety- and risk-free environment where children arefree to test the limits of their knowledge and abilities withrelatively few repercussions (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff,2003). They learn to have confidence in their ability to solvea problem, and they become resilient in the face of achallenge (Erikson, 1985; Hurwitz, 2003; Pepler & Ross,1981). Play builds the foundation for a lifetime of learning.

8

PLAY ANDDEVELOPMENT

In PLAY, children develop alasting disposition to learn.

Many of these skills, first developed through play, arecrucial for success in the 21st century. There is no doubtthat amassing knowledge of the world around us continuesto be important in our society – and playful learning canhelp children to learn content-based lessons, too (for areview, see Fisher et al., 2011). Increasingly, however, toachieve success in a global economy, the individuals thatmake up our workforce must also be socially adept and highly creative. The “6Cs” – Collaboration, strongCommunication, knowledge of Content, Critical thinking,Creative innovation, and Confidence to fail and try again– will be essential to our children’s future success. Manyof these skills are not easily taught in the classroom;however, they are readily learned through play (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003; Hirsch-Pasek et al., 2009;Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2008).

The benefits of play begin to accrue early in infancy andthough play gradually decreases over childhood, it neverreally ends. It changes forms according to the needs andskills of children (and adults) at a given age. Some benefitsare fairly universal and cross play types; some are morespecific to one type or simply stronger in certain types ofplay than others. Yet, the benefits of play nearly alwaysoverlap in some combination to serve the needs of thewhole child. The following sections will describe some ofthe most relevant benefits of social, object, pretend,physical, and media play.

SOCIAL PLAYSocial play is defined as play that occurs in the interactionof children with adults or other children. Typically, socialplay is not classified as a unique category of play becauseany type of play – object play, pretend play, and physicalplay – has the potential to be enacted alone or with others.Interactions within play scenarios, however, provide greatbenefits to children whether their partners are adults orpeers, and are therefore worthy of note.

Social Play with AdultsParents, especially mothers, are oftenchildren’s first play partners. Startingin infancy, parents initiate play withchildren through simple games likepeek-a-boo. By the second year oflife, parents and children regularlyengage in more complex forms ofplay such as pretending to race carsor care for a baby doll. Earlyinvolvement from parents asinitiators, directors, and partners inplay serves to scaffold youngchildren’s abilities so that play struc-tured by an adult is more sustainedand sophisticated than the child

would be able to achieve alone or with peers (Bornstein,Haynes, Legler, O’Reilly, & Painter, 1997; Escalona,1968; Feise, 1990; Stevenson, Leavitt, Thompson, &Roach, 1988).

As children mature, they begin to take initiative in gener-ating their own activities (e.g., Fein & Fryer, 1995), butparents remain involved on the sidelines through commentsand prompting (Haight & Miller, 1993). Play with parentssets the stage for children’s ability to successfully play withpeers (Haight & Miller, 1992).

9

PLAY with parents sets the stagefor children’s ability to successfullyplay with peers.

Social Play With PeersWith age and increasingly mature social capacities,children’s interactive play with peers becomes progres-sively more common and complex. Mildred Parten (1932)established four levels of social play that are still used todayas a broad framework to describe increasing social maturityin play over the early years (typical age of appearance,according to Parten, in parentheses):

1. Solitary play (2 – 2½ years): The child plays alone.

2. Parallel play (2½ – 3½): Children may be engaged insimilar activities but they play separately.

3. Associative play (3½ – 4½): Children are playingseparately but may share, pay attention to others, and/orcommunicate with others about their play.

4. Cooperative play (4½): Children are engaged in playwith a common goal and they work cooperatively toachieve the goal.

Parten found that children followed adevelopmental progression througheach of the four levels, exhibiting lesssolitary play from ages two to four infavor of more interactive forms ofplay. This description implied thatsolitary play at older ages is a sign ofsocial immaturity. However, solitaryplay is, in fact, a common occurrenceinto the school years, and the qualityof children’s solitary play increaseswith age (for a review, see Johnson,Christie, & Wardle, 2005). Moreover,Parten’s research has also been criti-cized for underestimating children’sability to engage in social play atyounger ages.

More recent research provides arevised account of the developmentof social interaction in play settings. Although the frequencyof social interaction does increase over time, children arequite capable of social interaction from a very early age.Parten described the onset of cooperative play around 4½

years of age, but when children are in the company of afamiliar peer, they can cooperate in play through games likepeek-a-boo or running and chasing after one another as earlyas 18 months (Brenner & Mueller, 1982). Around this sametime, children reliably interact during play by showing eachother their toys, occasionally offering to share, inviting peersto play, expressing disapproval of their playmate’s behavior,and communicating their feelings (Hughes, 1999). At twoyears of age, children can engage in joint activities withshared goals, such as making a bridge out of blocks orhaving a tea party. By around three years, they can engagein cooperative play with a shared purpose between playersand clearly differentiated, complementary roles (e.g., leader-follower, or mother-baby; Howes, Unger, & Seidner, 1989).

By providing children with the opportunity to exertgreater control over their situation, play with peers setsup a robust context for the development of the wholechild, including benefits to cognitive, social, andemotional development. In contrast to parent-childrelationships in which parents are typically in charge, peerinteractions have a relatively even distribution of power.Thus, in play among peers, children must jointly establishthe rules of the game (e.g., “We’re building a bridge,” “I’llbe the princess, you can be the dragon,” “This towel isthe moat”), and in doing so they practice the skills of

planning, negotiation, and cooperation (Hughes, 1999).Importantly, play with peers is rife with conflict, as whenboth partners want to be the mommy or one child takes ablock the other wanted. As they navigate their way

10

Although the frequency of socialinteraction does increase over time,children are quite capable of socialinteraction from a very early age.

through such situations, children learn how their owndesires may differ from those of another child, how toadvocate for their own ideas, how to deal with frustration,how work in a group, and how to respond in sociallyappropriate ways (Berk, Mann, & Ogan, 2006; Hirsch-Pasek et al. 2009; Pellis & Pellis, 2009; Tepperman, 2007;Vygotsky, 1978). The diverse skills that children gainthrough social play with peers help them feel competentin social situations (e.g., Connolly & Doyle, 1984;Hirsch-Pasek et al. 2009; Singer & Singer, 2005), whilealso contributing to cognitive and emotional growth.

OBJECT PLAYAs soon as children acquire the physical capacity to pickup and manipulate objects, they begin to play with thoseobjects (Hughes, 1999). Throughout childhood, object playremains a large part of the daily routine, occupying approx-imately 10-15% of children’s waking hours by conservativeestimation (Smith & Connolly, 1980).

Object play can be formallydefined as the active, playfulmanipulation of objects(Bjorklund & Gardiner, 2009).Examples of object play includethrowing a ball around or buildinga racetrack out of blocks.Although debates exist as towhether children’s exploration ofobjects or construction play (i.e.,organized, goal-oriented play, inwhich children use variousmaterials to build symbolic struc-tures) can rightly be consideredplay (see Pellegrini, 2009;Hughes, 1999), several notableresearchers have recently includedthese interactions with objects as examples of playfullearning (e.g., Fisher et al., 2011; Hirsch-Pasek &Golinkoff, 2003). Thus, this paper will also take a liberalview on the inclusion of exploratory and construction playwithin the overarching category of play with objects.

Exploratory PlayExploratory play is the first form of object play and typicallybegins around five months of age. By the second year,children begin to combine objects in play (e.g., put play foodon a plate or build a tower of a couple of blocks). Aroundthis time children also start to treat objects according to theirintended function (e.g., blocks are for stacking). Then laterwithin the second year, children begin to treat objectssymbolically; for example, a block may represent a piece ofcake (Hughes, 1999). Over the following few years,children’s use of objects in play continues in large partthrough the use of objects in pretend play and the creationof increasingly complex and representationally realisticstructures in construction play (Reifel, 1984). They also useart materials to create symbolic representations of theirthoughts and the world around them (DeLoache, 2004). Byage four, construction play may account for as much as halfof children’s free-play time in preschool classrooms (Pelle-grini & Bjorklund, 2004; Rubin et al., 1983), and children’sinterest in building extends well into the elementary schoolyears (Christie & Johnsen, 1987).

Object PlayPlay with objects is believed to make significant contributionsto children’s physical, social, and cognitive development.Manipulation of small objects gives children the chance topractice fine motor skills, and play with larger loose parts

involves gross motor skills. As discussed earlier, interactiveobject play with adults and peers benefits children’s socialdevelopment. Object play also contributes to cognitive devel-opment, including learning about the nature of objects,problem-solving, creativity, and foundational skills forscience, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

11

Children can use PLAY to scientifically reason about novelobjects and test hypotheses abouthow those objects operate.

Cognitive BenefitsConceptual Knowledge through ExplorationPiaget believed children to be little scientists, who weredriven to perform everyday “experiments” that wouldreveal the nature of their world. Through solitary objectplay and exploratory play, children are introduced to theways objects work (“What does it do?”) and how they canexert control over those objects (“What can I do with it?”;Bjorklund & Gardiner, 2011, p. 154). Research has shownthat children can indeed use play to scientifically reasonabout novel objects in their environment and to testhypotheses about how those objects operate. Studies havedemonstrated that when young children are presentedwith a puzzling new toy, their first instinct is to engage inexploratory play, touching and manipulating parts of thetoy to figure out how it works (Schulz & Bonawitz, 2007).

Amazingly, children’s playwith objects not only teachesthem about the particularobjects with which theypersonally interact, but theknowledge gained throughexploratory play can helpchildren generalize about broadcategories of similar objects. Ina study conducted by Baldwin,Markman, and Melartin (1994),9-16 month-old babies werepresented with novel toys such as horns or castanets thathad non-obvious properties (i.e., honking, clacking). Afteronly a brief exposure to the toy, the researchers showedchildren a similar toy. Upon receiving the new object,children immediately tried to produce the non-obviousproperty; they had learned not only about the toys they

played with, but also about a category of objects. Throughexploratory play, children are able to learn about theproperties of and uses for objects that they can touch,hear, and see, but they can also make inferences to learnabout properties that are not so easy to ascertain.

Problem-solving and CreativityGiven the imaginative and flexible nature of play, specialattention has been given in child development research toits contributions to creative problem-solving. Whenchildren play, they experiment with different behaviors –build new block towers, create new shapes in sculptingclay – which help them develop the creativity andstrategies necessary to successfully tackle novel problems(Johnson et al., 2005).

Convergent and Divergent ProblemSolvingConvergent problems require children to organize piecesof disparate information to arrive at one correct answer.The ability to solve convergent problems has been linkedto children’s performance on standardized intelligenceand classroom tests where there is a single solution toeach question (Guilford, 1967). A classic study illustratesthe impact of play on children’s ability to generatesolutions to convergent problems. Sylva (1977) directed

children to retrieve an object that was placed out of theirreach, without moving from their seat. The experimenterprovided each child with two short sticks that could reachthe faraway object only if they were connected to oneanother to form a longer stick. Children who had an

12

PLAY has been described aspractice in divergent thinking,because in play, children areconstantly coming up with new ideas andrecombining themto create novelscenarios.

opportunity to play with the sticks before this task werebetter at finding the correct solution to this convergentproblem (i.e., connecting the two sticks) than children ina control group who previously had not seen the sticks.Although children in a third group who observed an adultmodel the solution also correctly solved the problem moreoften than the control group, they were not as motivatedor persistent in their problem solving as children in theplay group. They often gave up if they failed to immedi-ately solve the problem, whereas children in the playgroup were more likely to keep trying new strategies untilthey solved the problem.

Divergent problems seem to call upon creativity to a greaterextent (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003), since theyrequire problem solvers to consider a range of possiblesolutions; there is no single right answer to a divergentproblem. Play has been described as practice in divergentthinking, because in play, children are constantly comingup with new ideas and recombining them to create novelscenarios (Pearson, Russ, & Spangel, 2008; Singer &Singer, 1990). Experimental evidence supports this claim.For example, children who were given 10 minutes to freelyplay with paperclips, matchboxes, or other small everydayobjects were subsequently able to produce more creativeuses for those objects than children who imitated the play

of an adult or had no prior exposure to the objects (Dansky& Silverman, 19731).

Research also indicates that the characteristics ofchildren’s play materials impacts divergent problem-solving ability. Pepler & Ross (1981) assignedpreschoolers to play with a single-solution puzzle (i.e., aconvergent toy) or a multiple-option block set (i.e., adivergent toy). On later tasks, children who played withthe divergent toy were more innovative and flexible intheir approaches to solving problems than their peers whoplayed with convergent toys. While the benefits ofexperience with convergent toys were limited to problemsolving in similar convergent tasks, the benefits ofdivergent experiences transferred more broadly. Childrenwho played with the divergent toys were generallysuccessful on a range of both divergent and convergentproblem solving tasks, suggesting that engaging indivergent playful activities might instill the idea that therecan be numerous creative solutions to a problem.

13

1While this study remains one of the most commonly cited pieces of exper-imental evidence for the effect of play on divergent problem solving inrecent years, it is important to note that the results are controversial.When Smith & Whitney (1987) tried to control for possible experimenterbias through a double-blind experimental paradigm, these effects of playon divergent thinking did not replicate.

Science, Technology, Engineering, and MathRecently, the field of education has experienced a push todevelop the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, andMath) skills that are important to success in the 21st century.Through play with objects – blocks, sand, balls, crayons,and paper – children begin to understand logical scientificthinking, such as the concept of cause and effect. They alsopractice mathematical skills such as measurement, quantifi-cation, classification, counting, ordering, and part-wholerelations (Gelfer & Perkins, 1988; Ginsberg, Inoue & Seo,1999; Piaget, 1962; Ness & Farenga, 2007). The informalunderstanding children gain through experimentation,observation, and comparison in play lays the foundation forhigher-order thinking and later learning of formal STEMconcepts (Bergen, 2009; Ginsberg, 2006; Shaklee et al.,2008 as cited in Fisher et al., 2011; Tepperman, 2007).

Free play provides rich opportunities for children to exper-iment with mathematical concepts. Ginsburg, Pappas andSeo (2001; see also Sarama & Clements, 2009) foundevidence of mathematical activity during almost half oftheir observations of preschoolers’ play. Specifically, theynoted that children spent 25% of their time exploringpatterns and shapes, 13% comparing the magnitude ofobjects, 12% on enumeration, 6% exploring transfor-mation, 5% on spatial relations such as direction anddistance, and finally 2% on the classification of objectsinto groups. Even without specific adult guidance in themoment, children’s free play is rich with STEM lessons.

Moreover, research has linked early object play withpositive math and science outcomes. Object play, includingplay with art materials, has been shown to be related tobetter visuo-spatial skills (Caldera et al., 1999; Hirsch,1996). Wolfgang, Stannard, & Jones (1996) followed agroup of 37 children over 16 years and found that thecomplexity of their play with blocks as 4-year-olds wassignificantly and positively related to their level ofachievement in mathematics during middle and highschool, even controlling for IQ and gender. This researchsuggests that complex object play could provide childrenwith the early mathematical understanding that supportslater learning in formal contexts.

In summary, research on object play suggests it can benefitchildren’s cognitive development in the short- and long-term. Giving children the chance to freely experiment withdiverse objects provides information about the world andthe child’s place in it, allows them to create and expressthemselves by making new objects or art, encouragescreative problem solving, and builds the foundation uponwhich formal math and science training can be built. Asdiscussed in the section on social play, interactive objectplay also builds children’s social, emotional, andregulatory skills as they learn to cooperate with oneanother and regulate their own behaviors in order to jointlyplan play activities.

14

PLAY lays the foundation forhigher-order thinking and laterlearning of formal STEM concepts.

PRETEND PLAYPretend play is a hallmark activity of early childhood.Pretending involves creating alternate realities to the realworld. Children can enact different people, places or times,and objects become symbols for what is imagined (Fein,1981; Lillard, 2011). Here, pretend play refers to a rangeof behaviors including symbolic play (i.e., mentally trans-forming objects to represent pretend entities, as when achild pretends a banana is a telephone) as well as socio-dramatic play (i.e., pretend play with a group in whichchildren cooperate and take on complementary characters).

The Timeline for PretenseThe developmental timeline for pretense is well established(Carlson & Zelazo, 2008; Fein, 1981; Garvey, 1991). Pretendplay first appears around 12 months of age. At this point, itis typically directed toward the self, as when children pretendto sleep or eat (Piaget, 1962). Later, children begin to directtheir play toward other people and objects. By the middle ofthe second year, children transform objects in theirenvironment by giving animate characteristics to inanimateobjects like dolls or stuffed animals. Shortly thereafter, theyalso assign new, pretend identities for objects (e.g., a bananabecomes a telephone). Two-year-olds can understand pretendactions by adult play partners and respond appropriatelywithin the pretend context. For example, if an adult pretendsthat a cardboard box is a bathtub, the child can then fill thebathtub with “water” (Harris & Kavanaugh, 1993; Lillard &Witherington, 2004).

Gradually from toddlerhood to preschool age, pretendingbecomes increasingly decontextualized so that play canoccur independent of tangible objects, and children cancreate imaginary characters and situations. By preschool,children have reached the “high season” of pretend play(Singer & Singer, 1990), and up to two-thirds of the timethey spend in make-believe play is interactive (i.e., socio-dramatic play; Rubin, 1982, 1986). Overt pretending isthought to wane in middle childhood as children becomemore interested in organized games, but reports indicate thatolder children are most likely to engage in fantasy privatelyor in the context of technological media (Bergen & Williams,2008, as cited in Bergen, 2009; Singer & Singer, 1990).

The Benefits of Pretend PlayThe benefits of play are perhaps best addressed in the areaof pretend play, both theoretically and empirically. Severaleminent scholars (e.g., Erikson, 1950; Freud, 1958; Piaget,1962) of the last century spoke of the significance of thistype of play in cognitive, social and emotional development.Vygotsky was perhaps most resolute in his belief that pretendplay is a “leading factor in development,” noting that in playchildren develop a range of skills and learn culturally valuedcompetencies (Berk, Mann, & Ogan, 2006).

Research over the past few decades has supportedVygotsky’s bold claim, underscoring the ability of pretendplay to serve the development of the whole child. Thefollowing sections will review several ways in whichpretend play impacts children’s growing abilities in thesocial, cognitive, and emotional realms.

15

The benefits of play are perhapsbest addressed in the area ofpretend PLAY.

Cognitive BenefitsCreativityAs in play with objects, pretend play has been linked tocreativity, and creative problem solving in particular (e.g.,Dansky, 1980; Russ, 1993, 2004; Saracho, 2002). A meta-analysis of play studies found that one of the strongest linksamong a long list of correlates of pretend play was todivergent thinking, a key component of creativity (Fischer,1992). In one study, Dansky (1980) assigned children toone of three conditions (1) free play, (2) imitation of anadult’s actions, or (3) problem-solving experience, andfound engaging in free play increased performance on alater divergent problem-solving task. However, this relationheld only for children who were observed to display highlevels of pretense in their play, suggesting that there mightbe something special about the nature of pretend play, overand above other forms of play, for promoting flexible andcreative problem solving.

Although these and similar studies related to object playtogether are suggestive of positive effects of play ondivergent thinking, the research on pretend play anddivergent problem solving is correlational. Withoutfurther experimental study it is premature to assume thatpretending causes increased divergent thinking; therelation could also be due to a third factor such intellectualflexibility, which is believed to be a prerequisite for bothconstructs (Carlson & White, 2012).

Language and LiteracyPretending and language are each, at their core, modes ofsymbolic thought. Just as a block can stand in for a car inpretense, in language, letters and words representconcepts, objects, or events in our world. Pretend playallows children to practice creating symbols as theymentally transform objects within a play scenario. Assuch, pretending contributes to children’s understandingof symbols and their meaning, which is essential forcounterfactual thinking, empathy, and formal learning(consider using numerals in math or diagrams to representatomic structures in chemistry). It is also particularlyrelevant to literacy-related learning. Hanline, Milton andPhelps (2010) found that preschoolers who had highlevels of representation in their block constructions hadhigher reading abilities and a faster rate of growth inreading in early elementary school.

The large amount of time children spend pretending alsoprovides opportunities to practice language use. Duringpretend play, children talk more, speak in lengthier utter-ances, and use more complex language (e.g., future tense,interrogative clauses, conditional verbs, descriptiveadjectives, mental state verbs) than when they areengaged in other activities (Fekonja, Umek, & Kranjc,2005 as cited in Fisher et al., 2011; Singer & Singer,1981). Moreover, in their research, Dickinson and

16

Pretend PLAY has been linked tocreativity, and creative problemsolving in particular.

Moreton (1991, as cited in Fisher et al., 2011) found thatkindergarteners’ vocabulary was positively related to theamount of time they spent talking with other childrenduring pretend play sessions at three years of age.

In addition to oral language proficiency, dramatic playcontributes to children’s developing narrative abilities(i.e., thinking in stories). In jointly creating a story with apartner or group, children must communicate their ownideas in ways that others can understand and integrateeach partner’s ideas into a single coherent narrative (fora review, see Fisher et al., 2011). Fisher and colleagues(2011) suggest that children may be better prepared tounderstand narratives when they have experienced similarconcepts through play, such as identifying and acting outcharacters or creating contextual descriptions to supporta fantasy scenario. Pretense and narrative ability doappear to be related in the preschool years: Trionfi andReese (2009) reported that children with imaginarycompanions tended to produce richer narratives than theirpeers who were not so fantasy prone.

Moreover, pretense in the early years is related to laterliteracy outcomes including reading comprehension andthe ability to communicate clearly through speech andwriting (for a review, see Nicolopoulu, 2006 andTepperman, 2007). Bergen and Mauer (2000) found thatchildren with who engaged in more play with literacymaterials (e.g., pretend reading to stuffed animals,making shopping lists) at age four had more advancedlanguage abilities and reading readiness in kindergarten.Finally, experimental research has repeatedly shown thatwhen children listen to and reenact a story, theycomprehend and remember more about the story thanchildren who did not play out the scenes (Pellegrini &Galda, 1982; Saltz, Dixon, & Johnson, 1977; Williamson& Silvern, 1984).

Early pretense is related to laterliteracy outcomes includingreading comprehension and theability to communicate clearlythrough speech and writing.

17

Executive FunctionIn psychological terminology, the cognitive abilities behindconscious self-control of thought, action, and emotion areknown as executive function. They involve a group ofrelated processes including inhibition of impulses, workingmemory, planning, and cognitive flexibility. Executivefunction develops rapidly in childhood, concurrent withmaturation of prefrontal brain regions (for a review, seeCarlson, Zelazo, & Faja, 2012), and continues to strengtheninto the mid-20s (Zelazo, 2012). Early executive functionabilities have been implicated in school readiness, (Blair &Razza, 2007) as well as the development of memory,attention, intelligence, morality, and emotion regulation (fora review, see Zelazo, Carlson, & Kesek, 2008). Moreover,measures of executive function at age four have beenshown to predict a host of long-term outcomes includingphysical health, substance dependence, personal finances,and criminality (Shoda, Mischel, & Peake, 1990; Moffittet al., 2011). Such research is contributing to a strong casethat building a child’s executive function skills should be apriority in early education.

Noted Russian psychologist, Lev Vygotsky, believed that“a child’s greatest self-control occurs in play (1978, p.99).” He proposed that pretend play, in particular, couldbe a leading factor in the development of the child’s abilityto self-regulate. Indeed, pretending provides practice inmany aspects of executive function: for example, childrenmust be able to flexibly view an object both as what it trulyis and as its pretend identity, inhibit their own desires inorder to follow the rules of the group, and plan elaboratestory scenarios.

Playful preschool curricula can improve children’sexecutive function skills. Following Vygotsky’s theory,the Tools of the Mind preschool program (Bodrova &Leong, 2006) was developed with the goal of improving

18

Early executive function abilitieshave been implicated in schoolreadiness, the development ofmemory, attention, intelligence,morality and emotion regulation.

young children’s self-regulatory abilities. Through thetraining of mature pretend play, children learn to use toysand props symbolically, develop consistent and extensivenarratives, maintain rules and roles, and plan playscenarios from beginning to end (Bodrova, Leong, Atwill,Ko, & Saifer. 2009). Several evaluation studies havefound the Tools of the Mind program to be effective inimproving participants’ executive function relative tocontrol groups (Barnett, Jung, Yarosz, Thomas, Hornbeck,et al., 2008; Bodrova & Leong, 2006; Diamond, Barnett,Thomas, & Munro, 2007).

Within the field of child psychology, studies have estab-lished consistent links between executive function andpretense abilities (Albertson & Shore, 2009; Carlson,White, & Davis-Unger, 2012; Elias & Berk, 2002; Kelly& Hammond, 2011; Taylor, Carlson, & Shawber, 2007).Experimental studies have further shown direct effects of

pretend play on children’s self-regulatory abilities. Saltz,Dixon, and Johnson (1977) developed a pre-tense trainingprogram for low-income preschoolers. After a full year ofparticipation in the program, children who were trained inthematic pretense (i.e., fairy tales) tested higher onexecutive function than children who received socio-dramatic training in realistic roles, those who heard fantasystories without enactment, and the regular curriculumcontrol group. Researchers concluded from these findingsthat the abstract or symbolic nature of imaginative activitiescould be responsible for the improvements seen inexecutive function.

Recent research shows that even a small dose of pretendplay – less than 10 minutes – improves children’sperformance on a subsequent executive function task,further suggesting that pretending may encourage theflexible thinking required for children to overcomeimpulses and successfully control behavior (White &Carlson, 2011). Taken as a whole, this line of researchindicates that encouraging children to engage in pretendplay, and furthermore cultivating more mature forms ofpretend play, could be a natural vehicle by which we canpromote executive function within and outside of formaleducational environments.

19

Stepping into the shoes of acharacter and imagining what hewould say, do or feel might helpchildren to develop an under-standing of other people.

Social and Emotional BenefitsNavigating Interpersonal InteractionsSocial 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 complexsocial interactions with peers and adults because it is, bydefinition, so intensely interactive in nature. In addition tothe negotiation and cooperation that takes place in planninga pretense narrative in collaboration with another andjointly determining the rules of engagement, childrenfrequently engage in problem-solving and conflictresolution during socio-dramatic play (Russ, 2004). Withinthe intricate negotiation process that takes place during andbefore complex socio-dramatic play, children can learn topersuade one another and resolve disagreements in sociallyappropriate ways (e.g., de Lorimier et al., 1995; Doyle &Connolly, 1989; Doyle et al., 1992). That play can fosterthe development of early friendships (Singer & Singer,1990), may be related to the fact that children’s ability tosuccessfully negotiate with their peers during play is relatedto peer social acceptance (Doyle & Connolly, 1989). Infact, training children on socio-dramatic play has beenshown to increase perspective taking abilities, positive peerinteraction and cooperation (e.g., Rosen, 1974).

SocializationPlay is a way for children to learn about the realities andexpectations of their culture. During play, children inter-nalize scripts for how to act in society and how things aredone (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 afireman, and the next day a baby. Stepping into the shoesof a character and imagining what he would say, do or feelmight help children to develop an understanding of otherpeople (Hughes, 1999). Another socialization benefit ofdramatic play is that it allows children to master scriptsfor events in their lives. Hirsch-Pasek and Golinkoff(2003) use the example of the supermarket at the Please

Touch Museum ofPhiladelphia to illus-trate this concept. Aschildren play in themarket, they shop forcanned goods andproduce, place theirgoods in miniaturecarts and wheel themup to a register wherethey check out.Similarly, children

20

Through conflicts and negotiationswith other children or the creationof characters, children becomeaware that other people haveintentions and desires that may notmatch their own.

could rehearse the events of going to the doctor’s office orbeing a teacher. They are pretending to adhere to the rulesof the society they live in (albeit, often with creativemodifications or misunderstandings).

Social UnderstandingPlay could be a major factor in developing an under-standing of one’s self and others (e.g., Taylor & Carlson,1997; Lillard, 1993). Through conflicts and negotiationswith other children or the creation of characters, childrenbecome aware that other people have intentions and desiresthat may not match their own (de Lorimier, Doyle, &Tessier, 1995; Kavanaugh & Engel, 1998).

The ability to attribute mental states – beliefs, intent, desire– to oneself and others and to understand that others’ mentalstates could be different from one’s own is an ability knownas theory of mind. Research into the link between play andtheory of mind has revealed a robust relation betweenpretending and the frequency and nature of children’s talkabout mental states (e.g., thoughts, beliefs, memories;Hughes & Dunn, 1997).

Furthermore, Cassidy’s (1998) research suggests that themake-believe context may give children a boost in theory

of mind ability. She showed that children were able tounderstand that a character could hold a belief that the childknew to be false (a common test of theory of mind) whenthe scenario was situated in the context of pretend play, butnot in a “real” context. As Vygotsky (1978) noted, a childoften shows her highest level of functioning in pretend play,and skills applied in pretense may gradually transfer toother contexts.

Within the realm of pretend play, role play may be partic-ularly well-suited to help children appreciate mental states(Harris, 2000) as it may promote perspective-taking andhelp children to understand how others think and feel (deLorimier, Doyle, Tessier 1995; Kavanaugh & Engel, 1998).Numerous studies have revealed that the amount andquality of a child’s role play is related to their theory ofmind abilities (Carlson & Taylor, 1997; Hughes & Dunn,1997; Jenkins & Astington, 1996; Youngblade & Dunn,1995), but arguably the best evidence for role play’s impacton mental state reasoning comes from a study by Dockett(1998, as cited in Kavanaugh, 2011 and Pellegrini, 2009).

21

PLAY can help children to regulatetheir emotions by providing an outletto deal with stress in the moment.

Four-year-old children were trained in role playing overthree weeks. Compared to children who did not receive thistraining, the role-play group performed better on theory ofmind tasks both immediately after the program and againafter three weeks. Similarly, after a year of acting classes,children and adolescents showed increased empathy, andadolescents showed increased theory of mind (Goldstein& Bloom, 2007).

Notably, this ability to successfully take the perspectiveof another person – to understand what they are thinkingand feeling – is necessary to establish close interpersonalcommunication (Harter, 1983), and is related to altruism(Froming, Allen, & Jensen, 1985), empathy (Bengtsson& Johnson, 1992), and social popularity (Kurdek &Krile, 1982).

Coping and Emotion RegulationPlay and fantasy give children means to exert control overtheir environment and to regulate their thoughts andfeelings. Play is an especially important outlet in this sensebecause young children are often at the mercy of others todetermine rules of behavior, what they will eat, or where

they will go. Moreover, young children may lack thecognitive and linguistic abilities to verbally work throughproblems or difficult emotions. Play can help children toregulate their emotions by providing an outlet to deal withstress in the moment, allowing children to revisit andunderstand disturbing experiences after the fact, and givingthem the tools to cope with distress in the future (Johnsonet al., 2005).

Several studies have found pretend play to be positivelyrelated to coping (e.g., Cristiano & Russ, 1996) andemotion regulation (Gayler & Evans, 2001; Russ, 2004).Theorists have suggested that play offers children theopportunity to master negative feelings in a risk-freecontext by exploring and modifying their emotional experi-ences (Bretherton, 1989; Fein, 1989). A study by Barnettand Storm (1981) supports this idea. The researchersrandomly assigned preschoolers to watch a movie clip witha stressful ending or one with a positive ending. As onemight expect, the children who watched the stressful clip

22

PLAY and fantasy give childrenmeans to exert control over theirenvironment and to regulate theirthoughts and feelings.

were more anxious and unhappy following the movie thantheir peers who watched the positive clip. When given theopportunity to play following the movie, children in thenegative group spent more time enacting events related tothe movie clip than children in the positive group, and theywere able to attenuate their anxiety and negative emotions.Another study shows that play is related to children’srepertoire of emotion regulation and coping skills duringa 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 playreported implementing a greater number and variety ofcoping strategies and felt less distress during the

procedure than children who were not as advanced in theirplay. Some have suggested that the symbolic nature of artmay have similar effects on coping, as children canrepresent and deal with thoughts and feelings via artisticmedia in a similar fashion to what they do in dramaticplay (Russ, 2004). Russ (1988) has proposed thatdivergent thinking skills may play a role in helpingchildren to come up with various ideas on how to regulatetheir emotions.

Benefits to the Whole ChildAlthough, the lists of benefits to specific areas of play arelong, the most impressive evidence for the impact of pretendplay comes from those studies that consider influences inmultiple domains of development. Studies in whichresearchers have trained children to engage higher qualitypretend play have shown improvements in verbal fluency,vocabulary, language comprehension (Smilansky, 1968), IQ,ability to distinguish fantasy from reality, controllingimpulsive behavior (Saltz, Dixon, & Johnson, 1977), storyinterpretation, memory (Saltz & Johnson, 1974), verbalcomprehension, story sequencing, creativity, causalreasoning (Dansky, 1980), and empathy (Saltz, Dixon &Johnson, 1977; Saltz & Dixon, 1974). Of course, the benefitsrevealed by these studies likely underestimate the reach ofplay in development because of a lack of resources tomeasure all possibilities. Still, together with the benefitsdescribed above in the areas of creativity, language, socialskills, socialization, social understanding, coping andemotion regulation, this research makes a clear statement:Pretend play is a powerful tool for learning in childhood (cf.,Lillard et al., 2012).

Pretend PLAY is a powerful toolfor learning in childhood.

23

PHYSICAL PLAYPhysical play, also known as locomotor play or exerciseplay, involves physical activity in a playful context such askicking, running, jumping, chasing, and climbing (Pelle-grini, 2009). Generally, scholars believe that physical playfollows an inverted-U shaped trajectory, graduallyincreasing from infancy through the school years and thendeclining during adolescence (Power, 2000). Unfortunately,despite the potential physical and cognitive benefitsbestowed by physical activity, physical play is one of theleast researched forms of play (Pellegrini, 2009). It is alsoone of the most endangered forms of play in our schoolsand society: recess in schools is disappearing at an alarmingrate (Pellegrini, 2005) and active play among youngstershas plummeted by 50% over the last forty years (Juster,Ono, & Stafford, 2004).

Benefits of Physical PlayPhysical BenefitsPromoting the physical benefits of locomotor play isperhaps more relevant today than at any other time in recenthistory. Obesity among children is at an all-time high;

approximately one-third of American children between theages of 2-19 are overweight or obese (American HeartAssociation, 2011). The American Academy of Pediatrics(2006) considers physical activity to be an importantstrategy in promoting healthy lifestyles, and some in themedical community have suggested that encouragingchildren to play is key to boosting levels of physical activity(Budette & Whitaker, 2005). In addition to practicing grossmotor skills, children receive vast health benefits fromphysical activity including aerobic endurance, musclegrowth, strength, coordination, growth stimulation of majororgans (Pica, 2008), and increased bone mineral content(Gunter et al., 2008). Extended periods of activity may berequired in order to accrue such benefits (Byers & Walker,1995); the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(2011) suggest that children aged 6-17 should play for 60minutes per day. Studies show that children naturallygravitate to physical play given the chance. Approximately20% of children’s free play behaviors can be classified asvigorous physical activity (McGrew, 1982, Smith &Connolly, 1980 as cited in Pellegrini, 2009). Givingchildren the time to play could contribute to immediate anddeferred physical health benefits.

24

Active PLAY among youngstershas plummeted by 50% over thelast forty years.

Cognitive/Academic BenefitsPhysical play can also provide benefits in the cognitive andacademic domains. First, physical activity could contributeto the development and expression of self-regulation. Whenrunning around in a game of chase for example, childrenare at a high level of arousal, but when the game is over theymust control their behavior in order to disengage and settledown (Hughes, 1999). Several intervention studies haveshown that moderate to vigorous levels of physical activitycan improve executive function in school age children (fora review, see Diamond & Lee, 2011). Organized activitieslike sports may be even more effective, because they requiresustained attention and disciplined action.

If physical play can impact executive function in youngchildren, it may in turn affect academic outcomes (Blair &Razza, 2007). Taking breaks for physical play also hasimmediate impacts on learning, which may be due tochildren’s increased attention to academic tasks (Pellegrini,2009). School-aged children who were assigned to fiveadditional hours per week of physical activity performedbetter on standardized academic assessments than their peerswho did not take part in physical activities (Shephard, 1983).

In another study, third graders were found to be moreattentive to in-class activities after recess than they werebefore it (Pellegrini & Davis, 1993). While the connectionmay not be immediately obvious, recess and other formsof physical play may be crucial to children’s ability to learncognitive and academic lessons.

Further research is needed to understand the full range ofbenefits physical play has to offer. In the meantime, weknow that this type of play can boost physical development,promote healthy lifestyles, and even help children performbetter in school. As our society continues to face the obesityepidemic and strives for higher academic standards, theneed for physical play in childhood should become evermore apparent.

MEDIA PLAYTechnology is more prevalent in children’s lives todaythan ever before. On average, children under three spend

PLAY can boost physical development, promote healthylifestyles, and even help childrenperform better in school.

25

3-4 hours per day engaged with screen media (Christakis,2009), and by eight years of age, that number increases to7.5 hours per day (Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, 2010).Research on children’s use of technology and its effect onlearning and development is currently in an early stage, butthus far it suggests that interactive technology, includingvideo and computer games, can be a valuable tool inpromoting playful learning.

Popular opinion is not always in favor of the rise of mediause; gaming has been accused of inhibiting the devel-opment of social skills, increasing rates of obesity, andpromoting violent behavior (Gray, 2012). For the most part,however, research does not support such claims. In reality,video game players are reported to be more likely to partic-ipate in sports, less likely to be obese, more interested incivic involvement, more obedient of parents, more likelyto have academically-minded friends, less likely to haverisk-seeking friends, and no more violent than non-videogame players (Durkin & Barber, 2002; Ferguson, 2010;Williams, Yee, & Caplan, 2008).

Cognitive/Academic BenefitsTechnology-based games can be a powerful tool to promoteplayful learning beyond the point in early childhood wheninterest in traditional forms of play begins to wane. Likeother forms of play, games are fun and they providechildren with the opportunity to exert relatively high levelsof control and self-direction in their learning. Games alsoguide children toward advanced knowledge and skillsthrough the graduated levels of complexity built into theirprograms. Moreover, the presentation of materials inmultiple modalities (i.e., visual, tactile, auditory) can servethe needs of children with a wide range of learning styles(Mayo, 2009). Together, these properties of games motivatechildren to play; they stay on task longer, and that gives thebenefits of this type of play more time to take hold(Owston, Wideman, Sinitskaya, & Brown, 2009).

Video and computer games can promote learning evenwhen they have not been designed with specific educationalgoals in mind (Gee, 2003; Shaffer, 2008). Games requirechildren to make decisions, present increasingly difficultchallenges, and encourage exploration, experimentation,and creativity in problem solving (Goldstein, 2011; Fischer& Gillespie, 2003). Such behaviors feed into the founda-tional skills of science and mathematics: hypothesis testing,experimentation, and discovery (Goldstein, 2011). Amongthe many additional cognitive benefits of video gameexperience are increased visuo-spatial abilities (includingtests used as components of IQ assessments; e.g., Green &Bavelier, 2003), memory, critical thinking, problem solving,

26

Technology-based games can bea powerful tool to promoteplayful learning beyond the pointin early childhood when interestin traditional forms of PLAYbegins to wane.

executive function, and qualitative thinking (Goldstein,2011). Technology can even promote social learning whenchildren must cooperate with one another to achieve goalsin multi-player games (Prensky, 2004).

Games are also a valuable resource in imparting specificcontent-based lessons. For example, a recent study found thatyoung children’s (3-7 years) self-initiated play with the educa-tional iPhone application “Martha Speaks” increasedvocabulary scores as much as 31% over two weeks (Chiong& Shuler, 2010). In contrast to this finding, a recent studyfound that preschool-aged children correctly responded tomore content and chronology questions after reading tradi-tional books with a parent than when they read electronicallyenhanced books, a finding which could be due to decreasedlevels of dialogic reading tactics employed by parents readingelectronic books. (Hirsch-Pasek, personal communication).

More positive results for media play can be found inresearch with older children. A review of educational videogames for middle-school to college students also found 7-40% increases in learning over lecture-based programs

(Mayo, 2009). Games can and have been applied to a rangeof content areas including language, civics, and STEM(Goldstein, 2011; Mayo, 2009). Video games, computersimulations, and virtual reality allow users to experienceand manipulate infinite environments, objects, or situations– the Oregon Trail, outer space, atoms, coral reefs, ancientGreek Parliament – that are outside of their reach(Strangman, Hall, & Meyer, 2003). The largest gains inlearning seem to occur in the areas of science and mathe-matics. (Roschelle, Pea, Hoadley, Gordon, & Means,2000). Overall across content areas, technology-basedlearning has largely contributed to positive outcomes andhas a distinct advantage in that children find it to be a funway to learn (Ainge, 1996).

Technology should never replace traditional forms of play.Children still need to play with blocks, pretend, and runaround outside. It may, however, be time to eschew theautomatic stigma attached to video games and similar media.They can introduce rich content and provide the opportunityfor children to practice a wide range of skills. Used appro-priately, games are a valuable tool for playful learning.

27

Like other forms of PLAY, games are fun andthey provide children with the opportunity toexert relatively high levels of control and self-direction in their learning.

The preceding sections have demonstrated the profoundimportance of play for learning and development inchildhood. An abundance of research and theory suggeststhat children may accrue maximum benefits of playfulexperiences when activities are scaffolded by adult playpartners. As noted above, adults can guide children’s playby setting up the play environment or through directinvolvement in play activities (e.g., Fisher et al., 2011).Importantly, adults can further scaffold children’s behaviorsduring play to achieve higher levels of play and learning(e.g., Fisher et al., 2011; Vygotsky, 1978). This section willexplore research on the role of the adult in guiding andfacilitating children’s playful learning experiences.

The idea that children can benefit from sensitive, child-directed adult guidance and participation in play isempirically supported. In addition to the benefits mentionedabove for social play with adult partners, evidence tosupport the power of scaffolding children to higher levelsof play and learning can be seen in the Tools of the Mindpreschool program. Based on the works of Vygotsky,teachers in this program provide individually-tailoredguidance based on children’s developmental level, includinghints, props, and modeling behaviors. This guidance

includes support for mature intentional play in whichchildren carefully plan and enact specific roles in pretense.

Research has revealed significant gains in executivefunction and literacy for children in this learningenvironment. Although, one cannot be certain that adultguidance in play was responsible for the benefits seen inTools of the Mind students, the results are suggestive thatproper scaffolding helps to raise children’s level of learningand subsequent performance on a variety of tasks (Tools ofthe Mind, 2012). More direct evidence comes from experi-mental manipulations of adult intervention in play. Fisherand colleagues (2009, 2010 cited in Fisher et al., 2011)found that guided play is more beneficial to children’slearning than even direct instruction. When the experi-menter guided children through play with shapes byencouraging them to explore and prompting explanationsabout the number of sides or other properties, childrengained a better understanding for new, complex shapes thanwhen the experimenter simply showed children relevantproperties of the shapes. Together, these studies speak to thepotential for adults to positively impact learning outcomesthrough play.

28

FACILITATINGPLAY

ROLESResearch shows that the quality of adult interactions in playscenarios may be more important than the quantity. Whenadults respond in a sensitive and child-directed manner,children’s play can be more elaborate (Feise 1990; Sylva,Roy, & Painter,1980), creative (Shmukler,1981), andsustained (Dunn & Wooding, 1977). Children engage inmore social play (Farran, Silveri & Culp, 1991) andcognitive activity as well (Howes & Smith, 1995). On theother hand, when adults become too bossy or are insensitiveto the needs of the child in the moment, children tend to loseinterest and stop playing (Howes, Unger & Matheson, 1992;Shmukler, 1981). Between the extreme positions of beingcompletely uninvolved and taking over the play scenario,adults (in this case, teachers) have been observed to interactwith children in several roles that can facilitate play(Johnson et al., 2005; Singer & Singer, 1977).

Knowing which role is best for a given situation can bedifficult and often takes quite a bit of practice. Childrenwill differ on the level of adult involvement they want orneed on a particular day, or in a particular space, and assuch adults may need to take on several different roleseven within one session (Gronlund, 2010; Johnson et al.,2005). Roskos and Neuman (1993) found that, experi-enced teachers flexibly and frequently shift betweenseveral different roles depending on children’s needs.Overall, research on adults’ various roles in play suggeststhat they need to be sensitive to the child’s needs in themoment, flexible in choosing the way they intervene, andwilling to follow the child’s lead.

A study by Shine and Acosta (2000) on parent-child inter-actions at a children’s museum suggest that parents mayneed some guidance to successfully facilitate play. Whilevisiting a grocery store exhibit, children were likely to roleplay, while parents mostly prompted, taught concepts, anddirected pro-social behaviors from outside of the playframe. As such, interactions between parents and childrenwere brief, often non-contingent between partners, andsometimes disruptive to play. Follow-up interviewsrevealed that parents felt a desire and duty to teach theirchildren about real-life experiences while at the museum,which can sometimes be detrimental to the flow of the playscenario (Wood, McMahon, & Cranstoun, 1980) They also

29

ONLOOKER As onlookers, adults

observe children fromnearby and may make an

occasional comment, but do nothing to enhance

or disrupt play. Observationcan help the adult to

understand children’s playhabits and in turn, to know

when they need to intervenewith one of the more

involved forms of playdescribed below.

STAGE MANAGERIn this role, adults do notdirectly take part in play.

Instead, they help childrenset the stage for variousactivities and offer assis-

tance when asked (e.g., getmaterials, make costumes).A stage manager may also

propose extensions to aplay scenario (e.g., a new

imaginary obstacle toovercome in socio-dramaticplay), but children are free

to follow or ignore thesuggestions as they please.

CO-PLAYERCo-players join in play

activities. Typically theytake small supporting roles, while the child

takes the lead. Co-playersmight make suggestions to extend play and oftenmodel play skills for the

child, such as sharing or role playing.

PLAY LEADERIn this role, the adult

actively guides children’splay from within the

activity. Play leaders aim to enrich and extend play

by suggesting new themes, props, or plot twists to the current

scenario. Teachers are likely to take on this

high level of involvementwhen children have trouble starting ormaintaining play.

Overall, research on adults’various roles in PLAY suggeststhat they need to be sensitive tothe child’s needs in the moment,flexible in choosing the way theyintervene, and willing to follow thechild’s lead.

avoided participation in play because they felt exposed anduncomfortable in the role of co-player in public. Toencourage parent involvement in pretend play, Shine andAcosta suggest that museums provide private, enclosedspaces and adult-sized props to prompt parents to join inthe play, as well as parent education about the benefits ofparent-child play through classes and signage.

FACILITATION TECHNIQUESBased on a review of relevant literature, Johnson andcolleagues (2005) recommend several specific techniquesto help adults scaffold children’s play. Perhaps the mostimportant aspect to any intervention is to follow the child’slead. Adults can observe what children like and do, andrespond to it accordingly. They can also engage children intheme-relevant conversation, ask leading questions, respondto their requests for help, and address questions in a waythat encourages critical thinking (i.e., not necessarily givingaway the answer; Mind in the Making, Ellen Galinsky).

Another suggestion for adults is to ground new experiencesat the museum in children’s knowledge of the outsideworld, as play is contingent on an understanding of thesituation or materials at hand: for example, providingchildren with preparatory experiences has been a key factor

in successful socio-dramatic play training studies (Dockett,1988, as cited in Kavanaugh, 2011 and Pellegrini, 2009;Smilansky, 1968). Finally, adults can give children the timethey need to play and explore. Research shows that children

often need at least half an hour to plan, set up, and executeplay. Specifically, in one study, preschoolers exhibited moremature forms of social and cognitive play, and higherpercentages of group play, constructive play, and socio-dramatic play during 30 minute play sessions than 15minute sessions (Christie, Johnsen, & Peckover, 1988). Byusing a few child-centered techniques, adults can help toboost children to higher levels of play and learning.

Overall, this line of research suggests that in addition toenhancing children’s experience at the museum, targetingthe education of adult visitors could provide a uniqueopportunity to impact playful learning in a broader sense.Given that the time children spend within the walls of themuseum is relatively short, and many of the benefits of playaccrue over the long term, helping parents to realize theimportance of play and how to foster playful learning in ahome environment could be particularly important.

30

Research shows that childrenoften need at least half an hour toplan, set up, and execute PLAY.

CONCLUSIONPlay is learning. As Vygotsky (1978) noted, it “contains alldevelopmental tendencies in a condensed form and is itselfa major source of development (p. 102).” Through thepresentation of research on various, overlapping styles ofplay, this paper illustrates the impact of play on the wholechild. In the short and long term, play benefits cognitive,social, emotional, and physical development. Childrenlearn cognitive skills such as creativity, problem solving,divergent thinking, mathematics, and language. They learnto negotiate social relationships, regulate their emotions,and control their own behaviors. Play also fosters the devel-opment of fine and gross motor skills. When play is funand child-directed, children are motivated to engage inopportunities to learn. Moreover, when given choices inplay, children can find activities that are best suited to theirindividual needs.

Together, the research summarized here makes a strongstatement for the benefits of play. We must, however, takecaution in the interpretation and application of someindividual studies. Much of the research is 30 years old ormore. With the passage of time, it is hard to predictwhether the same outcomes would hold for children intoday’s world. Also, much of the research on the benefitsof play is correlational; we cannot say for certain whetherplay itself is the cause for learning or development in thosecases. Finally, we know that culture can impact parents’

opinion on play and how children play. Although, care wastaken to include research with diverse groups of childrenin this paper, the majority of play research is done withmiddle-class, Western samples. While these limitations donot negate the overall argument that play benefits learningand development – it will be important to keep theselimitations in mind when applying individual findings.

The mission of Minnesota Children’s Museum is to promoteplayful learning for young children. By providing childrenwith rich play experiences, and helping parents to understandthe importance of playful learning in children’s lives, we canhelp children to learn, build successful relationships, behappy, and find success in the 21st century. In an age where

play is under siege (Zigler, 2004) in many educationalcircles, promoting opportunities for children to learn throughplayful contexts could not be more important. Through play,we can begin to build the foundations for motivated, healthyand happy children, and a productive society.

31

PLAY is learning.

For the bibliography, visit MCM.org/references or use theQR code.

MissionSparking children’s learning through play

Foundational BeliefsEarly learning is the foundation for lifelong learning.

Families are our children’s first teachers.

All children deserve a time and place to be children.

Diverse perspectives enrich children’s lives.

Playing is learning.

10 West Seventh Street, St. Paul, MN 55102 • 651-225-6000 • MCM.org