Fluent Essays

Studying in Early Year Education MAAssignment question: Critically discuss the importance of play in the curriculum for young childrens learning and developmentWord Count: 4500 words in British English. Please follow Ariel point 12, not justified text and use more than 20 references in the APA Referencing style when referencing.- The assignment must draw on carefully referenced evidence from empirical or theoretical texts. Your answer should include reference to research journal articles, academic literature, national and international policy and practice. - Coherent narrative and 3/4/5 arguments. - Content and critical analysis and argument is essential.- Required reading:Rogers, S. (2011) Play and pedagogy: a conflict of interest? In Rethinking play and pedagogy in early childhood education: concepts, contexts and cultures. Ed. Rogers, S. London: Routledge, pp. 5-19 Wood, E. (2007) ‘New Directions in Play: Consensus or Collision?’, Education, 35 (4), 309- 320. Fung, H. & Cheng, D. (2012) ‘Consensus or dissensus? Stakeholders’ views on the role of play in learning, Early Years: An International Journal of Research and Development, 32(1), 17-33 - Recommended reading: Wood, E. (2013) (3rd Edition) Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum: London, SAGE Publications Ltd. (Chapter 5) Wood, E. (2010) Developing integrated pedagogical approaches to play and learning, pp9-26 in Broadhead, P., Howard, J. and Wood, E. (eds) Play and Learning in the Early Years: From research to practice. London: Sage. (Chapter 6). Brooker, L., Blaise, M. and Edwards, S. (2014) The SAGE handbook of play and learning in early childhood. Los Angeles: SAGE Grieshaber, S. and McArdle, F. (2010) The trouble with play. Maidenhead: Open University Press Wood, E. (2013) (3rd Edition) Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum: London, SAGE Publications Ltd. Broadhead, P. And Howard, J. And Wood, E. (Eds) (2010) Play and Learning in the Early Years London, Sage Dahlberg, G. (2009) Policies in Early Childhood Education and care: Potentialities for Agency, Play and Learning, in Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W.A. & Honig, M. Eds. The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies, London: Palgrave Macmillan Wood, E. (2013) (3rd Edition) Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum: London, SAGE Publications Ltd. (Chapter 5). Brooker. L (2011) Developing learning dispositions for life. In Waller, T. Whitmarsh, J. and Clark, K. (2011) Making sense of theory and practice in early childhood : the power of ideas Maidenhead, Open University Press. (Chapter 6 pages 83-98). Moyles, J. (2010) The Excellence of Play Maidenhead, Open University Press.Vygotsky, L. (1978) The role of play in development, in Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Broadhead, P. (2010) Building Friendship through Playful Learning in the Early Years in Moyles, J. (2010) The Excellence of Play Maidenhead, Open University Press. Broadhead, P. (2010) Cooperative Play and Learning from Nursery to Year One. In Broadhead, P., Howard, J., and Wood, E. (2010) Play and Learning in the Early Years London, Sage Publications. (Chapter 8). Wood, E. (2010) Developing integrated pedagogical approaches to play and learning, pp9-26 in Broadhead, P., Howard, J. and Wood, E. (eds) Play and Learning in the Early Years: From research to practice. London: Sage. (Chapter 6). Brown, F. (2009) Playwork, in Brock, A., Dodds, S., Jarvis, P. and Olusoga, Y. Eds. Perspectives on Play: Learning for Life, Pearson: Longman ~~ I have upload the 3 past example papers, the assignment proforma and the lecture notes of Play Pedagogy for you to understand how to structure this assignment and the academic literature that can use in the assignment. Please finish it in time! Thanks in advance!! grade_a_assignment_1.pdf assignment_2.docx grade_a_assignment_3.pdf assignment_proforma.docx lecture_play_pedagogy.pptx Unformatted Attachment Preview 1 Critically discuss the importance of play pedagogy in the curriculum for young children’s learning and development Word Count: 5,412 2 Introduction This assignment will seek to explore play with an emphasis on mathematical learning in young children. The terms play and learning will be defined with the intention to better understand what they mean and how they have been interpreted in various different ways. The theories of Piaget’s (1952) Cognitive Constructivism and Vygotsky’s (1978) Social Constructivism will be explored. This essay will look at each of these theorist’s ideas of cognitive development and how their ideas are influencing the teaching of mathematics; including an exploration of the common criticisms of these theories. Following these critiques of theories, policies from Florida’s “Collaborate, Plan, Align, Learn, Motivate and Share” (CPALMS) and the UK’s Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) will be critically examined. These policies are focused on Reception or Kindergarten mathematics curriculums and if play is included in the expectations of these curriculums. Finally, this essay will discuss how mathematical play can be implemented in practice to the benefit and reinforcement of learning in young children. Definitions Play is an activity that is hard to definitively define. Theoretical constructs have described dramatic play, socio-dramatic play, constructive play, and rough-and-tumble (R&T) as prominent play elements in the early childhood years. Dramatic and socio-dramatic play are often linked together, however, there are some distinct differences; Smilansky (1990) describes dramatic play as the child pretending to be someone other than themselves, predominantly in the form of 3 imitation or role taking. This form of play is usually independent. Socio-dramatic play involves two or more children and acts more as a performance through role-play (Smilansky, 1990). This type of play requires what Wood (2013: 31) coined the term as play memories. The children recall what has happened previously with the stories they have presented in their play. Constructive play contains the building and manipulation of objects, such as blocks and modelling clay, which can then act as props in the dramatic and socio-dramatic types of play described above (Wood, 2013). Rough-andtumble play, which is often influenced by what children see in the media (Wood, 2013); allows children to manage physical contact with one another, while maintaining emotional engagement (Jarvis, 2010). However, some practitioners view R&T play as a segue to actual fighting between peers if the children do not understand the concept of play fighting (Wood, 2013). Taking into consideration these various forms of play a practitioner should be able to plan activities that would enhance mathematical learning and development. Definitionally, in a more general sense, Huizinga (1955) hypothesizes that play is not serious, takes the child out of their ordinary life, is rule-governed and immerses the child completely. Like Huizinga, Vygotsky (1978) agrees that play involves rules. He includes that play is imaginative and desired by the child. While many researchers and theorists define play in different ways a common theme runs through many of their definitions:  play is imaginative or child-invented (Huizinga, 1955; Vygotsky, 1978; Garvey, 1991; Meckley, 2002); 4  play is intrinsically motivated (Vygotsky, 1978; Rubin, 1983; Fromberg, 1987; Pellegrini, 1991; Saracho, 1991);  play is guided by mental rules (Huizinga, 1955; Vygotsky, 1978; Fromberg, 1987); and,  play is child- led and self-directed (Vygotsky, 1978; Meckley, 2002). These characteristics place the child in charge of when and how play happens. More recent developments suggest children are engaging more with virtual play be it online or with video games (Marsh, 2010); and whilst this has become a more common form of play, there have been objections by adults because of the games’ tendency to be violent (Marsh and Millard, 2000). However, Marsh and Millard (2000) argue, despite these objections, it is important to take into account what children are interested in in popular culture as they are the ones accepting it as a form of play. Marsh (2010) and Wohlwend (2009) also present the notion that using such technological platforms allows creativity that influences development and learning in young children. Children use play as a way to expand on experiences and adapt them in a way that is pleasurable to them. There is a reason for children to be playing, but that does not mean that it is the only system children use for interaction. By contrast, Hutt et al. (1989) suggest that play is a multiplicity of activities within which not every activity is supporting learning, coinciding with the thoughts of Piaget (1962) who reasoned that play did not exercise cognitive thought. As a way of merging these ideas of play, Wood (2013: 5) states that “play can be regarded as deeply serious and purposeful, or trivial and purposeless” therefore implying that everything the child does is playing, but some activities carry more cognitive weight than others. Similarly, Gray and MacBlain (2015) 5 contend that learning can be effortless and undirected, or it can be purposeful and directed. Gray and MacBlain (2015: xv) describe learning as “complex, multifaceted and informed by factors within and without our control”. As stated, this implies that learning does not only happen in the classroom; it is influenced by every factor of a child’s life, such as culture, as later discussed in this essay by reference to Vygotsky’s ideas (1978). EYFS (2017) defines the characteristics of effective learning as playing and exploring, active learning, and creating and thinking critically. Through the influence of these characteristics, playing with peers enjoys a specific role in helping children make sense of the world around them by socialising and problem-solving, hence encouraging early learning. Children create knowledge through these many different forms of play (Dau, 1999; Levin, 1996). They are utilizing existing knowledge to expand and explore the unknown in their environment, therefore they are learning. When deciphering these definitions of play and learning it becomes hard to discuss one without the other. Play is described as a way of enhancing learning, and learning is commonly described as a process begun through play and exploration. Theories In this assignment the theories of Piaget’s (1952) Cognitive Constructivism and Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) are explored, as they are pivotal to understanding the generic ways in which children learn and are directly applicable to their understanding of mathematics. Both theories are a form of constructivism - an approach to teaching and learning which is based on the idea that cognition occurs 6 because of mental construction (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). Coalescence of these theories, therefore lends support to the idea that these theories of mental construction provide a rational basis for the development of mathematical skills and understanding in young children. Piaget- Cognitive Constructivism Piaget’s theory of cognitive constructivism (1952) views children as making sense of their own world. The child is expected to learn or increase their knowledge by building on what they already know through interaction with new ideas and experiences. In the eyes of Piaget, the child is a scientist whom is experimenting, acquiring new experiences to gain more knowledge (1952). He believed that children begin thinking before they learn to talk through schemas or the grouping of thoughts and actions to make sense of new experiences. Through these schemas, children are grouping their interpretations of the world and must be able to assimilate and accommodate these ideas when new information is presented. Their ability to assimilate and accommodate shows their understanding of the world and demonstrates mental construction, which is important to mathematical play-based learning so that the skills learnt in mathematics develop incrementally. The idea that schemas are central to learning has been criticised. Sutherland (1992) claimed that the concept of schemas is under-developed, vague and that as there is no way to demonstrate the existence of this mechanism in young children’s learning, this cannot be a credible concept. Assuming as a predicate that Piaget’s concept that children go through four stages of development, and that of those stages the intuitive phase of the pre-operational 7 stage, is most relevant to the reception age range, this model will be used in this essay. Noting, however, that this hypothesis has been disputed (Gray and MacBlain, 2015), and that Piaget (1970) later modified his approach to what he described as a spiral process. The intuitive phase of the pre-operational stage focuses more on perceptual attributes such as size and shapes (Gray and MacBlain, 2015), which are also considered a focus in the EYFS mathematics development for reception and the CPALMS standards used in Florida for Kindergarten. In this phase the child is beginning to decentre, meaning they are beginning to see a more complete picture. This shows that children are building on what they know about grouping and applying it to make smaller groups within said whole group; they are mentally constructing, which will later be helpful when they begin adding and subtracting numbers. Piaget (1952) states that while the child may be able to decentre there will still be an inability to move between the whole group to subgroup and back again during the intuitive phase. Following consideration of Piaget’s model, the pre-operational stage discusses that children’s understanding of conservation is limited because they cannot focus beyond the visual cues of shape and size (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). Shape, size, and measurement are another focus point for the UK and Florida within their curriculums in reception and Kindergarten. Piaget tended to focus on children’s cognitive abilities and development as opposed to play. However, when explaining play, Piaget (1962) states that the behaviors of play were meant to satisfy pleasure. He did not believe that play stimulated cognitive thought; only that play gave the children a means to exercise what they already knew (Piaget, 1962). Taking this idea into consideration, it could be assumed that this thought from Piaget could support the idea that play could act as a reinforcement tool, but not a 8 mechanism for delivering the concepts of the mathematical curriculum. With that being said, Piaget described that learning should be child-centred and that there should be an emphasis on peer interaction, which is similar to some of the definitions of play that were earlier discussed. Piaget also contends that learning during the child’s appropriate stage of development should be implemented in the form of stimulating tasks. Whitebread (2012:3) comments that the uses of stimulating tasks or experiences are still supported by many European countries as a way of achieving high quality early childhood education. By adding stimulation to play it could be assumed that play would captivate the child and enhance their learning. This could be seen as important because it may inform mathematical policy and curricula based on children’s learning development. Regarding this subphase, some critics argue that Piaget only focused on what children cannot do as oppose to what they can do between the ages of four and seven (Issacs, 1930; Sutherland, 1992). These criticisms are important because limiting a child’s learning will not allow for their full potential to be met through mathematical play-based learning. Differently, Duveen (2000) viewed Piaget’s approaches as a way to determine where children had difficulty learning at each stage, which could be used as a guide to reinforce learning through each sub-phase. Using these stages as a guide may be viewed as helpful, however this would imply that all children learn and develop at the same rate. Piaget is often criticised for the use of complicated language when assessing children’s understanding, as a way of deliberately guiding the children away from the right answer, therefore underestimating their cognitive ability and manipulating their 9 responses so that they fell more predictably into his model (Meadows, 1993). Piaget (1955) justified the use of complex language by explaining that his intention was to eliminate any background knowledge to elicit the child’s purest answer. Even with reasoning, using complicated language could mask the child’s true cognitive abilities, which is inherent to understanding how best to extend the learning of the child. Vygotsky- Social Constructivist Theory Vygotsky’s Social Constructivist Theory focuses on the importance of considering the child’s home life, culture and environment; as well as how they interact with those around them, as predicates for the way in which that child will develop. Gray and MacBlain (2015) theorise that he reflected on the child as a member of their cultural context, not as an individual, making the child a puzzle piece that fits into the big picture of society. Recognizing Vygotsky’s view of the child helps to understand his theory in relation to the learning and development of mathematics through play pedagogy. Vygotsky believed that children were born with basic building blocks of cognition and that they were enhanced with higher-order thinking skills (Rose et al. 2003), which mirror Piaget’s use of open-ended questions to build cognition. Vygotsky believed that development occurred because of the child’s interaction with their social environment and that it was not a concrete model. Based on the relationship between development and learning, Vygotsky (1978) hypothesized that learning and development do not coincide directly. It is his idea that development tends to lag behind learning; though like Piaget, he agreed that children are constructors of their own knowledge and skills (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). He thought that the construction of knowledge and skills 10 comes from the culture that the child lives in and they acquire knowledge through social interaction. Vygotsky believes that children have preconceived notions about various subject areas taught in school, including mathematics. Therefore classroom learning is in part reinforcing learning that takes place in the home and the community. Vygotsky’s theory of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) suggests that children need to establish two developmental levels- one level is a baseline of what the child can do independently and the other what the child can do with support from a more knowledgeable adult (Meadows, 1993). By playing with a more knowledgeable adult, children begin to develop the mathematical skills that have been reinforced in the classroom as the adult gives an opportunity to demonstrate new strategies of mathematical processes. Vygotsky (1978) described the ZPD as a process of maturing and characterises cognitive development prospectively. It is not a specific or predetermined quality within the child or teacher; it is what occurs when the child works with a more knowledgeable person. The child is building their knowledge from what they already know through social interaction. The role of the adult through the ZPD is to build a self-regulated and competent learner. They are to be supportive in the beginning then slowly remove support when they recognize that the child is becoming an expert in what they are learning (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). Once the child becomes an expert, the role of the adult is to identify the next point of learning and find meaningful activities and tasks to further enhance said learning in the child, similar to Piaget’s (1962) learning through stimulating tasks. 11 The curriculum in England appears to follow Vygotsky’s example and includes adult-led activities in the EYFS, which became the guidelines for planned activities. Vygotsky believed that each child would require different amounts of support through their ZPD levels and that each child would be capable of different achievements while learning (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). This thought of different achievement levels influenced the CPALMS standards in Florida as they have different variations of each standard to accommodate each learner. Adults should be aware of this idea when developing children’s ZPDs. Children may be at the same mental age, however they may need different tasks, strategies or scaffolding (Wood et al., 1976) from the adult to build knowledge in a productive way. When planning for young children’s learning and development the goals set by the more knowledgeable adult need to be realistic and achievable within the child’s ZPD (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). Vygotsky focused on the social interaction between the child, their environment, and adults, but he also commented on how peer collaboration may shape the child’s learning. Like Piaget, he believed that children learned more effectively if at least one child was an expert on the topic (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). There is then an asymmetric relationship between these two children, transferring knowledge from the more knowledgeable child to the learning child. Vygotsky tended to focus on adult-led activities through the ZPD, however he mentioned the importance of child-to-child conversations in play. He focused on the process of these conversations, not the product that came out of them by observing how higher-order thinking occurred (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). 12 Wood (2013:28) emphasizes child-to-child communication in dramatic and socio-dramatic play as it is seen as complex and purposeful. It is assumed that Wood chose these words because they require children to think through their conversation with their peers in order to achieve an effective play session. Sawyer (2003) hypothesizes that children use communication in play as a way to clarify and negotiate ideas in social and pretend play. However, since Vygotsky’s findings, there have been some reports that have found that large, diverse group collaboration is more effective than that of small groups made up of children in similar ages, abilities and genders (Kutnick and Blatchford, 2014). Vygotsky (1987-98) believed play was “self-education” and a precursor to abstract thinking. In accordance to play and the child’s ZPD, Vygotsky stated that “play creates a zone of proximal development for the child. In play a child always behaves beyond his average age, above his daily behaviour” (1987-98, p. 102). Play replaces the adult in this instance. This becomes more evident when children begin to take charge and make up their own rules in play, which they are less likely to share with adults (Gray and MacBlain, 2015). Like his thoughts on development, play is influenced by the child’s culture and most likely initiated by an adult. Later confidence and independence develops in their play. Specifically, sharing their own cultural experiences develops imaginative play and may influence components like rules. These will be decided based on what the child hears at home, experiences in class, or sees in the media. However, it is important to consider that play is different in many cultures. Brooker (2006; 2011) argues that it is important for the teacher to understand the students’ cultural background so that there is an opportunity to transfer the cultural 13 differences of play into the classroom. Without that understanding it can be thought that there would be a gap in the cultural transfer between home and school. Through recognizing and learning the cultural differences in the classroom, it can be assumed that the practitio ... Purchase answer to see full attachment