Hi, Linda, Thanks for asking about the topics I addressed in my newsletter to parents. Yes, I addressed many aspects of play and how dramatic play, block play, and other types of play led to specific learning outcomes. That's what was important to include--the connections between play and learning. It allays parents' fears that their children aren't learning when they play if we continually point out all of the learning outcomes. Oftentimes, I addressed questions based on parents' comments in our everyday conversations, such as "What types of toys should I buy my kindergartner?" I would turn that into a column in the newsletter. Yet, every column did not address play. I answered questions such as "Where is the time-out chair?" to address why we didn't use one and explain what types of guidance techniques we did use. Or questions on specific areas of the curriculum, like, "Why are you melting snow on the windowsill?" The answer to that one covered science (water cycle and weather) and health (the reasons why we don't eat the snow!). It's really fun to take parents' comments and questions and turn them into a little column. It's like having a one-to-one conversation based on their questions, which is a luxury we rarely get in our busy lives. SWS

Hi Mary,
Well, we have been working through the Common Core and consider where and how it affects children in K-3, and possibly children before they enter kindergarten. We have been developing a paper that talks about the role or importance of play within the Common Core. As that paper is not yet completed, I’ll give you the primary ideas that we are focused on. First, the writers of the Common Core go to great pains to note that although play is not wrapped into the standards, neither is it excluded. It is important to remember that the Common Core sets learning standards – we may agree or disagree with what these expectations are for young children (that may be a good subject of a different Q&A event), but standards, in themselves, do not dictate how they will be reached. So, quite possibly, one could imagine meeting all of the Common Core standards through play-based or play rich classrooms and opportunities. The second point we will make is that including play intentionally as part of how one seeks to meet the Common Core standards is not easy, and may require some additional supports (including trainings and materials, possibly). As one of the other posts suggests, one thing we are seeing with use of the Common Core is that teachers in kindergarten (especially) are being directed to (or feeling pressure towards) using approaches sin the classroom that more typical for older children, and less inclusive of play. Some commentators have argued that publishers of curriculum aligned with the Common Core are taking more control over instruction than giving teachers – this is a long-standing debate between teacher initiative and curriculum dictatorship that we also saw with No Child Left Behind. So another point we may be making is the need to communicate to school leaders the powerful role that play, effectively used, can play in meeting expectations under the Common Core, in addition to promoting child health and well-being generally. Again, play and learning are not mutually exclusive – the Common Core should not be a threat to play so long as we can use include play appropriately in classrooms for young children and demonstrate the results.

I wholeheartedly agree with both Sandy's and Kyle's comments. The only piece I felt I could add is to encourage you and your colleagues to work together to make the learning that can and does occur through play more visible to stakeholders: families, administrators, community members. Too many times, I hear a teacher say to a family member, "I know your child is really dirty but she learns so much when she plays outside in the dirt." This teacher's statement is accurate, but it doesn't communicate to that family member what is being learned. Families want their children to learn, and a dirt-covered child doesn't look like learning. Flash cards, worksheets, sitting still all day - unfortunately - look like learning to a lot of folks. If we want to replace that image with the more accurate play-based-learning one, then we have to give the learning that does take place when children play a face and a clear, distinct voice. Tell the family member with the dirt-covered child about how she compared the dirt to the sand, examined both under a microscope, found an ant fossil in the dirt while examining it under the microscope, and then noticed shiny pieces in the sand that weren't visible to the naked eye. She theorized that the shiny pieces used to be some kind of shiny rock. Her exploring, comparing, using many tools to explore, and theorizing all support kindergarten science standard mastery. And if the teacher is photographing the child doing these things and using quotations from the child to support the photographs, then this child's learning while playing will have the face it needs to communicate that learning to a larger public. I can tell you are committed to your children and to their learning or you wouldn't have these questions. Thank you for that commitment!

Dear Soital,
First of all, reading about your situation saddened me. As a kindergarten teacher for many years, I cannot imagine the pressures that you and your students must be feeling with the absence of recess, play centers, and play in your day. NAEYC is working on a position paper on play that will help those of us in the field make a strong case for why play is important in the lives of children--not only as a source of joy but as a way to learn about their worlds. I think what you are asking is about how to advocate successfully for changes in these recent policies. Let's start with recess. . . around 12 years ago a group of us became concerned that our local elementary schools were not permitting the children and teachers to have outdoor recess. We joined forces with the League of Women Voters, local doctors, parents, and anyone else who was concerned. We did our research before addressing the school board, by collecting every study that we could find that addressed the advantages of recess on children's brain development, academic focus, mental and physical health, etc. Local doctors, including cardiologists, psychologists, and pediatricians wrote letters to the editor of the local newspaper (as did many children!). We enlisted parents to collect data on whether their children had gone outside while at school for a two-week period and recorded the data on special calendars. Then, we went to the school board with all of our evidence. It was amazing! The board moved to reinstate recess immediately (it had been "missing" for over 20 years). So. . . I guess my message to you is to enlist others in your advocacy and "make a noise." Although you might want to stay in the background since you're employment might depend on it.

As far as the push for RIGOR in your kindergarten, I cannot think of a more engagied, focused, and attentive child than a child who is exploring a new material in science or engrossed in writing his or her own journal entry and creating a piece of art to go with the journal entry. Can you do some of these engaging activities without calling them "play"? In my view, rigor is measured by how much a child has learned from the activities and lessons we provide. If a child isn't engaged, then he or she isn't learning. To me, that is rigor.

I don't mean to belittle your question or your situation in any way because it is serious. It sounds like children are being adversely affected by policy changes and pressures that are beyond their control. That's why we have to be advocates for what we know is right and good for children. You might consider joining an interest forum through NAEYC like the Kindergarten IF or the Play, Policy, and Practice IF. It would be a start in finding colleagues who have similar interests and backgrounds, and it's easy to do from the "Members Only" page of the NAEYC website.

All the best in your battles! SWS

Thanks for asking the “so what” question – how do I actually do this is usually the most difficult question to answer. I cannot really give a single answer to this question – there are many bits, I think. The first and foremost consideration is intentionality – having a clear sense of why you are doing something at this moment, whether it be sitting one-to-one with a child reading a book and expanding on its content through dialogic reading, powering up technology to find (and show) information that responds to or builds off of a child’s question, or using a period of pretend play to build social skills. Frances gives a nice example of melding technology with play and exploration in talking about uncovering worms then using technology to bring more information to the children. Second, avoiding the temptation to believe that there is one single approach that will work for all children, or even for the same child, all the time. Having a clear sense of what the goal is for each child, and building from where he or she is, it may be that play, technology, teacher-led instruction, group, etc., may be effective. Knowing the child, and how he or she responds to different approaches, is a subtle part of teaching – but focusing on the desired outcome, and harnessing multiple approaches to move a child there, requires flexibility (and confidence) from the teacher as well. All that said, this balancing of approaches, matching them to individual children to meet multiple needs, continues to be one of the hardest things that teachers do, and observing others, sharing ideas, working with coaching, mentors, or other forms of ongoing training, can all support teachers in finding what works. Finally, looking at other questions on this forum, you will see that engaging parents in ways that validate the role of play in early education is one concern – I would suggest that our teachers may come with the same views about play (and technology, specific instructional styles, and so on). So, the final critical thing (to me) is the teacher’s skill and confidence in using play, technology, teacher-led instruction, group work, and so on…a teacher that can be very effective in using play and less effective using technology will tend to use play more – again, building the skills, and confidence, to use all the tools at our disposal in the classroom is the key.

Hello, Juan,
As a kindergarten teacher in a play-based program for many years, I, too, grappled with trying to find the best way to convince parents that their children were learning as they played. It made me cringe when I heard them say that their children were "just playing." The approach that I found worked best was to engage them in playful learning experiences from the "get go." When we had our open house in early fall, I used to set up two ways to teach the same concept. One way was based on play; the other was based on more traditional, direct instructional approaches. For example, I set up the block area to teach selected three-dimensional shapes (cube, sphere, rectangular prism, etc.). The parents at this station engaged in constructing buildings of their own out of the selected blocks. They worked together as they discovered properties of the blocks such as which ones stacked, fell over, rolled away, etc. The parents at the more traditional station had a lecture from me on the different shapes, followed by a worksheet. Then we would come together and brainstorm about what they had learned. It was apparent to them that the parents at the block center had learned much more from their hands-on experiences. I followed this by sharing with them all of the standards that were addressed in their block play (covering math, science, literacy, and other content areas). This usually convinced even the most skeptical of parents of the value of play. To add a little more fun to the activity, take photos of the parents playing in the blocks to share with your students the next day! They will love it!

Another strategy I used was to have an "Ask Sandi. . ." column in my weekly newsletter. I encouraged parents to ask me about anything that we did in the kindergarten and why I would do such an activity. Tapping into research and theory on children's development and learning, I answered the questions without using lots of jargon. You wouldn't have to use a newsletter to do this--you could use the web and make this process even more interactive and communal. If you don't have a question some of the weeks, make up your own to answer. That way you can insert some questions about the value of play as a learning tool.

Those were two strategies that I found to be successful with the population of parents at my school. You have to start all over each year when you get a new crop of parents, but, in my experience, it helps to get their support right at the beginning of the year. You won't hear many more of those "just playing" remarks!

Stephanie, It sounds like you're a concerned parent who wants to provide the best type of play for your child. There are many types of play, including pretend play (which can be done alone or with others), constructive play (which involves creating something like a block structure or a painting), and games with rules (such as board games or sports). As children get older and more mature, they are able to engage in different types of play. For example, games with rules is very hard for a two-year-old because it requires an understanding that the same rules apply to everyone playing the game or the game doesn't work. Yet, a five-year-old can participate in simple games; by seven- or eight-years-old, the child can play rather complex games and make up games of their own. A similar progression occurs with pretend play. Around the age of 18-months, a child first starts pretending that an object is something that it isn't. Or the child pretends to take on a role, such as a "driver of a car." This is an exciting milestone because it shows that the child can represent one thing with another. Then when the child is three- or four-years old, she or he can extend the pretending further by participating in a common theme with others, such as pretending to cook dinner for each other. This requires more social and language skills than playing alone. Then, by the age of six, children can engage in complex scenarios that persist over time. An example, kindergartners who pick up the theme of the family cooking dinner that they started the day (or week) before, right where they left off, playing the same roles and following the same script.

So, to answer your question, the best thing is to follow your child's lead. When your child shows interest in pretending, pretend right along. When the child shows interest in creating a piece of art, encourage this type of play by providing the materials, time, and encouragement. It's very important for parents to play with their children at all ages, but it shouldn't be an activity that is forced on the child. In order to be play, it has to be child-initiated and actively engage the child. I always tell parents that YOU are the best toy for your child. Don't worry about buying expensive toys, but use what you have around the house. Pots and pans, cardboard boxes, recycled paper all make for great play materials. . . and they don't cost anything. The biggest investment you can make is your TIME spent playing with your child. It will pay off in the end!

Hi Linda - Great question, and one we all get asked a lot. My recommendation would be to first clarify the value of worm play to a preschooler's learning: which of your state standards are addressed when this child plays with worms? What is the language value, the scientific thinking value, the math value? Once you've clarified how this wonderful play benefits the child's development, you can then focus on documenting the learning that occurs. I think that sometimes it's a little harder for parents to see the connections between what their child is doing and what their child is learning, and so we have to focus more intentionally on making the learning very visible to them. Being a sports fanatic myself, I can relate to the dad's wanting his son to be playing basketball :) The basketball play is important to his son's development, too, and I would encourage it whenever possible. Bottom-line, we know play is an ideal vehicle for children's optimum development. Our job is to delineate exactly how the child's play is supporting what specific development, and then help communicate that learning to families in highly visible and jargon-free ways.

Wow - I certainly remember wanting to be Snow White when I was a little girl, and so it would be difficult for me to say this kind of play doesn't belong in preschool because it's going to occur in preschool whether we believe it should be there, or not. Our job is to help children gain the greatest value from their play. For example, if I had a group of girls fixated on being Cinderella (or any other popular princess-type figure), I would first help them investigate what it is that makes someone a princess, along with helping them discover the world's actual princesses. Help them increase their knowledge about what a princess really is so that their fantasy play can extend beyond a Disney storybook or movie. I would provide a rich array of props representing the world's real princesses in order to support their dramatic play. I would also help them more clearly define what it means to be pretty by giving them lots of rich vocabulary for "pretty"(words like unusual, striking, kind, gentle, different, unique, and so on). Again, our job is to help flesh out the concepts children are experiencing in order for them to learn and grow from those experiences. Last advice - try to focus on girls' attributes that they can actually control instead of labeling them and/or their clothes as pretty. So much better to acknowledge how diligent a girl was in cleaning the block area, how helpful she was in wiping up the spilled milk, how strong she was when she climbed the rope ladder, or how kind she was when she comforted a crying friend.

Becky, Thanks for asking such a relevant question. As I thought about how to answer you, I was reminded of the famous quote by Albert Einstein that ". . . technology has exceeded our humanity." This is the fear that many of us have, the hint of which was in your question. For specific guidance, I consulted the recently released Position Statement on Technology and Interactive Media in Early Childhood Programs that was published by NAEYC and the Fred Rogers Center in 2012. This position statement is available on the www.naeyc.org website. Based on the research on how children learn, this statement has many practical ideas that can help you make decisions about how and when to use technology in your early childhood program. It recommends not using computers and other screen-based technology with children less than two years old, and limiting the usage for children two- to five-years old, especially avoiding programs that promote passivity on the part of the children. And, as teachers of young children, we need to be informed about what technology is available and cautious of the violent and highly sexualized content of many of the programs on the market today. Our children may not be exposed to this content in our early care and education programs, but they might be exposed to inappropriate content when they are at home or in other settings. We oftentimes see evidence of this in their play.

That said, how can we use technology intentionally and appropriately in our early childhood programs? Advances in assistive technology make it possible for children to participate in our play-based programs who were unable to do so in the past, such as using technology to communicate, move, manipulate, and interact with peers. Teachers can use technology to communicate with the families through the web and social media. The wonderful aspect of this use of technology is that it can be multi-directional as parents ask questions or voice concerns to which teachers and other parents can respond. You might be able to use the newer platforms available through social media to answer questions and concerns about why play is important for young children. Overall, I encourage you to continue offering a play-based curriculum in your early childhood program and use technology to help you make the case that play is important in the lives of young children.

I think that everyone who works with - or on behalf of - young children has asked this question. My belief is that technology certainly has a place in a play-based program. When technology is used to enhance children's play instead of replace it, then children reap the enormous benefits technology offers all of us. For example, some children in a preschool classroom had a question about whether or not earthworms would eat apples. They believed the worms would. To test their hypothesis, they gathered ten worms in a container full of soil, and placed a cut-up apple in the container. The worms did not eat the apples. One child asked, "Do worms have teeth? Do worms even have mouths?" Years ago, I would've had to go and find a reference book (or several) about worms. Instead, I was able to immediately locate a YouTube video on my iPad. The video showed worms eating soil. The children were able to see that worms do have mouths. Instead of this immediate access to information hampering their curiosity, technology supported it. The children now wanted to see if the worms were eating the dirt like they saw worms in the video eating. To me, giving children access to as many inquiry tools as possible supports their learning through play. The caution is in using technology as a substitute for teacher-child interactions, like having the computer read a story to a group of children instead of reading it aloud ourselves. I hope this helps answer your question.