Reflective Playwork: For All Who Work with Children 9781474254052, 9781474254090, 9781474254076

Citation preview

i

Reflective Playwork Second Edition

ii

ALSO AVAILABLE FROM BLOOMSBURY Gender, Sex and Children’s Play, Jacky Kilvington and Ali Wood Observing Children and Young People, Carole Sharman, Wendy Cross and Diana Vennis Playing Outdoors in the Early Years, Ros Garrick Rethinking Children’s Play, Fraser Brown and Michael Patte The Value of Play, Perry Else

iii

Reflective Playwork For All Who Work with Children Second Edition Jacky Kilvington and Ali Wood Online resources to accompany this book are available at: http://​bloomsbury.com/​cw/​reflective-​playwork-​second-​edition/​ Please type the URL into your web browser and follow the ­instructions to access the Companion Website. If you experience any problems, please contact Bloomsbury at: [email protected]

Bloomsbury Academic An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

LON DON • OX F O R D • N E W YO R K • N E W D E L H I • SY DN EY

iv

Bloomsbury Academic An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway London New York WC1B 3DP NY 10018 UK USA www.bloomsbury.com BLOOMSBURY and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First edition published 2009 Second edition published 2018 © Jacky Kilvington and Ali Wood, 2018 Jacky Kilvington and Ali Wood have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Authors of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the authors. British Library Cataloguing-​in-​Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: HB: 978-​1-​4742-​5405-​2 PB: 978-​1-​4742-​5403-​8 ePDF: 978-​1-​4742-​5407-​6 ePub: 978-​1-​4742-​5408-​3 Library of Congress Cataloging-​in-​Publication Data Names: Kilvington, Jacky, author. | Wood, Ali, author. Title: Reflective playwork : for all who work with children / Jacky Kilvington and Ali Wood. Description: Second edition. | New York : Bloomsbury Academic, An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2018. | “First edition published 2009”–T.p. verso. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017019666 | ISBN 9781474254052 (hb) | ISBN 9781474254038 (pb) | ISBN 9781474254076 (epdf) | ISBN 9781474254083 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Play. | Play (Philosophy) | Child development. | Creative ability in children. Classification: LCC LB1137 .K525 2018 | DDC 649/.5–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017019666 Cover image © StudioS / Cultura RM / Alamy Stock Photo Typeset by Newgen KnowledgeWorks Pvt. Ltd., Chennai, India

v

To all our grandchildren –​Ellie, Josh, Beth, Dylan, Owen, Sam, Ethan, Jessica, Darcey and Jackson (and any more who may arrive!)

vi

vii

Contents

List of Illustrations  viii Acknowledgements  ix Preface  x

Introduction  1 1

Principled Playwork  3

2 Play  21 3 A New Paradigm for Play  41 4 The Child  65 5 Playwork Practice  83 6 Children’s Play and Welfare  109 7 Playable Spaces  133 8 Continuing Professional Development  155 Afterword  169 Appendix  171 References  173 Index  181

viii

List of Illustrations

Figures 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.2 7.1 7.2 7.3 8.1 8.2

‘Free to play’  9 Single loop learning  11 Double loop learning  12 ‘Being me’  19 ‘Contemplating life’  31 ‘Learning a lot!’  33 ‘I will survive’  36 Integral Play Framework 1  43 Integral Play Framework 2  44 The play frame  47 The play cycle  49 Three-​dimensional play type  54 ‘Need more water!’  55 ‘Yeah’  58 ‘Who is this child?’  75 ‘Unpredictable logs’  91 ‘Part robot, part den, part alien’  96 The Ludic Third  102 ‘Equal under the sun’  111 ‘See Mum? I can do it!’  122 ‘This is my space’  140 ‘Playing out’  143 ‘Mud, glorious mud’  150 ‘Playing in school’  157 ‘Reflect on this’  160

Table 6.1 Risk/​Benefit Assessment Form  125

ix

Acknowledgements

We owe thanks to all the people who supplied us with photographs for this book and to all the children featured within the photographs and within our reflective accounts. Special thanks are due to Julia Sexton, Morgan Leichter-​Saxby and Suzanna Law for their time in talking with us about their research and practice. We are grateful as always to our partners Pete and Dave for their practical support and also to each other for critique, debate, humour and an enjoyable writing partnership  –​long may it continue.

x

newgenprepdf

Preface

We are two women who via various circuitous routes of work with children and young people eventually ended up in playwork –​partly because we both deeply believe in the life-​force that is play and also because we feel strongly about a child’s right to be and to have a sense of self that makes their life worth living. The playwork sector was where we each found like-​minded people who are also fascinated by the amazing capable and creative people children are and who care about the damage being done to them in many countries and societies in the name of education and protection. As we had both separately worked as playwork trainers, assessors and verifiers and had written towards playwork education and qualifications, it made sense for us to bring our experiences together in book form and the first edition of this book was duly published in 2010. Much has changed since then. At that time, the long-​term lobbying by playworkers in the United Kingdom for professional recognition and for political acceptance of the importance of play in children’s lives and the need to properly fund playwork provision that supports this had borne fruit and the UK playwork sector was enjoying governmental funding on a scale that had never happened before or since –​sadly. A change of government just after the first edition of this book was published undid most of the gains we had made and issued in years of austerity through forcing local government authorities to make severe budget cuts in non-​front-​line services. This meant that many old and new playwork projects closed and many playworkers were made redundant –​it seemed we were back to almost where we started. Amazingly though, at the same time, interest in the playwork approach has grown around the world and demand for our first edition –​and many other playwork texts and blogs –​has happily prompted the commission of this second edition that is more relevant to anyone working with children both inside and outside the United Kingdom, who wants to understand the unique playwork approach and how to incorporate this into their working lives and professional settings. We hope you will find that this book both answers and provokes more questions, supports you in rethinking your own approach to playing children, encourages you to see the world more through children’s eyes and helps you make sense of playwork theory. More than anything we hope this book inspires you to step back and become fascinated by play itself, how much it means to children and how essential it is that they have freedom and control of it in their lives.

1

Introduction We would like you to know two things before you begin to read further. 1. Whilst the book is about playwork, it is not just aimed at studying or practising playworkers –​it contains theoretical, practical and reflective material that will be useful for anyone working with children because it talks about play, which is universal to all children and therefore something we could all better understand. It also talks about the playwork approach, which we believe can be used by any adult, whether a relative or another professional in the children’s workforce. 2. The book is very much about reflective playwork, and by this we mean that it requires us as writers and invites you as readers to think more deeply and critically about our work and relationships with children. In many fields of work, physically ‘doing the job’ often takes priority and buries the potential for improvement and discovery along the way. In these pages we want to reverse that trend and unearth learning by questioning more closely what we each do, say, see, think and feel in our own work. We should additionally explain the following to help you both navigate the book itself and understand some of our terminology. ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

Playwork is a developing field and there is much research and theorizing currently taking place. We will be referring to both emerging and more established theory and hopefully demystifying (and questioning!) it. Each chapter is relatively self-​contained and its title self-​explanatory so can be read alone or in a different order to that given here apart from Chapter 5, which builds on knowledge from Chapters 1, 2 and 3. References to relevant websites and/​or books are given at the end of each chapter so that readers may follow up and/​or explore further. Our use of the terms ‘child’ and ‘children’ do refer to any and all children and young people of school age, whatever their individual background and circumstances. Our use of the term ‘playworker’ refers to both those employed or working voluntarily in the playwork sector and those adults who –​perhaps knowingly or unknowingly –​use a playwork approach when relating to children of any age. ‘Play’ is understood and interpreted by diverse people in a myriad of ways –​as Chapter 2 demonstrates. Playwork however sees and feels play –​as far as is possible for adults –​through

2

2

Reflective Playwork

the eyes and minds of children and that often surprises, shocks, confuses and delights us at different times. It takes courage, honesty and openness to see their world from their perspective, because we adults don’t always understand the depth and breadth of children’s play lives and the deep necessity they have to play out their experiences, emotions, dreams and questions in instinctive ways that we have forgotten or no longer need to do. Chapter 1 explains what playwork is and is not. It outlines how the Playwork Principles underpin the playworker’s role and introduces us to the concept of reflection. Chapter 2 is all about play. It takes a look at a range of old and new and sometimes competing theories about play and how these can create a coherent framework for playwork practice. Chapter 3 explores some of the theoretical concepts that have emerged from playwork practice, which enable us to better understand play and most importantly helps us question, think about and modify our own interventions. Chapter 4 is all about the ‘child’ –​the guinea pig of so much adult thought and attention. We explore the history of childhood, theories of child development and the sociology of childhood and ask how this affects our current perceptions of children and childhood. Chapter 5 explores playwork practice; the role of adults in creating and resourcing play environments and ways of supporting children’s play processes and behaviours. Chapter 6 outlines our wider duty of care to children and how our policies and procedures can support and safeguard children with due regard for their growing capabilities and competencies. Chapter  7 investigates the concept of play spaces, how children emotionally respond to and adapt these for their purposes, and how we can help locate and co-​create these. Chapter 8 summarizes ways in which the playwork approach can ‘fit’ with other professional work with children and explores ways to move forward and improve our own playwork practice. We conclude with a brief look at current playwork research and development of the playwork approach across the world. We invite you to tread the path with us in advocating for children’s rights to play.

3

newgenprepdf

1 Principled Playwork

Chapter Outline Introduction What is playwork? Playwork Principles Reflective practice Methods of reflection

3 3 5 11 15

Introduction This chapter explains what playwork is and who playworkers are. It goes on to look at the guiding precepts of playwork –​The Playwork Principles –​and explains what they mean in relation to playwork practice. The chapter outlines the importance of reflective practice in playwork giving examples of the ways that it can be implemented.

What is playwork? Of all the professions where people work with children, playwork has to be the most misunderstood. The very word –​joining together two other seemingly opposite words –​probably doesn’t help! Most people have a good idea of what a teacher or a childminder does and why, but not so for playworkers. This however doesn’t stop people surmising or thinking they do know! Let’s put the record straight. Playwork is still a relatively new profession and, despite its importance, one that is not recognized as such in many places and countries. The concept of playwork originated in the United Kingdom in the late 1960s/​early 1970s, with its roots in urban community work, on unused local land that had become ‘junk playgrounds’ emulating the first of these established in Emdrup, Denmark in 1943. The adult workers on these playgrounds at that time saw themselves as having a variety of roles (parent, teacher, advocate, social worker,

4

4

Reflective Playwork

police officer, etc.) because they immersed themselves in local children’s lives. It was, however, this immersion that for many slowly prompted a greater understanding of play and its huge importance to and impact on children. This in turn created a growing recognition that play itself, and the right to freely play, was to be guarded and supported if children were to survive in a changing world. The actual term ‘playwork’ began to be used in the 1980s in the United Kingdom to describe a distinct way of working with children on the unused land that became adventure playgrounds. Leading a playground is not like leading play and occupation. The children are sovereign and the initiative must come from them…to organise and arrange programmes is to stifle imagination and initiative and preclude children whose lively curiosity and interest demanded new outlets. We should not forget that play itself is a natural process, shaped by the child’s own interest at any given time and the possibilities offered by any given environment… no matter how we might consider play potential in our present and future design, children will continue to interpret this in their own way. (Benjamin 1974:1&3)

Playwork continues to evolve, with an ever-​increasing theoretical foundation and supported by academics in a variety of other fields and is being practised now with increasing recognition in many countries, such as in Hong Kong and in some American states, by those who have ‘caught the bug’ and are operating ‘guerrilla-​style’. Its original passion for children’s rights continues to fuel it –​sometimes quietly, sometimes loudly –​and to champion that which children themselves see as imperative to them –​ play. As a way of working with children, it is unique –​substantially different from educational, developmental or therapeutic models, and rich with its own theory and approaches. While becoming a playworker takes years of training and practice, anyone can start incorporating its key principles in their own practice. (Leichter-​Saxby 2010:1)

For this reason we are using the term playworker in this book to encompass not only professionally employed playworkers, but to all those people who do or might use a playwork approach, even if that is occasional and not their job title or their whole focus. So if you are a teacher or parent, an early educator or youth worker, you could still be sometimes playworking as is likely to be the case for many of our readers. As understanding of playwork grows, then it may well be that its principles are recognized and incorporated into other jobs, or that people are solely employed (as has happened in the United Kingdom) as playworkers. But for now in these pages, we use the term playworker to refer to anyone putting playwork principles into practice –​and we explain these principles here. Playworkers are quite a diverse group –​they often debate and disagree with varying levels of passion, which is not uncommon in a dynamic field of work and in many ways it is a healthy sign. We do, however, have some parameters that have been developed, consulted on, commonly agreed in the field and then endorsed by SkillsActive –​the UK Sector Skills Council who was responsible for playwork training and qualifications. These are the Playwork Principles, which are listed here.

5

Principled Playwork

Playwork Principles These Principles establish the professional and ethical framework for playwork and as such must be regarded as a whole. They describe what is unique about play and playwork, and they provide the playwork perspective for working with children and young people. They are based on the recognition that children and young people’s capacity for positive development will be enhanced if given access to the broadest range of environments and play opportunities. 1. All children and young people need to play. The impulse to play is innate. Play is a biological, psychological and social necessity, and is fundamental to the healthy development and well-​ being of individuals and communities. 2. Play is a process that is freely chosen, personally directed and intrinsically motivated. That is, children and young people determine and control the content and intent of their play, by following their own instincts, ideas and interests, in their own way for their own reasons. 3. The prime focus and essence of playwork is to support and facilitate the play process and this should inform the development of play policy, strategy, training and education. 4. For playworkers, the play process takes precedence and playworkers act as advocates for play when engaging with adult-​led agendas. 5. The role of the playworker is to support all children and young people in the creation of a space in which they can play. 6. The playworker’s response to children and young people playing is based on a sound up-​to-​ date knowledge of the play process and reflective practice. 7. Playworkers recognize their own impact on the play space and also the impact of children and young people’s play on the playworker. 8. Playworkers choose an intervention style that enables children and young people to extend their play. All playworker intervention must balance risk with the developmental benefit and well-​being of children. We will elaborate on and refer back to different principles at various times, but here give an overview of what they mean. The first two principles set the scene in attempting to describe what we currently accept about play. Daroon stated, ‘Attempts to characterise or define play are legion; a concise definition seems almost impossible’ (1977:123) and forty years later, the various theories about the origins and benefits of play are of course still being examined and the perspectives that gave rise to them (many of them socially or politically constructed) challenged. The next chapter goes into more detail on this. The ‘changing fashions in the definitions of play….have coloured our adult conceptualisations’ (Kelly-​Byrne 1989:3)

5

6

6

Reflective Playwork

Reflective questions Why do children play? Much evidence suggests that play is actually a biological drive and is therefore as fundamental and necessary to children as eating and sleeping. What do you think?

The first two principles are inevitably though unashamedly from an adult perspective, because they have been arrived at via four routes, by adults using 1. 2. 3. 4.

their intuition; their personal childhood memories; their experiences of working/​being with children in play situations; and what they have gained from research and other evidence they have read. (Hughes 1996:30)

We cannot say that these first two principles are therefore accurate (and in fact many in the playwork sector are still debating where these fall short), but they do set the stage in defining what is important for us adults to understand about play if we are going to be around children playing. The reality is that children absolutely do not want adults to control or direct their play –​ adults ‘get in the way, spoil everything and just don’t get the point’ (one articulate seven-​year-​old in 2006).

Reflective questions Recall memories of you playing as a child. Where were you? Who were you with? What were you doing? What were you feeling? What were you playing with? How did the play stop on that occasion? What does all this tell you about play? Do your play memories ‘fit’ Principles 1 and 2?

Over the years we have asked thousands of adults of all ages about their memories of playing and there are many commonalities. The vast majority (apart from some younger adults whose freedoms were more limited) persistently remember playing outside, playing made-​up games, playing with whatever was to hand and playing away from adult eyes –​all of which expound the first two principles well. Principles 3–​8 go on to describe the basic interrelated aspects of the playwork job, that is what underpins whatever a playworker does. There is no ‘right’ way to do it, no blueprint or schedule to conform to. The Principles describe an approach, an attitude, a belief system, a way of working that

7

Principled Playwork

is very different to other ways of working with children. It is an approach that is instinctive and natural for some people (in other professions too) but also can be learnt through reflective practice. It is an approach any adult can understand and use in their work with children at different times –​ the only difference being that professional playworkers use it all the time. To use the old adage: ‘it’s not what you do; it’s the way that you do it’. Essentially, a playworker understands that children’s play is very much their domain; adults are not wanted unless ●● ●● ●● ●●

some predicament or disaster occurs; some kind of assistance is required; there are no other children to play with; or the adults are sufficiently playful and intuitive and follow children’s lead.

The playworker therefore is primarily a bystander who proactively supports play through ●●

●●

●●

●●

seeking out and helping create specific places where play can happen (because children are often disallowed to do so themselves); ensuring these places have sufficient and varied components and props that truly interest children and ‘spark’ playing; unobtrusively observing play, thereby learning more about play and how to better support it; and sensitively judging when and how it might be occasionally necessary to intervene (e.g. to prevent serious injury or to help play continue and then withdraw).

None of this is easy. It goes against much of what we feel as adults ‘responsible’ for children. It also means that more than any other adult, those who practise playwork get to see and know children ‘in the raw’ –​a rare privilege not to be taken lightly or abused. Parents feel they know their children, but in reality, if they peeked through a two-​way mirror and saw their offspring playing with peers, they would probably not recognize them. Playworkers can use the insights and understandings they gain to advocate for children’s rights and to educate other adults about children’s real needs, relationships, development and culture and particularly about the importance of play in its multiple forms for survival, identity, expression and growth. So playworkers do not exist in order to ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

correct or control children’s behaviour; ensure children never come to harm; entertain children; lead or direct children’s play; plan activities for children; teach children what they need to learn; socialize children into being good citizens; and look after and protect children;

although these are normally all roles undertaken by and expected of adults responsible for children.

7

8

8

Reflective Playwork

This does not mean playworkers are irresponsible or uncaring, or that they do not sometimes do some of the things listed above. It means there is a great shift in emphasis and that responsibility and care is expressed differently. Playwork is unique because its fundamental reason for existence is to support play. And play is what children prefer to do away from adults. Do you remember? Adults got in the way, stopped you, told you off…and yet you knew –​with great certainty and intensity –​that what you were doing was vital and important and they just didn’t understand. Ali often uses a giant pair of star-​shaped sunglasses with students as a visual aid in helping them not to view children’s play through just an adult lens, but attempting to see it from children’s perspectives too. For example a nine-​year-​old boy was recently seen in a school corridor grabbing another boy in a headlock and was immediately admonished by a teacher. The same action out on the school playground later that day was seen by a lunchtime supervisor who said nothing because she interpreted it as play behaviour rather than aggression –​reinforced by the laughter-​filled and mutual roughhousing that ensued. Children will play anywhere and anytime they can (including when walking down a school corridor!) and we do –​all of us –​need to try and see the world through children’s eyes far more often.

Reflective questions Do you still play as an adult? In what ways? Who with? Why? Is adult play different to children’s play? Might that colour your view of children’s play?

It would be true to say that many people –​both employing and even nominally employed as ‘playworkers’–​have still not understood this approach and see their role as primarily one of group child-​minding and/​or activity leadership. Playwork is however neither of these things; playwork serves and supports the play needs of children as defined by them. Why are playworkers needed –​if they are needed at all? Put simply, times have changed. The majority of children in developed countries have far less freedom and mobility than they did a few decades ago; children then played out for hours on end, only returning when too cold, wet or hungry or when summoned. Most children in many developed countries today have little time away from adult eyes and adult control and spend much more time indoors where they are supposedly ‘safe’. There is now little doubt that this has taken its toll on children’s development, independence and health and well-​being. At no other time in recent history have children had so little freedom. They are ‘increasingly battery-​raised –​cooped up in their homes, living virtual lives, or in the car, being transported –​rather than enjoying the free-​range existence they could expect even twenty five years ago’(Palmer 2006:62) and concern is growing in a number of related professions at the effects this is having. On the other hand there are also those children who are at risk of real harm because they are left to play out anywhere in what is now, in some urban areas, a hostile environment with more cars, more access to drugs, a greater propensity for violence and reduced community interest.

9

Principled Playwork

Figure 1.1  ‘Free to play’. Permission granted by Adjiba and Meakin

Playworkers therefore create ‘compensatory play spaces’ –​places that give children back their freedom to play in the ways they need and want. Ideally such places comprise both outdoor spaces (open to the elements and both wild and landscaped) and a variety of indoor spaces that children genuinely feel is theirs because they are ‘allowed’ freedom of expression. Sadly many play settings fall short of this and operate where there are many constraints and many adults who do not understand children’s need –​and right –​to play. Such adults often have good intentions but in reality they at best inhibit and at worst prevent play, by insisting on certain rules, behaviours or environmental conditions. Play settings technically include anywhere where children play, but staffed and supervised play settings have included the following and are either ‘open access’ (i.e. children come and go as they please) or closed access (children are brought and collected by carers): ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Before-​ and after-​school clubs Holiday playschemes Mobile play projects Adventure playgrounds Playcentres Junior youth clubs

9

10

10

Reflective Playwork ●● ●● ●●

Parks and streets ‘staffed’ by play rangers Integrated play projects ‘Pop-​ up adventure playgrounds’ (temporarily using and resourcing an indoor or outdoor space)

Sadly many of these settings have been lost in the United Kingdom in the past decade due to the government’s ‘austerity policy’ and resultant budget cuts. At the same time, play settings supervised by those practising playwork are increasing elsewhere in Australia and America for example. This does not mean, however, that every after-​school club or playcentre, for example, will be effectively playworking. Much depends on sympathetic and supportive management, the training the workers have received, their understanding of play and their attitudes to children.

Reflective questions Think about play settings you know. Are children really free to play there? Can they play outside, make their own choices, get dirty, take risks, explore and experiment…? How do the workers behave –​do they support or restrict play? What is the priority there? Is it children’s safety? Parent’s views? Job requirements? Or is it play?

Returning to the Playwork Principles then, the first two principles describe play from children’s perspective and the following six principles therefore set out the consequent role of the playworker. If we are to truly practise playwork then we cannot do it in isolation. As Principle 3 states, the policies and procedures and mission statements of our settings will also need to be addressed as they may well otherwise conflict with a playwork approach. If, for instance, we have a behaviour policy which doesn’t recognize that some seemingly unacceptable behaviours might in fact be playing behaviours (e.g. play-​fighting as opposed to fighting), or we have a health and safety policy which doesn’t recognize that children naturally take risks in their playing and that this develops resilience, then these policies will not support using a playwork approach and put us in a very compromised position. Those of you practising ‘guerrilla playwork’ will know exactly how hard it can be when your manager or supervisor insists on you following organizational procedures which often restrict or inhibit play. Similarly with Principle 4, we cannot practise playwork in secret –​we will have to address those alternative ‘adult agendas’ that in the name of protection and education insist on controlling what children do and when and how they play. We will have to promote and advocate for children’s right to play in their own way and challenge the powers-​that-​be, or nothing will change. Such challenging can be done sensitively over time, but it has to happen. It is this slow change of ethos that enables us more and more to practise Principle 5 and indeed support children and young people in creating places and spaces where they can freely play. Principles 6 and 7 both describe the need for reflective practice if we are to support play, especially when it comes to children taking physical and emotional risks in their playing (Principle 8); so we need to say a little more here about reflective practice –​what it is and why it is so important for playworkers.

11

Principled Playwork

Reflective practice Reflective practice is not new. Confucius reputedly suggested (1977:299) there were three ways we could learn to be wise –​‘first by reflection, which is the noblest; second by imitation, which is the easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest’. But many think that reflective practice just involves thinking back and evaluating ‘how something went’. It is much more than that. In many ways, playwork is an ‘unnatural art’ with a ‘whole raft of tensions and contradictions inherent in what we are expected to do’ (Russell 2005:98). Trying to support the play needs of each individual child, whatever their personal needs and preferences, personality type, previous experiences, expectations, age, gender, ability, culture, social status, language, economic condition, race or nationality, is an almost impossible task, not least because it also constantly hits all our protective and educative adult buttons where we find ourselves wanting to control, organize, sort out, teach, look after, keep safe, remonstrate –​when children do not want or need us to do so. Reflective practice involves picking up an imaginary mirror and looking at ourselves –​our motives, our feelings, our words and actions, our thoughts. As Johns (1995:226) puts it: Essentially, learning through reflection is a process of: • enlightenment –​an understanding of who I am in the context of defining and understanding my practice • empowerment  –​to have the courage and commitment to take necessary action to change ‘who I am’ • emancipation –​to liberate myself from previous ways of being to become ‘who I need to be’ as necessary to achieve effective desirable practice

So reflective practice looks less like this:

What was done or said

What happened as a result of this

What I learnt from this and what I may or may not change next time

Figure 1.2  Single loop learning. Adapted from http://​infed.org/​mobi/​chris-​argyris-​theories-​of​action-​double-​loop-​learning-​and-​organizational-​learning/​

11

12

12

Reflective Playwork

And more like this:

What was done or said

What happened as a result of this

What I learnt from this and what I may or may not change next time

Realising my underlying beliefs or assumptions and how they affect what I do and say

What I have learnt from also looking at and questioning both my feelings and my motives

Figure 1.3  Double loop learning. Adapted from http://​infed.org/​mobi/​chris-​argyris-​theories-​of​action-​double-​loop-​learning-​and-​organizational-​learning/​

To explain: when we do, see or plan something, there are or will be consequences. If we carry out a basic evaluation similar to that adapted and described in Figure 1.1, we undertake what Argyris and Schon (1974) describe as single loop learning. But in doing so, we often also make the assumption that our thoughts, actions and feelings are justifiable, and so if something unexpected happens, we don’t rethink our own position, but try and make conclusions that fit our current standpoint. So if a child for instance shoves or argues with another child, we may instantly remonstrate with them and feel justified in doing so, because our educative role ‘requires’ this response. If, however, we look at the wider context (see Figure 1.2) and we question our underlying beliefs, attitudes and values which make us act, think and feel the way we do, we undertake double loop learning. Double loop learning doesn’t assume we are already ‘right’ –​it makes us face and examine the difference between ‘espoused theory’ (what we say to others that we know and believe) and ‘theory-​in-​use’ (what we actually do). So using the above example, we might reconsider our response to the child’s behaviour and recognize that in fact s/​he could be playing but our ‘superior educative role’ hadn’t recognized this as a possibility. This double loop learning model helps us objectively consider our practice by becoming more aware of our simultaneous intuitive and subjective experience. This can greatly enlighten and change our practice.

13

Principled Playwork

There are a number of possible reflection ‘points’: ●●

●● ●● ●●

Reflection in action –​where we stop and think whilst in process, where we may use intuition and so on. Reflection on action –​where we think back after the event. Reflection on inaction –​where we think about what we(or others) didn’t do or say and why. Reflection before action –​where we think in advance, visualizing how it might be and so on.

We can illustrate all of these when thinking about a particular incident or experience.

Reflection –​ Ali I was working with a school for six months with the aim of making lunchtimes freer and more playful. Things were going well –​teachers were being positive and less risk-​averse, lunchtime supervisors were more responsive and reflective and children were taking charge of their own experiences and playing in ways that had never been allowed before. On this day, a girl aged ten (I shall name Ella) asked me if I would help her build a den. I thought back over the last few days and recollected that I had not really seen her playing with any of her peers and thought (reflection in action) it would be much better for her if she played with other children rather than me. Seeing another child in her class who looked unoccupied I said ‘Why don’t you ask her to play with you? Or join in with that group over there –​they’re making a great den?’ ‘No’ she said firmly, ‘I want to make my own den and I want you to help me do it’. I asked her what she wanted to use to make her den and where and encouraged her to go and collect what she needed and come back to me and I’d help her begin. She persisted that she wanted me to help her find what she needed. I found myself saying I’d love to but I have to keep watching the children who were climbing trees (this was a new phenomenon and did need observing in order to support the less competent children who were being egged on by others to ‘go higher’). ‘You could still help’, she said rather forcefully as she turned away. I thought again (reflection on action) and realized that (reflection on inaction) though my reasons for not helping her (she did need to build bridges with others and the climbers did need watching) were valid, I was not recognizing that if I was honest this girl really irritated me. I  was then called away to deal with a minor injury and never returned to her although I noticed that she approached other members of staff rather than children. Later that day I reflected again on my response to her and realized that she reminded me very much of a time in my own childhood when I was uncertain of myself and worried about being accepted by others. It struck me that (1) my irritation with her was really exasperation with myself and my own lack of childhood confidence and that (2) she perhaps didn’t know where to start and didn’t wish to appear incompetent to her peers. I thought ahead to the following day (reflection before action) and how to best encourage her and build her confidence and so when I saw next her I apologized for not helping her the day before and said ‘Let’s start again shall we?’ She broke into a big smile and told me she wanted to make a den with a roof but didn’t know how to make it stay up. ‘I know what you mean’, I said, ‘it isn’t easy –​ let’s see if we can work it out together’. We had a few laughs with some roof collapses while she then thought it through and came up with a method that worked. After a while, another

13

14

14

Reflective Playwork

child came over and asked if she could join in –​I looked at Ella to make the decision and she said yes. Within a few minutes they were both enthusiastically ‘decorating’ their den; I was no longer needed and they continued to play together until it was time to go back into class.

Reflection –​ Jacky I was playing outside with two boys aged four and six, at their request. We were playing with Playmobil fi ­ gures –​knights, pirates, dragons, Father Christmas, horses and so on. plus a pirate ship and a castle: I was directed as to what to do as the boys were in charge of the game (reflection during action). There was spying, fighting, magical flying, kung fu, full-​scale battles, climbing the rigging and ramparts, torture, death and destruction as befits a game with these ingredients. All was going well until the boys’ mum arrived to collect them and heard them making killing and dying noises and she immediately intervened: ‘We don’t want to fight and kill each other, do we? We don’t want people dying? Play nicely.’ To which the oldest boy said ‘Oh yes we do!’ and she replied ‘Don’t be silly.’ I decided I couldn’t contradict the mum in front of her children (reflection on inaction) so I just said ‘Okay boys, we’ll have to stop playing now as your mum’s come.’ Off they went without me saying a word. I thought about this afterwards (reflection after action) and felt that somehow I had colluded with the mother, and let the boys down, by not defending the game. I decided that next time I saw her (reflection before action) I would have a private word away from the boys about how normal and useful it was for her boys to play with death and destruction and that they can easily tell the difference between playing and real life. I did speak to her and we had a good conversation around the topic. She will probably always have some difficulty with the idea of her boys playing in ‘violent’ ways, but she agreed that she would try to step back.

Reflective question Can you identify the triggers in you that sometimes make you overreact in some play situations?

Reflection in these terms does require commitment, self-​awareness, openness and willingness to ‘move beyond’ and ‘think outside of the box’. It can be both uncomfortable and powerful because it always seeks to know why and to understand a wide range of perspectives and motives. For some people it even goes against the grain of their surrounding culture, which does not encourage individual introspection that could conclude we need to think differently. As Wheatley (2006:147) so aptly said:

15

Principled Playwork

It’s hard to look at modern life and see our capacities for reflection or meaning-​making. We don’t use our gifts to be more aware or thoughtful. We’re driven in the opposite direction. Things move too fast for us to reflect, demanding tasks give us no time to think and we barely notice the lack of meaning until forced to stand still by illness, tragedy or job loss. But in spite of our hurry, we cannot stop life’s dynamic of self-​reference or the human need for meaning. If we want to influence any change, anywhere, we need to work with this powerful process rather than deny its existence.

So we will all have our difficulties with the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Making and taking the time Being really honest Digging deep enough Fear of finding out or being found out Lack of support or understanding by others Realizing it may well mean change Clarifying what to actually reflect on, how and why Making it personally meaningful as opposed to doing what is required Finding ways of doing it that suit me

Methods of reflection Which of these words do you find yourself attracted to? ●● ●● ●● ●●

Drawing Writing Talking Expressing

The chances are the one(s) you are drawn to will indicate the reflection methodology of your choice. Most people think –​once they recognize that reflective practice is broader and deeper than evaluation –​that it is done purely by thinking and that if it has to be recorded or evidenced that it has to be written down in some kind of diary form. This is often because, on training courses, participants have been required to keep some kind of reflective log. This is fine for some people and really suits them –​we have seen journals from some learners that are huge and wonderful philosophical tomes. For others, however, if they are given no other way of expressing themselves, such logs will contain struggling and blunt one-​liners. So what are some other methods?

1.  Writing People who choose to record their thinking using the written word do this because it is an extension of their thinking –​they think on paper. Writing down their thinking actually gets it out of

15

16

16

Reflective Playwork

their heads and helps them progress their thinking and start to resolve the issues they are thinking about. This can be done in a number of formats and it could be private or shared: ●●

●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

●●

●●

Jotting down questions as they occur in a notebook and returning to them later –​for example how can I broach a particular subject with a colleague? Why did I react the way I did? What might that child’s play narrative be meaning? Keeping a diary –​for example of observations, actions and consequences, incidents Keeping an informal journal –​for example of feelings, thoughts, questions Using question and answer formats –​both simple and complex Making up explorative prose Using third person perspective –​writing from someone else’s viewpoint (known or unknown) can help you be more objective and resolve reactions or differences Using unsent letters –​for example writing to someone you are angry with in order to explore why you feel that way Online discussion forums

2.  Talking For many people, to reflect is to think out loud. This may mean talking to oneself –​in the car, in the bath, whilst walking, whilst working. As for the writers above, it gets their thinking out of their heads and helps shape and resolve it. Reflecting by talking is also often done with one or more other people. These could include the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Mentors Managers Tutors Non-​line managerial supervisors Critical friends Colleagues Partners Trusted friends Fellow learners

Such reflection could be formal or informal, be planned, be spontaneous, be self-​initiated or prompted by someone else and could be one-​to-​one or in groups. It obviously happens face-​to-​face or on the phone, but could also be via using a Dictaphone, making a video diary or chatting online.

3.  Drawing Some people think visually and find that their ways of reflecting are either pictorial or diagrammatical by nature or prompted by illustrations, pictures or images they see. To further their thinking, they use

17

Principled Playwork ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

mindmaps lifelines diagrams pictures charts spidergrams flowcharts story boards

4.  Expressing Some people think actively by actually doing –​being hands on and using their bodies in some way. This might include ●●

●●

●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

role-​play –​recreating or walking through a scene or an action and taking either their own or some other person’s role; trying out, replaying and/​or freeze framing incidents to consider different outcomes or perspectives; mirroring –​copying someone else to understand a different viewpoint or action; creating a game or exercise from a problem that needs resolving; miming scenes or actions –​using no words often unearths underlying emotions and motives; using activities like hot seating or goldfish bowl to explore a theme or issue; or using evaluative/​reflective exercises that involve movement and activity, for example standing on a continuum, using stickers, fingers or feet to indicate opinions, and so on.

Different methods suit different people and it helps to find out ‘what works best for me’ which may well encompass more than one of the above styles. Different methods are also appropriate to doing alone and/​or with others at various times. So what works for you?! How reflective are you? How often do you question why you do and say what you do and what the impact is of your feelings? If for example certain behaviours of children wind you up or make you anxious, do you consider why that is or do you inadvertently ‘blame’ the child? Bolton (2010: xix) encourages us to be ‘reflexive’, to find a way to stand outside ourselves to ‘examine how seemingly unwittingly we are involved in creating social or professional structures counter to our espoused values … being able to stay with personal uncertainty, critically informed curiosity, and flexibility to find ways of changing deeply held ways of being’. There are a number of areas and questions we can focus on to encourage us to reflect. We give a selection of these below and encourage you to start asking and thinking and building up your knowledge of the play process! 1. Thinking about what I  did and felt when I  played and the relevance this may have. For example, are my experiences the same or different to others –​both then and now? How do my childhood play experiences affect my attitudes to children now? How do my experiences

17

18

18

Reflective Playwork

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

impact on my interaction with children now? Do I try to inhibit or recreate any of my experiences? Am I still ‘playing out’ some of the feelings and issues I had then? Thinking about my interactions and interventions with children. For example, what feelings do I  experience when watching children playing and why? What behaviours trigger fear, anxiety, anger, frustration, excitement, sadness… in me? How do I  block or inhibit play? When do I get too involved, too directive, too instructive…? Why did I just say or do that? Observing children playing now and thinking about how this can inform my understanding and improve my practice. For example, what are they playing and how –​what with, who with and where? How does it change? How does it end? What feelings are evident? What play types are being displayed? What cues are being given out, what returns are going on, what play frames and narratives are happening and who or what is creating them? (Chapter 3 explains these terms). How does age, gender, or culture have an impact on playing? Observing the physical play environment and thinking about how this supports or inhibits play. For example, what different kinds of spaces exist –​can/​do these change? What is new and stimulating? What resources or materials have high play value? Is there play with the elements? Are there nooks and crannies and diverse shaped spaces? Are there different levels, heights, slopes? Which areas attract children –​where do children spend most of their time and why? Observing the affective play environment and thinking about how this supports or inhibits play (see Chapters 5 and 7 for fuller descriptions of affective play environments). For example, what kinds of lighting are there? What colours are about? What kinds of music are played? What smells are around? What feelings are stimulated by or expressed in different spaces? What unwritten rules exist and who made them? Are children supported in freely expressing their emotions? Observing other adults in a play environment. For example, are they observant, responsive, supportive or are they directive, prescriptive, inflexible? Are they playful and permissive, or fearful and controlling? What messages –​verbally and non-​verbally –​are they giving out? What are they actually doing and what impact does this have on children and their playing? Are they balancing both the risks and the benefits of playing and thinking carefully about any interventions they make? Reading relevant literature and thinking critically about how it informs or relates to practice. For example, can I see this happening in real life? What other evidence bears this out? Does this relate to my past and/​or present experience? What does my intuition say about this?

Reflective practice in playwork is essential because we have a supportive and responsive role to a myriad of unique young individuals who are spontaneously playing out their emotions, thoughts and fantasies. Only careful and honest thinking will lead us to understanding how to best attend to them, for playwork is a moving artistic feast, not a predictable science. ‘The reflective paradigm assembles its theoretical resources in order to defend professional values, creativity and autonomy in a context where they are generally felt to be under attack from political and economic forces which threaten to transform the professional from an artist into an operative’ (Winter et al.1999). Playwork cannot be mechanistically done, it needs to be lived!

19

Principled Playwork

Figure 1.4  ‘Being me’. Permission granted by Law

Becoming reflective practitioners and developing reflective playwork practice is hugely important. Understanding why we behave the way we do around children and transforming this into practice that will truly support children playing is the bedrock of our profession. We will look at different examples of reflecting as we go along, and we will be posing questions here and there in each chapter. Many of our readers may be just setting out and experimenting with the ideas and theories we present in this book, but just as acorns grow into large oak trees, so donning those star glasses and watching children play can herald a whole new ethos and modus operandi. We are currently seeing the ethics and ethos of playwork slowly increasing across the world as all kinds of people and professionals start to apply these. So, we go onto the next chapter and take a closer look at play itself.

19

20

20

Reflective Playwork

Further reading/​Resources Hughes, B. (1996), Play Environments: A Question of Quality, London: Playlink Newstead, S. (2004), The Buskers Guide to Playwork, Eastleigh: Common Threads Palmer, S. ‘Reflective Practice’, in F. Brown (2003), Playwork –​Theory & Practice, Maidenhead: McGraw-​ Hill, Open University Press Pop-​up Adventure Play, available online: https://​popupadventureplaygrounds.wordpress.com/​ Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/1-afterschool-club-extract-from-playworkers-reflective-diary/

21

newgenprepdf

2 Play

Chapter Outline Introduction Play definitions and concepts Play theory

21 21 23

Introduction An understanding of play is fundamental to playwork, which we believe should also be the basis for working with children in any kind of play situation. This chapter is weighted with theory but we recommend that you persevere with it because without an honest attempt to appreciate play and all its perceived drives and manifestations, we can provide only an impoverished version of playwork –​one that does not recognize the vital importance of play in the life of a child –​eat, sleep, breathe, defecate, play! In this chapter we will consider some of the meanings that are given to play by a range of theorists, including those from the playwork world, and we will look at how some adults try to corral children’s play and use it for their own ends. Whilst reading this chapter it is important to keep in mind the influence that a playworker may have upon the playing life of a child, depending upon their understanding of play and their subsequent approach to providing for it. We cannot separate children and their play, but the meaning of play, as Sutton-​Smith (1997) suggests, is indeed filled with ‘ambiguity’. Play is an elusive concept and we can only give you an overview of it here, but we do signpost you to further reading material.

Play definitions and concepts Play has been defined in a variety of ways that give it meaning, but for every concept or theory about play there is an alternative and seemingly contradictory view as may become apparent as you read. Perhaps this is because play is in some way related to all areas of life as suggested by Guilbaud (2003:17): ‘Play is a layer of living that can encompass all the subject areas and processes

22

22

Reflective Playwork

of living.’ Kane (2015:50–​1) moves us away from trying to categorize play into ‘understanding playing as forces’; she suggests that ‘it is no longer possible to define play because its meaning is not seen as fixed. Instead material, affective, physical and other forces are seen to be at play, that is be playing’. Although play may be seen to be a somewhat complex and slippery customer or as Pellegrini (2009:20) puts it, ‘play is a multidimensional construct’ and although much has been written and researched over the centuries about it by people in various disciplines, there has emerged from the playwork world, based on both previous theory and current practice, a general consensus about the manifestations, purposes and processes of play behaviour. A body of knowledge and an approach to that knowledge that is unique to playwork, in that it is centred in ‘play for play’s sake’ rather than having societal outcomes as the basis for its being, has been and is being developed and some of this has now been enshrined in playwork qualifications and training courses. For instance, the Playwork Principles as explained in Chapter  1 describe what is unique and valuable about play from a playwork perspective, such as self-​determination, positive affect for the individual and process not product. The following are some ideas about play that come from different eras and schools of thought but have informed and have relevance to current playwork thinking. In her book, Garvey (1977:10) suggests the following as being generally acceptable characteristics of play: 1. Play is pleasurable, enjoyable, even when not actually accompanied by signs of mirth it is still positively valued by the player. 2. Play has no extrinsic goals. Its motivations are intrinsic and serve no other objectives. In fact it is more an enjoyment of means than an effort devoted to some particular end. 3. Play is spontaneous and voluntary. It is not obligatory but is freely chosen by the player. 4. Play involves some active engagement on the part of the player. 5. Play has certain systemic relations to what is not play. Ellis (1973:123) suggests that ‘children are playing when their behaviour is largely under their own control’ and King (1988), Hughes (2001) and others used and updated these characteristics that developed into the definition that is now used in the Playwork Principles to describe play as ‘freely chosen, personally directed and intrinsically motivated’. We would partly agree with this definition, but have some reservations as discussed later. Bruner et al. (1985) suggested that the main characteristic of play was not its content, but its mode –​not activity but the approach taken. In other words it’s not what you do but the way that you do it that makes it play. Guilbaud (2003:10) further developed this idea of approach to action into ‘a special way of being’, and we (2008) previously played with the idea that play is an ‘individual state that may involve thinking, feeling and/​or doing, with anticipation of satisfaction (not necessarily fulfilled) whilst involved in the unnecessary’. This again puts play in the context of being a ‘personal state of being or mind’ rather than an activity or an approach to activity. It allows for the possibility that something can still be play even if pleasure is not experienced and nobody else can observe anything happening, and that play is linked to emotion. For example a child might

23

Play

go over and over in his mind various versions of a close family member or friend dying, in order to come to terms with that sort of possibility and to practice how he might feel or behave is playing with emotions. Groos (1989) quoted in Bruner et al. (1976:66) argued that ‘animals do not play because they are young, but they have their youth because they must play’ thus emphasizing the role of play in development, and as we shall see later in this chapter we see many continuing links between play and development. Indeed Brown (2008:8) sees the links between play and development as one of the fundamentals of playwork: ‘Children learn and develop both while they are playing and through their play.’ We should add that Brown is talking about non-​adult initiated play here. Winnicott (1997) saw play as essentially creative and ‘as if ’ behaviour, and the links between play and creativity are reflected in much playwork practice and theory. Several of the currently accepted play types such as ‘Imaginative Play’ and ‘Creative Play’ reflect this (see Chapter 3). Else (2008:79) says that ‘through play, children are driven to explore both material and imaginary worlds: they play with real objects and intangible concepts’. Hughes (2001, 2012) thinks that play may act as ‘an experiential filtering mechanism’ so that potential experiences can first be encountered in a virtual, non-​real way. This would support Sutton-​Smith’s (1997) notion that play is a way for the child to use up a great deal of brain function that otherwise would be lost and to try out things that otherwise might not be attempted. These links to the brain are further developed by Lester and Russell (2008a:2) when they suggest that neuro-​scientific evidence implies that ‘playing is a way of building and shaping the regions of the brain that concern emotion, motivation and reward, and developing a range of flexible responses across a number of adaptive systems that link the brain, the body and the social physical environment’.

Reflective question Which of these ideas about play resonate with any definitions that you use to describe play?

Play theory Over the years play has been variously described by adults and theorized to fit into any number of boxes on the basis of different scientific perspectives. This has led to different professional groups and policy makers having different understandings of play based on a range of anticipated outcomes fuelled by the scientific perspective that fits their organizational philosophy, funding criteria, and the like. Play has thus been consciously or unconsciously ‘used’ to develop, improve, socialize, cure, educate, occupy, improve the health of, entertain, relax, keep separate, or tire out children. Here are examples of this showing the differing aims of some professions and job roles that involve adults working with children at play.

23

24

24

Reflective Playwork

Different views of play from different professional perspectives ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

Playwork and therefore playworkers aim to extend the choice and control that children have over their play, the freedom they enjoy and the satisfaction they gain by supporting and facilitating the play process and by helping children to create their own play spaces. Playworkers believe that play is behaviour for its own sake and the benefits of play are more importantly ‘of the moment’ than deferred. Through play children experience those things that can’t be taught, explore their world at their own pace, try new skills, subvert reality, make nonsense of the serious, invent the serious, practice themselves, practice other selves, relax, create stress, take risks, hurt themselves, use their bodies in weird ways, make and break friends, fail, succeed and fail again and have fun. Playworkers observe children to see their play cues and returns and what play types or mechanisms they are engaged in (Chapter 3 explains these terms), or whether the environment and resources are supporting them to play. Play rangers have similar views on play to playworkers but they specifically aim to get children playing out of doors in their communities using either public spaces, such as playgrounds and sports fields, where they will provide loose parts for games and sports, or interacting with outdoor environments and natural materials in woods and fields and so on. Play therapists believe in the power of play as a means of communication and healing. They help children whose behaviour or emotions are causing them problems. Play therapists believe that children communicate thoughts and feelings through play and the therapist provides structured time, a safe play space and appropriate play artefacts. The therapist observes the child playing and gradually, by following their lead, supports the child to make meaning out of their play and to heal themselves. Teachers have a curriculum to follow usually, with aims to promote the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at school and of society and to prepare pupils for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of later life. For teachers play is always in support of the curriculum. This might be either as a way to engage children more readily in classroom activity that is geared towards the educational outcomes, or giving children time to relax and play at breaks and lunchtimes because it has been recognized that this aids their ability to concentrate and learn during lessons. Progress towards curriculum goals is recorded. Early years workers/​Educators exist in many countries and aim to set a secure foundation for all children to make good progress through school and life. They see play as a means by which children learn and develop social, emotional, cognitive and physical skills that can be supported or ‘scaffolded’ with adult intervention, either by providing resources geared towards particular areas of development or by worker involvement during a child’s play through questioning, addition of extra resources and so on. Children are observed playing to record development towards goals. In Australia for example they have ‘Belonging, Being and Becoming –​An Early Years Learning Framework’. The Council of Australian Governments developed this ‘to assist educators to provide young children with opportunities to maximise

25

Play

their potential and develop a foundation for future success in learning’. Play is seen as a context for learning that allows for the expression of personality and uniqueness; enhances dispositions such as curiosity and creativity; enables children to make connections between prior experiences and new learning; assists children to develop relationships and concepts; and stimulates a sense of well-​being. Finland, for example, requires its kindergarten teachers to offer playful learning opportunities, including two ‘kinds’ of play: free play that is spontaneous and free form and ‘pedagogical play’ that is more facilitated. Youth workers have core aims associated with such things as preparing young people for participation; promoting acceptance and understanding of others and testing and exploring values and beliefs. They therefore see play as a means to engage young people towards these ends. They deal with older children who like to participate in activities that recognize this, such as indoor sports, music and dancing, discussion groups and so on. School playground supervisors are generally responsible for the health and safety and behaviour of children during their playtime at school. Playtime activity is seen as being beneficial for pupils’ enjoyment and health and also for some schools as a means of developing independence, social skills and the ability for children to learn to handle risks for themselves. In several countries (e.g. United States, United Kingdom, Australia) there is concern that playtime is being cut in some schools to give more time for formal structured learning. This concern has led to projects such as ‘Scrapstore Playpods’ (see Further Reading) that involves playgrounds being equipped with a container full of ‘loose parts’ and the lunchtime playground supervisors being trained in the ‘playwork approach’. Projects such as this and others such as ‘pop-​up adventure playgrounds’ (see Further Reading) are proving to be very successful at not just improving children’s play experiences, but also reducing accidents and conflicts and increasing inclusion, attendance and concentration in afternoon class. Accidents and incidents that happen during play tend to be the only things that have to be recorded. Camp counsellors in America are generally responsible for the supervision of children; looking after their physical, emotional and moral well-​being; making their camp experience fun and organizing stimulating activities. Play is seen very much as taking part in adult-​directed activity and play theory is not considered part of their training. Children’s holiday representatives around the world are responsible for organizing and supervising children’s activities; ensuring that they are in a safe environment and organizing and participating in children’s entertainment. Reps have to be playful people as it is seen as important that the children on holiday have fun and are kept entertained. Play is therefore perceived as organized activity and entertainment. Pedagogues value children’s self-​directed play as being vitally important both for itself and as a means of learning, but they also recognize that early educators can become involved to support a child towards educational goals. They see their focus as tuning into the child’s world and sharing communication and interaction whilst valuing the child’s own creativity, choices and initiatives. They do not interfere in the play but become involved in it. The direction of ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●



●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

25

26

26

Reflective Playwork

●●

the play is child led and can turn up unexpected learning opportunities that the pedagogue supports. The pedagogue inspires and supports, challenges and encourages through play. There is a stronger pedagogic tradition in Nordic countries than anywhere else in the world. Forest school leaders tend to use a play-​centred approach. Forest schools offer an innovative approach to outdoor play and learning in woodlands, or natural environments with trees, where they offer opportunities for supported risk-​taking. They foster resilience, confidence, independence and creativity through their activities. Their aims are to create a community for being, development and learning through which children will develop the following qualities: Self-​awareness Self-​regulation Intrinsic motivation Empathy Good social communication skills Independence A positive mental attitude, self-​esteem and confidence There are other forms of alternative education that see play in particular ways but these all have to be seen to fulfil set educational outcomes. For example, Steiner Waldorf education, particularly in early years settings, has an emphasis on the importance of play and what this activity gives to the children with regard to their development. Montessori education is based on the premise that children prefer work to play and that all their play artefacts should reflect real life and engage them in real problems, real activities and real decisions related to their future lives. The Reggio Emilia philosophy is based upon a set of principles which although do not directly mention play do give emphasis on children controlling the direction of their own learning; learning through experience using their senses; exploring their world and expressing themselves in their own way.

●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Reflective questions Can you see that play is viewed differently in different professions and that this affects the way that adults behave and treat children? How is play viewed in organizations you have worked for? Can you think of other professions or job roles where play is considered in a different way to those above?

For a few decades now there has been a growing body of evidence and interest in children’s play in the United Kingdom which led to campaigning for wider understanding of and support for children’s play and play provision. Unfortunately in 2010 the funding for the much lobbied for Play Strategy (2008), which supported all forms of play, was lost as part of the then coalition government’s austerity strategy. Voce (2015:1) tells how the shadow chancellor in 2004 accused the then Labour Government of profligacy stating in a deprecating manner that ‘they even have a council for children’s play’! Despite this and the consequent cuts to much local authority play provision, playworkers particularly –​because play is the total focus of their professional

27

Play

work –​have been and continue to be in a unique position, to test out or interpret the practical application of all the major play theories and also to highlight the emergence of the body of knowledge that has been developed through evidence-​based practice and articulated by play and playwork theorists. The focus on children’s participation in decision-​making in social policy initiatives, such as Children’s Fund work in England, or Funky Dragon which is the children’s parliament in Wales, helped to highlight the importance of play. It seems that whenever children and their parents were asked about what is important to them, play is consistently given a high priority in their answers. With prompted hindsight most adults see their own playing in childhood as powerfully significant and there is a vast amount of observational evidence that has been analysed to show that, no matter how much importance is given for time to play, children from all parts of the world and in all cultures play and this has an impact on their development. In his chapter on play in different cultures, Smith (2010:95) tells us that ‘children everywhere play, regardless of culture and place, and everywhere a child playing is a sign of healthy development’. We must beware, however, of thinking that play is only about the future. It is not. Play’s benefits are also firmly rooted in the here and now. ‘Children are pure being. They are in the present moment’ (Tsabary 2016). Understanding this notion is one of the main aspects that make playwork different from many other disciplines working with children. Pellegrini (2009:71–​5) outlines three different models of the function of play: deferred, immediate and accelerated. He sees scientists such as developmental psychologists and biologists associating play with deferred benefits and having no ‘immediate utility’. Less commonly held but equally valid is the idea of play belonging to ‘the niche of childhood’ –​play serving immediate benefits and being beneficial to the juvenile period but not beyond, other than that it aids the survival of childhood. The third possibility mooted is one of accelerated benefits –​under normal conditions children will develop a skill with or without play, but play will accelerate the development of that skill; thus the benefits are ‘rather immediate and short term’. Pellegrini also points out that play can serve different functions at different periods and in different environments. We have all experienced playing and this in some ways shapes our views about play. Guilbaud (2003:17) puts it very nicely; ‘We know the essence of play through the subjective experience of playing, but we are less able to know it through objective analysis and it is this dichotomy which is part of the essence of play.’ We (2008) have written elsewhere that we also believed that the results of this subjective experience of play may have a possible affect on the ways that male and female thinkers perceive play and playwork theory and work with children at play. We have explored this notion further in Gender, Sex and Children’s Play (2016).

Reflective questions Are you aware of any differences in the way that men and women work with children at play? Have you ever reflected on your childhood memories of play with both males and females and if so are there any obvious differences? Do you think that your experience of playing as a boy or girl has had an effect on your perceptions of children’s play now and if so what is that effect?

27

28

28

Reflective Playwork

Sutton-​Smith (2003), an important thinker and scholar of play, was interested in play for its own sake whether the player is a child or an adult. He gave due breadth to play, when he suggested that there are seven rhetorics (persuasive view-​points) of play: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Progress (primarily about development) Fate (destiny, magic, gambling, games of chance) Power (contest, conflict, status and heroics) Identity (traditional and community celebrations in order to confirm, maintain or advance the identity of the community of players) 5. The imaginary (flexibility and creativity, inversion and irrationality) 6. The self (play related to the desirable experiences of the players –​their satisfaction, such as fun, relaxation and escape) 7. Frivolity (tricksters, playful protests against the order of the world, inversion of ‘work ethic’) He gives validity to each of these seven rhetorics by giving them a historical background, a specific function and form and also recognizable players. He locates each within a particular discipline and names scholars who have done play-​related research within that discipline. At the end of his analysis, he suggests we can only see rhetorics as ‘representing the possibility of a truth yet to be discovered’. We are not aware of anybody having done further research around these rhetorics to uncover the truth that may lie therein. He suggests we should think of play as ‘adaptive variability’ –​that is play as the means by which we learn to be adaptable. He notes that Gould, an eminent evolutionary biologist, suggests that humans need to possess characteristics usually devalued in society such as ‘sloppiness’, ‘quirkiness’, ‘un-​productability’ and ‘massive redundancy’, and sees these as being the very processes that are developed through play and which therefore make us flexible. The idea of flexibility is an important one, particularly in playwork; thus Brown (2003) talks about compound flexibility and Hughes (2001) talks about combinatorial flexibility (we mention these again later).

Reflection –​ Jacky In relation to Sutton-​Smith’s rhetorics my own understanding of play is probably based on a combination of the identity, imaginary, frivolity and self. I like the idea of play subverting efforts of society to ‘tame’ us into good citizens, whilst helping us, through the opportunity for bizarre behaviour, to find ourselves and have fun with others. Much of the play that I have been personally involved in as a child or observed children involved in, when there are no adults in charge, is definitely anarchic –​it is not the ‘nice’ play of ‘turn taking’, ‘no breaking’, ‘calm making’ that we see ruled over by adults, but the ‘bear baiting’, ‘rule breaking’ ‘chaos creating’ play of powerful animals! I see play as freedom.

Reflection –​ Ali I look back at my childhood and see many examples of me playing that fit the rhetorics of power, fate and the imaginary. As the only girl playing with older brothers and their friends, my playing was a serious business and involved a lot of risk-​taking, competition and fantasy. For me, in those years play was definitely about survival!

29

Play

We have linked (2016:9–​15) children’s play to seventeen different spheres of thought, which have their basis in a variety of different theoretical perspectives.

Spheres of thought ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●● ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

Species survival –​supports the idea that selective pressures favour play behaviours that have some functional value for the player in relation to evolution. Physical development –​physical playing is the way that children naturally exercise and grow and gain control over their muscles; enhance their balance, spatial awareness and stamina, thereby creating healthy cardiovascular systems. Emotion regulation and resilience –​playing helps children to gain control over their strong emotions by experimenting with possible feelings and identities without risking real consequences and thereby enabling increased resilience in their real lives. Brain growth –​neuroscientists suggest that the brain grows, develops and changes throughout our life in response to both mind and body experiences. The flexible nature of playing supports this development by optimizing neural growth, integrating brain systems and is vital for maintaining plasticity. Intellectual advancement –​self-​directed playing provokes experimentation and exploration and through this children learn. Spiritual experience –​through play children explore questions about birth, life, death, the earth, the universe, the supernatural and their place within it all. Arousal –​children seek out new experiences, which naturally maintains an optimal and balanced level of arousal in their central nervous system, which equally supports their ability to respond to a wide range of stimuli and situations. Social competence –​children seek out other children to play with and through this playing with others, they learn how to attend to and respond to others’ wishes –​to negotiate, compromise and deal with conflict. Life satisfaction –​the best moments of people’s lives is often when they are playing. Playing makes children feel alive. Creative appreciation –​play fosters imagination, invention and make-​believe. Identity formation –​in their playing children try out roles and identities and test the responses of others to these. In this way they experiment with various versions of themselves. Trauma resolution  –​play can help children discharge their feelings, overcome their fears, make sense of their worries and come to terms with traumatic events. Empathetic emergence –​through responding to the play signals of others during social play and by having their own play cues responded to, children learn how they feel and what happens next depending upon the nature of the response, which in turn develops empathy. Stress management –​playing helps adults and children to relax; but children also learn to cope with stress by putting themselves into stressful play situations and mastering them. Language construction –​children appropriate and use language in their play much of the time. They also play with language itself and its symbolic meanings.

29

30

30

Reflective Playwork ●●

●●

Sensory evolvement  –​children feel, listen, see, taste, smell and sense every aspect of the world around them when they are playing and this supports their ability to know and understand in a whole variety of ways. Induction of further playing –​meaningful play experiences create the drive for more playing –​play is so important to them that children will play endlessly if they are allowed to. It is vital behaviour.

A lot of theorizing for something that even children comment on by saying ‘I was only playing’!

Reflective questions When asked about why they played, children in Scotland suggested some of the following answers: ‘you’d just be sad if you didn’t (play); ‘work is more important though’; ‘you need time to relax (just like adults get)’; ‘playing is important because it builds friendship’; ‘adults probably think it’s important; after all they can get peace and quiet’; ‘it’s what makes children fun’ (IPA Scotland 2011) Do you think we incorporate children’s own theories of play into our own? How do you think we could better do this? Do we give children’s theories the same validity as our own and if not why not?

So what has the playwork sector made of all this? Although there are these many and various views on play, there are three main different paradigms of children’s play that are used in playwork as the basis of working with children at play. These paradigms incorporate three different schools of thought related to play, with different epistemological roots. Thus for the purposes of this chapter we have the following: 1. Theory based on play as therapy 2. Theory based on play as development 3. Theory based on play as part of evolution Each of these has a basis in previously expounded theories and each has its proponents and antagonists. However there is a coalescing of some of these different schools of thought that forms enough common ground about the relationship of the playworker with the process of playing that enables a constructive dialogue between the different proponents. This has led to the shared practical definition of play. We note that Howard and McInnes (2013) also classify their theories into three different ‘practices of play’, namely ‘therapeutic play practice’, ‘educational play practice’ and ‘recreational play practice’. For our purposes, we have incorporated all play theories into our own three paradigms as in our mind the word ‘recreational’, although perfectly valid, may undervalue the importance of play in the minds of those who tend to view play as something less important than work; that is something that you only do if you happen to have the free time, rather than as an essential part of life.

31

Play

It is important to analyse the thinking behind each paradigm in order to inform our own thinking. Understanding of the scientific literature has contributed to this playwork view of play, and play like every other area of life is also influenced by the world around us and the current political, social and cultural mores of the time. In another era, another time, another place in the world, different view-​points may be developed. Indeed, even since the first edition of this book, there have been some changes, certainly for the support for play. Thinking is not static; like play it is changeable, quixotic and the stuff of life. Indeed whilst there is fairly common acceptance of the definition of play as ‘freely chosen’ and so on, there is also awareness, through practice experience, that play can also describe behaviour that is not freely chosen or that is negative and harmful. Sutton-​Smith and Kelly-​Byrne (1984) describe play as ‘often brutal and unpleasant’ (p.311) ‘obscene and erotic’ (p.312) and ‘children also use play to terrorize each other’ (p.313). Else (2014:87–​94) asks whether ‘it is any wonder that many children choose to play in clandestine and covert spaces away from the adult gaze’ because of the very rule breaking nature of much of their play. Russell (2007) explores how playworkers might respond to freely chosen and self-​directed play that disrupts the play of others, threatens safety or causes discomfort to adults. We as playworkers have to continue to develop our thinking in order to solve the incongruity of play in the real world.

Theory based on play as therapy

Figure 2.1  ‘Contemplating life’. Permission granted by Dunbar

Such theories consider that all play has therapeutic value for its own sake. Indeed the Therapeutic Playwork approach –​slightly different to that of the play therapist –​has grown out of the psychological theories of play. Freud was the first to recognize the therapeutic nature of play and later

31

32

32

Reflective Playwork

child psychotherapy was developed from this, based on the premise that play is a form of communication and transmission of emotions, unconscious experiences and thoughts. Carl Rogers explored the relationship between therapist and client and this idea is developed in ‘therapeutic playwork’. In his paper ‘The Sacred and the Profane’, Sturrock (1995) also explored the spiritual side of play. He cites Schiller’s idea that the play impulse ‘balances and reconciles the opposing thrusts of material and spiritual concerns’ and this thread runs through much of playwork based on play as therapy. 1. Playing helps with the development of self, identity and emotional well-​being. In the words of Sturrock et al. (2004:38) play is associated with ‘being and becoming’. 2. Play is seen as having both preventative and curative therapeutic value. Children often play in ways that enable them to experience emotions and feelings that they have not felt in real-​life situations. This experimentation may well help them to better cope with difficult emotions and feelings if and when they come along. It is also through play that a child can play out some of his or her actual experiences that may cause psychological difficulties, later in life, if not dealt with at the time. 3. A playwork setting that has any therapeutic value should be one in which the child feels supported and valued by the place and the people in it and where the workers understand how children express themselves during play. ‘The playground in practice becomes a setting where the child can have ‘safe emergencies’ (Sturrock 2002:4). 4. An important part of a playworker’s role in a therapeutic play setting is to be able to recognize and have strategies for dealing with their own ‘un-​played out material’ (our own experiences and perspectives that can obstruct or contaminate our perceptions now) in the play space so that they can be in service of the child’s own healing process. From our own list above (2016) we can see that the following spheres of thought fit into play as therapy: emotion regulation and resilience; social competence; life satisfaction; creative appreciation; identity formation; trauma resolution; stress management and sensory evolvement.

Reflective questions Does this resonate for you? Are you aware of children using their play to make sense of their lives? Do you seek ways to support this?

We have certainly witnessed many children having ‘safe emergencies’ when they are playing. We have seen many children or their toys ‘dying’ over and over again and ‘funerals’ being enacted. We have seen ‘planes, trains and cars crashing’ or ‘operations being undertaken or endured’. Indeed we have had many of these ‘operations’ performed on ourselves, and we have ‘died’ and been ‘resurrected’ as we imagine have many of you in the name of play. We have seen children (or ‘animals’) ‘becoming lost and not being found’ or ‘running away and going to new homes’. We

33

Play

have seen children being ‘chased by monsters’ and having to ‘fight and overcome’ them. When they are playing we have seen children willingly ‘submitting themselves to almost unendurable fright’ by summoning up ‘ghosts and ghouls’. We have seen children ‘making war’ and we have seen children being victorious and being defeated in a myriad of ways during play. We have also seen children participating in ‘domestic dramas’ and pretending to be ‘lonely, unhappy, sick, in pain’ and many more states of being. Sometimes as adults we have wanted to manipulate that play to make it all turn out well, but our playwork knowledge has enabled us to let the ‘bad times roll’.

Theory based on play as development

Figure 2.2  ‘Learning a lot!’. Permission granted by Clegg

Many people, who theorized about play, found some form of link between play and human development whether that is physical, emotional, mental or social.

33

34

34

Reflective Playwork

From our own categories we (2016) see the following as being linked to this paradigm: physical development; emotion regulation and resilience; brain growth; intellectual advancement; arousal; social competence; creative appreciation; identity formation; empathetic emergence; language construction and sensory involvement. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, play was largely seen as an alternative to work for children and a chance to get rid of excess energy. Many classical theorists of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries tried to link play to human development but their ideas were mainly based on philosophy and informal observation rather than rigorous research. 1. Most children pass through recognizable developmental milestones at particular stages of life (e.g. smiling, eruption of teeth, walking, talking, reading etc.) and these can be monitored through observation, testing and measuring. Information gained from a range of different disciplines such as psychology, philosophy, biology, anthropology, sociology and education has been used to support the notion that play is related to this child development. 2. Psychologists and educationalists of their day, such as Froebel, Piaget, Montessori, Isaacs and Vygotsky, all linked play to development of one sort or another. Indeed Montessori (1936/​ 1996:193) coined the phrase ‘Play is child’s work’ as she saw play as having to have a practical purpose. This still seems to be the case in much early childhood education in the West –​play is seen as work towards developmental goals. 3. Biologists and zoologists such as Groos and Young and, more recently, other scientists have advanced biological theories in relation to play and the way it helps the immature brain of a child to develop to its full capability. Pellis et al. (2010:289) say ‘juvenile play experience is organized in a manner to promote the development of those brain areas associated with the skills used during play’. When they talk of play they mean totally free play, not structured by adult devised rules or towards adult outcomes. Babies are born with a full complement of nerve cells but these are immature and do not connect up –​if the brain cells are not used they will be lost. Play is a natural way for children to use their brain cells when other experiences may not be available to them. 4. Play is seen as very important in the development of social skills. According to Hendricks (2001:51), Parten (1932) identified the development of stages of social playing in young children from solitary to co-​operative play. In describing a play episode she had unobtrusively observed where children were in furious conflict about a particular game they were playing, Hanscomb (2016:1) says In minutes these children learned important life lessons  –​social emotional skills that are excruciatingly hard to try and teach children. Through this real life experience, they learned how to stand up for themselves, how to work through anger and frustration, and most importantly –​they learned empathy. You can’t role-​play empathy! Or lecture children to death on how important it is to include other children. Children need to learn these things through practice. Lots of it! This is best done through daily play experiences with other children –​especially outdoors, where children can roam, explore, and play away from the adult world.

As a result of all the above, and although it was never a description of play, acronyms such as SPICE began to be used (sometimes inappropriately) in the mid-​1980s by some play trainers, as an ‘aide

35

Play

memoire’ to think about how playwork settings could provide for specific areas of child development such as the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Social interaction Physical activity Intellectual stimulation Creative achievement Emotional stability

However this led, in some instances, to an overemphasis on the developmental nature of play, which in turn led to over-​structured ways of planning for play that took little account of the wealth of other theories that support the importance of free play. Brown (2003:53–​63) explains that SPICE was part of a theoretical construct of ‘compound flexibility’ that demonstrated that a flexible environment and atmosphere can lead to development of self-​confidence, self-​awareness and self-​acceptance which in turn leads to the development of flexibility within the child and therefore the ability to cope with an ever-​changing world. This explanation supported the notion that play could not be planned to lead to specific areas of development. There are many ways of linking play to child development. In recent decades, however, the emphasis has been particularly on the educational and socializing aspects of play almost to the exclusion of other areas of development. This has resulted in play being used as a tool for development of those things that adults wish children to develop and has been adopted by educationalists and early years workers almost to the exclusion of other possible ‘non-​beneficial to society’ but ‘beneficial to children and their culture’ benefits that play may support. Some current playwork practice has been influenced by this imbalance. There is a danger that, without a full understanding of play, playworkers can be overly influenced by these more dominant rhetorics. We need to realize that if we try to predetermine the outcome of play, we can destroy the very thing that makes it play and along with that the associated benefits. This is not to say that play based on developmental theories alone has no benefits of its own, of course it has. But it is important to recognize that play based on adult-​led outcomes is manufactured. Play that spontaneously bursts from within a child is based on their own intrinsic needs in that moment and these needs may not be ones desired by adults but are a part of that child’s being, at that time.

Reflection –​ Ali I remember coming up with a skeletal plan once for a day on a playscheme. I asked children to split up into groups and gave them a set of ‘instructions’ and a rucksack filled with bits and pieces that would enable them to carry these out. This was based on the idea that they had landed on a desert island and needed to find ways to survive (e.g. building a shelter, drawing a map of their island, finding ways to communicate their whereabouts, finding food and water etc.) Several groups of children decided to run with this idea and

35

36

36

Reflective Playwork

spent all day outside changing and subverting the plan in all kinds of fascinating ways (including tracking each other and creating sign languages and daubing themselves with war paint and planning raids). The children clearly had a great day. Another worker who was visiting that day asked me if she could borrow the ‘instructions’ so she could use the idea at another setting. I discovered later that she had not only labelled parts of the plan as encouraging particular aspects such as teamwork, creativity and imagination(i.e. promoting their socio-​emotional development) but had enthusiastically insisted that children stick to the instructions. It ended up as a disaster really, because the children weren’t allowed to make it their own and use the plan as a springboard for their own playing. Children will learn and develop in all kinds of ways as they play, but it is not something we can engineer.

Reflective question Have you ‘oversubscribed’ to the developmental rhetoric? Do you think we can encourage children’s development by deciding in advance what they should do and how?

Theory based on play as an essential part of evolution

Figure 2.3  ‘I will survive’. Permission granted by Martin

37

Play

Evolutionary playwork theories have their basis in some of the early classical theories about play that are based around biological and physiological reasons why children play. Much of this thought stemmed from Darwin’s Origin of the Species. Links to animal play are still important in evolutionary play theories. According to Hughes (2001:1), ‘Play is the behavioural and psychic equivalent of oxygen’ and ‘a vitally important ingredient in the development and evolution process’ (Hughes 2012:8–​9). 1. Biologists such as Groos linked play to survival. 2. Hall’s (1844–​1924) recapitulation theory indicated links to instincts and heredity but saw play as going through the evolutionary stages that man had gone through from prehistoric to modern times. Thus as children develop they go through animal, savage, nomad, planter and tribal stages of play. Wilber suggests, ‘Play enables humans to feel “at ease” with their situation’ (Hughes [2001:118] summarizing Wilber [1996]). 3. Animal Play (1998), edited by Beckoff and Byers, has influenced some of the thinking about the evolution of play, brain growth and play deprivation in humans, which in turn has informed some of the ideas behind evolutionary playwork. For example, Hughes gives an example from Burghardt’s chapter, where he speaks of evidence suggesting that ‘play behaviour in some juvenile mammals may permanently modify muscle fibre differentiation and cerebella synapse distribution’ (1998:18). 4. Hughes’s (2012:7–​11) theories of evolutionary playwork are based in evolutionary psychology (a fusion of cognitive psychology and evolutionary biology) and ‘neuroscience, ecology, evolutionary psychiatry, neurology’ are also pertinent. In its crudest sense, he believes that children’s play is linked to the very survival of our species. Hughes (2012:118) contended that play has evolved as a biological mechanism to enable human beings to come to terms with what and where they are and have some control over and understanding of what is happening to them. That through their playful interactions with their physical and psychological environments, they develop an individual and collective relationship with these environments which enables them to make some sense of human existence.

5. Interestingly whereas Brown’s description of ‘compound flexibility’ is part of the developmental paradigm (see above), Hughes’s interpretation of ‘combinatorial flexibility’ is drawn from the biological sciences notably from Sylva (1977). She suggests that ‘play trains the animal (or child) to string bits of behaviour together to form novel solutions to problems’ (Hughes 2001:136). From our list of categories (2016), the following specifically link to evolutionary play theories: species survival; emotion regulation and resilience; brain growth; spiritual experience; life satisfaction; sensory evolvement and induce further playing. Evolutionary theories related to play make the role of adults who work with playing children vital in today’s constrained Western world where most of a child’s time is spent in organized and educational activity or in an uncreative environment where passive entertainment is the norm.

37

38

38

Reflective Playwork

Reflective question Do the concepts of evolutionary playwork make sense of what you think and feel about playing –​whether in your own experience or that of children playing now?

Reflection –​ Jacky I have become very aware, by playing with my grandchildren, just how children string together different ideas, or behaviour, in a very flexible way and use this adaptability to find solutions to problems. One young grandson had inadvertently kicked a big blue sponge ball over into a neighbour’s garden. After a few weeks a small blue sponge ball arrived in his garden so he had the idea that this must be the original large blue sponge ball, but that it had been shrunk somehow by the neighbour. He decided it must have been shrunk by an incredible shrinking machine and then hunted around to see if he could find anything that would enable him to shrink things for himself. He started by trying out a bug catcher and various other bits and pieces that didn’t work but eventually realized he could use a small telescope to demonstrate how things that looked big through one end, could be shrunk by looking through the other end. He spent a long time in the garden shrinking everything!

So here we have it –​three different ways of looking at play theory, but remarkably proponents of each do not disregard the others. Though the playwork sector continues to debate, argue, research and theorize, there is still considerable consensus about the purposes of playing and the consequent role of particularly the playworker, much of which has been enshrined in the Playwork Principles. Lester and Russell (2008:14–​15) consolidated the emerging body of evidence based on all our current understandings and interpretations of play. From their major review of published literature about play across all disciplines, they provide some key messages: ●●

●●

●●

●●

There is an interrelationship between genes, the brain, the body, behaviour and the physical and social environment. Contrary to the dominant belief that play is a way of learning specific motor, cognitive or social skills, play has an impact on the very architectural foundations of development such as gene expression and physical and chemical development of the brain. These architectural foundations influence the child’s ability to adapt, to survive, to thrive in and to shape their social and physical environments. Emotions have a key role in playing and play makes a major contribution to developing emotion regulation, building strong attachments and peer friendships.

39

Play ●●

Play also plays a key role in engendering positive feelings, and enabling children to cope with stressful situations through developing creative approaches and problem-​solving skills. Play builds resilience.

Their findings support the notion that play should be provided for its own sake and that ‘play provision should be judged on whether it enables children to play in the ways they want to rather than on more instrumental outcomes’.

Reflective questions So which of the following seems to encapsulate for you why human children play? 1. They will learn and practice the competencies they need. 2. They will develop their thinking and problem-​solving processes. 3. Their brains will make the necessary synaptic connections for healthy growth. 4. They will master a whole range of feelings they encompass and experience. 5. They will continue to evolve and enable the ongoing existence of our species. 6. They pass on customs and cultures and create new ones. 7. They adapt, invent and explore –​all necessary skills for survival. 8. They find ways to communicate and thus acquire empathy and social skills. 9. They ask and come to terms with questions around life, death, immortality and morality. 10. They discover who and what they and others are. 11. They will find out and try out their increasing strengths and capabilities. 12. They learn to regulate their emotions and become resilient. 13. They seek out novelty and uncertainty to test their responses. 14. They can be daft, silly, nonsensical. 15. They can express their ‘darker side’. 16. They just have to!

The literary evidence, the observations made by playworkers, the current and ongoing research into play indicates strongly that all of these take place. ‘Play is indeed multifaceted and its ultimate function for humankind is to maintain our adaptability, vigour and optimism in the face of an uncertain, risky and demanding world’ (Kane 2004:63). In this chapter we have given an overview of some of the thinking on play that abounds, with particular emphasis on the play theories that influence playwork practice. In Chapter 3 we outline the results of this influence by explaining some of the finer points of playing. We hope we have provoked your own thinking and feeling about play and that you will not stop here! Is our society and your society ready to see play as a universal right for children regardless of whether it achieves tangible outcomes?

39

40

40

Reflective Playwork

Further reading/​Resources Else, P. (2009), The Value of Play, London: Continuum FSE, ‘What are forest schools’, https://​www.forestschools.com/​what-​are-​forest-​schools/​ Hughes, B. (2012), Evolutionary Playwork and Reflective Analytic Practice, 2nd edition, London: Routledge Lester, S. and Russell, W. (2008), Play for a Change, London: National Children’s Bureau Scrapstore Playpods, http://​www.playpods.co.uk/​ Sutton-​Smith, B. (1997), The Ambiguity of Play, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/2-afterschool-club-risk-in-play/

41

newgenprepdf

3 A New Paradigm for Play

Chapter outline Introduction Using the playwork approach Play framework Play frame The play cycle The play process Play types Play behaviour Play and risk-​taking Resilience Play deprivation Technology and play

41 42 43 44 47 50 50 55 57 60 60 62

Introduction In the last chapter we considered a variety of theories around play both old and new. This chapter takes a look at the consequent theoretical information that has built up within playwork particularly and which now informs the repertoire of interventions into children’s play that can reform and improve our practice. There has been a growing confidence and articulation for these ideas within not only the playwork world but also from other professions where work with children at play is important. The interventions underpin the playwork approach and should also be of use to anyone who is working with children at play.

42

42

Reflective Playwork

Using the playwork approach To get to the crux of using the playwork approach we must be able to do the following: ●● ●●

●●

●●

●● ●●

Understand and utilize the philosophy behind the Playwork Principles Understand the varying theories about play but, when with playing children, concentrate only on those that are about the here and now Believe that children and young people do not need to be improved or developed towards adult chosen outcomes Believe that playing children intuitively play in the way that is necessary for themselves –​they know better than we do Try not to see everything through the prism of adult knowledge and understanding Intervene as little as possible

There can be a tension between playwork theorists and practitioners in relation to their ideas about play and how to provide for it. How play is viewed is, like most aspects of life, affected by social and political factors and also by cognitive dissonance, which prevents some workers from understanding and overcoming seemingly insurmountable issues. Palmer (2003:180) comments on some of these issues: ‘This conflict between espoused theory and theory in use may be justified by playworkers in a number of ways, from the physical restrictions of the environment to the issue of acceptable behaviours by children in specific settings.’ Palmer goes on to suggest that the mismatch between theory and practice also happens in other professions. In playwork this antithesis is encapsulated in Playwork Principle 3: ‘for playworkers, the play process takes precedence and playworkers act as advocates for play when engaging with adult-​led agendas’. In other words, recognizing and overcoming in practice the adult’s need to justify protecting and/​or educating children, for example, as a reason to interrupt or direct children’s play. One of the difficulties in the United Kingdom and now more widely as playwork training and courses have become available in other countries is that those adults working directly with children receive this training and see the need to change their practice but often their managers or supervisors do not.

Reflective questions What have your views been about the relationship between theory and practice in working with children at play up until now? Does understanding theory help your practice and if so how?

The model for play that underpins the playwork approach, at this time, is mainly influenced by evolutionary, therapeutic and developmental play theory, as outlined in Chapter 2, and is based on the assumption that ‘children’s play is freely chosen, personally directed behaviour and motivated from within’. Play is thus seen as an essential and innate process and a necessity for the biological, psychological and social well-​being and healthy development and survival of children, which in

43

A New Paradigm for Play

turn informs the role of the playworker and any other worker who sees these as important aspects of working with children at play. Some of the concepts from evolutionary, therapeutic and developmental theories for play are elaborated below and are essential knowledge to help you use the reflective playwork approach. The randomness of children’s play behaviour can sometimes make it difficult for us to see how play affects the whole child. We often break the affect up into a range of different areas in order to simplify our thoughts. The following is an attempt to show how a child develops their whole self through play.

Play framework The Integral Play Framework (Else 2004:17–​20) (2014:10–​23) gives us a way of looking at the world from a holistic viewpoint and when focusing on the elements of developmental play shows how our feelings and thoughts (psychological and cognitive development), physical ability and skills (physiological development), beliefs and culture (cultural development) and our relationships, power and control (social and political development) develop alongside each other and how areas of our experience overlap. Subjective Feelings

Self

Myself

My body

Feelings and thoughts

Physical ability and skills

Psychological and cognitive development

Physiological development

Us Others

Objective Facts

Belief and culture Cultural development

Our society Relationships, power and control Social, political development

Figure 3.1  Integral Play Framework 1. Taken from ‘The integral play framework’, Tables 1 and 2 in Towards Ludogogy Part 1, Sturrock et al. (2004)

During their play, children will flexibly move between various modes, using their bodies, voices, relationships, rules, imitations, jokes and so on in a random yet integral way thereby developing their sense of self within their own environment and milieu. ‘If I  feel/​think this, then do that, what happens?’ ‘If I do this and that happens, what do I think or feel about it?’ (Integral Play Framework 2004:19) and then perhaps ‘what do others think and feel about what I have done and do they know how I feel?’ All of this is naturally assimilated into the child’s

43

44

44

Reflective Playwork

mind and over time is accommodated to form part of the child’s sense of self and skill base. The process continues on throughout life. Subjective Feelings

Objective Facts

Adult Self

Adult

Adolescent

Adolescent

Child

Child Toddler

Toddler

Baby Baby

Baby Baby Toddler

Others

Child Adolescent Adult

Toddler Child Adolescent Adult

Figure 3.2  Integral Play Framework 2. Taken from ‘The integral play framework’, Table 3 in Towards Ludogogy Part 1, Sturrock et al. (2004)

So when children are randomly playing they are developing themselves. But how does the actual play process occur? How does it get started? How does it keep itself going? What makes it stop? How do we know when or how to respond to it? What does it look like? How do we know if a child is playing? The following sections are an attempt to explain some of this and include aspects of what is called the Play Frame and the Play Cycle and these can be used on three levels to help 1. any adult observe and understand play better; 2. workers understand how they can better support play; and 3. workers understand how they can support specific children better in their play.

Play frame We begin with the play frame. The play frame can be a ‘material’ (real space), or ‘non-​material’ boundary (in the mind or emotions) that contains play episodes that can last from moments to weeks or months, for example two children playing at ‘house’ in a den –​the den is the material frame; a child daydreaming –​the edges of the fantasy are the non-​material frame; a child pretending to throw a hand grenade to cue the start of an ongoing game of war –​a narrative frame (or story) with the narrative containing the play over what might be a substantial period of time.

45

A New Paradigm for Play

Play frames hold the play together and can be ●●

●●

●●

physical places or spaces, which can be very small (a cardboard box) or very large (a whole field); or edges of the play frame might be indicated by chalk, skipping ropes, furniture, or trees and so on; narratives or storylines which could be from a television programme, book or made-​up tale; some agreed rules; words or rhythm of a song or rhyme; anything that gives shape and reason to the playing; emotional; when play is exploring a particular feeling such as: anger, fear, grief or joy which may be expressed in a variety of ways with and without props. It is the expressing of the ‘feeling’ that keeps the play going rather than a story or space.

Reflection –​ Jacky I have been the catalyst for three lengthy play frames with one, then two of my grandsons whose home I visit periodically. This narrative frame has been going on for about four years since the eldest grandson was four, but it only happens in their house and usually in their bedroom. When I arrive I am always greeted by ‘Come on Granny, let’s play’ and then ‘what do you want to play –​Playmobil, James Bond or Army?’ ‘Playmobil’ involves: Playmobil campers who camp near a bank and a castle, with money and a ‘sack of glowing cheese’ being robbed by knights and a bad Santa; saved by police; swamped by water from firefighters and drowned or rescued. I am always the camper; the youngest is always the baddies and the eldest is always the hero. ‘James Bond’ consists of two hero type characters (the two boys, one usually James Bond but not always) visiting a school or family where the children (two soft toy elephants and two rats) offer to make them food of their choice. One or two of the ‘children’ are very naughty and put naughty things in the food and drink and then get punished in a ridiculous and violent way, for example thrown against the wall then put in a dirty sock. ‘Army’ is two different armies of small world characters –​one is good and the other bad (it is their choice that I am always bad). The bad army is full of hopeless characters, ‘Useless’ being the name of one of them, with futile plans and tactics and their plots to beat the goodies are always foiled. This game often also involves the sack of glowing cheese as the target. The story frames have many minor variations but are all on the theme of good versus bad. The setting up of the game is always as important as the playing and can be very elaborate. The playing is often very serious in its intent and there can be friction if one brother’s notions don’t fit the other’s but the playing also always has plenty of funny happenings and we laugh a lot. Sometimes the frames flow for a long time and at other times they terminate quite soon after everything is set up. One frame is swiftly replaced by another –​ the important thing is to keep playing. Apparently they never play either these games or in this way with anyone other than me. Perhaps this is because I am prepared to spend lots of time playing; pick up on their play cues and respond positively to them. I never impose anything –​we play in their way, with their ideas and in the way that they want to play. I see it as a privilege to be included.

45

46

46

Reflective Playwork

Play frames therefore provide the context for play and are chosen and initiated by the child/​children. It is important that a playworker knows how to recognize and ‘contain’ these frames whilst holding the integrity of the play (not trying to change it so that it better fits their idea of what play should be). On rare occasions it may be necessary to gently reframe play when it seems that the child or children have become stuck, or maybe one frame is dominating, for example a football game in a small school yard, but this can all too easily slip over into trying to create what the adult considers to be more appropriate play frames thereby dominating and adulterating play and robbing it of its ‘self-​ordinated’ developmental or healing potential, that is the child’s own internal developmental and healing mechanism. A lovely example of this was given to Ali recently by one of her American playwork students. The following interaction occurred months ago, but it still lingers in my mind as a moment I wish I’d handled differently. X (age seven) and I were sitting at the kitchen table. She was drawing and then suggested that we write a story. ‘I’ll make it up and you write it down’, she instructed. The frame was in both the interaction between us and in the narrative constructed as she told the story. X’s story was gruesome and bizarre, I thought. A deer, wearing a white bandana, robbed stores and shot the storekeepers. Her first cues–​telling the first bit of the story and then looking for my response–​I returned with a nod and a smile, writing quickly to keep up. But as the story wore on, it became increasingly more violent. Her gory details shocked me, and I stopped writing. ‘Do you mind if we don’t say that his head got blown off?’ ‘But that’s what happened!’ X protested. ‘It is supposed to be scary.’ My role was progressing from simple involvement of a scribe to complex involvement of co-​ author, albeit uninvited. But looking down at what I was asked to write, it was hard to let go. ‘Maybe we could say the deer just captured his victims?’ I suggested, fully aware of how my idea paled in comparison to the rest of the story. ‘Ugh…I guess…,’ X fidgeted. In the moment, my discomfort in penning her scary story took over any greater intent of letting children play uninhibited. My stomach turned hearing this young child telling a murder story. Was she testing my reaction, or was this a story she just needed to get out? Looking back, I  was closely interacting with her game. Writing out her story confused my role in my mind, even if X still saw me simply as a conduit for her words. She did not take kindly to the effort to adulterate her play.

We often find that when we really watch and listen to children playing as a participant observer, we will find the play is sometimes full of gory nonsense of the kind that usually causes adults to react. We have to understand that not all play is ‘nice’. Else (2014) talks about the darker side of play and Hughes (2012:78) states that ‘some adults have actually called what children do when they play irresponsible, pointless, even dangerous’ and he tells us (2006:22) that in his own experience ‘some play was deeper, more scary, more ominous than others … and some deep play would manifest feelings of loneliness and powerlessness’. He thinks it would be strange if what he calls the ‘embryonic proto-​ tendencies’ of cruelty, violence, exploitation, sexuality and greed (all things that contain elements of risk) that are manifested in our human world were not reflected in children’s play (ibid.:23).

47

A New Paradigm for Play

Jacky remembers, as a small child, there being two boys who lived across from her, who used to play ‘Cowboys and Indians’ outside the front of their house. This usually resulted in the weaker of the two boys being captured and tied to a tree and left for a long time whilst the other boy pretended to sharpen his arrows, polish his gun and so on. Sometimes the captive would cry but always came back for more. A play frame can be demonstrated in the following way and can be used as a tool to reflect upon ways of improving the environment; resources or interventions, to extend or support particular children’s play (see also diagrams in the section on the play process)

Internal frame

Typical play frame; moderate chance for interaction with the environment and possibility of interaction with another

External frame

Figure 3.3  The play frame. Taken from ‘The playground as therapeutic space: playwork as healing’, Else and Sturrock (1998)

The play cycle The play cycle includes all aspects of a ‘play episode’ from its very inception to when it ceases. Those people who have studied psycholudics (the study of the mind at play) have developed a model for ‘the play cycle’. This describes the process of play, as it happens within a ‘play frame’, by which a child is motivated to play, plays and then stops playing. The concepts within the play cycle can be very useful in helping workers to recognize and better facilitate the play process. Although some of these concepts can at first seem complex it is worth persevering with them as they will bring about a heightened understanding of play and therefore a better understanding of the role of the adult when working with children at play. For the purposes of description, the cycle, which occurs within the play frame’s internal (in the mind) and external (the environment) auspices, has been given a number of functional components and attendant potential interventions outlined below: 1. Metalude 2. Play cues 3. Return 4. Flow

47

48

48

Reflective Playwork

5. Annihilation 6. dysplay 7. Containment 8. Adulteration 1. The metalude is the part of the mind where the drive to play is formed and from which the ‘cue’ to play is issued –​the motivation to play. This motivation may be stimulated by nothing other than the child’s own mind or may be activated by particular objects, places, atmospheres, feelings and so on, such as a favourite toy, a beach, trees, a tune, hunger, potential danger, loose parts, boredom, curiosity, anger and so on. 2. A play cue is an action –​facial expression, eye movement, bodily stance or movement, verbal communication, particular behaviour and so on –​that invites play; it could be a simple verbal request like ‘would you like to play?’ (although this more direct and recognizable cue actually happens least often). It is more likely to be subtle such as a slight change in facial expression; saying something provocative like ‘you’ve got a fat belly’ or the movement of a hand or foot; or it may be complex such as setting up the materials or equipment for a game, for example building a den and going inside it. The possibilities are endless and are often missed, misunderstood, or responded to inappropriately by adults, but they are usually well understood by other children. Play is a bit like a language that all children speak where most adults have forgotten how. 3. The play return is the positive response to the play cue which further develops the action from either, the mind, the environment or other player and acts as a further cue. Returns are often playful and from children (or savvy adults) but can also be from such things as an echo, a collapsing model or a feather blowing in the wind. Without a satisfactory return the play will never get going. Some children (it is suggested particularly children with ADHD) do not cue effectively and they become frustrated because their cues are ignored by others or their mind does not become sufficiently taken up with the further possibilities of play. 4. The loop and flow –​if a play cue is returned positively, this in turn causes the metalude to generate a further cue which may set up a flow of play so that the playing continues; motivation is continually stimulated and the play frame is held. Play can be seen to be flowing when a child or children are fully absorbed and this may last continuously for minutes, hours or on and off for days, weeks or even months. 5. Termination or decay is the breakdown of the drive to play over time –​lessening of motivation or interest on the part of the child or children –​and is never the stopping that is caused by an adult who calls time for some reason. Play can wane and stop in a matter of moments or over days. Who has not seen children engaged in a new craze that goes on and on and then suddenly disappears or gradually fades away? 6. Dysplay describes the repetitive issuing of a play cue that builds up and misfires. The child becomes frustrated because of little or inappropriate response and therefore urgently and desperately sends out more cues to try and get a satisfying return. This often backfires and fuels irritation to the adult, other child or children and even greater urgency on the part of the child to generate a satisfactory response. This scenario frequently ends badly unless somebody recognizes the initial play cues and has learnt how to respond positively. Ali recalls

49

A New Paradigm for Play

a recent example of a boy who had found it difficult to play with others coming out into the school playground and picking up a piece of foam, looking at it and then smiling and eagerly bopping the nearest child on the head with it. This child looked crossly at him and turned away, so he tried the same thing again with another child, who equally rejected him. He looked puzzled and then irritated and so then bopped three more children on the head in quick succession. At this point a teaching assistant who had obviously seen all this rushed across the playground shouting his name. The boy’s response was to run off out of the school gate and up the road, hotly pursued by the adult. The whole situation escalated from then, with the head teacher calling in the boy’s parents and the boy being kept in school for a week at playtimes and lunchtimes. How sad that the teaching assistant did not recognize that this began as play cues. Had she picked up another piece of foam and bopped the boy with a big smile, all would have been well. 7. Containment is the term used to describe how adults may support the play process for a particular child when and if this sort of ‘holding’ is required. Holding assumes the recognition of the importance of a particular play episode for a child and helping them to either preserve the meaning of the play at that time or keeping the meaning safe while the child is reframing or reconstructing it. This could be done verbally, ‘you’re at sea and your boat is sinking’; could be by helping the child to move the props that make up the boat to another place; or could be by promising to keep all the props that constitute the boat intact and available so that the child can recreate it when next needed. 8. Adulteration is more fully described later in this chapter but explains the multiple ways that adults stop, control, alter, prevent, interfere in and spoil children’s play by for instance responding inappropriately to their play cues; failing to recognize when play is flowing and intervening mid-​flow; failing to recognize that a child’s play episode is significant to them and not containing its meaning on their behalf; issuing their own adult play cues or responding to a play cue in a particular way to try and influence what or how the play unfolds or ending play at a time that suits their adult timetable rather than allowing the children’s play to terminate naturally. Internal Frame The meta-lude M-L The loop and flow §

T> Termination @ Active development External Frame

Figure 3.4  The play cycle. Taken from ‘The playground as therapeutic space: playwork as healing’, Else and Sturrock (1998)

49

50

50

Reflective Playwork

Reflection–​ Jacky I can still remember going to a concert when I was at school. We were in rows of about twenty girls per row. One girl at the end of our row had crossed her legs and started moving her top leg gently (cue) to the music being played by a string quartet (motivation to the metalude); the girl next to her started doing the same (return). The girl next to her started tapping her hand on her knee followed by the girl next to her nodding her head and soon the whole row was doing a subtle movement of some part of their body in time to the music (flow). The movements gradually became more exaggerated and eventually we were all gasping for air from suppressed giggling. We stopped after a while (termination) although possibly from fear of being caught out by a teacher (adulteration) rather than from a natural ending as our playing was much more fun than the music playing! We exploded with laughter as soon as we left the concert. We had been spotted and did get into trouble.

The play process So the whole play process can be seen as an inner and potentially compelling drive, which sets up a cycle of playing that eventually breaks down over a period of time.

Play types Because of its enigmatic nature, and therefore in some way to better understand it, play is sometimes broken down or categorized into various types. Here are some examples: ●●

●●

●●

●● ●●

●●

●● ●●

●● ●●

Sensorimotor play; role play; rule-​based play; construction play; movement play (Lillemyr 2009:12) Social play  –​solitary; looking on; joining in; simple co-​operative; complex co-​operative (Parten 1932) Social contingency play; sensorimotor play; object play; language play; physical activity play and fantasy or pretend play (Smith 2010:8–​9) SPICE –​social; physical; intellectual; creative; emotional play (Brown 2003) Games –​high verbal content; high imaginative content; high physical content (Bishop and Curtis 2001) Experienced play; intuitive play; pretended play; expressive play; cognitive play; physical play (Minouru in Wada 1994:57; Wada’s Classification) Free play (play opportunity); structured play (play activity) (common usage) Mind or subjective play; solitary play; playful behaviours; informal social play; vicarious audience play; performance play; celebrations and festivals; contests (games and sport); risky or deep play (Sutton-​Smith 1997:4–​5) Progress, imagination, selfhood, power, identity and fate and chaos (Kane 2004) Play and playful play (Bateson and Martin 2013)

51

A New Paradigm for Play

Hughes in his A Playworker’s Taxonomy of Play Types (2002a) identified sixteen different types of play as follows. These have been widely accepted by many practitioners as well as by the playwork world and are referenced within the UK Playwork Occupational Standards. We have built on his descriptions and examples in the following list.

Play types Symbolic play Play which allows control, gradual exploration and increased understanding without being out of one’s depth, by using symbols, that is, objects, designs or signs to represent people, ideas or qualities. For example, using a piece of wood to symbolize a person or a weapon, a piece of string to symbolize a wedding ring, a length of rope to symbolize a boundary, a carrot to symbolize a microphone; building a shrine, creating a flag.

Exploratory play (finding out play) Play to access factual information about an environment and engaging with the area or thing and, either by manipulation or movement, assessing its properties, possibilities and content. For example stacking bricks, taking a camera apart, digging ‘to Australia’.

Object play (problem-​solving play) Play which uses infinite and interesting sequences of hand-​eye manipulations and movements such as examination and novel use of any object, such as cloth, rope, bubblewrap, paintbrush, cup. The fascination here is with the object itself and what it can do or be (regardless of what its ‘proper use’ might be).

Rough and tumble play Close encounter play which is less to do with fighting and more to do with touching, tickling, gauging relative strength, discovering physical flexibility and the exhilaration of display. Finding out and testing one’s own and other’s limits. Learning social and interpersonal codes of physical conduct: for example playful fighting, wrestling and chasing where the children are obviously unhurt and giving every indication that they are enjoying themselves.

Socio-​dramatic play The enactment of real and potential experiences of an intense personal, social, domestic or interpersonal nature; that is re-​creating scenes from own life, such as by playing at house, going to the shops, being mums and dads, organizing a meal, having a row, funerals, divorce courts; sometimes acting out emotions too scary to express in real life –​often therapeutic.

51

52

52

Reflective Playwork

Dramatic play Play which dramatizes events in which the child is not a direct participator, that is re-​creating scenes from others’ lives or from television or theatre: for example, presenting a TV show, an event on the street or in the news, a religious or festive event, a birth or death, or being famous footballers or a band in a recent match or concert; sometimes done for an audience.

Social play Play during which the rules and criteria for social engagement, interaction and communication can be revealed, explored and amended: any social or interactive situation which contains an expectation on all parties that they will discuss and abide by certain rules, customs or protocols, such as games, conversations, making something together, challenging, or discussing.

Communication play Play using words, nuances or gestures: for example, mime, jokes, play acting, mickey taking, singing, debate, poetry, graffiti, swearing, making up languages/​words/​slang, story-​telling. Creating a reaction and exploring the impact.

Creative play (inventive play) Play which allows a novel response, an expression of self, the transformation of information, awareness of new connections and new insights, with an element of surprise. It is about focused but spontaneous creation (possibly using materials and tools) for its own sake, with real freedom and not necessarily an end result. It could be small or large scale, individual or group.

Deep play Play which allows the child to encounter risky or even potentially life-​threatening experiences; to develop survival skills and conquer fear: for example, leaping onto an aerial runway, riding a bike on a parapet, balancing on a high beam. The risk is subjective –​from the child’s perspective (certainly not from the adults’) and so what is deep play for one child is not for the next.

Fantasy play Play which rearranges the world in the child’s way; a way which is complete fantasy and unreal: for example, being superheroes, aliens, goblins, time-​lords, flying a UFO, casting spells, saving the world from certain destruction.

Imaginative play Play where the conventional rules that govern the physical world do not apply, but is still based on reality: for example, imagining you are, or pretending to be, a tree, a ship, or an animal, patting a dog which isn’t there, having an invisible friend, imagining a table is a bus or a cave.

53

A New Paradigm for Play

Role play Play exploring identity and ways of being and doing, although not normally of an intense personal, social, domestic or interpersonal nature. Often imitating someone or trying out something seen but not experienced: for example, driving a car, playing dead, being a clown or a shopkeeper.

Locomotor play Movement in any and every direction –​up down, along, at various speeds and seemingly for its own sake; examples include chase, tag, hide and seek, tree climbing, rolling, jumping, dancing. Experiencing the possibilities of one’s body within a particular environment: includes ranging.

Mastery play Generally expressed by taking (and feeling) control of the physical and affective ingredients of the natural environment: for example, digging holes and tunnels in earth or sand, changing the course of streams, constructing shelters, building fires. This could also include mastering a new skill such as jumping across a river or riding a bike.

Recapitulative play Play that displays aspects of human evolutionary history, stored and passed on through our genes and manifested when children play spontaneously –​often stimulated by aspects of the outdoor environment like forests and shallow pools/​rivers. Examples of such play include lighting fires, engaging in spontaneous rituals and songs, dressing up in historic clothes/​uniforms and role-​ playing, playing wars and making weapons, growing and cooking things, creating ancient style communities, building shelters, creating languages and religions. (Adapted from Hughes, B. (2002) A Taxonomy of Play Types, 2nd edition, London: Playlink)

Reflective question Can you think of other examples of playing you have seen that express Hughes’s play types?

In some settings children’s workers plan play activities slavishly around the notion of development through certain types of play, for example a construction table has been provided with the assumption that exploratory play will take place at it and the children will develop numeracy, spatial awareness and fine motor skills. In reality if we allow children to play freely and flexibly they may well use the construction materials in a way an adult would not anticipate and if there are developmental benefits they may not be the ones that were anticipated. For example, a child may combine construction material with sand and water in a hole in the ground to make a brew to cast spells with. Which play types are reflected in that scenario and what developmental benefits could

53

54

54

Reflective Playwork

there be? Using children’s natural inclination to play as the basis for planning activities that are intended to lead to specific outcomes is rather like having fresh bread baking when showing people round a house that you are trying to sell –​it’s a cunning sales technique! It can never replace the actual taste of freshly baked bread for its own sake, or participating in play for its own sake.

Reflection –​ Jacky A friend of mine took her little granddaughter out for a walk in the countryside to ‘get fresh air’. The girl loves all the usual stereotyped pink, Frozen (as in the Disney film) stuff, but also loves ‘sloshing about’. She picked up a fairly hefty stick at the beginning of the walk and proceeded to ‘slosh about’ with it, dig in muddy puddles, scrape at leaves, poke at things and generally enjoy the stick, all the way round the walk. When they returned to the house she carefully leant the stick up against the wall by the front door and said ‘Bam can you hang on to this ’til I come back next time? It’s a really good stick.’ Who could have known at the start of the walk that this would happen? Of course the stick is being very respectfully kept.

Classifying play into types can certainly help with observation of children playing and planning an environment for play to ensure that it offers the potential for the realization of all play types. However being prescriptive will cause its own problems. There may for instance be other play types as yet not classified –​a number have been postulated recently such as nurture play, sexual play and sadistic play. Would we and could we adults necessarily want to plan for all of these?! There may perhaps be play types based around emotions and feelings such as ‘anger play’ or ‘embarrassment play’. What of play that uses technology ‘technological play’–​television, computers, laptops, tablets, mobile phones that give access to video games, apps, social media and the like? We discuss this later in this chapter. We have imagined three-​dimensional play types that have thinking, feeling and doing facets to them and an over-​arching ‘interaction’ play type that could contain all others and yet not be a constraint to play.

Thinking

Feeling

Doing

Interacting

Figure 3.5  Three-​dimensional play type

55

A New Paradigm for Play

Play behaviour How do you know when a child is playing? Is it what they do, why they are doing what they are doing, when they do it, or can it only be a person who is playing who knows whether they are playing or not? Can it be play if you cannot be seen to be doing anything? How do you know if a child is working out a homework problem in their head or daydreaming about riding a turquoise unicorn above the clouds? Does a baby recognize when it starts to play that this is behaviour that is different to say feeding, or is feeding actually play for a baby because it is freely chosen, personally directed and intrinsically motivated as well as being enjoyable? We adults may think we know what play is and therefore know when a child is playing, because we have experienced play and tend to believe that we can determine that which is real and not real. Children and the more spiritual of adults can easily mix the two together to form a different type of reality –​one that exists in reality but is not real and therefore may not be able to be seen. An example of this occurred when two children came to the door of Jacky’s flat and asked if she would like to buy a magic stick for 10p. She asked what it would do and was told that if she waved it about she would get what she wanted. She said she would like one and gave them 10p and they said they would come back with one shortly. They came back about half an hour later with a magic stick which lives on her fireplace to this day. You just never know when you might need a bit of magic! We may not be able to determine play behaviour by observation alone. However if the play cycle within a play frame is used as the model within which to locate play behaviour (which may or may not fit into particular play types) it gives the playworker a context within which they can call upon their knowledge of play types and repertoire of interventions to help decide how to best intervene if needed.

Figure 3.6  ‘Need more water!’. Permission granted by Dunbar

55

56

56

Reflective Playwork

In order to broaden our notions about play, in all its manifestations, a dedicated few continue to delve into the complexity which is play and give us other ways of thinking, or different things to think about it. For instance Hughes (2006:116–​20) has developed twelve ‘play mechanisms which provide us with another tool for analyzing what is going on when children play’ (see First Claim: Desirable Processes 2002). He also wonders whether different play types are located in specific sections of a triune brain (i.e. a brain that is three different neural structures in one –​reptilian reflex, limbic emotional and neo-​cortex rational) as part of our evolutionary history or whether there might be three different versions of each play type in each part of our triune brain. The idea that our brain has evolved in this way is no longer neuroscientists’ way of identifying parts of the brain, however Hughes’s notion is one that stretches our thinking about play types from an evolutionary perspective. Smith (2010:217) outlines some areas of research about play that he considers have not yet been fully developed, for example he considers that ‘we need to work toward more differentiated models for different kinds of play, at different ages, and with various developmental outcomes’. He thinks we need to know more about how rough and tumble play develops and changes through adolescence and he also sees that the role of probably uniquely human ‘pretend play’ is still a mystery as part of evolution. Bateson and Martin (2013:127) make several suggestions for future research including looking at the role of play in the development of complex mental and physical skills and whether play is the best or only way to acquire certain skills. They wonder what the neural basis is for play and playfulness. Howard and McInness (2013:42) also look at the concept of play and playfulness and they explain playfulness as ‘an attitude of mind that affects the approach taken to an activity’ which ‘can be viewed on a continuum of being more or less playful’. They further suggest that ‘where children’s cues have been manipulated to create playful and non-​playful situations, children have consistently shown improved performance in the playful situations and said it felt like play’. The idea of play situations being manipulated in this way, in order to achieve desired outcomes does not sit easily with playwork but Bateson and Martin (2013:96) also see that ‘play and playfulness can contribute indirectly to more conventional forms of learning’ and they suggest (ibid.:84) that playful play fosters ‘divergent thinking and connection of previously unconnected thoughts’ and that (ibid.:88) facilitating play and playfulness can be helpful in generating new ideas…’. Perhaps there is room for the playwork approach to be utilized, on occasions, for the purposes of education as long as this is not seen as the only purpose for play!

Reflective question How do you feel about the notion of manipulating play and playfulness for the purposes of helping children to achieve adult created educational goals?

Reflection opportunity Observe a child or children playing and try to determine whether it appears to be playful and what it is that makes it playful or not playful. Is it necessary for an episode that appears to be play, to be playful in order for it to be play?

57

A New Paradigm for Play

Play and risk-​taking ‘The way that playworkers think and behave about risk is one of the things that make playwork a distinct style of interaction with children’ (Gladwin 2008:68). It is during play that children take their initial risks in life, for example a toddler climbing onto a chair or a child hanging upside down on the branch of a tree and risking injury; children ‘performing’ in front of others and risking ridicule. Gladwin continues (2008:69) that ‘play is one of the arenas where the dominant paradigm of risk avoidance sometimes gives way to an alternative paradigm of voluntary risk taking’. Gordon (2002:6) suggests that there is a sliding scale spectrum of risk-​taking across all children that extends from a child who exhibits virtually no risk-​taking in play to a child that exhibits a high degree of risk-​taking behaviour including Deep Play. She proposes that there are biological, genetic, evolutionary and social reasons as to why this risky or sensation-​seeking behaviour is manifested during play, but she and we do not doubt its importance. Solomon (2014) tells us that neuroscientists Aamodt and Wang (2012:129) believe that children’s risk-​taking may be a developmental factor that ‘tests boundaries and establishes what is safe and what is dangerous’. Professor David Eager and Dr Helen Little (2011) delivered a presentation at the International Public Works Conference, Sydney, Australia, about what they term ‘Risk Deficit Disorder’ (RDD) in which they state thus: The absence of childhood risk is leading to many problems both directly and indirectly: Problems such as obesity, mental health, lack of independence, and a decrease in learning, perception and judgment skills within our children have been cited in the literature.

You will see that some of these link to those problems associated with not playing. Play and risk-​ taking are uniquely intertwined.

Reflections Jacky remembers her daughter and friends aged about fourteen to fifteen sitting on the window ledge of her bedroom with their legs dangling onto the small, unprotected, area above a bay window with their music playing loudly. She later found out that sometimes one or other of them (there only being room for one at a time) would get up and dance provocatively and precariously near the edge, partly to amuse each other but particularly if they could taunt the boy across the road! There were various risk factors involved –​getting into trouble from home; complaints from neighbours; the risk of falling from the top of the bay window; the risk of passers-​by noticing –​all of which added to the value of the risk. Ali recalls two recurring games with her siblings: one outside which comprised climbing out through a bedroom window onto the garage roof, crossing a glass conservatory roof on its joints and then jumping over a paved area containing dustbins onto grass, and one inside which involved climbing over the banisters and walking around the ledge over the stairs and then sliding down the stairs in a washing basket. She still recalls the frisson of fear –​of being caught and/​or of injury –​although neither ever happened.

57

58

58

Reflective Playwork

Gill (2007) points out that it is easier to collect quantitative information about the negative side of risk-​taking because there are many statistics to tell how many children have, for instance, been injured in settings. Most information about the benefits of play is qualitative. For instance Gill (2007:42) talks about some adults who have allowed play-​fighting or gun play worrying about getting blamed if other adults find this unacceptable or if the children get hurt. He suggests however that if children (and he says boys particularly) are deprived of these experiences they may well be less able to keep themselves safe as they grow up as these experiences help them to negotiate tricky social situations. Psychologists (as do ethologists working with animals) believe that children learn to read the communication of their opponents during play-​fighting and learn to understand when something is play or genuinely threatening. Because of the belief in children’s natural desire and need to take risks, playworkers (and we would suggest anybody who works with children at play) must manage risk in a way that balances benefits with risks. Where benefits seem to outweigh risks, measures can be put in place to enable the play to happen. Gladwin (2008:71) says there is a paradox where ‘nobody wants a child to be injured, yet a playground where, no accidents ever happen is unlikely to be meeting children’s play needs’. Many adults find this difficult; particularly those who have lost contact with their own childhood play, forgetting the risks that they themselves took.

Figure 3.7  ‘Yeah’. Permission granted by Elliott

59

A New Paradigm for Play

There are many deeply held and widely recognized beliefs about the potential benefits for children of risk-​taking during play, such as self-​confidence; self-​awareness; capacity to assess risk and therefore develop survival skills; the development of skills associated with the particular risky behaviour such as bike riding, swimming, singing; problem solving and divergent thinking; adaptation skills; life experiences gained (many of us can remember ‘surviving’ various escapades and these stories become part of our life history); social status and so on. Gordon (1999) further suggests that if opportunities for risk-​taking in play, are not made available to children, then those who are natural risk-​takers, will often create their own opportunities which may be more dangerous and also outside the law. We would go further and suggest that if opportunities for risk-​taking in play are not made available for all children, regardless of their natural tendencies children may well not develop the capacity to assess risk for themselves and to become independent. Decreased ability to self-​assess risk means that a child is constantly beholden to others and potentially unable to recognize that which is dangerous. Hughes (2001a) even thinks that children need to confront their own immortality and cosmic insignificance by experiencing risk to find their place in the world. Gill suggests (2007:61) that in many countries there has been a ‘collective failure of nerve about children’s need to learn for themselves how to cope with many types of risks’ and this thought is echoed, in different ways, by others such as Guldberg (2009), Brown and Patte (2013) and Voce (2015).

Reflection –​ Ali Ali recalls visiting an after-​school club in Berlin with others from England, some of whom had apoplexy when they discovered that the children (aged five to eight) made their own way from school to this setting which involved crossing many busy roads and also having (as the German worker told us) many ‘everyday adventures’. Similarly Ali remembers visiting a school in inland Portugal with its unfenced playground on the edge of a sheer cliff and no one there thought this was a problem –​‘children are not stupid’ was their reply to someone who asked why this was allowed.

Playworkers and others have a duty to children and society to find ways to continue researching and influencing views on children’s risk-​taking in play and ways to safely manage this essential need for risky opportunities in children’s play provision.

Reflection –​ Jacky When I  was a child I  liked to hang upside down by the knees from the branch of an old apple tree. Getting onto the branch in the first place was quite difficult and getting into the right position to lower myself took skill. Once there, hanging, I achieved a great sense of success and would stay there for some time trying to swing as far as I could without falling. This required a strong grip of the knees. On one occasion I swung too far and slipped from the branch. In efforts to save myself I grabbed onto the trunk of the tree and slithered down scraping most of my body on the way. I  was really scared that I  had seriously damaged

59

60

60

Reflective Playwork

myself as it hurt a lot and I ran round and round the garden screaming. My mum came to see what had happened and I  remember not wanting to stop running in case she found I was seriously injured. Of course I was not, but I was much grazed and spent a few days in discomfort. I forced myself to climb back up to the branch and hang from it by the knees again in order to prove to myself that I wasn’t too scared to do it. But shortly after that the interest waned and I moved onto other things –​hand stands, walking on tall stilts and so on. Looking back on this as an adult, I realize that I gained a great sense of mastery from this; a sense of pride in my physical ability (I was not altogether very physically able); a knowledge of what I could do rather than what I couldn’t do; an ability to see my world upside down; a knowledge that I could have an accident and survive; a story to tell and so on.

Reflective question Reflect on your own risk-​taking play as a child. What benefits do you think you gained from this?

Resilience Resilience is the ability to recover from and adapt to adversity without it causing long lasting damage. It is believed that freely chosen play helps children to develop resilience. In Lester and Russell’s (2008b:48–​50) section on the nature of resilience they tell us that play ‘operates across adaptive systems’. They further give us a list of interrelated adaptive systems that play supports in relation to developing resilience. These are as follows: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Emotion regulation Promotion of positive feelings The ability to create and respond to uncertainty The ability to make novel connections Learning Attachment to people and places

They go on to explain that ‘taking risks when playing’ allows children to also create their own levels of stress for which they then create coping mechanisms and this in turn builds what Hagland and others (2007:890) term a ‘resilient neurobiological profile’. The brain adapts and enables the child to become more resilient.

Play deprivation If we believe in any of the theories and concepts related to play then we must also believe that play is one of the vitally important processes of a child’s life. If a child is unable or prevented from

61

A New Paradigm for Play

playing freely and flexibly in a rich play environment, then we must also believe that they can suffer from varying degrees of play deprivation. Else (2014) explains that if children are suffering from stress they do what they can to survive before they play, and if the stressful circumstances continue it may in turn lead to them being deprived of play. For example, a child who has run away from home because of abuse and is now living on the streets may not play because they are scared, tired and hungry and out of their depth with their circumstances. They may spend their time working out what to do and trying to find food and somewhere safe to sleep and hide. There would be no physical or emotional time for playing. Equally some children can suffer from a hugely impoverished environment where there is little or no stimulation for play, and this may cause them to be deprived of many different types of play. Some children’s lives are so overly regulated by their parents or schoolteachers enrolling them into different classes, activities or programmes and they may also be so overburdened with school work that they have little or no time spare and are thus deprived of opportunities for play. Sturrock suggests (2003:59) that the consequences of children suffering play deprivation ‘are potentially damaging to the healthy development of those children’ and indeed to the well-​being of our future societies. Depending upon what types of play that children are being deprived of perhaps we are seeing some of the effects, some examples of which are listed below: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Lower levels of physical activity Obesity Poorer ability to cope with stress/​mental health problems Greater reliance on others to solve problems Greater reliance on others for protection Less independence Poorer concentration

The playwork approach to providing for play through the creation of rich play environments, reflective practice and appropriate interventions (see Chapter 5) then can be seen as both preventative and curative, part of the antidote for children who experience play deprivation. Ali illustrates this with a close-​to-​home example.

Reflection A child I have known well had cancer and from the ages of five to seven, he had a triple Hickman line in his chest which meant he could not go swimming or do any body contact sport or rough and tumble play. He keenly felt the loss of all this and almost as soon as he had the line removed and was able to be ‘normal’ (his words) he was getting himself into trouble for what was labelled both aggressive and ‘tell-​t ale’ behaviour. Actually all he was doing was joining in with play-​fighting and so on but he had not had the experience over time (as the others had had) to be able to judge what he was physically capable of. Consequently he was too rough and hurtful to others and wincing and crying when he got shoved back. Years later when he was in his teens he told me that he still considered

61

62

62

Reflective Playwork

himself behind his peers –​he is much more cautious about what his mates deem everyday behaviour. Certainly I see him taking fewer risks than others his age, but from my perspective, the ‘damage’ is more social. The loss of rough and tumble play for over two years at such an important time has had long lasting effects on his peer relationships –​he finds it really hard to socially ‘joust’ and still has difficulty with everyday banter and teasing.

There is some evidence to suggest that children who suffer from major forms of play deprivation or who manifest extremely violent and sadistic forms of play in childhood may be an indicator of later psychopathic, violent or extreme anti-​social behaviour. For instance Brown and Lomax (1969) found in a study of twenty-​five young murderers that there was evidence of play deprivation and/​ or major play abnormalities such as sadism and cruelty in their childhood play.

Reflective questions Are you are aware of children who show or may be showing signs of suffering from play deprivation? What are the signs? How do you think adults should respond to this?

Technology and play Just as there are contradictions in the way that play is perceived in general, so too there are conflicting views about the dangers and benefits to children and young people of playing with various forms of technology, such as mobile phones, tablets, computers, televisions, music players and so on. Indeed some people think that these do not provide what we consider to be play. for example, Lillemyr (2009:33) suggests that although ‘computer games can seem like play, (they) nonetheless do not need to function completely as play in the strict definition of the word’ and in his section on games with rules Smith (2010:12) suggests that it does seem appropriate to refer to computer games as games and not computer play. If we look at adult concerns we find that some are not so much perturbed about children and young people playing with various pieces of technology as they are by the fact that they prevent children and young people from engaging in more traditional physical and imaginative forms of play. Brown and Patte (2013:27) for instance show concern that electronic media has replaced children and young people’s opportunities for engaging in more active, social and creative play and is contributing to a sedentary, therefore unhealthy lifestyle. Else (2014:101–​2) quoting Campbell (2013) tells us that ‘half of all UK 7 year olds are sedentary for six to seven hours a day and failing to undertake the recommended daily levels of physical activity and that they are often “ ‘glued to screens” ’. Interestingly Oyster (2015:2) talks about ‘tradeoffs’: that is if children and young people are not watching TV, would they necessarily be engaging in those ‘better things’ that adults consider more appropriate. We think not necessarily so!

63

A New Paradigm for Play

Another concern (which we have addressed elsewhere [2016]) is related to the sexualization of childhood which it is thought is being promoted both through lyrics of songs and ‘sexy’ videos that accompany them and the accessibility of online pornography. Olfman (2009:1), in her introduction, talks of childhood in the United States as previously being considered a ‘unique and vulnerable stage of development’ (we would anyway query this for children all over the world) but now considers that ‘children’s creative outdoor play is being replaced by media entertainment that is saturated with sex, violence and gender stereotyping’. There are also major concerns about the use of mobile phones and social media for ‘sexting’, cyber bullying and online grooming and there have been national and even international agencies set up to deal with these sorts of problems. However there are many who see technology as a very positive force within children’s and young people’s lives and think that adults have the problem. Guldberg (2009:118–​9) notes that ‘hard evidence of the media’s ominous effects on young children is sorely lacking’ and quoting from Marsh et al. (2005:11) suggests that ‘often anxieties about media and young people are based on misinformation and nervousness ...’. Guldberg (ibid.:123–​5) believes that children and young people look for ways of ‘circumventing adult control’ and that ‘teens are (always) looking for ways of socializing with their peers whilst being confined’ and ‘research indicates that children and young people may be a little bit more savvy than most policy makers and the child protection industry assume’ although she acknowledges that there may sometimes be problems. Livingstone (2016:3) also tells us that her research suggests that ‘digital devices and the uses they put them to have become teenagers’ way of asserting their agency –​a shield from bossy parents or annoying younger siblings or seemingly critical teachers, a means to connect with sympathetic friends or catch up with ongoing peer drama’. She suggests that we might ‘spend less time worrying about what they get up to and more time discussing challenges that lie ahead in an increasingly connected world.’ Lanza (2012) sees very positive uses of the mobile phone (and GPS APS) for enabling children and young people to safely ‘roam away from home (with) adult supervision’ at an earlier age than many parents and carers these days would otherwise feel comfortable with. This roaming supports their independence and self-​reliance and aids family communication. However he does believe that the use of mobile phones should come with restrictions and Johnson (2013) urges a balanced and considered approach to the playing of video games. He believes that there are positive benefits such as improvements in mood; reductions in stress; feelings of competence and autonomy; social well-​being and relatedness. He suggests that co-​operative video games increase brain activity for younger people, but he does say that ‘dysfunctional patterns of play are related to certain basic needs (competence, autonomy and relatedness) not being met’ and that moderate video game playing has the best results. Else (2014:104) puts it well when urging a sense of proportion when it comes to using technology as part of play; balancing activities –​‘play indoors a bit, play outdoors a bit, play passively a bit, play actively a bit’. We can’t ‘un-​invent computers’ and children have to experience them’. We end with what children have to say in Voce’s pertinent anecdote (2015:161)  –​after a dad discovers his sons playing Minecraft, linked to a friend in another city via Skype –​inhabiting a virtual world that they have constructed themselves and involving themselves in treasure hunts, survival quests, general ‘mayhem and mischief ’ and much laughter –​he asks ‘What’s the point of

63

64

64

Reflective Playwork

Minecraft?’ to which the older boy replies, ‘It’s a game dad –​the best game ever. You might as well ask, “what’s the point of life?” ’ In this chapter we have examined some of the widely accepted concepts that currently inform playwork practice. We have looked at the whole process of playing; that which constitutes play behaviour; the links between play and risk-​taking; the consequences of play deprivation and the dangers and benefits of technology and play. As time advances, thinking on these complex notions will also advance and help us to better understand what is going on when children play and therefore how to better serve them. In order to understand children’s play it is important to think about children. Chapter 4 does just that.

Further reading/​Resources Brown, F. and Taylor, C. (eds) (2008), Foundations of Playwork, Berkshire, England: Open University Press McGraw-​Hill Education Hughes, B. (2001), The First Claim –​A Framework for Playwork Quality Assessment, Cardiff: Play Wales. Hughes, B. (2002a), A Playworkers Taxonomy of Play Types, 2nd edition, London: Play Link. Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/3-observationof-a-particular-child-in-a-preschool-setting/

65

newgenprepdf

4 The Child

Chapter Outline Introduction What is a child? Child development and post-​developmental theories The sociology of childhood How are children perceived by professionals?

65 66 70 73 74

Introduction This chapter will analyse what we understand is meant by the word ‘child’ and equally goes on to explore the concept of childhood and how this has changed through history and across the world and continues to do so. We summarize the main theories of child development and how these came about. We look at a sociology of childhood as well as at how the theories and current trends have affected our perceptions of children today. The title of this chapter is in itself a misnomer, because there is no such being as ‘the child’ –​ indeed childhood and therefore the concept of ‘the child’ is a social construct. That is ‘the understanding that childhood is not a natural process, rather it is society which decides when a child is a child and when a child becomes an adult’ (Norozi and Moen 2016:5) and this varies from culture to culture and country to country and can be linked to constructs of gender and motherhood which also vary historically and in different societies. Many of us would readily agree that every child is a unique individual with their own needs and interests. But, as with many things, there is a difference between ‘espoused theory’ and ‘theory in practice’ (Argyris and Schon 1974:6–​7), or to put it more crudely there is a contrast between what we say or think and what we do. This distinction is usually not intentional because we often do not recognize it exists. We ‘see through a glass darkly’ (1Cor. 13:2) because to be truly objective about who children are requires us to sit outside our experiences, our culture, our society and our time. We need to, as Finlay (2008:6) suggests, ‘engage in critical

66

66

Reflective Playwork

self-​reflection: reflecting critically on the impact of (our) own background, assumptions, positioning, feelings, behaviour while also attending to the impact of the wider organisational, discursive, ideological and political context’. This chapter takes us on a more historical journey to see where our current understanding about children has come from and how this view of the child affects our playwork.

What is a child? So what are our views? What do we think a child is? How do children differ from adults? Are the differences purely physiological? What is an adult? How does a child become an adult and when? Can we be sure of any of our answers to these questions?

Reflective questions We will all have been influenced in many ways to perceive children in the ways that we each do. How do you ‘see’ children? How would you describe them? Which of the following statements do you find yourself agreeing or disagreeing with? Children will be wild if they do not have firm boundaries Children should always be listened to Children are adults in the making Children learn how to behave from adults Children learn how to behave from children Children don’t know what’s good for them Children can keep themselves safe Children need to learn respect Children are thoughtful, responsible, capable people Children have their own culture, peculiar to themselves

Of course in reality, none of these and other such statements can be either true or false, but our answers to them can sometimes show the trends and influences in our own attitudes towards children and if we work or live with children, then we should make efforts to recognize and question these patterns and pressures. Who are children really? What are their needs and capabilities? What is a ‘good’ childhood? Moss and Petrie stated some years ago that ‘no critical questions are asked about what might constitute a good childhood and how public provision for children might contribute to this’ (2002:87) and we’re not sure that we’ve made much progress since then despite a lot of early intervention programmes. Are children blank pages  –​unformed people ‘who through literacy, education, reason, self-​ control and shame may be made into a civilised adult’? (Postman 1994:59). Or are children innocents, important in their own right and born with ‘capacities for candour, curiosity and spontaneity’ (Postman 1994:59) with ‘access to levels of understanding greater than those available for

67

The Child

adults’? (Cunningham 2006:134). These two opposing views about children’s nature that embody the Protestant and Romantic movements in the eighteenth century still have influence and are still largely unresolved today in the developed world. However when considering the child we need to take account of other ideas and theories. For instance from a sociological viewpoint, the perspective of interpretive reproduction, ‘children are always participating in and are part of two cultures –​their own and adults –​and these cultures are intricately interwoven’ (Corsaro 2011:489) which suggests a third dynamic, where ‘socialization is not only a matter of individual adaptation and internalization (on the part of the child), but also a process of appropriation, reinvention, and reproduction’. Children and adults are constructing their knowledge and understanding together, thereby developing a shared culture. Our view of children cannot help but be coloured by past and current societal attitudes and these too have changed and are changing rapidly. The lives of children a hundred years ago, fifty years ago and even twenty years ago were very different and many of these differences are not necessarily due to external situations or conditions but to the ways they are perceived and therefore treated by adults. This is still the case the world over –​the prevailing needs and beliefs of adults in each society will dictate the ways in which children lead their lives. Children can hold great responsibility or none, can look after themselves or be looked after, can have much freedom or very little, can question and help shape social policy or be its recipients, can wage war or be its victims. It does seem to us that in much of the Western world at least, the most prevalent attitude towards children is a patronizing one –​however ‘positively’ or ‘negatively’ this might be expressed –​adults ‘know best’. But do they? Just because we were children once, does that equip us to understand children and childhood? Just because we are adults now, does that entitle us to define and decide who children are and what they shall or shall not do?

Reflective questions Stop and think for a moment about what you personally think about children and who they are and how they should be treated. Where did your views come from? Your own childhood experiences? Your parents? Your work experiences as an adult? Books? The media? Children you see around you today?

A History of Childhood Much has been written in the last few decades about children in some parts of the world both in the present and in the past. Volumes on the history and social constructions of childhood and child development theories –​many of them conflicting –​now abound and it is not the purpose of this chapter to specifically explore or champion any of these, but to draw attention to some of the concepts therein. It is worth bearing in mind, however, that it is adults who have written the majority of these tomes about children; children themselves have little or no contribution.

67

68

68

Reflective Playwork

The very idea of childhood as a specific and separate time to adulthood is a moving feast and indeed the concept of adolescence as another distinct phase is fairly recent and a subject of regular debate. Speaking of American colonial children (1600–​1775), Ehrenreich and English (2005:1) write thus: Today, a four year-​old who can tie his or her shoes is impressive. In colonial times, four-​year-​old girls knitted stockings and mittens and could produce intricate embroidery: at age six they spun wool. A good, industrious little girl was called ‘Mrs.’ instead of ‘Miss’ in appreciation of her contribution to the family economy: she was not, strictly speaking, a child.

Aries was an influential historian in the 1960s and in his work titled Centuries of Childhood he argues that childhood had been invented in Europe in the fifteenth to eighteenth centuries. Prior to this, children –​once they could walk and talk –​seemed to have been regarded as miniature adults and they were therefore not shielded or removed from any of the realities of life, harsh or otherwise. During these centuries, however, Aries states that attitudes slowly changed and children began to be seen as different to adults, with specific needs for care, protection and education. This idea of the invention of childhood inspired others and Lloyd de Mause’s The History of Childhood and then Stone’s The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500–​1800 took up the theme, examining parochial, biographical and educational texts and records and even artwork for evidence of the everyday lives and attitudes of adults and children. Postman further contributed by arguing that the concept of childhood as a different state to adulthood was a direct result of the birth of literacy because 1. 2. 3. 4.

the communication of ideas was no longer solely oral and therefore could be more widespread; society became divided into the literate and the illiterate; places of learning were created for those who wanted to become literate; and these places eventually became schools –​for children.

In the medieval world Postman (1994: 36) says, There had been no need for the idea of childhood for everyone shared the same information environment and therefore lived in the same social and intellectual world. But as the printing press played out its hand, it became obvious that a new kind of adulthood had been invented. From print onward the young would have to become adults and they would have to do it by learning to read, by entering the world of typography. And in order to accomplish that they would require education. Therefore European civilisation reinvented schools and by so doing it made childhood a necessity. (Emphasis in original)

The detail contained in all these volumes is impressive and the case often well put, but Aries, de Mause and Stone also all argue from a ‘progressive’ perspective, that is they feel that adult treatment of children has vastly improved with time. Pollock has been critical of this approach and in her Forgotten Children: Parent-​child Relations 1500–​1900 in which she claims that the evidence put forward can be interpreted very differently when put into the social and religious contexts of the time; for example many diaries and letters feature only middle-​class and/​or male perspectives, who therefore write with a particular emphasis.

69

The Child

Her view is that, as now, most parents cared for their children and did their best for them and she cites numerous examples of this throughout history. Perhaps then what has changed for European children in the past few hundred years is not so much a growth in parental care but a slow recognition in wider society that children are a group in society that have certain needs. Shorter (1976) certainly felt that Rousseau’s influence in the eighteenth century made a difference as this circulated ideas about romantic love and proper child care which provoked greater maternal attachment. Over time legislation has evolved to ensure the diverse needs of children are addressed and more recently there has been acceptance of children having legal rights and entitlements, embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). This of course has happened and continues to happen for other groups in society –​women, disabled people, ethnic minority groups and so on. Perhaps the mark of a ‘civilized’ society is not the way that individual parents care for their children, but the way society itself regards and treats them. In her essay on the history of childhood, Sharnette (1996:1) puts it thus: It is incredibly difficult for historians to reconstruct the life of a child, much more the ‘experience’ of being a child… Advice literature, journals and letters, are so open to differing interpretations, that historians have divided over major issues such as whether children were loved and wanted in the past, the way parents viewed their children, and the treatment they received.

Cunningham’s book The Invention of Childhood covers a thousand years of childhood and does feature children’s own stories and comments where these have been found, in a heart-​warming attempt to give children of the past their own voice. A few other historians have also tried to right the balance and have been determined to focus on children’s own actions and narratives (see e.g. Hanawalt 1993 and Nasaw 1986). Whatever the truth about adults feelings and attitudes towards children, there is no doubt, however, that over time children were slowly separated from adults and no longer allowed the same access to the ‘adult’ world with its values, appetites and secrets. Postman contends that this gave rise to a ‘well-​developed idea of shame’ (1994:9) a ‘not in front of the children’ ethic that became ingrained in adults and has perhaps given us the ‘adults-​know-​best’ perspective so widespread today. Of course the ability to read and the availability of books also meant that ideas about the needs and nature of children –​and how best to rear them –​began to be written and by the end of the eighteenth century there was much printed instruction and advice. This still goes on today of course –​ideas on what is and is not good for children have their day and can sometimes influence whole generations before the next ‘new’ ideas emerge. Just within the last century, from King (1934) to Spock (1945) to Liedloff (1975) to Leach (1989), parents have been cajoled to bottle feed then breast feed, to physically punish children and then to reason with them, to make them eat their greens and then to give them choice, to give them freedom to roam and then to rein them in and protect them. ‘Childhood may be a biological fact (but) the way in which it is understood and lived is socially determined, within an actively negotiated set of social relations’ (Moss and Petrie 2002:20).

69

70

70

Reflective Playwork

Reflective questions What are the current governing ideas in your society on rearing children and what is their impact? Which ones do you agree with and why? Which ones do you not agree with and why? Where do these ideas come from? Many of us don’t recognize or question these ideas without the opportunity to read about, travel to or meet others from societies that are different to our own.

Child development and post-​developmental theories Just as there have been diverse views on children’s historical lives, there have been proposed many theories on children’s development and subsequent debates on the research methodologies behind these. These theories have been categorized in a number of ways, with the most simple being ‘nature’ and ‘nurture’; that is children develop according to their preordained genetic code, or, their development is shaped by what and who is around them and their own consequent passive or active reactions and responses. The nature-​nurture debate has raged for decades, although it is now generally accepted –​even on both sides –​that both are true. Within the ‘nature school’ are the maturationists; those who believe that development has a biological basis and is a naturally occurring process in healthy children. Beginning with Gesell (1943), the maturationists gave us the ‘ages and stages’ perspective; the developmental milestones that all children should achieve and were very influential in the 1950s. This is now viewed more flexibly as we have recognized that these norms can vary widely according to individual interest and cultural practices (although we have visited a number of crèches and early years centres where such flexibility is not that obvious). As Lindon says, ‘it is possible to build up a flexible use of developmental norms without signing up to rigid maturational theory’ (2007:20) Also residing mostly within the ‘nature school’ are the biologists and zoologists that have made connections between animal and human development. These led to the following theories: 1. Attachment Theory (Bowlby 1969) –​the concept that without a strong and instinctive emotional bond with another (usually mother, but it is now understood that this is not exclusively the case), mammals will fail to thrive. 2. Practice Theory (Groos 1901, Young 1978) –​this suggests that instincts and behaviour patterns essential for survival have to be practised in early life and that this naturally occurs through playing. 3. Recapitulation Theory (Hall 1904, Reaney 1916, Wilber 1996) –​the idea that children naturally ‘play out’ the previous stages of human history as they grow up, for example animal, savage, nomad, pastoral and tribal, in order to adapt to the present and continue to evolve as a species. Hughes (2012) has recently built on this to propose that the breadth of recapitulative play is essential for all aspects of human health and that deprivation of this will have serious evolutionary consequences.

71

The Child

4. Neuroscience  –​recent and ongoing research in this fascinating area looks into how the brain grows and works and affects behaviour and development. Brain growth occurs through stimulating millions of neural connections which in turn help to make patterns of meaning –​these patterns are continually checked, changed and renewed as new information, insights and connections are added. The brain is designed to solve problems and keep us alert, alive and able. Play is highly significant in promoting brain growth because its free and random nature stimulates more neural connections and more checking of neural pathways (see Burghardt 2005). On the nurture side of the fence, there are theorists who believe that a child’s environment influences their learning and behaviour –​the environmentalists who think that children are passive recipients of experience and the constructivists who think that children actively respond to and create new experiences. These can all be loosely divided into three theory types.

1. Learning theory a) Behaviourism –​behaviourists such as Watson (1970) and Skinner (1953) stated that humans develop by learning through experiences and that such experiences can therefore be controlled in order to produce or ‘condition’ the desired growth or learning. Conditioning operates by causing and reinforcing certain responses by linking them to specific stimuli and/​or rewards. Bandura (1977) took this further to add the process of ‘modelling’ –​children will closely observe the behaviour and expressions of others (children and adults) and then copy these, including the underlying beliefs and ideas that these may embody. b) Cognitive development –​Piaget (1969) proposed that children actively construct their own understanding in different ways at different ages, but individually exploring and experiencing what is around them. The details of his stages are now mostly disputed, but his ideas were radical at the time and generated a lot of further research. c) Social interactionist approach –​Vygotsky (1994) was very interested in how children both teach and learn through social interaction with each other and also with adults –​what he called the zone of proximal development. Bruner (1986) developed this perspective to help adults be observant and sensitive to children’s interests and therefore provide materials for them to explore and return to and also to spark new ideas or ways of using them.

Reflective question Children do not play in order to learn, but they certainly learn through play and seek out stimulation through their playing. They will examine and investigate the world around them through using all their senses, their minds and their bodies. They will imitate others and try out all kinds of roles and explore different values in order to comprehend their meaning and significance. Can you think of play you have seen that fits here?

71

72

72

Reflective Playwork

2.  Psychoanalytic theory Theories under this heading are many and diverse but the basic tenet is that behaviour (and therefore development) is influenced by our feelings and thoughts, many of which are unconscious and due to previous and sometimes traumatic experiences. Such experiences, especially in early childhood, when children are too young to make full sense of them and may therefore negatively interpret or respond to them, can lead to defence mechanisms, suppression, anxiety, aggression and feelings of inferiority, if not understood, treated or resolved through play. Freud (1914) was the main instigator of psychoanalytic tradition, although his approach has significantly diversified. Erikson (1950) introduced the concept of psychosocial developmental stages where children have to find the balance between opposing dilemmas at different ages; for example, ‘is this person trustworthy or not?’ or ‘shall I do what I want or what someone else wants?’

Reflective questions Children themselves work hard at making sense of their experiences and play is their natural medium for doing so. They ‘play out’ things that frighten and confuse them (this is why so many play narratives are violent and regularly have battles between goodies and baddies). They will also use fantasy play to make reality more manageable and feel more in control of themselves and events around them –​again their play content often features aliens, monsters, fairies and superheroes. Can you think of examples of play you have seen and/​or heard recently that show this?

3.  Socio-​cultural theory This approach has evolved over the past few decades, arguing that children cannot develop apart from the groups and systems they belong to  –​how they each physically, emotionally, socially, intellectually and spiritually develop is all affected by family culture, educational ethos, friendship dynamics, community relations, religious expectations, current political strategies and so on. Bronfenbrenner (1979) presented a model of concentric circles to illustrate the complexity of individual human development within an ever-​changing society within an evolving world. Some theories have moved away from developmentalism to a post-​developmental position concentrating on children’s capabilities as active citizens.

4.  Interpretive reproduction theory This approach believes that children create aspects of culture from their own creativity and by taking aspects of adult culture and adapting it. Corsaro (2011) explains the term thus: I mean interpretive to suggest the innovative and creative aspects of children’s participation in society, and, in fact, children as young as two create and participate in their peer cultures by appropriating

73

The Child

information from the adult world to address their unique peer concerns. I mean by reproduction the idea that children do not simply internalize society and culture, but they actively contribute to cultural production and change.

5.  Social integrationist theory The social integrationist model is a dynamic system where typically children cue their parents into supplying the appropriate language experience that they require for language advancement –​very much like cuing for play.

Reflective question Children’s social play is intriguing and complex. They develop cues, codes and rules and secret societies that keep experimenting with concepts of ownership, membership, democracy and justice. They particularly love to test out the power of adults whilst still externally conforming to adult rules and come up with highly organized small ‘rebellions’ that achieve this without overt violation. Can you describe examples from your own childhood –​or more recent incidents you have seen from other children?

We would do well to apply ‘Critical Theory’ which would have us critically think about and question all theories that relate to the way that children develop, as individuals or as players in their social worlds and the world at large as they inform much of our practice. Without this critical analysis and subsequent challenge, Nolan and Raban (2015:12) note that Apple (2004) points out in relation to childhood education and care settings that ‘some practices, based on cultural, political and economic reproduction, might remain for no good reason’. Ongoing critical thinking and questioning about how we work with children, or what we call reflexive reflective practice, enables us to uncover issues in the way that we practice based on potentially false premises constructed through our own experiences, views and opinions and without true knowledge of how children really are.

The sociology of childhood Older sociological models viewed children as either passive (and therefore naturally integrated by adults into society) or potentially threatening (and therefore shaped by the adults in their lives and made-​to-​fit into society). Here again we see the same black-​and-​white views about children. However, many sociologists have moved away from the idea that socialization is an individual process where the whole point is to grow up and become an adult. As Rich-​Harris says, ‘a child’s goal is not to become a successful adult, any more than a prisoner’s goal is to become a successful guard: a child’s goal is to be a successful child’ (1998:198). Sociologists such as Mayall (2002),

73

74

74

Reflective Playwork

Corsaro (2005), Wyness (2006), Jones (2009) and Kane (2013) have looked at children as a social group existing in the present and see children negotiating, sharing and creating culture ‘by creatively taking or appropriating information from the adult world to address their own peer concerns...they are not simply internalising society and culture but actively contributing to cultural production and change’ (Corsaro 2005:18). In other post-​developmental words, children are not just adults-​in-​the-​making –​their lives are valid and contributory throughout their childhood, and they create their own rules and methods of communication that are different to adults, reflecting their different needs, interests and concerns whilst growing up. Rich-​Harris admirably argues that children are not socialized and brought up by their parents, but by other children. Children are not incompetent members of the adult society: they are competent members of their own society, which has its own standards and culture…loosely based on the majority adult culture within which it exists. But it adapts the majority adult culture to its own purposes and it includes elements that are lacking in the adult culture. And like all cultures, it is a joint production. (1998:199)

Children’s free time with each other is highly prized and valued –​they make ‘persistent attempts to gain control of their lives and they always attempt to share that control with each other’ (Corsaro 2005:134) Children are active players in their lives and they experience the world in a different way. If we are to work with and to understand children, we have to try and enter their world and see it through their eyes, for it is truly a different place. It is helpful to be in touch with how we thought and felt as a child, but we must not assume that childhood is the same for each generation or each culture –​it is not. When we come from a position of profound respect for children and a willingness to learn from them and about them, we will find that our conception of who they are also changes. We will find along with Malaguzzi that ‘our image of the child is rich in potential, strong, powerful, competent and connected to adults and other children’ (1993:10).

How are children perceived by professionals? How does all this affect how we personally relate to and perceive children? All these different theories have their place in a wider understanding of how children develop. A holistic approach recognizes that human development is not linear but probably more like a spider’s web where many diverse experiences all reverberate across and connect to those that have gone before. Moss and Petrie say that ‘particular disciplines, professions, agencies, settings and policy areas each create or construct particular versions of childhood and images of the child shaped by their own theories, understandings and perspectives’(2002:20). In other words, adults in different organizations see children through organizational glasses as a particular kind of child. So rather than see lots of individual unique human beings, we see certain sorts-​of-​children. For example, in early years we see ‘the toddler’, ‘the preschooler’ (which in itself seems to describe an unfulfilled stage that will only gain status with school attendance), the ‘child-​with-​working-​ parents’. In Social Services we hear about ‘the newly-​arrived child’, ‘the looked-​after child’ and

75

The Child

‘the abused child’. In Health Trusts we talk about ‘the hyperactive child’ and ‘the disabled child’. In Education we discuss ‘children with learning difficulties’ and ‘children with behavioural problems’ and ‘children from lone-​parent or step-​families’. These are all labels that confine and stereotype individual children, yet conversations and comments like ‘he’s fostered so he’ll have all kinds of issues then…’ and ‘she’s got Asperger’s syndrome –​ have we got enough staff to cope?’ occur every day across the children’s workforce without us batting an eyelid. We think we know a child because we’ve met their family, know where they live, what language they speak or what religion they belong to. But these are all social constructs that can stop us seeing the individual whole child before us. Children are being viewed through the lens of the service providing for them, which can never give the whole picture.

Figure 4.1  ‘Who is this child?’. Permission granted by Law

Do we also have a certain sort-​of-​child in Playwork? Is our image of ‘the freely playing child’ any more or less accurate? Is it true that all children are naturally adventurous –​cut up worms/​ love rain? Could the older ones amongst us just be expressing ‘the nostalgic and idealised view the middle-​class and the middle-​aged have of their own apparently tranquil post-​war upbringing’? (Brockliss and Rousseau 2003:4). Playworkers who are truly reflective will recognize that they cannot be immune from both external and internal influences and strive to develop a greater awareness of these in their own thinking and practice. We have to be prepared to learn from children and from our feelings –​we may discover that some of our deeply held ‘musts’ are clearly not right for our children (and probably never were for us either).

75

76

76

Reflective Playwork

So what do we in playwork make of all this? Is there a ‘right’ image of children? What messages do we –​consciously or unconsciously –​give out to children about who they are? Certainly we need to have a holistic approach and set out to ‘address the whole child; the child with body, mind, emotions, creativity, history and social identity. This is not the child only of emotions –​the psychotherapeutic approach; or only of the body –​the medical approach; or only of the mind –​the traditional teaching approach’ (Moss and Petrie 2002:143). Do those of us in the playwork sector also need to add here –​‘nor only of the child at play, the playwork approach’? Do we sometimes focus so much on play that we lose sight of the whole child? Whilst those of us who work with children may be subject to or influenced by particular constructs, we look here at two societal views in the developed world about children. The first is that they are ‘weak, poor and needy’ (Moss and Petrie 2002:55). This is not to say that there are not people and organizations who question this and who lobby for children’s rights and involvement in society. But the existence of such campaigning illustrates the nature of this prevailing belief that children are passive, incomplete and dependent and they at all times need our care and our protection. The second view is that children are increasingly out of control, disrespectful and delinquent. We only need to get a selection of newspapers in any one week and watch both local and national news to see both these views manifested. We will see examples like ‘brave’ and ‘suffering’ children with terminal illnesses or disabilities; children as powerless victims of abuse or exploitation; anxiety-​ridden parents who cannot let their children out of their sight lest a paedophile abduct them. And we will see other examples of aggressive and/​or abusive children, of bullying and gang culture, of drunken teenagers, shootings on the streets and residents fearful of the ‘local yobs’. As Gill put it recently, ‘Adult anxieties typically focus on children’s vulnerability, but they can also portray children as villains, again recasting normal childhood experiences as something more sinister’ (2007:11). What we are far less likely to see and read about are the real stories of real children’s lives and their actual achievements and genuine problems. Instead children themselves get both sentimentalized for their courage and diminished for their neediness, or they get blamed and vilified for their behaviours. As a result, society is successfully distracted from (a) hearing the real voices of everyday children and (b) facing the substantive and changing issues that affect children today. So we should not be surprised that children end up being perceived as an ‘out-​group’, that is inferior and not worthy of the same respect as adults. Our view –​based on our life experiences of over half a century, where we have seen issues like sexism and racism come to the political and societal fore –​is that children are the most oppressed group in many societies. Jones lists adult attitudes that have been noted in research on children’s participation (2009:10): ●● ●● ●●

●●

Perceptions of children’s capacities that see them as incapable The idea that children are best served by adult judgements and opinions The idea that adult perceptions about children’s lives are more valid than those of children themselves Concerns that children will harm themselves, or others, if not governed by adult decision-​making

77

The Child ●● ●● ●●

The confining and restricting effects that stereotyping can have Unwillingness to adapt or change processes to enable children’s participation A desire to maintain authority over children

If we’re honest, many of us will recognize these attitudes in ourselves and adults around us. When we come across the opposite it is at least notable if not quite shocking.

Reflection–​ Ali I visited Istanbul on a study tour a few years ago and remember standing on our first day outside our hotel in the street waiting with some colleagues. There were a couple of boys playing football in the street accompanied by lots of laughter. One rather errant kick sent the ball flying towards the hotel steps where it knocked over a potted plant with a crash and rolled into the hotel foyer. We heard a shout from inside and the sound of approaching footsteps and we all waited for some adult to come out and heartily tell the boys off. To our astonishment, a male receptionist came out with the ball and joined in their game! We continued to find high tolerance levels and respect from adults to children during our time there and kept saying to each other how sad it was that this surprised us. We had many conversations with adults that week who were anxious to learn from the West and from us, and we found ourselves over and over encouraging them not to lose the approach to children they had and not to assume that the West knew better in this regard.

Reflective questions Test this out for yourself. Ask a number of different people to list as many phrases or statements as they can, they that have heard adults over the years saying (a)  to children and (b) about children. What responses do you get?

When we have posed these questions ourselves to learners in various parts of the United Kingdom, nearly all the statements have been negative and even the positive ones were patronizing. There was also some comfortable laughter at many of the phrases. Can you imagine, however, conducting the same exercise with the focus on some other societal or minority group and getting such an easy and overwhelmingly annulling response? You may feel that we are painting too dark a picture and that we are ignoring political initiatives to improve children’s lives such as the United Nations Convention for the Rights of the Child and their recent General Comment (2013) to alert the world to children’s need and right to play. Or that we are discounting closer to home programmes for young children like America’s ‘Head Start’ and ‘Every Child Matters’ in the United Kingdom? Surely these represent real progress? We don’t doubt there are lots of people with a genuine commitment to children’s rights and participation and we know there are great and applaudable examples of good practice and some fantastic projects. But

77

78

78

Reflective Playwork

on the macro level, many good intentions at political level don’t change attitudes on the ground and are also still coming from a superior perspective of what can and should be done for children. It is less often that we hear the rhetoric of true participation, working with children to effect change. Wyness discusses children’s welfare rights and also their rights to self-​determination. Of the latter he says that ‘whilst these … are starting to gain a foothold in global and national child policy, there is much less support for them. A child’s right to self-​determination is still a peripheral feature of child policy and common discourse on childhood’ (2006:205).

Reflective questions Which of these rights does the organization you work mostly uphold? Do their governing documents mostly feature how we care for children (their welfare rights)? Do they support children’s involvement in decision-​making and find ways to truly listen to their views (their self-​determination rights)?

Consultation has been a buzzword in recent years and programmes to find out children’s views have abounded. Sadly many of these have taken little account of the relationship between the consulting adult and the child ‘consultee’. Unless this relationship is a truly equal one, where the adult genuinely listens and recognizes that children’s perspectives differ from those of adults, consultation will be of no value, because the child will only say what the adult wants to hear –​if she or he speaks at all. As Kilderry (in press) says, ‘Critical, reflexive researchers need to reflect on the processes which produce children’s voices in research, the power imbalances that shape them and the ideological contexts which inform their production and reception, or in other words issues of representation.’ Many of these consultations have also taken little account of who originated the topic and why and therefore the subject is almost always chosen by adults for adult reasons and may be of little or no interest or concern to children themselves. This seems to still perpetuate the old adage of children being seen and not heard. Perhaps it is not all doom and gloom however; Thorne (2002:251) believes that ‘critical perspectives on the marginalisation of children were inspired by earlier political movements on behalf of other subordinated groups such as colonized peoples, racial-​ethnic minorities and women. These critical approaches helped open attention to the silencing of children and to the goal of bringing them to voice.’ Certainly there are some documented research and participation projects that are challenging these prevailing adult attitudes and seeking to give children a real say in their lives (see Jones 2009) and Kane comments on ‘the emphasis on democracy and participation in the governing documents for school-​age childcare in Norway, Sweden and Denmark’ (2015:14). So here we are, nearing the end of a chapter entitled ‘The Child’, and yet all we have reviewed are adults’ perspectives of children. As Wyness says, ‘we come up against the perennial problem of ‘second-​hand data in child research …. we learn about how children view their worlds from the perspective of significant figures’ (2006:187). What do children make of all this? How do they see themselves? Whilst the adult world around them wrestles with how best to nurture them and/​or discipline them, what do children say and feel about their lives?

79

The Child

Reflection –​ Jacky Spending time with one of my grandsons aged nine and apropos of nothing he asked, ‘Did you like school when you were young Gran?’ I answered, ‘I liked my junior school but I wasn’t very keen on school when I got to my secondary school. Do you like school?’ He answered, ‘No I hate it’. ‘Oh dear, what’s wrong with it then?’ ‘The school dinners are disgusting.’ ‘What about the rest of it –​your friends, playtime, the lessons, your teachers?’ ‘Oh they’re alright!’ he said. I discussed this later with my daughter and we laughed because my grandson now takes packed lunches as he hates the school meals so much. So this then requires some adult interpretation  –​food is very important to him (the reason he enjoys being on the school quiz team is because they get jammy dodger biscuits) and therefore, we surmised, that colours his view of all aspects of school. However we could well be wrong as he might just have told me about the food because he didn’t want to say he didn’t like the teachers or lessons. He will realize that his mum and dad want him to enjoy school. This is a simple illustration of how hard it can be to really interpret children’s views.

Duncan (2015:68) from her research based on ‘perspectives on play as revealed through children’s drawings’ suggests that ‘from a child’s perspective what defines play is not a predetermined or specific activity but the nature of the engagement (its affect, its context, the significant others, or the objects involved) in any activity and the interactions between them’. However this again is an adult interpretation of children’s drawings. IPA Scotland (2011) carried out thirty-​six workshops where children, of primary school age, played games, drew pictures and made models as they discussed play in relation to who they play with, what they play, where they play, when they play and why it is important to them. In their own words –​Boy aged six: ‘I like playing with my brother –​pushing him around in the laundry basket, that’s my favourite game. I don’t know what it’s called; just the “pushing my brother around in the laundry basket game”.’ Girl aged ten: ‘You just have to know how to entertain yourself.’ Boy aged five: ‘It’s not good to have adults around when you’re playing because they stop you doing secret stuff…it spoils the game.’ Girl aged eight: ‘You don’t always need toys to play; you can play with your imagination.’ Girl aged nine: ‘Bullies stop you playing because you have to sneak away in case they see you.’ Boy aged six: ‘I have homework, music and art clubs. I don’t have much time for just playing.’ Boy aged seven: ‘Because if you don’t play, you don’t get any fun.’ We could interpret these but choose to leave them unadulterated. As popular wisdom has it, Plato said, ‘you can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation’.

Reflective questions What was your image of yourself as a child –​how did you see yourself? Do you think others saw you like this? Do you have the same image of your friends at the time? Thinking about children now –​especially those you work with –​what is your image of them? Is it the same or different to that you have of yourself and other children in the past? Which images are accurate and how do you know? Does the organization you work in influence this positively or negatively?

79

80

80

Reflective Playwork

There are –​as there usually are in each generation –​a number of issues and concerns about children today. We both remember adults worrying about whether television was suitable for children to watch and the big debates about the nine o’clock watershed. Ali remembers concern about the graphically gruesome pictures of the American civil war on the sweet cigarette cards that children collected –​(at that time no one was bothered about whether pretending to ‘smoke’ sweet cigarettes was a bad thing)! Jacky remembers the furore around ‘rock and roll’ as being corrupting of youth morals; the pirate radio stations that could only be listened to in secret because they were considered subversive (usually on transistor radios under the bedcovers) and the notion that wearing hot pants or mini-​skirts was inviting trouble for girls!!

Reflective question Can you recall what concerned adults about children when you were young?

What concerns adults about children today? Around the world we can see a number of areas that disturb or distress parents and adult professionals and list some below: ●●

●● ●● ●●

●●

The sexualization of children via the media, the internet and through particular consumer goods Gender stereotyping of children through toys, games and adult attitudes Children’s physical and mental health and their consequent abilities to cope and thrive Children’s educational achievement  –​many societies test and push children’s learning through extra lessons, courses and examinations in order to ensure future career-​readiness Obesity and children’s diet

Whilst there may well be cause for some such concerns (and we have researched and written [2016] about the first two), the resolution of these still tends to be based on a ‘care and control’ model that disregards children’s own resilience and competencies. In our ever-​changing world, each generation has its own challenges to face and conquer that will be different from those who have gone before and so the ‘adult knows best’ mantra certainly hinders rather than helps today’s children. Moss and Petrie highlight what is lacking in this approach. Joy, spontaneity, complexity, desires, richness, wonder, curiosity, care, vibrant, play, fulfilling, thinking for yourself, love, hospitality, welcome, alterity, emotion, ethics, relationships, responsibility –​ these are part of a vocabulary which speaks about a different idea of public provision for children, one which addresses questions about the good life, including a good childhood, and starts with ethics and politics. (2002:79)

Perhaps of all available professional models, the pedagogical approach is the most relevant to playworkers and in fact it could be the basis for any professional working with children. The underlying principle of pedagogy is that children and adults are fundamentally equal but different and together embark on journeys to reflect and enquire and learn from and surprise one another –​an interpersonal relationship that is both mutual and reciprocal. Pedagogues can ‘no longer fall back

81

The Child

on knowledge as universal, unchanging and absolute, producing the one correct answer’ (Moss and Petrie 2002:119) that they as an adult have to pass on to the child. Through their playing, children explore and discover for themselves and an attendant adult can also learn with them. Pedagogues believe that a child is not an adult-​in-​waiting, but ‘an active and creative actor, a subject and citizen with potentials, rights and responsibility… worth listening to and having a dialogue with and who has the courage to think and act by himself –​a constructor in the construction of his own knowledge and his fellow being’s common culture’ (Dahlberg 1997:22). If we really believe that –​and it is absolutely in keeping with the Playwork Principles –​and daily reflect on whether that belief is truly guiding what we say and do, we will have gone some way to seeing children as they are. We end this chapter with a provocative question from Wyness (2006:11). ‘Do we undervalue play because it is associated with childhood, or do we compromise childhood because we trivialise play?’

Further reading/​Resources Jones, P. (2009), Rethinking Childhood, London: Continuum Wyness, M. (2006), Childhood and Society, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/4-adventureplayground-setting/

81

82

83

newgenprepdf

5 Playwork Practice

Chapter Outline Introduction The playworker and the play environment Creating play environments Physical environment Resources and materials for play Observation in playwork Approaches to intervention

83 84 85 88 94 98 101

Introduction In the previous chapters we have reflected on what playwork is and isn’t; ideas that abound about play, and perceptions of ‘the child’. In this chapter we will examine the actual playworker’s role in relation to playing children and the environments that are provided for them. Before proceeding, the Playwork Principles (Chapter 1) and the complexity of theory surrounding play (Chapters 2 and 3) should be fully studied for they underpin what a playworker actually does. As Leichter-​Saxby says in her blog ‘Play Everything’, ‘playwork does not mean: leading games in which every child must take part, teaching skills such as representative painting or standing guard over equipment ensuring that “everyone gets their turn” ’. What exactly is the main role of a playworker and how can it best be fulfilled? We will look at the play environment and at the playworker’s role in relation to this and continue with other important aspects namely materials for play; observing children playing; and when and how to possibly intervene into children’s play. From a playwork perspective it would seem impossible for any work with children to not involve play in some way, given that play is a major drive in children’s lives. Leaving the potential for play out would seem like leaving out oxygen, the potential for breathing!

84

84

Reflective Playwork

Reflection –​ Jacky I remember way back in a previous life, when I was teaching art in a secondary school, that the most successful lessons were also the most playful ones –​play and creativity having strong links. Many years later this was born out by a chance meeting with a former pupil who remembered the good attention I  had given him related to his ‘psychedelic sprouts’ that nobody else had seen any sense in. Indeed when I came across playwork as a potential direction to head into it seemed to make far more sense to me than teaching as play allowed for endless and internally motivated creativity and experimentation from which so much more can be learnt than from a narrow curriculum.

The playworker and the play environment We think of a playwork setting as having affordances; a term first coined by psychologist Gibson (1977) but taken up by other professions and here related to playwork, meaning that the play environment and what is available within it has a whole variety of ‘action, thought and emotion possibilities’ appropriate for its users. Voce (2015:38) suggests that playworkers ‘seek to honour and serve the immediacy of the playing child’ as ‘uncertainty and unpredictability’ are watchwords in playwork. So let us now consider the environment that will best support these playwork intentions. The environment that therefore best supports play and offers the most affordances includes both the physical and psychological environment. When we think about play environments we may think about staffed and unstaffed play environments. However playworkers are directly only involved in the former, namely in staffed play settings, where they give ‘added extras’ to an environment which might otherwise not offer as many play affordances and much playability. We will look in more detail at the variety of other places and spaces where children play in Chapter 7. In Play Environments: A Question of Quality (1996:48), Hughes suggests that ‘a play environment lives or dies on a daily basis from the ambience it has’ and this is ‘directly related to the playworker’s consideration of the ingredients which go to creating it’. Thus the playworker has a massively important role in ensuring that their own impact is not one that inhibits or constrains play but one that facilitates the play process. In his academic paper, Sturrock (2007:17) outlined some of what he called the ‘truth validities’ of playwork. He introduced the notion that the playworker plays within the play environment but that this playing should be consciously engaged in, and should be the conscious generator of insights and understanding on their part; whilst the child plays unconsciously, during which s/​he is unconsciously developing or as Sturrock puts it s/​he is ‘being and becoming’. It is at this interface of playing (which Sturrock calls the Ludic Third, and is described later in this chapter) that both the child and the playworker develop. He thus assigns a very important role to the playworker of being aware of, or ‘witnessing’, what is it that goes on for both him/​her and for the child/​ren during play within the play environment. He believes that the sharing of insights with colleagues and the development of understanding that is generated through this process is fundamental to the playworker’s role. This is of course part of reflective practice the tenets of which run throughout this book.

85

Playwork Practice

Reflective questions If your main focus is working with children at play, reflect on your day-​to-​day work under these headings: 1. Enable children to create their own play environment 2. Create a good atmosphere for play 3. Reflect on the play process alone and with others and respond to this How much of what you do relates to these three major aspects of your role?

Creating play environments Ambience How do we go about creating an environment that allows children to create their own environment? This can be split into two distinct areas: the physical environment and the psychological environment, or ambience –​the feel of a place or situation. Let us start by thinking about the latter. In the same way that we adults know how a place ‘feels’ and the ‘way that we are treated’ when we go somewhere for fun, and how that makes a vast difference as to whether we enjoy ourselves or not, so too do children. For children to be able to play freely the environment has to feel right. It has to feel like a place that understands how they feel. If the environment does not feel right they might play but less freely and possibly not the kind of playing that is as much use to them for their ‘being and becoming’. So what sort of ambience is needed? In our chapter (2007) we suggested that to create an effective affective environment for play, playworkers should try and ensure the following in relation to the feel of a place: 1. An overall ambience of welcome, acceptance, freedom and playfulness 2. Awareness of children’s moods and emotional baggage 3. Not to be fazed by children’s strong feelings and to have a supportive repertoire of both positive and playful responses when required 4. To be comfortable with authentically expressing and talking about their own feelings Hughes (1996:48) says that ‘a friendly, usable and secure environment is absolutely essential for most children’, and he suggests that playworkers can affect the ambience in many ways by ‘being friendly and affectionate, being energetic, even eccentric’. It is important that playworkers are not seen as experts who demonstrate how to do things but as people interested in playing and experimenting with things themselves thereby highlighting the unbounded possibilities within the play space. If children feel comfortable and accepted, they will in turn feel able to create their own ambience appropriate to their playing. Thus within one play environment there may be spaces that have, for instance, scary, competitive, relaxing or creative ambiences, all developed by the children’s involvement in playing.

85

86

86

Reflective Playwork

Here is a list of potential ‘ambience indicators’ (Hughes 1996) which may help you think about the atmosphere of your own play provision.

Ambience indicators 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Caring (playworkers will help children if they get into difficulties or hurt themselves) Trustworthy (children know that the playworkers will not let them down) Empowering (children can be in charge of own behaviour and feel powerful) Enjoyable (children can be natural and have fun without too many rules) Friendly (the provision attracts children who may be marginalized elsewhere, so all children feel welcome) 6. Familiar (children feel a sense of place and belonging because the provision reflects their life) 7. Homely (a place where children can feel at home, keep warm and dry, make food etc.) 8. Multi-​choice (lots of opportunities, and a place where children can choose what to do or be) 9. Sharing (the playworkers don’t behave as if they own the resources and environment) 10. Non-​detrimental (causes no harm to children, who understand that everybody has the right to be themselves without fear of ridicule) 11. Non-​judgmental (children don’t feel as if they are being judged all the time –​differences are considered normal) 12. Non-​petty (children are not constantly being told off for trivial things and any rules that exist, do so only for good reason) 13. Alternative (different to home, school etc. –​a range of different and compensatory opportunities and experiences) 14. Respectful (children are treated as competent human beings) 15. Secure (secure from strangers, dogs etc. Entry and exits safe and playworkers alert) 16. Safe (health and safety guidelines understood and properly followed) 17. Spacious (room for children to play how they wish without feeling cooped up and limited) 18. Sanctuary (somewhere that children feel safe from the rigours of life –​truly their environment where other adults only access via the playworkers) 19. Useful (the provision has meaning for children) 20. Unthreatening (the place and playworkers do not feel dangerous –​any bullying, racist and sexist behaviour etc. is sensitively –​even playfully –​challenged) 21. Variable (changeable and flexible in line with children’s ideas and play needs) 22. Sensitively supervised (distant supervision and minimal intervention, when asked for or really needed) We also created a list of material things to consider in relation to the ambience of a place as follows:

Ingredients for an affective environment ●●

Lighting  –​varied indoor and outdoor through use of lamps, candles, coloured filters, torches, fairy lights, tealights and so on. Consider darkness, shade and shadows and the like

87

Playwork Practice ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●● ●●

●● ●●

●● ●●

Colours –​contemplated and changing use of vibrant, primary and pastel colours on walls, fabrics, partitions, furniture, rugs/​cushions and so on. What natural colours are outside? Music –​use of and access to diverse range of music styles from past, present and around the world. Natural and wildlife sounds, real and created instruments, mikes, decks and so on Images –​diverse and positive depictions of people/​children, pictures, posters, drawings, mirrors, photos. Abstract and scenic representations. Use of cameras, projectors Aroma –​the means to create a range of smells including cooking, scented candles, incense burners, fire, air fresheners, flowers and grass, aromatic, pleasant or not and so on Layout –​is it changeable, accessible and inclusive with heights, levels, slopes and corners, nooks and crannies? Spaces (indoor and outdoor)  –​are there open, enclosed, secret, large, small and natural spaces and the means to create these? Familiarity –​consistency and continuity but still allowing for neophilic stimuli and change Noise/​sound level  –​can accommodate across the spectrum of loud to silence in different spaces plus the means to create and experiment with sounds Comfort factors –​consider temperature, food/​drink, cushions, places to relax and chill out Sensory stuff –​are there a variety of textures, sounds, tastes, sights that are spread around and available and not prescribed or fixed? Elements –​multiple ways and props for children to play with earth, air, fire and water Resources and loose parts –​are you constantly varying and supplying large through to small scrap and props for playing with?

Reflective questions Assess your environment for play against the ambience indicators and these affective ingredients. How does it measure up? Are there other indicators and ingredients that you feel are important? Discuss these and the ones above with colleagues. Can you improve the ambience of your setting, and if so how?

Reflection – Jacky I remember at an integrated playscheme where I  was working there were dressing up clothes and make-​up for the children to use and on one day, all the children decided to dress up to have their photographs taken individually. One boy, who needed more support than most, had a wonderful time putting on a blond wig and smearing his lips with luminous coral coloured lipstick. He then posed with a very extravagant pout and primped his way around the playscheme for quite some time, stopping periodically to pose in different ways in front of a long mirror but without actually playing with any of the other children who mainly took no notice of anyone else (too busy doing their own thing).The boy obviously felt totally comfortable, accepted and unthreatened and able to play in his own way safe from bullying or ridicule. He was clearly really enjoying the opportunity to try out a different self.

87

88

88

Reflective Playwork

Physical environment The physical environment for play may be outdoors or indoors and hopefully a mixture of both. Whatever place you work in with children at play it is vital that you try to see through children’s eyes and think like them. If the ambience is right you have gone a long way towards creating the right kind of environment but what if the physical environment is sterile or communicates the wrong messages? Many impoverished play environments can be seen, such as tarmac yards and broken down playgrounds and yet still children play in them. Some play environments are overly stocked with what appear to be educational toys for learning yet given the right ambience still children play in them. Interestingly Guldberg (2009:82) says that ‘the number or variety of toys in their (children’s) midst is not likely to restrict their play. But adults constantly butting in to direct their play may well do so’. So what does a ‘good’ physical play environment look like? What are the elements, over and above a good ambience, that go towards making a great place to play?

Reflective questions Try to remember a special place where you used to play as a child. Try to remember what it was like. What did it look like? How did it feel? Where was it? Why was it good to play there? What was it about the place that enabled you to have a good play experience?

Reflection –​ Ali We had quite a long garden when I was a child and at the top was a brick building about the size of a couple of sheds with several mature trees –​one of which was in between the side of the shed and the fence to next door’s garden. This particular tree therefore was one of my favourite spaces because it had the advantage of being (a) a hiding place (I couldn’t be seen from the house) and (b) an escape route to next door. I remember many hours spent up the tree, happy in my own skin, relishing the quiet and time to think (I had four brothers and sisters!), loving being up high and the feeling of power and esteem that brought. I also remember many times playing with my brothers and daring each other to climb down into next door’s garden and see how close we could get to their back door without being seen or caught –​we pretended to be spies or secret agents and I can still feel the adrenalin rush, the fear and the pure excitement of it all.

Many places that cater and care for children seem to think that children need bright colours, special areas for particular activities and plastic –​lots of plastic and safety surfacing. Why is this? Think of a stream on the moors with rocks, rushing water, trees and shrubs, mounds and mud. Think of a rainy day and a picnic in the bottom compartment of a bunk bed that’s been made into a den with an old sheet. Think of a huge cardboard box. Think of the woods. Many children find these sorts of places ideal for playing in –​but where are the bright colours, plastic and safety?

89

Playwork Practice

Ali visited a children’s centre recently that was reputed to be exemplary for two-​to four-​year-​ olds and couldn’t believe the outdoor space, which was small, encompassed by a white plastic fence with pictures of cartoon animals and completely astro-​turfed and flat with a few brightly coloured plastic wheeled toys. There was nothing remotely natural, sensory, stimulating or even playful about it. But the workers all said how clean and safe it was. If we want to find out what makes a great play environment a good start is to think about those elements that offer the most affordances. Hughes (2001:23) did just this in The First Claim which asks playworkers to assess their play environments against the ‘playwork curriculum’ to see how much they enable children to play. We have listed possible collectible props and ideas against each component.

The playwork curriculum Fire –​candles, tea lights, matches, storm kettles, cotton wool, twigs, sticks, BBQ, tongs, old baking trays or woks. Water –​ plastic bottles, jugs, buckets and bowls, polythene sheets/​tarpaulins, water bombs, bins, aqua-​rolls, pipes and guttering, hose, trowels, washing-​up liquid, tubs, water pistols. Air –​ plastic bags, polythene, balloons, inflatables, earth balls, zip wire, stuff to make kites, windsocks, planes, wind chimes, flags, banners, pumps and syringes, fan, pipes, funnels, panpipes, didgeridoo. Earth (and snow, sand, clay and gravel) –​trowels, forks, spades, buckets, bowls, tubing, sections of downpipes/​guttering, sledge. Identity –​ hats, wigs, belts, make-​up, face paints, mirrors, cameras, wide range of different types and sizes of fabrics and pieces of material, masks, skin-​tone paints, bags, jewellery, glasses. Concepts (scientific theories or social constructs such as life, birth, death, peace, justice, gravity, democracy, crime and punishment…) –​witch’s hat, judge’s wig, white netting, swords/​guns, clock, scales, barometer, baby’s bottle, weathervane, binoculars, kaleidoscope, bunch of keys, globe, helmets, microphone, stethoscope, wand, goggles, motherboard, sieve, crutches, giant dice, measuring tape/​ jugs, veils, coffin, thermometer, children’s atlas, encyclopaedia, cookery book, cultural artefacts. The senses  –​varied lighting such as lamp, fairylights, torches, candles, darkness. Incense sticks, cooking and food-​tasting, herbs and spices, flowers and plants, wide range of music from around the world, instruments, a variety of natural textures, colours and images. A varied landscape –​indoors: large and easily movable stuff such as stepladders, stage blocks, mats, free-​standing partitions, ceiling and wall hooks, sheets and shower curtains, corners and hidey-​ holes, steps; outdoors:  structures, different heights/​levels, hills, mounds, slopes, trees, bushes, bridges, pits, swings, aerial runways, garden, ditches, tunnels, open and closed spaces, structures, platforms, ditches, quiet or hidden areas. Materials (playful and non-​prescriptive resources and equipment) –​pots/​pans, parachute, inflatables, surf boards, cargo nets, hammocks, bean bags, firepit, holes in the ground, trolleys, wheelie bins. Building –​stuff to construct and destruct such as cardboard, wood, pallets, tarpaulins, sheets/​curtains, chickenwire, egg boxes, withies, rope, tools, nails, hooks, wheels, tyres. Plus range of smaller loose parts.

89

90

90

Reflective Playwork

Change –​props and means to change, move, redecorate and redesign in order to create new transient or semi-​permanent spaces. Focuses (things/​object/​events that are novel and different…) –​new and wacky or unusual resources for example earthball, unicycle, shredded paper, luminous paint, piles of bandages, mirror ball, dead mouse, microphone, free-​standing door, large or distorted mirrors. Alternatives (experiences children may not otherwise have) –​outdoor pursuits like canoeing, climbing, trips off-​site, residentials, sleepovers, camp-​outs, visiting specialists (art, dance, music, circus etc.), star-​gazing, old fashioned toys. Tools  –​ hammers, screwdrivers, saws, nails/​screws, drills, chisels, craft knives, cutters, staplers, forks/​spades, pliers, hoe/​rake, shovels, crowbar, axe, brushes, needles, nuts/​bolts, clips/​pegs, sieves, measures, spirit levels. Loose parts (donated or recycled stuff that children can use in their own way for their own reasons) –​ ropes, tubs, barrels, blankets, bricks, breeze blocks, pallets, boxes, vessels, mats, crates, cushions, ladders, poles, sticks, tape, pegs, old electrical equipment (see later list). Risk –​props and opportunities for climbing, balancing, building, biking, wrestling, jumping, fire-​ building, performing, swinging, experimenting, tool use.

Reflective questions Think about your own play environment. Does it contain props and give opportunities for such as those mentioned above? What does your provision enable children to do? How do you enable children to create their own play spaces?

Hughes (1996:33) asks us to consider why a child might be attracted to a play environment. From asking children a series of questions he comes up with what he describes as ‘content indicators’. These describe some of the things that children have indicated attract them to play and give us another set of tools for examining our play environment.

Reflective questions Think about a play environment you know or work in. Could any of the following content indicators be used to describe the environment and what it has to offer? What changes could be made to try and incorporate more of them? ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Absorbing Physically challenging Diverse Exciting Exhilarating Fun Exploratory Compensatory

91

Playwork Practice

●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Interesting Magic Larger than life Malleable Child-​scale Mysterious Permanence Private Relaxing Risky

The two words which best sum up what is essential in a physical play environment are flexibility and adaptability.

Outdoor play Outdoors offers wonderful affordances for play that cannot be replicated indoors. In her book about therapy in the outdoors, Chown (2014:18) describes the outdoors as offering ‘the sensory food of life’ with its varied sounds, smells, tastes and sensations and she suggests thus: All humans need this; it is at our core and is deeply therapeutic to both our bodies and our minds. It feeds our spirit, soothes our soul and connects us to the earth’s vital energy. It is our very own therapy in waiting.

Many elements contained in the Playwork Curriculum can be found out of doors and particularly in natural surroundings such as woods, fields, beaches, parks, streams and so on but we can also try to make some of these things available for play in tarmaced yards and playgrounds where at least the children will still be able to feel the air, the wind, the rain and the sun, the heat and the cold –​if you also provide for different weather. Remember there’s no such thing as bad weather, just bad clothes. We should not think of weather as an enemy but as an opportunity for playing!

Figure 5.1  ‘Unpredictable logs’. Permission granted by Meares

91

92

92

Reflective Playwork

Indoor play If the indoor environment allows for freedom and is flexible and adaptable, then it can also provide for exciting places to play. However there are sometimes more rules related to indoor spaces, either about damaging the fabric of the building; not using some of the resources all of the time; making noise if accommodation is shared; keeping movement under control and so on depending upon the whereabouts and nature of the indoor space and its resources. Such rules can limit the play of those who need more freedom and scope. Indoors is also more easily policed by adults who become less and less desirable as ‘supervisors’ the older children become. Many possibilities that are usually only offered indoors can just as easily be offered outdoors, but the same is less possible the other way round. Although we remember a play setting that used to use stepladders and planks inside to create opportunities for climbing and balancing and one particular time when they laid down tarpaulins and brought in piles of earth, sand and bowls of water for children to play! We also remember running a session in a big hall, as part of a play day, where we organized a big plastic box of water which contained shells, weed, sea creatures and so on and the children put on snorkels and masks and put their faces and arms in to explore ‘the depths’.

Reflection –​ Jacky I was having tea in a café overlooking a narrow part of a muddy estuary in Norfolk. There was a core group of about ten children, boys and girls in bathing costumes, who spent at least the two hours that I was there creating a whole range of muddy slides down into the stream of water, which they slid down in various ways and then struggled back up to slide down again. Other children came and went but some stayed the whole time working hard on the construction of the slides. There were humps and lumps in the banks so the more daring children took to the air off some of the bumps. They were all completely covered in mud from head to toe and clearly having the most wonderful time. There seemed to be much debating about ways of going down and using or not using things such as plastic bags to slide on and then how to get back up the incredibly slippery slopes. Some children tried to help others and some just did their own thing. There were clearly a few minor injuries but nothing that prevented children from carrying on. It was wonderful to watch.

Children have differing play needs at different stages of their childhood and at varied times depending upon ambience, time of day, their mood, current circumstances, other people present, props available, risk-​taking needs and the like. A place that has been specifically designated as a place for children to play therefore has to take account of all these factors and the fact that it will be used by lots of different children all with their own variable and differing needs. Those needs can only be guessed at by witnessing, reflection and IMEE (Hughes 2001:22) –​a simple reflective tool which helps playworkers to analyse the quality of their play environment against their intuition (what do I feel makes a good play environment?), memory (where did I love to play?), experience (where have I seen children love to play) and evidence (what does scientific literature say?) and

93

Playwork Practice

even when you have been through this process you may not begin to know what children have in their own minds.

Reflective questions Think back to the special places you liked to play in as a child. In what way were they adaptable and flexible? How did you use that potential?

Reflection –​ Jacky I remember when I was a child our garden had a bit at the end that was shielded by laburnum bushes and couldn’t be seen from the house. There was a big old elm tree with a tyre-​swing hung from it; a broken down shed filled with old stuff and my dad would build his bonfires there. This was a perfect area for me and my friends to go and play in. Sometimes we would just root about in the shed or ground or swing on the tyre. There were always things to be found and I remember on one occasion finding a frog. We put it into a box with a lid until we had built a home for it. We built the home up with walls of mud with a lid full of water for a pond. We made the frog a bed of leaves and put lots of stones, twigs, grass and so on into it. We then ceremoniously released the frog into its new home whereupon it hopped straight out and disappeared!

A designated play place should be seen as a ‘compensatory’ environment, compensating for the fact that much of our modern life in the West does not take account of the play needs children have. The outside world is dominated by the rush of traffic, people in a hurry to get to and from where they are going (for many middle-​class children that is in a car and going to and from organized activities and classes), consumer orientated local areas where touching of goods is forbidden unless you are buying, vast tracts of concrete, fear of strangers and abduction, fear of children and young people and lack of community interest. Alternatively for some children the outside world is their ‘playground’ and without the interest of adults they can and do cause problems for themselves and for others. However as noted before the outdoors provides many natural affordances for children’s play and many great adult memories of playing as a child come from their time out of doors. This will be explored further in Chapter 7, together with ways we can support this. The inside world for many children after they have finished any chores they may have often consists of passive entertainment or educational activity, a plea for keeping things clean, tidy and quiet and if they do play to do it sensibly. Many parents have neither the time nor energy for involving themselves with their children’s play and many others are too controlling and never allow their children time and space to play on their own and in their own way. For some children, where perhaps they are the bread winner or the carer, there is not even time to play. ‘The playworker gives a sort of licence to play by serving as a presence which can indicate the boundaries of what is permissible’ (Tamminen and Chown 2000).

93

94

94

Reflective Playwork

Resources and materials for play Children will play anywhere and with anything that is usable for play if they have time and inclination –​let us take an example, such as a flat garage roof with a wall next to it. This would be a potential magnet for play. It offers opportunities for climbing, jumping, spying, socializing, hiding, daring, comparing and taking risks and so on.

Reflection – Jacky Jacky remembers playing across the road at her cousin’s where there was an old shed with a sloping roof, built on the side of the house. There was a small group of us girls who used to dare each other to climb up onto the roof of this shed and jump down onto the uneven ground below. It was quite difficult to get onto the roof via a crumbling wall and it was difficult to balance on. It felt high and scary once you got up there and if you were going to jump you also had to gauge where it was safe to land avoiding all the hazards below. It took a lot of cajoling, failed attempts and bravado before anyone was able to jump off. I only did it once and felt so relieved and proud to have been successful that I didn’t try it again. Not all of us managed to do it so you felt part of an elite club if you had.

Reflective question Do you have other past or present examples from either your own childhood or your current work with children that illustrate how children appropriate and use a space not necessarily designated for playing?

In many parts of the world we think of toys and games when we consider resources for play because these are obviously designed specifically for children and they are very heavily marketed. Some people such as Elkind (2007:16) think that an excess of toys ‘weakens the power of play-​things to engage children in dramatic thinking’, although it is clear from our own observations and experience that this is not necessarily the case. We have both seen children playing in very creative and imaginative ways with toys. However we are also sure that bought toys are not essential; many of them use up a great deal of money, are unnecessarily stereotypically gendered and do not offer the ongoing multi-​potential that supports the widest variety of play types. Children and adults are equally prey to sales techniques and we are all attracted to new and novel products. When we think more deeply about play we realize that children in many parts of the world make their own toys and the making becomes part of the playing. Rossie (2007), for example, tells us about two eight-​year-​old girls in a Moroccan village making a dolls house out of a cardboard box for their cheap plastic doll, for whom they’ve crocheted a dress and a boy from the mountains making a car out of a piece of cactus and pieces of rubber.

95

Playwork Practice

Children don’t so much need ‘things’ as they need ‘potential’. It is important then to consider which things or types of things have the most potential for play.

Reflective question Consider the following items and using IMEE (intuition, memory, experience and evidence) as your starting point, list all the potential for play that you can think of associated with each play resource, separately or together: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Car tyre Rope Cuddly bear Bucket Old newspapers Wooden crate Silver foil Cushion

You can do this exercise with any number of items.

Reflection –​ Jacky My youngest granddaughter, who is six, uses anything and everything to play with. She had recently set her little trampoline up as an office/​shop/​reception in the garden. In this area she had stones, broken twigs and about six different varieties of leaves laid out. We were to play ‘leisure centres’. I was the customer and after making my way round her designated route in the garden I went to her reception area where I paid with stones to do a keep-​fit and a wildlife activity. I was given change of stones and a little kit of twigs rolled up in a large leaf. The keep-​fit involved her demonstrating and me copying her using long thin fallen branches to reach up and touch various high parts of a tree and doing a range of different types of jumps up or on steps. The wildlife activity was to try and attract ants up a pole which was propped up on to the rail on top of the fence where we had to put crushed up catkins, tiny twigs, bits of grass and the odd little stone in a specific ordered pattern and then watch for ants. When she deemed that I had done all this correctly I was invited back to the reception area to receive my certificate, a large leaf, and a lollypop –​different sized leaves threaded onto a twig stick.

As a result of this, I might say that if a child is offered stones, twigs, dead branches, leaves, poles and catkins they would help with physical, intellectual, emotional, creative and social development and that they would also offer opportunities for symbolic, exploratory, object, social, creative, imaginative, role and locomotor play and maybe even deep play if you count the jumps on steps. I of course would have no idea whether this would be the case as another child or children playing with the same play resources may play differently, develop different aspects of their being, may engage in different play types or may choose not to play with these things at all.

95

96

96

Reflective Playwork

Newstead (2004:28) talks about ‘play value’ or the cardboard box theory. In other words children can usually get more play out of the cardboard box containing a new toy, than in the toy itself. Children like to have stuff to play with when the motivation to play comes upon them, but the play stuff doesn’t have to be anything definite. Its potential and availability for play is the important thing.

Figure 5.2  ‘Part robot, part den, part alien’. Permission granted by Law

Reflection –​ Jacky I know a boy who loves to dress up. He doesn’t need actual dressing up clothes as he will utilize whatever he can find in order to change himself. One day when another boy had put on some disco music he found a hula wedding garland to sling round his neck, took off his trousers so that he was only in his boxers and pretended he was at a beach party. He sometimes used to pretend to be Caractacus Potts from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and would tuck his trousers into his socks, put on an old waistcoat of his dad’s, borrow his mum’s sunhat and get a garden cane to jump over to do the cane dance with. As we can see, the boy does not actually have a beach party outfit and a Caractacus Potts outfit, but he utilizes his imagination and the things that he can lay his hands on.

When is a play resource not a play resource then? When it is not played with or when it is not played with in the way that an adult thinks it should be played with or when an adult decides that it is not a play resource? This does not mean, of course, that there are no boundaries to the way that any play resource can be used. Playwork occurs in the real world and therefore much play behaviour is unacceptable to many people. Throwing stones at a can when the stones and can are not near glass windows or

97

Playwork Practice

other people and so on is fine but if you were an adult present during a stone throwing game you may feel impelled to intervene if for instance you saw that the chances of a child breaking a window were very high, if only in order to prevent the child getting into trouble.

The theory of loose parts In the 1970s, architect Simon Nicholson (1971) wrote about ‘variables’ or ‘loose parts’ as the sorts of things that children love to play with. He quotes the theory of loose parts as follows: ‘In any environment, both the degree of inventiveness and creativity, and the possibility of discovery are directly proportional to the number and kind of variables in it’. An environment such as a beach, the woods or a brook offer any number of things that children can manipulate, explore, create with, change, build up and discover new uses for, and hence by using their own creativity, playworkers can provide resources or loose parts that will enable the same sorts of playing. Here are a few play resources to get you thinking –​be imaginative! Natural –​water, conkers, insects, stones, pebbles, sand, leaves, wind, mud, fur, seeds, rain, fire, straw/​hay, seaweed, soil, coal, fir cones, shells, wax, flowers, snow/​ice, fungi, acorns, sunlight, bugs, worms, feathers, berries, seeds, dust, ashes, rocks, animals, grass. Paper  –​cardboard boxes/​sheets, cards, loo rolls, newspaper, magazines, egg boxes, tissue, carpet tubes, paper cups/​plates, frieze paper, wrapping paper, glitter, lining paper, wallpaper, tracing paper, rice paper, sweet wrappers, papyrus, corrugated paper, catalogues, shredded paper, scrap paper, crepe paper, hemp, toilet paper, sandpaper, risler papers. Plastics –​carrier bags, yoghurt pots, milk crates, bin liners, bubble wrap, tarpaulins, barrels, milk cartons, wrappings, straws, shoes, inflatables, moulds, Perspex, storage boxes, film canisters, trays, crisp packets, lino, bread crates, cups, cotton reels, polystyrene, sheeting, pipes/​gutters, butts, bottles, buttons, beads, cellophane, cutlery, spatulas, acetate sheets. Metal  –​bottle tops, pots/​pans, tin cans, containers, magnets, trolleys, paper clips, nails, chains, keys/​rings, car shells, wire, curtain rings, circuit boards, baking trays, old cutlery, chicken wire, coat hangers, dustbins, shovels, bike frames, zips, padlocks, ball bearings, handcuffs, gold/​silver leaf, springs, wire wool, silver foil, coins, wheels, machine drums, CDs, tent pegs. Fabrics –​clothes, netting, sheets, silk, leather, string, football kits, bibs, cotton wool, blankets, tents, sacking, hats, jersey strips, velvet, curtains, aprons, rugs, carpets, felt, cushions, wool, parachutes, canvas, tights, socks, cargo nets, hammocks, seatbelts. Rubber –​tyres, hose, gloves, wellies, shoe soles, balls, inner tubes, elastic bands, matting, erasers, mats, tubing. Wood –​logs, pallets, garden canes, withies, poles, boarding, sawdust, branches, telegraph poles, driftwood, sticks, twigs, bamboo, planks, posts, benches, doors, frames, matches, boxes, crates, railway sleepers. Food (for cooking or creativity)  –​flour, pastas, lentils, potatoes, eggs, rice, cereals, chocolate, breads, onions, fruits, herbs, spices, food colouring, salt dough, cornflour, compost, icing sugar, pumpkins, vegetables, nuts, beans/​pulses, jelly, coffee, custard powder.

97

98

98

Reflective Playwork

Vessels –​jars, cups, bowls, buckets, trunks, butts, skips, bottles, boxes, watering cans, jugs, plant pots, sponges, baskets, oil drums, pods, crates, baths, window boxes, guttering/​ downpipes, rucksacks, sacks. Objects –​chairs/​sofas, tables, wheelbarrows, torches, trolleys, bricks, clothes horses, breeze blocks, incinerator bins, brooms, stage blocks, wheels, fans (to create wind), hay/​straw bales, large cable reels, mattresses, crash mats, bikes, prams, coffin, nets, boat. Tools –​hammers, screws, screwdrivers, nails, saws, nuts/​bolts, tape, needles, drills, measures, chisels, cutters, rollers, staplers, sieves, staple guns, scissors, drawing pins, hoes, brushes, rakes, pliers, knives, string/​rope, forks, hole punch, spades, matches, mallet, markers, chainsaw, glue, crowbar, pegs, axe, clips, pick axe, dibber, blutac, spirit level, grips. Identity –​wigs, hats, shoes, glasses, uniforms, make-​up, jewellery, belts, cloaks, scarves, shawls, masks, sunglasses, cameras, puppets, dressing up clothes, face paints, henna, hair accessories, fake tattoos, flags, religious symbols, large pieces of material, cultural props, books/​pictures of diverse people. Old technology –​outdated mobile phones, tablets, notepads, laptops, computers, CD players, DVD players, walkie-​talkies, televisions (some children love taking these apart).

Reflective questions Which of these are available for children in your setting to play with and explore? Where can you source all these?

If storage is a problem we have to find ways of overcoming this. How about portable storage boxes; stacking boxes; hammocks or baskets that can be hung above the space; trolleys that can be wheeled away; or an outside storage hut? The play needs of children are important and as ‘advocates’ for play we have a duty to use our own power, creativity and imagination to solve those things which interfere with our ability to provide for play.

Observation in playwork The best way of learning about children and their play is to observe and to listen to them when they are playing. Children are the experts in their own play and can teach us much. However in order to learn from them we have to concentrate and observe with our eyes and ears and an open mind. This takes time and skill, requires practice and an enquiring spirit. If you approach the task thinking that you already know what you are going to see and hear, you will learn little or nothing. Almost all theories related to children, their play and how it links to development, learning, health and so on have been developed through observation. You can try asking children written or oral questions about their play but what you will often get from this is answers to questions. Play, as a form of behaviour, is a far more truthful medium

99

Playwork Practice

of communication and will ‘leak’ all sorts of information. Once you have collected the information through observation, you can analyse and interpret it against other information gained through the IMEE reflective process in order for it to be useful. Some people use playful techniques for consulting and involving children, particularly when wanting to gain their views about play. Methods such as taking photographs of favourite places in the setting, sticking smiley or scowling faces onto pictures of particular pieces of equipment, and drawing favourite activities can be used, and sometimes to good effect. All too often though, consulting children can (a) break into their precious playing time (how do you feel when someone interrupts your favourite television programme?), (b) elicit the responses children feel we want and (c) ask questions that are more important to us than to them. We really believe there is nothing as successful as non-​intrusive observation of children playing for gaining information from children about their play. All playwork students are required to make and record observations and whilst some find this more difficult than others, everyone finds they learn a great deal from doing so. It is useful to simply practise being observant. Take a few minutes to stand back and unobtrusively watch a specific child or children; a particular playworker and child playing; a particular piece of equipment or area of the play space being used; a set or organized activity such as a game of unihoc or snack time, and concentrate on what you are seeing and hearing. Gradually increase the time so that you are training yourself to become more aware of what is going on and to build up your memory and a repertoire of knowledge which will inform your practice. Children may try to engage you in some way and you will need to find ways (playfully and respectfully!) to deal with this. With time you will develop ways of almost invisibly observing so that children don’t notice you –​we have both spent hours apparently tidying, cleaning, sorting but actually watching and listening keenly.

Reflection opportunity Take five minutes time out and spend a few moments in the middle of a session at your setting and observe what children are doing in a particular part of the play space. What types of play are happening? How are the children using the space and or the materials? How many children are involved? How many boys and/​or girls? What is the level of involvement? At the end of your observation, is there anything that has struck you that you want to make a note of to think about further or discuss with colleagues?

For certain types of information that you may wish to gain from the setting, such as how children ‘feel’ about aspects of the provision, you can attempt to be a ‘participant observer’ where you are joining in play when invited but covertly observing things that happen and listening to what’s being said. This requires you to have a good memory and there is the potential problem of ‘contamination’, that is, that your own participation in some ways influences how the child or children behave and feel, and therefore gives a false reading of a situation. This is easier to do if you are using a minimal intervention style, or can be classed as supernumerary. If you behave in a ‘minimally

99

100

100

Reflective Playwork

adult’ way you are less likely to affect the way that the child/​ren play and how they feel. Be aware of your own preconceptions and expectations of certain children or of particular ways of playing. Note down afterwards what you learnt or discovered. Sometimes you may feel that more formal observation is required. This could be for a number of reasons such as the following: 1. To better understand the play cues of a particular child 2. To see whether a particular layout of the play space is giving the best opportunities for children to play 3. To identify the play needs of a group of new children 4. To evaluate the setting, the involvement of playworkers and so on 5. To identify which play types are being manifested in the setting 6. To identify a particular child’s play needs in relation to their development There are a number of different techniques for recording observations: 1. Narrative format in which everything seen and heard is recorded ongoing. 2. Pre-​designed form in written format such as speech and behaviour recorded separately. 3. Time schedule where observations recorded at certain times throughout a period of time–​ say every thirty minutes for five minutes. 4. Tracking diagram where layout of area is pre-​drawn and child’s movement or a loose part is tracked with a line moving from place to place. 5. Checklist where a list of certain types of potential behaviour are pre-​recorded and then ticked if seen. 6. Video, voice-​recording, photographs:  great care must be taken if these methods are to be used in order to ensure that we do not infringe the child or children’s human rights; permission must be gained from parents or carers (especially with regard to use of the images) and confidentiality must be maintained. There are also a number of things you need to consider if you are going to make formal recordings of your observation: ●●

●●

●● ●● ●●

The ethics of observation –​are you observing for good reason? Do you need the permission of the child/​ren or parents to use information gained from observation? How will the information gained be used? What will you do if your observation inadvertently raises some concerns about the welfare of a child or the practice of a playworker? Confidentiality –​How will your observations be recorded and stored? Who else could access the observations and the information that comes from them? Do you have the time to observe? Do you have the support of your colleagues? Do you have good reason to observe? What is the aim of observing? Do you have the skill to observe and record information simultaneously? What method of observation will you use? How are you going to record the information that you gain? How are you going to handle interruptions?

101

Playwork Practice

In order to be aware of all influences on that which you are observing, all formal observation should contain some of the following information depending upon the aim: 1. Details of context 2. Time 3. Place 4. Numbers of children and adults present 5. Genders, ethnicity, ability and the like, if relevant 6. Weather 7. Materials and equipment available 8. Layout of space 9. Time taken on observation 10. Aim of observation

Reflection opportunity Plan to carry out a formal observation and the time to do it. Choose four play types that you can easily recognize. Prepare an observation sheet divided into four sections with the name of a play type at the top of each one. Find a place to sit away from the action which still enables you to see what is going on either in the whole setting or in one part. Observe for ten or fifteen minutes and record any examples of the play types seen in the appropriate area. Try to give detail of ages, genders, and activities for each recording. Develop shorthand if it helps. Write the observation up more clearly if necessary and when you have the time consider what you can glean from the information you have recorded. Ask yourself questions such as: Which play type was engaged in the most (and least) and why? Did boys and girls engage in the same or different play types? If children were playing together were they engaged in the same play type? Was the play type influenced by the materials/​environment and if so how? How often, if at all, did a child change the play type s/​he was engaged in over the period of observation?

Approaches to intervention Intervention is about the ‘why, when and how’ of playworkers’ engagement with children in the play environment and is at the heart of playwork practice. Of course all modification of the play environment and the very presence of playworkers is a form of intervention as illustrated here.

The Ludic Third In playwork, The Ludic Third refers to the playing that is created between a playworker and a child and which in its turn also creates changes (developments) in both the playworker and the child. However, it is considered that these changes can occur for both only if the playworker

101

102

102

Reflective Playwork

does not adulterate, contaminate, interfere with or in any way spoil the child’s intention for the playing and for the playworker if they reflect on these encounters and actively seek self-​growth from them. Often adults, who work with children, see development as being one-​way traffic; that is they offer an environment and resources and through this, they expect the children to learn and develop. In that model the adult reflects on what the child has done whilst playing and what this may have demonstrated in terms of their development and then prepares for future encounters to support the child’s further development. Using the Ludic Third model however, the playworker considers their own personal understanding of the playing and examines their own professional practice and how this affected the encounter as well as considering what it was like for the child.

The adult

The playing

The child

Figure 5.3  The Ludic Third. Adapted from ‘The Ludic Third’ in Towards Ludogogy Part 1, Sturrock et al. (2004)

In this section, we will consider the application of the Ludic Third through the involvement of playworkers during play sessions. Non-​playwork people sometimes have difficulty with the minimal intervention approach of playwork, believing that they as adults can help a child ‘learn’ from his or her play experiences by their interventions. If children are the experts in their own play, and are in charge of it, this of course is not the case and much adult involvement can be seen as interference. When children play they learn from their own mistakes, successes and failures, and their own experiments. If a child is in charge of the content and intent of his or her own play, then missing out on the failures may have a negative developmental effect. There have been a number of pieces of advice given about the whys and wherefores of intervention in playwork settings, three of which we include here.

Intervention styles The First Claim framework for quality assessment (2001:28) focuses the playworker on ‘appropriate’ playwork intervention styles which are essentially ‘non-​interventionist’. 1. Wait to be invited to play 2. Enable play to occur uninterrupted by me 3. Enable children to explore their own values

103

Playwork Practice

4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Leave children to improve their own performance Leave the content/​intent of play to the children Let children decide why they play Enable children to decide what is appropriate behaviour Only organize when children want me to

Range of intervention Sturrock et  al. (2004:15–​17) suggest that adult intervention in children’s play should be only to facilitate the process ‘to extend the play they engage in, or to help children avoid imminent and serious harm to themselves and others’. They define four interventions which range from minimal to complex as follows: 1. Play maintenance  –​The play is self-​contained; no intervention is necessary, the worker observes. 2. Simple involvement –​The adult acts as a resource for the play, for example by making a tool available. 3. Medial intervention –​At the request of the child the adult becomes involved in the play (and withdraws as soon as is appropriate) and for instance, initiates a particular game. 4. Complex intervention –​There is a direct and extended overlap between playing children and the worker. The adult takes on a role in the play, or acts as a partner to the playing child, for example by taking on the role of a character as part of socio-​dramatic play. This range still concentrates on intervention as a method of helping the child have a better play experience, not intervention related to modifying the behaviour of children. Wherever possible when a worker decides to intervene, their response should be playful, rather than controlling or prescriptive. There are of course times when it will be necessary for an intervention to not be playful. However this will be not because it is about play, but about our duty of care. The playworker’s prime focus is the playing child and the playful process, and this should take precedence whenever possible. Jacky ran a ‘round table’ session at the eighth National Playwork Conference in England, looking at intervention from a playful and real-​life perspective. The group came up with a list of intervention approaches that were based on real-​life experience, reflection and intuitive practice. They are pragmatically based on an authentic playwork approach where both the playworker and the child/​ren understand what is going on. The playworker and the child/​ren realize that on occasions, the adult is the one with the potential ultimate power but there will be an attempt at power sharing and some approaches will cede power to the child. These interventions are not supposed to supplant any of the established approaches to intervention but are known as Everyday Intervention Approaches –​some of which we recognize are unsuitable for inexperienced people or those of you that do not fully wish to incorporate the playful playwork approach into your practice. They were published in IpDip (2010) and are as follows:

103

104

104

Reflective Playwork

Table 23 –​Everyday intervention approaches 1. Wrong foot approach  –​using the element of surprise; confounding the child that a playworker would respond in such a manner. The example is based on a playworker suggesting a different kind of grip to a child who was grappling with another, to avoid the potential of a trip to A&E, but without actually stopping the fight. 2. Affective approach–​changing the atmosphere by the subtle introduction of mood changers such as a change of music, aroma, lighting and so on to deal with, for instance, ‘growing aggression’. 3. Sparking approach–​using the power of suggestion not by word but by adult playful behaviour to suggest different play possibilities. The adult issues a play cue to redirect and offer an alternative form of play, for instance he starts walking around with a book on his head, puts on a set of fairy wings or starts building something. 4. Win, win approach–​the playworker enters the play frame but takes on a role, such as a reporter, to modify play behaviour without the child losing face. For example, ‘I am from the Saturn Herald and I have heard that one of the alien enemy is being tortured. Do you have any comment Captain?’ 5. Big Bang approach–​an extreme mode of intervention with high risk attached. Used to distract and stop everybody in their tracks, such as the playworker doing extreme acrobatics, letting off an indoor fireworks and so on. 6. Reverse psychology approach (no but yes but)–​agree to everything about doing nothing. Used with recalcitrant children. For example: ‘Do we have to go?’ ‘No’ ‘But can we…?’ ‘Yes, all right then.’ ‘But do we have to keep quiet?’ ‘No’ ‘But can we…?’ ‘Yes, if you want to.’ ‘But have we got to….? ‘No’ ‘But can we…?’ ‘Yes, you can.’ 7. Back tracking approach (oops)–​permission for the playworker to retract their suggestion/​ play, say sorry and admit to having got it wrong. 8. ‘Eyebrow’ approach–​body language that humorously says it all, such as the slight lift of an eyebrow or adopting a strong stance. 9. Moment of madness/​clarity approach–​an ‘of the moment’ intervention; intuition without thought to swiftly respond to a situation, for example, rugby tackling a child (who needs stopping in their tracks) with a ‘whoop’. 10. The lurgy approach –​this approach is based on humour; the playworker suggests what they consider to be a funny but undesirable consequence in response to some undesirable behaviour. For example, ‘If you don’t stop taking the football I’m going to give you a kiss’, or ‘If you can’t stop with the language the first dance at the disco is mine’. 11. First Principle approach –​the playworker does not bother to intervene because they instinctively know that another child or children will sort it out because they are getting fed up. For example, a child keeps knocking over other children’s board game. In response, the children move to another location in the play space where the board is not so vulnerable. This intervention is freely chosen, intrinsically motivated and personally directed by the child or children. 12. Red mist approach (dicey) –​the playworker, totally out of character, ‘loses’ his or her temper in a big way and for example, reads the riot act to a child in a very angry voice. Can be scary but very effective.

105

Playwork Practice

13. The whistler (oy you!) –​the playworker whistles to attract attention (best with the ringed thumb and finger approach which gives some street cred). 14. Fade away approach (am I bothered, whatever) –​this is an unconvincing intervention which fades away in the middle; the playworker loses interest in the attempt to intervene and just lets it go but in a way that makes the child laugh and reconsider. 15. Presence approach (be there) –​ this is when the playworker subtly lets the child know they are available maybe by a touch of the arm, maybe by moving closer and the like. 16. Affectionate approach –​the playworker responds to bad behaviour designed to attract attention by being affectionate towards the child, for example by giving a hug whilst saying, ‘Ah! we all know there’s much more to you than the way you’re acting now and we all still love you.’ 17. Super treat approach –​the children are distracted with a super treat (something they love and always want) such as a tray of ice creams and a DVD or icepoles; this makes them love the playworkers. 18. Knife edge approach(can only be used when no strong potential for accusations of negligence could be applied) –​the playworker is not happy about some particular behaviour/​activity of the child/​ren and makes it obvious to them that they have been spotted but chooses not to intervene at that time hoping that it will not escalate or lead to anything more serious and will come to an end fairly soon, for example by walking by saying, ‘I didn’t see that’ (with hand over eyes) or ‘I didn’t hear that’ (with hands over ears). 19. Distraction approach –​when a conflict between children is clearly not resolving or the playworker senses that things will shortly erupt, s/​he distracts them by pretending to see or ask something unusual. 20. Reframing approach–​sensing that the play frames of different groups of children playing are about to collide, the playworker enters one of the frames (in character if it helps!) and enables that group to physically move away. 21. Applied constructivist approach–​use whatever works. This approach is based on experience of working with children and being aware of what does and doesn’t work in a wide range of situations and includes plucking an intervention from a wide repertoire of possibilities.

Reflective questions Have you ever intervened in any of these kinds of ways? How do you feel about them? Could you envisage any problems using any of these approaches? If so why and what would the problem be?

Adulteration Some playworker intervention says more about the playworker than it does about the playing child. Some playworkers have a lot of their own reactions to deal with and find it difficult not to become involved. When adults ‘spoil’ the meaning of children’s play, we see this as a form of ‘adulteration’.

105

106

106

Reflective Playwork

Reflection –​ Jacky I continue to find it difficult not to utter the totally redundant words ‘be careful’ when I see children embarking on something that has the potential risk of injury involved in it, such as climbing trees; jumping across gaps with a drop; doing some gymnastic moves and so on. The way that I have learnt to cope is that once I have considered any risk assessment, done an on the spot dynamic risk assessment to ensure there is no unacceptable risk and have given any ‘rules’ of involvement, if any arise from this, I stay around and keep a casual eye on things, should I be needed and I listen but I do not fully observe. If I do watch I can feel myself being drawn to constantly offering help where I think the child may be struggling, or to saying not only ‘be careful’ but such things as ‘that’s a bit too far for you to climb’ or ‘don’t do that you are going to hurt yourself’ and so on. These are useless things to say and only serve to ease my own concern. They do not actually help to keep children safe. In fact they can actually do the opposite and make children doubt themselves and their own ability to look after themselves.

Playworkers all have their own ‘bête noires’ of behaviour that unconsciously prompt an inappropriate or adulterative response –​often as a result of their own past experiences or upbringing, such as an accident in childhood, getting into trouble for untidiness or concern about what other people think. Can you see or hear yourself in any of these examples? Some of us will find it is over safety –​we find ourselves wanting to overprotect children when they need to learn to assess and cope with risk for themselves. ‘You two are too little to be trying to carry that plank. We don’t want you to drop it on your toes or hurt yourselves doing it, do we?’ ‘You are going to fall if you climb any higher. Watch where you’re putting your feet on the way down or you could slip.’ Some of us will feel we need to make sure everyone is happy and so we try to sort out every child’s problems so that they have no reason to feel miserable, when it is perfectly normal to feel unhappy at times. ‘You need to put a coat on if you’re going out. It’s freezing. Here, I’ll get it for you.’ ‘I can see you are having difficulty with sticking those two boxes together. Shall I do it for you?’ Others among us will find that certain behaviours or attitudes irritate us, or make us anxious, so we over control behaviour or remonstrate with children when they need to explore their own effects and boundaries. ‘This can only end in tears. You two stop squabbling over that. Try and play nicely together.’ ‘There are rules to this game. Listen! I said Listen! I’ll tell you what they are to make sure that you all play properly; otherwise things will just get out of hand.’ Still others will feel that we have a lot to offer children and so we often find ourselves ‘teaching’ –​unnecessarily passing on skills and information when it is not asked for and which can crush children’s own curiosity and creativity. ‘Nice painting Maddy but to make a proper green for the grass you need to add more yellow. Why don’t you try dabbing the paint on with a sponge to give it more texture?’ And many of us still have ‘un-​played-​out material’ so we want to play and be in charge of the play, rather than support the children’s play. ‘Let me have a go first to see what it’s like. Oh, it’s great fun! To get the best experience you need to slide down the left side. Let me have another go.’ ‘We’re

107

Playwork Practice

all going to add something to the mural but it needs to look good so I’ve drawn in the outlines first and pencilled in what colour they need to be.’ The examples given are some of the most common adulterative responses and many of us will find we can identify with some, if not all! There are however, various and more complex forms of each and it is only through reflective practice that we can discover which ones affect us most. Is it to help, to rescue, to organize, to control, to care, to teach? Where adulteration occurs, ‘the frame of the child’s play is entirely polluted by the playworker’s conscious or unconscious wishes and desires’ (Sturrock and Else 1998: 26). It is therefore really important that playworkers become increasingly aware of their impact in a play space. As Crowe says ‘we have so trivialized play and tried to confine it to the “proper” time and place with “proper” toys, or manipulated it for so-​called educational ends, that we no longer see or recognize it as part of the life-​force itself ’ (1983:27).

Times when intervention is required There are of course times when ‘intervention’ is appropriate as follows: 1. Child initiated –​when a child ‘invites’ intervention either overtly, by asking for help or by interacting with a playworker, or less obviously by using non-​verbal communication and the issuing of a play cue. 2. Child distressed –​when a child is clearly upset or unhappy and the playworker perceives that comfort and support is required. 3. Child has extra support needs –​when a child has a condition as previously recognized and requires support in specific situations or in relation to issued play cues. 4. Children in dispute –​when a disagreement or argument has escalated beyond the point at which the children can handle it for themselves. 5. Children engaged in violent behaviour  –​when behaviour becomes dangerous or very destructive. The timing of intervention is always a judgement call. Too early an intervention can sometimes result in ‘adulteration’ of the play, or to the creation of an atmosphere that is not conducive to playing. Too late an intervention can lead to frustration on the part of a child, problem behaviour getting out of control or the children’s perception that the playworkers are unhelpful. As playworkers we need to consciously think about the ways in which we do and don’t intervene and interact with children (and why we do) in order to see if these match up with the styles and modes listed above. We also need to be able to talk about what we do and don’t say and do with our colleagues –​this takes honesty and courage, but often our colleagues will be able to see the impact we have (for better or worse!) more easily than we can. Reflective practice is vital in relation to intervention so that the playworker can also learn and develop through their own experiences as matched against the knowledge and experience of others. In this chapter we have considered the playwork approach and the primary roles of a playworker namely to: create and resource an appropriate physical and psychological environment for play; to observe children playing and to reflect on this using a range of different reflective techniques; to be

107

108

108

Reflective Playwork

aware of a range of different approaches to intervention and use the most appropriate one in each different circumstance; to be aware of the effects that our own intervention can have on the playing child. In the following chapter we look at some further roles of the playworker that are less directly related to play.

Further reading/​Resources Best Play: What Play Provision Should Do for Children, National Playing Fields Association Brown, F. (2014), Play & Playwork –​101 Stories of Children Playing, Maidenhead: Open University Press Hughes, B. (2002), The First Claim –​Desirable Processes: A Framework for Advanced Quality Assessment, Cardiff: Play Wales Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/5-primaryschool-playground/

109

newgenprepdf

6 Children’s Play and Welfare

Chapter Outline Introduction The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Duty of care Safeguarding Health and safety Risk and risk/​benefit assessment Dynamic risk/​benefit assessment Equalities Conclusion

109 110 111 112 120 121 124 126 132

Introduction So we have looked at the crux of the playwork approach –​play, children, support for the play environment and for playing. Playing helps children feel good about themselves. It helps them support their own positive health and welfare. Playworkers believe that, given a positive ambience and play environment as described in Chapters 5 and 7, children are perfectly able to regulate their own playing in order to suit their own needs based on the circumstances of their own lives at any given time. They intrinsically know what type of playing they need in order to feel right –​to develop a sense of their own well-​being. However not all circumstances and situations support this and there are also some issues that need attention as part of a general duty of care that we all have when working with children. But, and it is a very big but, the playwork approach demands that we still use child-​centred, and wherever possible, playful methods for dealing with non-​play issues and also that we do not allow non-​play-​ related issues to dictate the direction of our practice away from play and towards other ‘adult agendas’. It is to this difficult yet vital dualistic nature of our playwork practice that we now turn our attention. How can we ensure that all aspects of children’s welfare –​play and non-​play –​are fully supported?

110

110

Reflective Playwork

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child One significant way that we can support children’s welfare is to vigorously defend children’s rights. All but two countries in the world have signed up to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and part of a playworker’s role is to help defend these rights wherever possible which are summarized here: 1. Civil and political rights –​name and nationality; freedom of expression; freedom of thought, conscience and religion; meeting with others; protection of privacy; access to information; protection from abuse, neglect, torture or deprivation of liberty; right to be treated appropriate to age when caught breaking the law. 2. Economic, social, cultural and protective rights  –​rights to life; decent standard of living; adequate provision for day to day care; high quality health care; independence and inclusion for disabled children; a safe and healthy environment; education; rest, play and leisure activities; protection from exploitation; no involvement with armed conflict for children under fifteen. It is important that playworkers have an awareness of all of the rights in the UNCRC but for people who work with children at play, knowledge of Article 31 is particularly crucial as it recognizes ‘the right of every child to rest, leisure, play, recreational activities and free and full participation in cultural and artistic life’. However all the rights are indivisible and interdependent, and so in order to fulfil one we really have to fulfil the others and this equally applies to Article 31. To find out more about the article see the links at the end of this chapter. Due to concerns about the lack of implementation around the world of many of these rights, the Committee on the Rights of the Child have produced a number of ‘Comments’ over the years outlining the obligations of countries that had signed up to the Convention. In 2013, they produced ‘General Comment 17’ to explain what has to be done in order to support the rights contained in Article 31. The International Play Association (IPA) believes that the rights embodied in Article 31 are ‘central to childhood itself ’ and their realization ‘will bring (not only) significant individual (but also) societal benefits’ (IPA 2013:5) and we believe this too. So what can we in playwork do to defend children’s rights? 1. Firstly know and understand what the rights are and commit ourselves to fully supporting them. (This cannot be a half-​hearted thing. If we are committed to the playwork approach we must support all children’s rights –​not just selective ones!). 2. Ensure we have up-​to-​date usable policies and procedures related to safeguarding children, equality of opportunity, inclusion, health and safety, confidentiality and for providing for play and leisure activities, and that we use these in everyday practice. 3. Listen to what children have to say; take it seriously and if and where necessary support them to find information and/​or support relevant to their issues or concerns. 4. Treat children as intelligent capable human beings.

111

Children’s Play and Welfare

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Get to know the children we work with and treat them with respect. Take steps to ensure they know their rights but also their responsibilities. Keep children’s welfare consciously in our thoughts and practices. Eliminate, as far as possible, any threatening, violent or degrading behaviour. Act as advocates for children and their play.

Reflective questions In what ways are you aware of personally upholding children’s rights? Can you describe any particular occasions when you have done this? What effect did your actions have?

Figure 6.1  ‘Equal under the sun’. Permission granted by Law

Duty of care As part of defending children’s rights then we have to be concerned with children’s general welfare and well-​being. A  comparative overview of child well-​being in twenty-​nine ‘rich’ countries was carried out on behalf of the United Nations Children’s Fund (2013), looking at the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Material well-​being Health and safety Education Behaviours and risks Housing and environment

111

112

112

Reflective Playwork

This showed that children in the top third of the targeted countries, namely The Netherlands, Norway, Iceland, Finland, Sweden and Germany, demonstrated overall the best well-​being results. The United Kingdom came sixteenth, the United States came twenty-​sixth and Romania came last at twenty-​ninth. The British Medical Association also pointed out that these figures did not reflect what has happened in some countries after the austerity cuts that have been happening in parts of the world. Our own beliefs and knowledge about the power of play would suggest that support for play is one way that we can help with children’s feelings of well-​being in a whole range of diverse situations. Indeed Gleave and Cole-​Hamilton (2012:5) tell us that there is ‘persuasive evidence of the role in playing to children’s overall happiness and well-​being’, and this is an area where playworkers are well equipped. What do we mean by a ‘Duty of Care’? People who work with children in many countries have a generalized duty of care which for instance in Britain includes ●●

●● ●●

●●

upholding children’s rights, as outlined above, without discrimination on any grounds such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status; meeting children’s needs and promoting their interests, that is providing for free play; protecting children’s health, safety and well-​being, that is providing a secure environment and taking precautions to prevent illness or serious injury; and ensuring safe practice, that is being aware of national legislation and following policies and procedures where relevant.

Other countries have variations on this.

Safeguarding Safeguarding is about guarding and protecting the rights of children and where these rights are being infringed to the detriment of a child’s well-​being and welfare, to do something about it. The degree to which it is felt that children need to be protected and from what varies from place to place, depending upon the general view of how vulnerable and/​or competent children are considered to be and what sorts of things have been recognized as being detrimental. We give you an example from Australia, but the principles are similar in many countries across the world. Australia has a framework within their national programme ‘Protecting Children Is Everyone’s Business’ in which they have the following aims: National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children 2009–​2020, Commonwealth of Australia 1. Children live in safe and supportive families and communities 2. Children and families access adequate support to promote safety and intervene early 3. Risk factors for child abuse and neglect are addressed 4. Children who have been abused or neglected receive the support and care they need for their safety and wellbeing

113

Children’s Play and Welfare

5. Indigenous children are supported and safe in their families and communities 6. Child sexual abuse and exploitation is prevented and survivors receive adequate support

Also in line with Australia’s obligations as a signatory to the UN Convention, the National Framework is underpinned by the following principles: ●●

●● ●● ●●

●●

●● ●●

All children have a right to grow up in an environment free from neglect and abuse. Their best interests are paramount in all decisions affecting them. Children and their families have a right to participate in decisions affecting them. Improving the safety and well-​being of children is a national priority. The safety and well-​being of children is primarily the responsibility of their families, who should be supported by their communities and governments. Australian society values, supports and works in partnership with parents, families and others in fulfilling their caring responsibilities for children. Children’s rights are upheld by systems and institutions. Policies and interventions are evidence based.

So wherever we are, we have a duty to safeguard children, but we also have to ensure that this does not mean wrapping them in cotton wool. Protecting them from exploitation, predatory adults, deliberate harm, extreme danger, domestic violence and the like is important, but so too is our duty to help them to protect themselves. There are many issues where children may need our support such as depression and mental illness, bereavement, post-​traumatic stress, addiction, early pregnancy, rejection and under-​achievement, pressure to over-​achieve, injuries and illness, abuse, bullying, stress, and the like. But we do not necessarily have to see children as victims in all these situations. In playwork we see children as potentially strong and resilient and it is towards this end that we intervene when necessary. We cannot ultimately stop any bad things from happening to children outside of our setting, but we can ensure that when they are in the play environments that we oversee, they have access to a range of diverse experiences, support, information and observant, caring adults who do their utmost to listen to and empower them as well as respond to concerns following agreed procedures. This is part of safeguarding. Safeguarding does include risk/​benefit assessment of the environment. It does include having policies and procedures so that everyone knows what to do in the event of a fire, an accident, an emergency, or a disclosure. But it also means that we are aware of and advocate for children’s rights, their needs, their responsibilities; that we have full regard for their personal identities; that we value who they are now and what they think and feel and that we care about the experiences they have. In playwork this regularly means going the extra mile. Ali remembers whilst doing some research a few years ago going to spend a day with an organization that took children away on camp for a week. The organization had taken all the normal precautionary steps related to legal requirements. It was very laid-​back with plenty of time and freedom for children to play how they wished, but at the same time there were opportunities available that were entirely new for these city children, such as sleeping out under the stars, cooking on an open fire, experiencing the dawn chorus in the woods, mud-​wrestling, looking after large farm animals, den-​building with branches and

113

114

114

Reflective Playwork

pallets and sleeping in them if wanted. Simple experiences –​but the workers had thought deeply and worked hard to make them available because as one said ‘we want them to feel who they are and lay down some deep memories’. So with specific regard to the above list of things that are undesired, playworkers should be aware of and be up to date with the following issues:

Bullying Remember that bullying is not every day teasing and name-​calling or even fighting. Guldberg (2009:94) suggests that ‘much of what is defined as bullying today is not bullying. It is boisterous banter or everyday playground disputes –​and should be resolved without adult intervention’. ‘Real’ bullying ●● ●● ●● ●●

intentionally hurts another person; is usually repetitive or persistent; uses physical and/​or emotional aggression; or involves an imbalance of power.

(Taken from www.anti-​bullyingalliance.org.uk) Playworkers should keep their eyes and ears open, take opportunities to listen and talk with children about bullying and talk with one another about any concerns they have in order to decide if any action should be taken (this may involve talking with parents or school or supporting individual children, passing on information on relevant websites, articles, etc.). We should also be aware of and be honest about our own feelings and experiences of bullying as these can make us very subjective and negatively influence our interventions and conversations with children on this subject.

Injuries Playworkers should ●●

●● ●● ●●

have emergency first aid skills or be able to refer to and support a first-​aider colleague and know how to contact the emergency services; know the differences between accidental and non-​accidental injuries; keep relevant records; and ensure that risk/​benefit assessments are done on particular activities, spaces or equipment.

Illnesses Playworkers should ●●

know the signs and symptoms of childhood illnesses and know how to respond to these appropriately in relation to the specific child or children concerned and in order to protect the welfare of other children and workers at the setting; and

115

Children’s Play and Welfare ●●

know how to support individual children with specific chronic illnesses in the event of an onset of symptoms or relapse

Abuse Playworkers should ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

be aware of the indicators of different types of abuse; know what to do and who to contact if there is cause for concern; have information available from appropriate organizations; know what to do in the event of a disclosure; be aware of their own related reactions and responses; and be able to discuss related issues with children when this is relevant

Reflective questions Here are some reflective scenarios related to child protection, children’s rights, parental rights and the playwork principles. There are no right or wrong answers to these. Consider all possibilities and try not to jump to conclusions. In each scenario what, if any, are your concerns? What might lie behind or contribute to the scenario? What actions might you take? Robert ●●

In Vermont, United States, Robert, aged six years, is packing up ready to go home at the end of his day in kindergarten. The teacher notices what looks like the sharp end of a knife sticking through the fabric of his backpack and asks Robert what it is. Robert immediately pulls out an eight-​inch hunting knife and tells the kindergarten teacher very proudly, ‘It’s my hunting knife from Uncle Jed. He took me hunting this weekend and we got a deer. He gave me this knife.’ The kindergarten teacher immediately took the knife from Robert and said that knives were not allowed in school and they would need to go see the school principal. The teacher was completely shocked, but did not respond to Robert directly. In Vermont hunting is considered important for men to put food on the table and it is expected that sons will be initiated into the traditions of hunting from an early age.

Jennifer ●●

Jennifer, aged five years, is dressed from head to toe in pink and is strutting around the playscheme in her high-​heeled boots. She pouts her lips and occasionally stops to place a hand on her hip, which she juts out provocatively. The playworker said ‘I like your boots Jennifer’ and Jennifer replied, without hesitating ‘They’re my hooker boots.’

Osman ●●

Osman, aged ten years, lives with his two younger sisters and his mother and stepfather. He comes to the adventure playground (open access) on most days that it is

115

116

116

Reflective Playwork

open, often staying from opening to closing. He tends to mainly play on his own but is not unfriendly. On this day he falls off the zip wire and lands very heavily. He is obviously hurt and a playworker offers help which he refuses, saying he is fine. He keeps rubbing his right upper arm and not using it. The playworker asks to look at it but he continues to say it’s alright. The staff think he should see a doctor and suggest it to him but he looks scared and says he is going home and will tell his mum to look at it. He then leaves.

There are a number of possible ways to respond to each of these scenarios and these may depend upon your area of work and its safeguarding policies and procedures; your knowledge and understanding of a situation and the context in which it occurs; your knowledge and understanding of the child or children involved and their personal circumstances; and your previous personal and professional experience as to what you think and do. In each scenario we should first state what exactly we are concerned about and then think of all the possible reasons for the child’s behaviour before taking any action. For instance in the last scenario you are probably concerned that Osman has hurt himself and has refused help. He may just be a proud little boy who hates to make a fuss. He may have a scar, a home-​made tattoo, a birthmark or a lovebite and is embarrassed for this to be seen. He may have a high pain threshold, or conversely may be in shock. He may have bad prior experience of doctors or hospitals and doesn’t want to be examined. He may have been abused and is covering up for any non-​accidental marks or bruises. Any of these are actually possible and so need to be considered before taking any further action.

Reflective question What possibilities can you think of in relation to the first two scenarios and what actions might you take?

Post-​traumatic stress Kids Health (2014) states that children who have witnessed traumatic events, such as ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

violent attacks (such as rape); fire; physical or sexual abuse; acts of violence (such as school or neighbourhood shootings); natural or manmade disasters; car crashes; military combat (sometimes called ‘shell shock’); witnessing another person go through these kinds of traumatic events; or being diagnosed with a life-​threatening illness.

117

Children’s Play and Welfare

may go on to suffer from PTSD (Post-​Traumatic Stress Disorder) and may experience any number of symptoms such as stress, anxiety and depression. These may manifest themselves in a play setting in a number of ways. Here are a few examples: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Seeming fearful and nervous Anxious and easily startled Re-​enacting what has happened in their play or drawings Persistent worries Lack of interest in anything –​detached from others Acting cranky, grouchy, angry or shameful Problems with focusing Frequent headaches and stomach aches

We should be particularly aware if children have recently come to the country as refugees and be conscious of painful and difficult circumstances in their lives. Their behaviour may be an expression of pain. Playworkers should ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

enable children to feel safe and secure in the play setting; support their play; offer them reassurance; support their expression of feelings through listening and simple praise; build their confidence; and talk to parents/​carers/​professionals, where necessary

Depression, mental illness Whilst the symptoms are hard to detect in childhood and tend to show up during adolescence, mental ill-​health is on the increase in children and it is thought by some that play deprivation could be at least partly responsible. Indeed Sturrock and Else (1998:6) propose that ‘the maladapted play cycle (might be) the kernel of neurosis’ and ask whether playworkers could ‘enable the playing out of actual neurosis formation’ (ibid.). Certainly playworkers should be listening, watchful and reflective, providing as much diversity as possible over time in terms of space and materials for children to use as they wish.

Early pregnancy Playworkers need to be aware of current facts and figures and know where to get advice and information locally on contraception and safe sex and to signpost young people if the need arises. It will be helpful if they feel able to discuss these issues openly with children when relevant and debunk any myths they may have. However it is important to have policies that support this open form of communication so that parents know that the setting has information on these sorts of matters (see also below related to drugs). Playworkers also should be aware that children do often play with

117

118

118

Reflective Playwork

their emerging sexuality (usually well away from the eyes and ears of adults so that we don’t know and can’t stop it!). This is quite normal and we should be concerned only if we discover there is a real age difference, one of the people concerned is not a child, there is a lack of consent or if it is happening publicly whilst the children are in our care. We discuss this in more detail in our book Gender, Sex & Children’s Play’ (2016).

Addiction Playworkers should be aware of the effects of different drugs and their local availability. They should have access to advice and information locally and get hold of good material that children and young people can also look at and/​or take away to read. It’s important to be able to talk about these issues without emotional baggage –​having the respect of children and young people can go a long way down the prevention road. The majority of children will at some point probably experiment –​knowing the dangers will not necessarily prevent this –​and those who continue to seek out such experiences are often looking for escape from some present reality. The more that we can promote resilience in children (and this is a natural by-​product of a wide range of freely chosen play experiences), the better.

Boredom Some boredom is a good thing, because it can encourage new creative or imaginative thinking and action. A good playworker is always on the lookout for neophilic (new) stimuli –​new ‘junk’, loose parts or materials to adapt or modify spaces, so that any of these can ‘become available’ at appropriate times.

Rejection, under-​achievement We all experience these at different times in our lives and we cannot protect children from this, nor should we necessarily do so. Playworkers can, however, build up children’s emotional resilience through their respectful and positive relationships with them, through their provision of diverse play spaces and loose parts and through listening and ‘being there’ when needed.

Pressure to over-​achieve Over-​achieving children, whether it be from their own desires to achieve, from parental pressure, or from school expectations, may suffer from a number of symptoms such as the following: ●● ●● ●●

Tiredness due to lack of sleep Self-​criticism Social isolation

119

Children’s Play and Welfare ●● ●●

Obsessive compulsive behaviour Always saying things are fine when they clearly are not

Playworkers can help by providing a free play environment that has no expectations or standards by which a child can judge themselves; by being relaxed and appreciative of quirky, creative playful behaviour that is usually ignored or scolded by other adults; by showing concern for the child’s feelings but not for their ability; by not praising ‘success’ and so on

Bereavement Children may suffer loss in many ways. The intensity and frequency of their feelings and behaviour will vary depending upon the circumstances. Types of loss that may affect children can include death of a close relative, losing a pet, moving house or school, losing or leaving friends, parental separation, burglary, serious illness, failing to achieve, divorce. Playworkers can help children make sense of loss in a number of ways: ●●

●● ●● ●● ●●

●● ●●

Take your lead from the child and be prepared to talk about issues to do with loss and death and answer their questions honestly Have books around that deal with these sensitive subjects Be reassuring and comforting Support children’s expression of strong emotions and feelings Provide opportunities for children to express their anger such as foam bats, clay, newspaper (for tearing and crumpling) and so on and physical activities such as digging and hammering to release angry energy and creative and make-​believe resources such as free painting, puppets and the like for children to replay situations and feelings Keep in contact with significant others such as parents and teachers For major losses don’t expect a quick resolution of the child’s grief

Stress Children, just like adults, can feel under stress from all sorts of things, such as the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Social pressure World or local news Going into hospital Demands from others Break up of their family/​being expected to take sides Too much to do –​overscheduled lives

Signs that a child is feeling stressed may include mood swings; withdrawal; acting up; aches and pains; lying; bullying; new habits such as twirling hair, scratching ears or sucking thumb; becoming clingy and other altered behaviours.

119

120

120

Reflective Playwork

What can we playworkers do to try and help children feel less stressed? Well we can just be there for them by doing the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Providing a free non-​stressful play environment Paying attention to their feelings without pressure Being a listening ear that supports their expression of feelings Talking about our own stresses and how we cope with them Ensuring that we do not exert any pressure

Many of the signs and symptoms of stress, PTSD, bullying, depression and so on may be similar, and we may not always know or understand what is going on. However we can ensure that we try to respond sensitively, with respect, with a listening ear and without exerting any pressure on them as suggested in the items above.

Reflection –​ Jacky I have a friend who is a counsellor and one day I was discussing the role of a counsellor with her. I explained that I didn’t think I would be any good at it as I find it much more difficult to feel supportive or empathetic towards people who come from privileged backgrounds than I  do towards people who don’t. She said that everybody has a right to have their misery taken seriously regardless of their circumstances. I have reflected a great deal on this. In relation to playwork I wonder whether children from middle-​class, privileged backgrounds with over-​scheduled lives, need opportunities for free play and places that use a playwork approach, just as much as those from deprived areas. What do you think?

Health and safety The health and safety of children are the responsibility of all adults who work with or care for children and in many countries there is legislation that covers this –​in some there is none. But children do have a right to an environment that will not cause them harm. This involves such things as ensuring that the physical environment for play and the materials and equipment within it are not inherently dangerous (this does not mean that children will not necessarily invent dangerous things to do as we shall explore later); that if food or drink is provided it is suitable for consumption; that there are procedures in case of illness, accidents or dangerous incidents; that adults who are in the environment are safe, that is they do not represent a danger to the children, and so on. As a playworker it is important that you know the health and safety requirements of your setting and if these refer to any legislation, that you actually understand what the law says rather than adhering to any myths, rumours or misinterpretations. For example some schools in Britain stopped running in their playgrounds for fear of accidents! You also need to be aware of your own fears and

121

Children’s Play and Welfare

concerns that may influence your interpretation. Wherever possible it is important to share your understanding of health and safety with your colleagues to ensure that you are all following the same interpretations and that your procedures are not unnecessarily limiting the children’s opportunities for all kinds of play.

Risk and benefits Learning to manage risk helps children become resilient. It makes them feel competent, independent and strong and they learn to deal with uncertainty. If you take a risk you never know what the outcome might be. Earlier in the book, Jacky reflected on jumping from a shed roof and hanging upside down from a branch and Ali recalled sliding down the stairs in a plastic washing basket and climbing over the fence to try and reach the neighbours back door without being caught. Nobody forced us to do these things –​we chose to. Taking risks is something that all children do because it is the only way that they can learn what they are and are not capable of; what they can and cannot manage; how to manage unexpected outcomes. What is considered risky is different from one child to the next, and culture and context also play a part. Playwork can support children in risk-​taking by providing an ambience and environment where they feel secure; have a sense of belonging and know that support is available without strings if needed. There is no success or failure and no right or wrong in play –​there’s just play. Anything is possible.

Risk and risk/​benefit assessment Play is an important way that children learn about risk-​taking and gradually become resilient, by learning to cope with minor injuries, upsets and independent decision-​making. If all risk is eliminated from their lives, children do not learn how to be responsible for their own and other’s safety and they may be less able to recover from injuries and upsets later in life should these occur. Over-​ protection of a child is actually as dangerous as under-​protection. The Health and Safety Executive UK (2012:1–​3) issued a paper promoting a balanced approach to planning for play that involves risk-​taking. Their key message is ‘play is great for children’s well-​being and development. When planning and providing play opportunities, the goal is not to eliminate risk, but to weigh up the risks and benefits. No child will learn about risk if they are wrapped in cotton wool.’ They hoped this paper would help to counteract the problem of play providers focussing on minimizing the risk of injury at the expense of other more fundamental objectives related to play and development. Insurance criteria and the fear of litigation seemed to be preventing many providers from offering a healthy range of play opportunities despite the fact that statistically playing in play provision is a comparatively low-​risk activity for children even when there are risky play opportunities on offer such as tree climbing and structure building. Many adults working with children are convinced that such activities are not legally allowed, but this is not actually true.

121

122

122

Reflective Playwork

Figure 6.2  ‘See Mum? I can do it!’. Permission granted by Meakin

Children do need to feel secure about their play settings and the playworkers who work in them. Parents also want to know that their children are safe and in good hands. A  safe and secure play environment is not one where all risk has been eliminated or where supervision is taken to mean never letting a child out of immediate sight! It is one where health and safety procedures are followed and where potential hazards are identified and risk assessed against their play-​related benefits. Where the benefits for children outweigh the potential risks, the risks are managed. While determining, through risk assessment, the ‘acceptability’ of play activities or use of particular objects, equipment or material, three things must be considered: The likelihood of children coming to harm; the potential severity of that harm; and the benefits, rewards or outcomes of the activity. Proper risk assessment then is an understanding of the balance between risks and benefits. It is also important, whenever possible, to give children their own opportunity for assessing risk, as this is what they must eventually do in order to be responsible for their own safety. The Play Safety Forum has published, on behalf of Play England, many competent guides of which Managing Risk in Play Provision: Implementation Guide (2009 and 2013) is really useful for playworkers as it adopts and promotes the risk-​benefit analysis approach and gives lots of common sense as well as legal information about risk in play. It is endorsed by many organizations including the Health and Safety Executive of Great Britain and would be useful ‘ammunition’ for those of you in more risk-​averse organizations and countries. An important part of a playworker’s role is undertaking both formal and informal risk/​benefit assessments related to activities that are likely to involve a certain amount of risk such as children playing in a stream or making their own tree swing. However these must strike a sensible balance

123

Children’s Play and Welfare

and as suggested by the Health and Safety Executive’s High Level Statement in Play Safety Forum (2013) as follows.

Striking the right balance does mean the following: ●●

●●

●● ●●

●●

Weighing up risks and benefits when designing and providing play opportunities and activities. Focusing on and controlling the most serious risks, and those that are not beneficial to the play activity or foreseeable by the user. Recognizing that the introduction of risk might form part of play opportunities and activity. Understanding that the purpose of risk control is not the elimination of all risk, and so accepting that the possibility of even serious or life-​threatening injuries cannot be eliminated, though it should be managed. Ensuring that the benefits of play are experienced to the full.

Striking the right balance does not mean the following: ●● ●●

●● ●●

●●

All risks must be eliminated or continually reduced. Every aspect of play provision must be set out in copious paperwork as part of a misguided security blanket. Detailed assessments aimed at high-​risk play activities are used for low-​risk activities Ignoring risks that are not beneficial or integral to the play activity, such as those introduced through poor maintenance of equipment. Mistakes and accidents will not happen.

A risk/​benefit assessment should consider the following: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Risks Benefits Any factors relevant to the particular location, activity and so on Pros and cons –​options Any precedents or comparisons A decision Action Ongoing assessment

We include here a simple working example of a risk/​benefit assessment form that uses a scoring system. Whilst the Play Safety Forum in the United Kingdom has now moved on from scoring, we still include this example because, in our experience of working in risk-​averse organizations, this enables workers not only to record decisions about particular play opportunities by assessing their

123

124

124

Reflective Playwork

risks and benefits but also to have a straightforward visual example to share with interested parties and/​or concerned managers. There are of course many variations on the recording theme and it is important to choose something appropriate to each setting. The conclusions which are reached that recognize the need for risk in play and the safeguards that are put in place if they are deemed necessary are, of course, the important aspects of risk/​benefit assessments. But in order to justify decisions that are made in the case of potentially dangerous activities, we must still have evidence that we have exercised our duty of care.

Dynamic risk/​benefit assessment Because adults have a duty of care to ensure that the environment and children’s behaviour do not put others at unreasonable risk of serious physical or emotional harm all of the time that they are present, playworkers must carry out dynamic risk assessment on an everyday ongoing basis –​that is risk assessing as things spontaneously happen during play and responding accordingly. Ongoing dynamic risk/​benefit assessment does not, however, take the place of the specific risk/​benefit assessments that may be required for particular activities (although it may lessen the need for quite so many) nor do the regular inspections that identify undesirable hazards and the steps that are taken to reduce any identified risks prior to play sessions starting. In their useful guidance paper on ‘Dynamic Risk Management’, Play Wales (2016:3) consider the following common play behaviours as ones that have been identified as regularly causing concern regarding risk, although it recognizes that there may be many more depending upon circumstances: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Running Climbing Jumping from height Balancing Sliding Swinging Throwing Fighting/​rough and tumble Constraining Using offensive words and gestures Playing with weapons Burning Eating and drinking Construction and destruction

1–​3 2–​6 LOW

Working together –​ co-​operation Using initiative Promotes creativity Problem solving –​negotiation skills Learning to build structures/​shelters Sense of achievement Balancing, fitting and joining things together –​what does and doesn’t work Physical ­exercise –​using strength and energy Improving gross motor skills Learning control and boundaries Taking responsibility for self and others Emotional regulation Tying knots Building empathy Engaging in fantasy and imaginative play Having fun and adventure

9 6

6 4 2

3 2 1

Initially close monitoring and observation to see if they are managing the risks well for themselves –​ ease off if so Intervention if heavy branches or other materials are being unsafely used Talk with children –​if needed –​about what measures they could put in place to make it safe without losing beneficial risk and fun Encourage children to take responsibility for themselves and others

Measures taken to eliminate/​reduce the hazard to an acceptable level of risk

g

4

8

12

16

20

24

Severity

3

12

8

15

10

5 4

18

12

6

Signed:

Likelihood

6

12

18

24

30

36

Date of next review

h

5

10

15

20

25

30

Note: Columns c and d should be expressed on a scale of 1 –​ 6. To assess the risk level, multiply the figure in column c by that in column d. The resulting score (risk level) is entered into column e. 1–​12 = Low risk, 13–​24 = Medium risk, 24–​36 = High risk.

Children may argue over available scrap or ‘raid’ others’ dens, possibly causing aggression or arguments

Cuts and/​or scratches from the bushes Manipulating heavier branches may cause falls and ropes could trip up children which could result in sprains or head injuries

2

f

Children building dens in the bushes from branches, leaves, twigs, grass, bracken, ropes and scrap materials

e

Likelihood Severity Risk What is the value/​benefit of the play of it of injury level opportunity etc. to the children/​young happening 1–​6 (cxd=e) people? 1–​6

d

Risk Assessment undertaken by: Agreed by:

What is being risk What could be assessed? (i.e. environment/​ the likely injury/​ play opportunity/​activity/​ problem etc. event, location, group size and ratio, other e.g. climbing a tree)

c

a

b

Date:

Location:

Likelihood; 1 –​no harm; 2 –​harm happens rarely; 3 –​harm happens occasionally; 4 –​harm happens sometimes; 5 –​harm happens regularly; 6 –​harm every time children do this Severity; 1 –​minor cuts and grazes; 2 –​cuts and sprains; 3 –​head injury/​hospital visit; 4 –​significant injury or paralysis; 5 –​death; 6 –​multiple deaths

TABLE 6.1  Risk/​Benefit Assessment Form

newgenrtpdf

125

126

126

Reflective Playwork

Reflective question Can you think of any other play behaviours that are regularly involved in ongoing risk management in your setting?

When and how to intervene in children’s play is always the job of individual playworkers and their teams, but the Guidance (p. 4) suggests a method of dynamic risk assessment of children’s playful behaviour that can be used all the time. The ABC Method does not, however, apply to behaviour that is unacceptable in a setting, although this is considered, for example, spiteful and intentionally hurtful to the other person. The ABC Method  –​things that playworkers should be always aware of during dynamic risk assessment –​is explained below: Actions –​that are likely to result in harm, for example abrading, burning, colliding, constricting, falling, wounding, damaging, ingesting, drowning and offending (all of which may occur in the midst of acceptable play behaviour) Behavioural modes –​of children that may lead to them having a diminished awareness and ability to manage risk for themselves and/​or others around them, for example emotional state, recklessness, lack of experience, excitement and immersion and whether malice is involved Context –​specific factors that may increase the likelihood and potential severity of harm, for example culture of community, weather, proximity of other children, density of children, types of materials and structures, heights from which children could fall

Reflection Drew was moving around an area of the adventure playground happily singing to himself and seemingly oblivious of everything else (Behaviour –​immersion). He was enjoying jumping and twisting around in a vigorous exaggerated sort of way sometimes moving forwards –​sometimes backwards. He was totally unaware of the tall heavy metal container (Context –​proximity of object) that he was about to collide with (Action –​colliding), which almost certainly would have resulted in a nasty injury. The playworker who was on duty, spotted that this was about to happen and loudly shouted ‘Watch out, Drew!’ (dynamic risk management) thereby averting an accident. He adjusted his movement in mid-​air and narrowly avoided the collision.

Equalities Play is the right for all children as enshrined in Article 31. Enabling all children to play, and to play together, is about benefit to the whole community. It is not about overcoming legal hurdles or making expensive provision for a small section of the community.

127

Children’s Play and Welfare

If any child is prevented from playing then it diminishes the play experience of all. (John and Wheway 2004)

Although this quote relates solely to including disabled children into mainstream provision for play, it really relates to any child with regard to their social and financial status, gender, race, colour, ethnic or national origin, belief, religion, family status, nationality, lawful sexual preference, ability, health (physical or mental) and age –​in other words, all children. It also relates to all types of provision for children and all types of playworkers. If children (and adults for that matter) mingle and play only with children who are just like them, they not only miss out on experiencing, understanding and valuing differences, but they also grow up with a diminished perspective that is more likely to judge ‘others’ and avoid them. Equality law (where it exists) comes into various aspects of playwork such as employment, staffing and provision for disabled children and those from minority groups. However equality of opportunity is not just about following laws; it is also about good practice, working within the Playwork Principles and following a moral and ethical approach when working with children at play. Different countries have different laws/​guidance related to equal opportunities, and it is important that we are aware of those that operate within the place that we work. For instance, The Equality Act UK (2010) brings together many pre-​existing British laws around equality; it sets out which personal characteristics are protected under the law and which behaviours are unlawful. The Act forms the basis of anti-​discrimination legislation in the United Kingdom and promotes the welfare of all children and young people by protecting their rights to fair treatment. The following are categories of these characteristics.

Protected characteristics ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Age Disability Gender reassignment Pregnancy and maternity Race Religion or belief Sex Sexual orientation

No child or adult may be discriminated against in relation to any of the above characteristics either knowingly or unknowingly.

Discrimination Knowledge of difference may be used in a positive way to better support equality of opportunity and fairness, or it can be used in a negative way to support prejudice and/​or unfair treatment of children and adults on the grounds of their difference. There are two types of negative discrimination:

127

128

128

Reflective Playwork

Direct discrimination happens when one person is treated less favourably than another, because of a protected characteristic, in the same or similar circumstances. For example, a playworker recognizes that all the boys love to play football and decides to start a five a side competition for them. No girls ever play. She puts up a notice inviting boys to put their names up if they are interested. One girl asks if she can also put her name up and the playworker says no as it is only for boys. Indirect discriminations putting in place a rule or policy or way of doing things that has a worse impact on someone with a protected characteristic than someone without one, when this cannot be objectively justified. For example, an after-​school club has one craft table but it is too high for the girl who attends in a wheelchair to use and so she cannot participate in any activity that requires the use of a large flat surface. Playworkers have a duty to make reasonable adjustments to remove the physical, social and psychological barriers to participation of children and adults with protected characteristics. Consider this example: An unknown mum approaches a playworker at an adventure playground and asks to have a private word. The family have only just moved into the area and her daughter who is nine ‘thinks she’s a boy’. She dresses, looks like and behaves like a boy. She wants to come to the adventure playground but is worried that there may be separate toilets for boys and girls and that the boys’ toilet may only have a urinal that she cannot use. The playworker assures her that the two toilets are not marked for boys or girls and they are both lockable cubicles. Equality means recognizing, enjoying and celebrating difference and ensuring that each child and adult is treated with equal respect and has equal access to what the provision has to offer. Obviously this does not just happen. We have to take active steps to ensure that our approach is as inclusive as possible and that we do not fall prey to any lurking prejudices that we have not confronted within ourselves.

Prejudice As playworkers we must take time to reflect upon our own views and opinions and those of our colleagues. Once a prejudice has been recognized it can be confronted and dealt with. However unless we are prepared to take the time to periodically check this out we could easily be guilty of unknowingly discriminating against a child or group of children; a colleague or groups of colleagues; a parent or carer or group of parents and carers –​not including everyone in a fair and equal way. As Play Wales (2013:6) notes, We can make inclusion work. It is a journey and no one day will be the same as the next. It takes an holistic approach with everyone pulling together with determination, imagination and creative thinking to ensure that disabled children and young people (and we would say all children and young people) can play and take part in things others may take for granted. As play providers, if we are to turn policies and legal requirements into workable reality, we require open-​mindedness, honesty, determination, hard work and creativity.

129

Children’s Play and Welfare

Reflection Ali recalls visiting an adventure playground in order to assess one of the playworkers there. It was a busy lively place with children from a variety of racial/​cultural backgrounds situated close to a large travellers’ site and many children from these families also used the playground. The playground had recently established an agreement with a local supermarket to regularly collect certain food products that had just passed their ‘best before’ date and then using these to feed those children that were hungry. Beans on toast were being offered on this day and the playworker shouted out that they were ready and to queue up. She then said that they were to wash their hands first and at least half of the queue complained and left the line saying they weren’t bothering and went outside. When those children who stayed were sitting down and eating, the playworker noticed that two or three of the Asian children were using their fingers and not cutlery and she asked them to use a knife and fork –​the children looked confused. When I asked her later to explain to me why she had said these things and what might lie behind the children’s reactions, she said that a recent inspection by the body regulating childcare had insisted that if they were going to feed children, then children must wash their hands and use cutlery properly as that was just ‘normal good manners’. When I prompted her to reflect further on this, she realized that the children who left the line were all from the travellers’ site and that the Asian children normally ate with their fingers at home and that in both cases she had unnecessarily crossed cultural lines without thinking and imposed practices from the most dominant culture, because she assumed the inspector was ‘right’.

At times, some children, as with some adults, are prey to their prejudices and this may make them behave in a discriminatory way. Playworkers have to make decisions about when and how they intervene in the play process and this includes situations where prejudice is apparent. It is standard practice in most childcare/​education provision to intervene and challenge all discriminatory language and behaviour as soon as it happens in a calm, informative non-​inflammatory manner in order that the adult, child or children realize that you find their behaviour unacceptable; learn why it is unacceptable; change their behaviour in the future and to support the child, children or adult who are being discriminated against. However it is important to reflect on discriminatory situations before you intervene in the same way as you do in other situations in order to ensure that you are not by default imposing an adult-​led agenda on the child or children rather than giving them the opportunity to sort the matter out for themselves and in their own way. Children do make sense of the world through their playing which includes their reactions and responses to differences and they need the space and time to do this without us jumping in all the time. Clearly, if you find behaviour or language offensive it is a good idea to let them know that you disapprove; however that may be sufficient.

129

130

130

Reflective Playwork

Reflection –​ Ali Ali recalls an incident in a primary school where a teacher in the playground one morning observed an eight-​year-​old white lad (A) going up to a black boy of similar age (S) and seemingly punching him in the stomach. S crumpled and seemed winded. The teacher immediately remonstrated with A, asking why on earth he did that. A looked down and said he couldn’t tell her. She asked S if he was alright –​he looked worried and said he was fine. The teacher turned back to A and told him he had done a terrible thing and that he must see the head teacher. Things escalated somewhat –​especially as A continued to say he couldn’t say why he had done it. The school was keen to execute its policies on equality and anti-​bullying and clearly interpreted this incident as racist bullying. Parents were called in, but still A –​ although upset –​insisted that he couldn’t say why he did it and that he wasn’t in the wrong. Later that day, however, A told his mum through lots of tears that S was his best friend and they had formed a club where the secret sign of greeting was a pretend punch in the stomach…. A conversation between A and S’s mothers soon confirmed that A was telling the truth. Play takes many forms and is often completely misinterpreted and misunderstood by adults who see through their own lens and not the child’s. How many of you reading this now can remember participating in your own ‘secret club’ and/​or making up rules or words that adults wouldn’t understand?

Reflective questions If this had been a playwork situation consider how you might have responded and why? What sorts of play types were being represented in the scenario above?

As playworkers we must use good play-​centred methods and have good play-​centred reasons for intervening in situations when our intervention may prevent children from following their own instincts and ideas, in their own way and for their own reasons. Playwork is not a profession that has modification of children’s behaviour as one of its aims. It has at its heart the belief that children learn and develop specific aspects of themselves during their free, non-​adult directed play and that an excess of adult intervention will prevent this learning and development from happening. This also includes learning and development that happens in some unpleasant situations as well as in pleasant ones.

Inclusion The best way of checking whether your provision is inclusive (i.e. that it is appropriate for all children with and without protected characteristics) is to carry out regular audits of staff attitudes, the environment and organizational policies and procedures to check if they are operating well and then make any changes that become apparent. Kids Inclusivity Assessment Tool is a useful resource for checking how inclusive our practice is and children’s rights can also be promoted in the play

131

Children’s Play and Welfare

environment by using the following checklist, as guidance, adapted from the key features of the Kidsactive Playwork Inclusion Project: ●●

●●

●● ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

The attitudes and behaviour of both playworkers and children demonstrate how unremarkable it is that children of all statuses, genders, races, ethnicity, abilities, health, beliefs, religions, nationalities, sexuality and the like are part of a wide cross-​section of the local community using the service. Play opportunities are led by the interests and enthusiasms of each child and young person who attends and take place with regard to any likes, dislikes and specific needs each one may have. Everyone is welcomed on arrival and wished well on departure in a way that suits them. Pictures, equipment and resources reflect the lives of people from all cultures, categories and walks of life as part of a wide representation of children and young people’s differing backgrounds and experience. The person in charge is committed to the active participation of children, young people, workers (parents and others where appropriate) to ensure good-​quality provision and to ensure that individual needs are met. The person in charge has made time to build links with families, local services, schools, community groups and so on as part of a commitment to give all local children and families a genuine choice to be part of the service. All playworkers have had attitudinal training around a range of equality issues and continue to take part in training about inclusion. All playworkers are aware that attitudes, environments, structures and policies need ongoing attention in order that they do not disadvantage particular children or young people. All playworkers have or are developing skills to communicate effectively with each child and young person, and encourage all children and young people to develop ways of communicating with each other. Each child and young person has opportunity to express their views and opinions on the play provision and the sessions they attend, using whatever communication methods they choose. Parents and carers feel welcome and valued when they offer information that helps the play provision enable their child to take a full part. The service has a vision of what it wants to do; policies and procedures for how it does it; and a process of monitoring and evaluation to see how well it is doing it. This includes all who are involved in the setting in a process of continuing reflection on the development of inclusive policy and practice.

Reflective questions How well does your own area of work stand up to these questions? What improvements do you think could be made in order for it to become more inclusive?

131

132

132

Reflective Playwork

Conclusion Playworkers frequently find themselves in the position of having to deal with extraneous things that potentially impinge, in some way, on children’s playing. Sometimes such things really interfere with our primary focus of supporting and facilitating children and young people’s play process and sometimes we even forget our focus in efforts to comply with rules and regulations and because lots of adult-​led agendas press in on us. The playwork approach requires us to keep our perspective; to uphold all children’s individual rights in a caring and supportive way and to deal with any issues in such a way that they do not spoil the natural process of children’s playing but enhance it. Safeguarding children and young people needs an ‘approach that requires all workers to strategically build children’s capacity to resist dangerous situations and be resilient’ (Tarr et al. 2011:49). People who work with children at play are in a very good position to do this –​so we should do it well and also play our part wherever possible in helping others to do the same.

Further reading/​Resources The Anti-​Bullying Alliance; see www.anti-​bullyingalliance.org.uk Managing Risk in Playwork Provision –​available via www.playengland.org.uk Play Wales (2013) Play –​Inclusive Provision, Play Wales; see www.playwales.org.uk UNICEF (2013), Summary United Nations General Comment No. 17, IPA, http://​www.ipausa.org/​pdf/​ IPASummaryofUNGCarticle31_​FINAL.pdf UNICEF (n.d.), Fact sheet: A summary of the rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, UNICEF, https://​www.unicef.org/​crc/​files/​Rights_​overview.pdf Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/6-observingeveryday-playing-scenarios/

133

newgenprepdf

7 Playable Spaces

Chapter Outline Introduction Children’s emotional relationship with space Children’s emotional development Play building community Urban public play spaces Natural public play spaces The role of the playworker

133 133 138 141 142 149 151

Introduction In Chapter 5 we discussed the role of the playworker in creating every day play spaces that are staffed and supervised, and the responsibilities of the playworker to observe and learn from children playing in order to support and resource play and cultivate sensitive and playful intervention styles. All of that is still as relevant here, but this chapter will explore how children emotionally relate to space and each other when playing and seek out public places to do so.

Children’s emotional relationship with space We’ll begin with some questions to help us understand the spaces children create around them almost everywhere they go.

134

134

Reflective Playwork

Reflective questions If you can, ask someone else to slowly read out these questions to you, while you close your eyes to relax and think and feel your answers. How do you feel if you are ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

in a library? in a hospital? in a football stadium at a cup final? in a dark forest? on top of a high tower? beside the sea on a sunny day? in a noisy restaurant? on a cliff at sunset? on a beach during a storm? lying down outside watching the stars at night? sitting by a real fire on a cold and wet winter’s day? in a room lit only by candles? playing charades at a party? in your favourite room?

There are no right or wrong ways to emotionally respond and we will all react differently –​some of us will feel calm where others are bored, excited where others are frightened, wary where others are relaxed, irritated where others are energized. Places affect us, sometimes quite profoundly. Places also greatly affect children –​they can be enticing, alluring, provoking, fascinating and intriguing, and they can draw out an imaginative and exploratory response that then sparks whole play episodes. Can you recall this yourself? We touched on ‘affective play spaces’ in Chapter 5 and how to make staffed play provision welcoming and inviting places through a reflective consideration of our own attitudes and behaviours and an affective audit of environmental props.

Reflective questions We have said (2006) that affective play spaces 1. pay attention to and support the variety of feelings and moods that children and young people bring with them or have during play.

What kind of feelings or moods might children bring with them? What kind of feelings or moods might children have when they are playing? What does it mean to pay attention to these? How can we support children’s feelings? Are there particular emotions we would like to evoke or encourage and why? Are there particular emotions in play spaces we would not like to evoke or encourage and why?

135

Playable Spaces

2. have particular areas, materials and/​or props that at different times stimulate or encourage the expression, experience or experimentation with a range of emotions.

What is the difference between experience, expression and experimentation? How can a space stimulate different feelings? What kind of props or resources might provoke different feelings? 3. have playworkers who seek to develop via diverse means, an overall ambience of welcome, acceptance, freedom and playfulness.

How do we continually create an atmosphere? How might the layout and décor of a setting be playfully inviting? What might we say and do to convey acceptance and encourage freedom? Would particular ‘rules’ or policies help or hinder any of this? How do we express our own emotions when children are around –​or not?

Sutton Smith (2001) suggests that adults who are accustomed to having authority over children often don't like it when children play in a real way. He also thinks that children have always used play to get deeply in touch with the extremes of the emotions that they may experience in their future lives. Many playworkers also seem to have difficulty with this concept and with recognizing that many play behaviours are not ‘bad behaviour’ that needs to be ‘managed’ but a normal consequence of children’s feelings whilst playing. Play has both ‘light’ and ‘dark’ characteristics, and it is both the ‘light’ and ‘dark’ emotions that an affective play environment should support. This means that playworkers should be observant, aware of and supportive of however children are feeling and like Hendricks (2011) understand that ‘the advantage of playing is that you can test out the action and emotions that would be too dangerous to act out in real life’. Children have strong feelings like fear, anger, frustration, despair, excitement, awe and wonder. They may bring some of these with them from events at home or school or they may experience them while playing. Good settings recognize this and not only support children, but also maximize their environment with sensory and elemental stimuli and with relevant props and possibilities that will encourage both emotional expression and experience. Children playing hide and seek in the dark, children telling ghost stories by candlelight, children using a ‘scream’ corner with a punch bag when frustrated and children creating an entire ‘underwater’ world indoors are some fine examples we have recently seen that had adult permission and support. Sadly all too many settings are ‘affectively poor’, unstimulating and rather boring places where the workers are –​wittingly or unwittingly –​trying to manipulate children into being bright, shiny, co-​operative humans who always feel friendly, happy and safe. Not only does this not work, it confuses and inhibits children. Goleman (1995) suggests that ‘when a carer consistently fails to empathise with a particular range of emotion, the child begins to avoid expressing and then even feeling –​ that emotion’. And suppression is not the same thing as self-​control. An effective affective play space then is not just a place where children play. It is a place where children’s inner worlds can be externalized and where the adults (if they are present) seek to actively support this through attunement, props, ambience and atmosphere. This includes expression of

135

136

136

Reflective Playwork

those strong and primal emotions that manifest themselves sometimes in aggressive behaviours (if we are honest we will all know how it feels to be angry or frustrated and to respond inappropriately as a consequence) –​how might a playworker respond to these? To answer this and understand how this relates to creating affective play spaces, consider the following questions and try to answer these honestly.

Reflective questions Recall the last time you were really angry or frustrated about something. What did you do? How did you behave? Now imagine a person close to you telling you at that time to calm down (which might have really happened!) What was your response? Have you/​do you ask or tell children who are angry or frustrated to calm down?

When we have asked our students over the years these same questions (and confessed our own answers too!), they have listed actions such as kicking or punching furniture, shouting and swearing, throwing (and sometimes breaking) something, slamming doors, screaming and crying, striding away from the scene, going silent or getting drunk. And almost everyone says being told to calm down makes them feel angrier –​perhaps because they feel unheard or misunderstood and their anger is perceived as unnecessary or invalid. Does this sound and feel familiar? We do need therefore a repertoire of more helpful responses to children than just demanding that they calm down –​a mature response beyond most of us! The following story gives an example.

Reflection –​ Ali Ali remembers two boys on a busy playscheme that both had tough things going on in their lives. Somehow when they were together, there was a particular dynamic that seemed to provoke all their pent-​up aggression and within the first two days, playscheme workers had remonstrated several times with them about picking on others and fighting. Early on the third morning, children came running in to say that they were ‘beating Alex up’ (not his real name). They did indeed have Alex pinned down on the grass outside having dragged him several yards across the field and punched him. Clearly intervention was required and one playworker tended to Alex while I took the two lads inside who were aggressively sulking and clearly unremorseful. I told them that their behaviour was unacceptable but they already knew that, so I asked them what they were feeling when they first attacked Alex. I remember they looked at me as though it was a mad question but I persisted. After much shoulder shrugging and grumping, one of them said ‘his eyes went all red’ and the other followed it up with ‘yeah, I was really cross’. I remembered that we had several large bin-​bags full of empty plastic pop bottles for possible creative use and then asked the boys if we could make a deal. I got two of these bin-​bags and put their names on them and asked them if

137

Playable Spaces

the next time they felt like that, they would come and get one or more of these bottles and hit the door frame, floor or fence with them, rather than taking out their anger on someone else. They still thought I was crazy but they agreed. They went through a lot of bottles that day –​probably for novelty’s sake too –​but we had no more violent behaviour for the next two weeks and we had a few conversations that made me understand why they were so angry and hopefully helped them understand their feelings and be more responsible for their behaviour. They needed to learn that it was okay to be angry, but it wasn’t okay to hurt themselves, others or someone else’s property. They needed alternative ways to cope with their feelings, rather than be overwhelmed by them.

Equipping a space with beanbags, punchbags or simply pillows or cushions for children to punch or kick or similarly inflatable toys, foam bats, or empty plastic bottles can all be used to take out frustration on a wall or piece of furniture. Piles of newspaper are great for tearing or crumpling or scribbling on, and having cardboard boxes to rip or jump on and crush, or bubble wrap to stamp on can help dissipate strong feelings. Just running, digging, throwing or kicking a ball against a wall can really help some children. Playdough (just flour and water) or plasticine are great to pound or even to make figures to squash. Another idea is simply agreeing to have a particular place where a yell, a shout or a scream can happen like a walk-​in cupboard. These are examples of some ways in which we can offer children space and materials that are both helpful and playful and consequently diffuse situations and give children the means to gain control and then talk things through if they wish/​need to. Different things work for different children; so it’s worth having a variety of possible approaches. Let’s move on and go a little deeper here in order to recognize children’s emotional engagement with different spaces and their affordances. Brooker and Woodhead (2012:14) ask, ‘Can children’s attachment to places, as well as their attachments to people, be understood as an important contributor to their well-​being?’ We think they can. Ali recalls reflecting some years ago with a colleague on what children called specific physical areas in a play centre over a period of time and deciding to listen out and note these down over a period of several days. A ‘corridor’ round the back of the building had been a chicane, a race-​ track, a gully, a tunnel, a prison, a kennel and a petrol station. The ditch and shrubs round the perimeter of the outside space had been the centre of the earth, the ravine, the jungle, the place where the monsters live under our power, the rumbling volcano and ‘our’ camp. The climbing frame had been the circus, the mountain, the tent and the obstacle course. The sandpit had been the desert and the temple of doom. The mats indoors had been islands, wrestling rings, houses and stepping stones. A corner had been a den, a cave and a shelter. Seeing these different spaces in the play centre through different children’s imagination was both fascinating and humbling for us. We realized then that we spent more time looking at the physical manifestations of play –​ that is what children did –​than we did about children’s emotional engagement with spaces and how the feelings engendered by a space both precedes and continues to promote what is outwardly ‘done’.

137

138

138

Reflective Playwork

In his writing on quality play environments, Hughes asks readers to use IMEE (their intuition, memory, experience and evidence) to list up to twenty ‘endings’ for a sentence beginning ‘the play space I want would be where I could…’. We have done this many times with workshop participants, although we have used it principally as a method of recalling play memories –​try it for yourself now.

Reflection opportunity Finish this sentence: ‘the play space I wanted would be where I could …’. See if you can come up with at least ten different endings.

In the past we have recorded people’s contributions and every time with every group, we found a 50:50 split between actions and feelings; that is what they had wanted to do (e.g. climb, build, run, dance…) and how they had wanted to be (e.g. be noisy or quiet, feel free, be daft…). Clearly how children feel –​and how they want to feel –​is every bit as important as what they do and utterly relevant to actually what they do. Because it is thought that freely playing supports emotional development and particular spaces induce and support playing, we should pay attention to the nature of such spaces and enable children to access these, both in the settings where we work and those that exist in public space. But first let us look at the nature of children’s emotional development in order to put these spaces into context.

Children’s emotional development From a theoretical perspective, there have been two major schools of thought about what constitutes children’s emotional development, although both of these are relevant and can comfortably co-​exist. The first concerns the development of emotions themselves (Stott [1967] and Sroufe [1995]) and just as there are primary colours which produce basic colours which then spread out into an array of diverse shades, it is widely believed there are primary emotions experienced in babyhood described first as anger, fear and pleasure, which evolve into more differentiated forms (Ekman [1972] postulated six namely, anger, disgust, surprise, fear, sadness, happiness and Plutchik [1990] proposed eight as four polar pairings joy-​sadness, anger-​fear, trust-​distrust, surprise-​anticipation). As a child becomes more responsive and then with the onset of memory and greater cognition, these basic emotions proliferate into further complex forms (such as humility, anxiety, envy, guilt etc.) as the child has new experiences, develops new capabilities and takes on surrounding culture. Whatever their foundational temperament, a child therefore increases her/​his emotional capacity over time as s/​he is exposed to more and more concepts and stimuli; emotional development in this context would therefore seem to be experience-​dependent.

139

Playable Spaces

The second context for emotional development is a behavioural one, in that it considers the development of individual competence to both express and regulate emotion (Roberts [1995] and Golinkoff, Hirsh-​Pasek and Singer [2006]). Others such as Goleman (1995) have coined the term ‘emotional intelligence’ or ‘emotional literacy’ meaning the capacity to name and understand one’s own feelings, empathize with others and moderate and manifest emotion in a way that enhances living. We would say that playing is a perfect context for both kinds of emotional development. Children seek out new experiences and express no-​holds-​barred feelings in their playing, and because they are also driven to play with others, they naturally grow to understand that games only keep going if there is some moderation and resolution of players’ conflicting feelings. Play is the place where children synthesize the release and control of emotions. As Sutton-​Smith (2001:167) remarked, ‘Play seems to be an attempt to avoid getting out of control while providing access to the vigour and vitality of the more extreme largely involuntary kinds of emotions.’

Reflection Jacky still remembers a very moving story from a playwork training session that she did some time ago. Having asked participants to recall places that were special to them as children and where they liked to play, one wonderful playworker recalled that at the convent where she lived and went to school, she had found a small space behind a loose brick in the perimeter wall that was her only ‘personal’ space. She shared a dormitory with many other girls and their cupboards were regularly inspected. She hid things she wanted to keep just for herself behind the brick, such as diary jottings and a few small bits and pieces that she owned or found and treasured, and she liked to sneak off and look over her ‘things’ when she could. When she was about thirteen there was some building work being done on a part of the school. The girls were not allowed to have any contact with the builders, but my student had a crush on one of them and wrote a love letter to him that she hid in her secret space. One day one of the nuns saw her going to the wall, removing the brick and taking out the letter to read. This was disaster! All her things were removed from the hidey hole and destroyed. She was reprimanded severely both for having a secret hidey hole in the first place and for writing a love letter. The wall was repaired in order to ensure that there were no further hiding places that could be found in it. Play places come in all shapes and sizes but for some children they are their world –​the place where they can fully express themselves.

Reflective question Can you recall a particular space that you loved as a child and would choose to often go to? It could be tiny or large, inside or outdoors –​but a place where you felt you could be you. Did anyone else know about this?

139

140

140

Reflective Playwork

Figure 7.1  ‘This is my space’. Permission granted by Law

‘Children know the importance of hiding out, of finding the “just for me” place where they cannot be seen’ (Sober 2002:viii). Such places are ‘consecrated spots’, that house ‘temporary worlds within the ordinary world’ (Huizinga 1950:10). Children’s geographers and environmental psychologists call this place-​making –​‘a means of looking inward, of establishing something of their own and developing a sense of self ’ (Derr in Spencer and Blades 2006:5) and for many children –​in middle childhood particularly –​this is symbolized and manifested in exploring interstitial in-​between spaces and building dens and forts, urged on to do so by their need for privacy, independence and self-​sufficiency. Sobel (2002:159) calls these ‘special’ or ‘secret’ places and views them thus: A sense of place –​a piece of the environment that has been claimed by feelings: We are homesick for places and the catalyst that converts any physical location into a place is the process of experiencing deeply.

141

Playable Spaces

Does this resonate with you? Of course in some Western countries children have less freedom to go out and play and explore their neighbourhoods as their parents and grandparents did, although apart from increased traffic, little else has really changed in the way of potential threats and hazards, but many parents ‘feel’ it has and are more protective. Whilst on the surface this may be understandable, the loss to children of being able to roam and explore and discover their growing sense of self is immense, and we need to find ways of enabling this to still happen not just in compensatory staffed play spaces, but also wherever possible to reclaim public spaces for children’s play. Individuals, organizations and even governments have been finding ways to do just that, and we will note a few of them. And along the way we also need to understand that play is not just of immeasurable value to children, play in itself also benefits and builds community.

Play building community Reflection –​ Ali Many years ago when my son was seven years old, he asked me if he could walk home from school on his own. Before I had even spoken, he held up his hand and said he had already thought about what he would do and whose houses along the way he could run to if he got into any trouble. He then played his trump card and reminded me of how much I talked to others about children’s rights to play –​‘what about me?’ he said. Despite the fact that as a child I had gone to and from school alone at an even younger age, all my parental fears hit me like a body blow, but I also knew he was right. I had to put my money where my mouth was. I started to say, okay how about we meet half way for a few days and take it slowly, but he was adamant that he wanted to begin the next day and do it all himself. It was a good twenty-​minute walk which entailed crossing two or three roads and coming through the park at the bottom of our road (he knew the park well and was good at crossing roads). I realized that more often than not I picked him up by car in order to save time and so also regularly denied him the opportunity to even come through the park with me. The next day it was the longest twenty minutes in my life and I stood looking out of the bedroom windows straining to see him and trying to stop myself from running down the road. Eventually he appeared at the park entrance and I watched him saunter up the road, stopping here and there to look up at the sky and at things along the way –​what Louv (2005:117) describes as ‘loose unstructured dreamtime’. As he approached the front door, I again forced myself not to fall upon him in relief, but just open the door with a smile. As I did so, he threw his school bag into the hallway, looked at me with a grinning face and eyes completely shining and said ‘oh, I feel like such a big boy’. I crumpled inside –​how could I take that away from him? Walking home from school in this way had to become the regular norm. I talked to mums of his friends and slowly one friend and then another began to join him in the walk home. They began to linger

141

142

142

Reflective Playwork

in the park for longer of course, but there’s an added bonus of safety in numbers and they were clearly loving the opportunity and proving their ability to look after themselves. It wasn’t long after that, that I and the group of other mums started a regular summer playscheme in the school, which lasted for years and grew considerably in numbers and spread into the park itself. Those children are mostly parents themselves now, but they and their parents still talk about the playscheme which was clearly significant in their lives and touched many many families in the neighbourhood and brought people together.

Putnam coined the term ‘social capital’ (2000:19) to describe people within a neighbourhood who relate to each other and look out for/​do things for each other –​it is also often termed ‘community spirit’. We cannot help but feel there is a relationship between the loss of community spirit and the decline of children playing out, where both foster each other. As Lanza said (2012:164), ‘children play more in neighbourhoods where mothers think their neighbours are likely to help children and other adults’. Strangely though, families tend to behave like this if they are on holiday –​they let their guard down and allow their children far more freedom and get to know other parents far more easily. Has life become so fast-​paced and stressful that we are unable to do this when we get back home –​and when it probably matters far more?

Urban public play spaces When traffic was less, children used to play in the street as well as accessing any local parks. Children were consequently far more visible and ‘one of the most significant changes in the urban landscape over the last century has been the disappearance of children’ (Penn 2005:1980). This has had a tolerance-​lowering effect so that when children do play out, Tovey laments (2007:5), ‘unaccompanied children can be viewed with some suspicion and be seen as a potential nuisance, or even worse as potential criminals. Parents who wish to give their children freedom to play can be perceived as irresponsible and lacking in appropriate care’. As Ali was sitting at her computer writing these words, she heard the sound of playing and looked out of the window to see a group of children around nine to ten years old playing cricket on the road. As she watched, thinking how long it had been since she had seen this, a police car stopped and two police officers got out, recorded names and moved the children on. A local resident had rung to complain of anti-​social behaviour. Only this week in an English newspaper were two articles –​one complaining about children chalking on the pavement in their street prompting a letter from the local council to all families to ask them not to allow their children to do this (hopscotch was apparently unsightly for residents), and another piece calling for action to be taken against children riding bicycles in the road and doing ‘dangerous’ wheelies. When did the simple pleasures of a game in the street become almost criminalized behaviour?

143

Playable Spaces

Figure 7.2  ‘Playing out’. Permission granted by Law

Children’s ‘retreat from the street is fostering the perception that public space is naturally or normally adult space where children are out of place’ (Valentine (2004:80)). Play advocates, parents and playworkers have been fighting back and it will need all of us to come together to change this perception. As we do so, we will find that we all benefit too, from the shared sense of purpose and new friendships and the skills gained in the process. Current examples include ●●

●●

●●

‘pop-​up adventure play’ sessions where playworking adults lay claim to a temporary (and often public) place and place in it piles of recycled scrap materials (loose parts) for children to engage with; doorstep play projects where playworkers run play sessions on built-​up estates whilst liaising with local people and organizations to encourage a greater understanding of play and the need for children to play out; and street play projects which find ways to temporarily and regularly block off particular streets for play sessions –​these have been increasing and exist in the United Kingdom, America and Australia.

143

144

144

Reflective Playwork

The Bristol collective in England (http://​playingout.net/​why/​) claims thus: Playing in the street increases community cohesion –​it brings neighbours of all ages together by providing a sense of common space and shared ownership. It can engender a sense of collective responsibility and thereby increase the safety of the neighbourhood. Street play creates new opportunities for socialising and friendships –​these are often across age groups, or with children that go to other schools. Playing out also increases contact between children and adults, helping to build up familiarity and trust. Streets constitute the vast majority of public space in the city –​to see them only as places to drive and park cars is to massively undervalue them. Streets can and should be places where people can sit, talk, read, play and walk –​and even sing and dance if they want to! The only way this will happen is if we start to use them differently.

As well as gains in physical, social and emotional health, playing out also had another more hidden benefit and its loss is bemoaned by Bucher (1990:79):  ‘children’s street world, formed relatively independently from adults and composed of children from a variety of backgrounds and age groups, is increasingly being replaced by integration into various peer-​group social sets, often chosen and supervised by parents for particular purposes and activities’. If children play only with other children chosen by their parents and in supervised settings sanctioned by parents, this decreases their exposure to diversity and can lead to the growth in assumptions about ‘others’ and potential social inequality.

Reflection –​ Jacky How times have changed in some ways but in others, still the same. One of my grandsons, who only started walking home alone to and from school when he was eleven (my daughter, a psychology graduate/​teacher had read that children’s ability to gauge the speed at which cars were approaching was not fully developed until the age of about eleven!) is now aged twelve going on thirteen. He goes to the park alone with his friends and during the summer holidays they have become the ‘barbecue gang’; buying, lighting and cooking on disposable barbecues. Since he has been given this freedom to roam, engage with his local environment and be trusted with matches, fire, buying, cooking and so on and the chance to hang out with his friends away from parental control he is so full of his life. It is wonderful to see.

Lanza’s determination to enable his own children to have the freedoms and experiences he remembers is documented in his book Playborhood (2012). Based on his experience of being a parent in an American town, he describes his efforts to turn his neighbourhood into a ‘place for play’ so that both his children and the children living nearby can play outside, make their own friends and decisions and settle their own disputes and create their own games and dens. He came up with some great ideas that could facilitate all this and researched what others were doing on similar lines. Some of these initiatives are listed here.

145

Playable Spaces ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

●●

●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Erect a ‘Slow, Children Playing’ sign in the street Take down fences between back gardens/​yards Create a community garden/​play space from some unwanted and/​or unused local land Have community dinners and barbecues based in front yards Run a playscheme in school holiday time Hold street parties Explore the routes, nooks, crannies, wild corners and common ground within the neighbourhood for possible play spaces and allow children to find and use these Encourage ‘reciprocal guardian behaviour’ by having parents taking turns to be based in the local park where groups of children are playing Agree with other parents that ‘you look after/​out for my kids and I’ll do the same for yours’. Have group sleepovers in different back gardens/​yards Negotiate use of local school grounds after school and/​or in holidays Hold scavenger hunts, street hockey, water balloon battles Have bike rides round parks, down canals, to woods Hold ‘pop-​up’ play sessions with collected scrap materials of all shapes and sizes

None of the above of course happens easily or quickly –​they take time and effort, passion and courage and people working together. But the dividends –​for both children and adults –​are priceless. Ideally of course, children should be free and able to roam and explore their neighbourhoods (going further as they grow up) and finding places to play, to meet up, to chill out and chat. Independent mobility and ‘outdoor play in particular is crucial because it is the primary mechanism through which children become acquainted with their environment’, says Valentine (2004:74). Cornell and Hill say that ‘way finding encompasses a set of perceptual and cognitive skills for orientation and directing travel’ (2006:33) and this is the way children develop their internal mapping skills, spatial awareness and gain autonomy. A number of studies on children’s independent mobility between home and school have been done and ‘research carried out in the last two decades in several European countries and both North America and Australia has in fact documented a sharp decline’ (Rissottoo and Guiliani 2006:76) in children going unaccompanied to and from school. Apparently Finland was the only European country where this was not the case (ibid.). If children are not allowed to ‘play out’ and get to explore their locality, with all the autonomous benefits this can bring, we have to ask whether what they are doing instead is as beneficial and whether in the name of protection and/​or education, we are accepting this as normal.

Reflective questions Are we helping to make children and their playing more visible? Are we having conversations with parents and local people about the benefits of playing out? Have we tried or are we working towards trying any of the initiatives described above?

145

146

146

Reflective Playwork

If children do go out to play in public areas (with or without us), where can they go? Mero (1908) took the view over a century ago that cities would need fewer hospitals, prisons and asylums if there were more playgrounds –​quite a claim for the power of playing. But what kind of public play spaces are out there? Public playgrounds evolved in America and Europe in the late nineteenth century at a time when children were in the political and legal foreground in terms of legislating for their basic education and against child labour (see Frost [1992] and Hendricks [2011]). Various reform and charitable movements followed by public health concerns prompted the eventual introduction of municipal playgrounds, with swings, see-​saws, climbing frames and the like –​primarily to promote children’s physical health. Similar equipment together with sandboxes was also placed in nursery schools and in school grounds. Lady Allen (1968:18–​19) describes the different design periods through which playgrounds ‘progressed’ over several decades: the ‘prison period’ with large tarmac yards and little equipment; the ‘ironmongery period’ with lots of climbing bars and slides; the ‘concrete pipe period’ with blocks and tunnels; the ‘novelty period’ with play sculptures or painted engines; the brief ‘concrete maze period’ and the ‘DIY period’ of junk playgrounds after the Second World War. Municipal playgrounds however –​those funded and managed by local government –​have hardly changed in a hundred years. Hendricks comments (2011:15) thus: New playgrounds are established using the same old formula that was developed in the early twentieth century –​and despite all the criticism of this quality of provision from play organisations and academics, cities continue to provide for play as if they have only a small number of rubber stamps to use when making the plans for these spaces. Swings, merry-​go-​rounds and combination structures with a number of slides continue to dominate public play facilities.

As Melville (2004:2) deplores, ‘these monotonously conceived fenced reservations are to be found the length and breadth of the land; sad monuments to a widespread misunderstanding of what children want and need’, echoed also by Solomon (2014:4): about ‘designs endlessly replicated across America…’ The Free Play Network, a (now disbanded) collection of individuals and organizations committed to free and better play opportunities for children, still has a thought-​provoking exhibition on their website entitled ‘Places of Woe: Places of Possibility’, which is really worth a look –​ the places of woe depicted there reflect Melville’s comments exactly that fixed play equipment is just furniture and doesn’t make a playground. Melville (2004:3) says that ‘to begin with questions about play equipment is to start in the wrong place. It would be alarming if an architect began a design for a house by inviting the client to choose the sofas. The first questions must be: what should your place look and feel like, what sort of a place do you want it to be and what do you want to do in it’? Solomon suggests not even thinking about playing to begin with as one’s view of what play is can prejudice one’s view of what a play space should look like. She suggests (2014:2) starting with children themselves and by asking: What do kids need to thrive? What factors affect how children mature emotionally, social, culturally? What type of experiences will help them become competent adults? How do we provide unpredictable daily occurrences that will enable kids to think through unexpected challenges? How can we prepare them to engage with a future we cannot envision?

147

Playable Spaces

The ‘places of possibility’ in the aforementioned exhibition, however, feature some great fixed equipment playgrounds from around the United Kingdom and Europe several years ago and show how play advocates have begun to make a difference. In England at that time, the playwork sector, which had grown out of the adventure playground movement in the 1970s and had been campaigning across the United Kingdom for children’s rights to play, was enjoying an unprecedented showering of governmental financial support that culminated in a national play strategy and a number of play programmes to be executed via Play England –​Playshaper –​a training course for heads of local authority departments; Playbuilder –​ design and development of 3,500 new public local play areas; and Pathfinder –​creation of thirty new adventure playgrounds. There was also money for playwork training and qualifications, plans to embed play in children’s services and wider local authority business planning for residential and public areas, plans to consult and involve children and young people in new developments, plans to make neighbourhoods and routes through them more attractive, safe and more community-​ minded. These and more proposals were described in the ambitious National Play Strategy and some other excellent publications were also written and disseminated such as ‘Managing Risk in Playwork Provision’ and ‘Design for Play’. During these years Wales too was forging ahead with play-​friendly policy-​making as a result of campaigning and advocacy by Play Wales and they became the first country in the world to place a legal duty on every one of its local authorities to assess and secure sufficient play opportunities for children in their area. Sadly the next United Kingdom general election two years later issued in a coalition government whose response to the world-​wide recession that had occurred after the 2008 crash was to bring in austere fiscal policy and severe cuts to local authority budgets over the next few years. The play strategy was abandoned and eventually whole play services, play centres and playgrounds were axed and playworkers made redundant. Voce’s book Policy for Play (2015) describes the whole story and salvages the important lessons to be learnt from this decade, which are relevant to any policy-​making democratic country wanting to champion children’s rights to play. In the meantime the four national play organizations of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland continue admirably and with undimmed passion and fight the ongoing battle for play advocacy. One of the many legacies of this era (Voce 2015:124) is an increased understanding of children’s need to play in their local area, researched and set out in ten design principles that claims successful play spaces 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

are bespoke; are well-​located; make use of natural elements; provide a wide range of play experiences; are accessible to both disabled and non-​disabled children; meet community needs; allow children of different ages to play together; build in opportunities to experience risk and challenge; are sustainable and appropriately maintained; and allow for change and evolution

147

148

148

Reflective Playwork

Using these principles as a foundation means we can envisage and create very different spaces to the same old fixed play areas that children went to only if there was nowhere else to go. They mean that we don’t have to have fences or synthetic impact-​absorbing surfaces –​evidence has failed to show that either of these costly elements have made children any safer, and they certainly haven’t made playing any more stimulating. They mean that we can begin with play itself and create spaces in which children can do and feel what and how they want. Children abandoned fixed play areas a long time ago, preferring bushes, trees, slopes, mounds and grassy areas where they can create their own spaces with a few extra bits and pieces like rope, pebbles and pieces of wood.

Reflective questions Where are children playing in the neighbourhood where you live and/​or work? Are there play areas, open spaces, natural spaces, places where children hang out? Are children playing out and where do they go? Do you know –​should you know?

A PhD thesis on ‘place friendship’ in Delhi, India, where low-​income urban neighbourhoods were researched against ‘child-​friendly’ criteria, made recommendations (Chatterjee 2006) which are remarkably similar to those in the national play strategy referred to above –​we highlight the main ones here. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Develop numerous, diverse and accessible open spaces of different scales in residential areas Create well-​cared-​for, shared parks which support different activities by different user groups Improve spatial mobility of children by better traffic management Promote streets in front of houses as active living places Preserve informal spaces and provide flexible resources (loose parts) in parks and playgrounds to allow children to create play territories 6. Embed play as a priority for local area development In many ways this is not rocket science. When we collectively recall our best play memories, we all know how fundamental play is for our lives and well-​being and yet somehow that intuitive knowledge is often lost and not prioritized when it comes to us deciding what is best for children in the next generation. Whoever we are and whatever profession we pursue, play is still relevant in some capacity and we can all contribute to making and modifying places for play that are forever evolving, are challenging and adventurous and speak to our very souls.

Reflection –​ Jacky I am lucky enough to travel quite a bit and see how different it is in some parts of the world and in different parts of different countries. For instance on one of the Canary Islands, Gomera (where I go regularly), I always see children happily playing out in the town and village squares and on the quieter roads. Children of all ages play or hang out and adults of all

149

Playable Spaces

ages sit and chat or stroll around. They all do their own thing but together. This I believe is because: there are squares for everybody to congregate (in Spanish countries children and old people are not thought of as a problem and in need of separate provision –​they are all just seen as part of the community) and drivers in the villages and towns know there may well be people on the roads so they are careful. Of course the weather is usually warm as well which helps enormously. However, in Germany, which is not always warm, I have been through many small towns that had streets designated as play streets. They were designed so that you could not go through them at speed, with various bends, obstacles, speed restrictions, halt signs, road bumps and the like and so it was expected that children would be playing there. In less developed countries, in rural places, I have seen children as young as five looking after children who can barely walk, just hanging around on the side of the road, playing with bits and pieces, sticks, stones, leaves and the like and clearly not considered to be in danger by their parents who are getting on with their own business.

Of course children don’t just play in playgrounds or designated places for play –​hence the wider strategies and recommendations above about making all public areas more playable and child-​ friendly. Children play anywhere and everywhere they can, whether that be the shopping precinct, the pavement, the museum, the town square, the library and all manner of urban places and we should recognize, accept and celebrate this, rather than discourage and disallow it. Some cities in America and Europe have begun to negotiate using school playgrounds outside school hours as places to play and congregate –​not an easy arrangement to organize as all schools are unique. Play Wales have produced many useful publications including a toolkit to help local individuals and community organizations through the negotiating processes involved. But whilst many schools have rather sterile yards, many more do have great green spaces that are underused and indeed the movement to ‘green schoolyards’ has been gaining momentum in America.

Natural public play spaces Perhaps most of all, children also love and gravitate to natural and wild spaces. ‘Outside natural spaces offer children a special boundless way of playing and learning that stimulates the development of mind, body and spirit’ (Brooker and Woodhead, 2012:42). Lester and Maudsley after sifting through reams of evidence to support the values and benefits of children playing in natural settings conclude that ‘all children have biological predispositions that impel them to interact with the physical world around them. Children form relationships with nature instinctively and should be considered the “natural” experts in play’ (Lester and Maudsley 2007:21). Whilst we are not certain that ‘nature-​deficit disorder’ exists as an actual condition (Louv 2005), we find ourselves both agreeing with much of Louv’s argument that all children need regular contact with nature and identifying with many of his stories with an almost palpable hunger. There is no doubt that children’s physical and mental health both in the here and now and in their future development is manifestly supported through self-​directed playing in wild natural space, whether that be small, local and regular such as a copse or creek near home, or large, further away and occasional such as

149

150

150

Reflective Playwork

a beach, forest or fell. Children are hungry for these places and the freedom to explore and experience them and we should do all we can to make this possible by identifying spaces and enabling access.

Figure 7.3  ‘Mud, glorious mud’. Permission granted by Martin

A number of play projects have been initiated in various countries, like employing regular play rangers in parks, woods and country parks, organizing ‘wild zone’ camps and/​or events such as mud play, nature sculptures and fort-​building. There have also been environmental education initiatives, including forest school; the emphasis here is on children’s learning rather than play, but good forest school leaders tend to be sensitive to children’s play needs and their instincts to explore for themselves. There are many ongoing initiatives and programs and downloadable toolkits and resources to enable parents and teachers to reconnect children with nature in as many ways as possible. Wherever children do play –​whether this is in supervised play provision, public urban or natural spaces, or their own gardens/​yards, there are always ways in which we can modify and enhance these. Playground Ideas is a global non-​profit organization giving ideas for creating and enhancing low-​cost sustainable local play spaces (see Further Reading). Hughes (2001:171) talks about the need for modification of an environment to ‘act as a physical and psychological catalyst that stimulates engagement and triggers sensory and affective engagement’ of the playing child. Frost (1992) lists twenty design principles for creating what he calls ‘magical playscapes’, and sometimes this can

151

Playable Spaces

include seemingly small modifications to outside spaces that are relatively simple and can make a big difference to children’s play and place experience. For instance, occasionally placing particular items in nooks and crannies like a wand, a star, an egg, a painted stone or some coloured glass or shells; strategically hanging a mirror or suncatcher from a branch; creating an archway or standing a door frame outside that goes nowhere but can imaginatively lead anywhere; setting up a circle of rocks or pebbles in unexpected places; leaving out digging tools; placing small world figures, fairies or elves in hidden spots and/​or tree roots; tying ribbons, windchimes or bells to bushes or trees where the wind will catch them –​all small magical modifications that can spark a unique and imaginative response. Such ‘artefacts have a fairy tale flavour to them that is more Brothers Grimm than Walt Disney’ and create what Wilson calls ‘liminal spaces (that) offer new ways for the child to be there, and to feel themselves to be present’ (2008:1; emphasis in original).

The role of the playworker The playwork national occupational standards in the United Kingdom recognizes that children’s imagination creates whole new spaces when they highlight ‘transient’ play spaces –​spaces that are ‘here’ one minute and gone the next that change, adapt, get deconstructed and reconstructed via the use of movable resources, props, materials and structures.

Reflection –​ Ali I remember leaving (deliberately) a pile of out of date bandages on the grass at a playscheme and within minutes children had mentally conjured up a field hospital and were operating on, bandaging up, nursing and rehabilitating wounded ‘soldiers’ –​almost all the children got drawn in to this transient space for a whole afternoon and used a lot of red paint too in the process. The next day a playworker put three large blocks of different heights on the grass and the previous day’s hospital space became an Olympic arena with a newly devised (and rather hilarious) decathlon event.

Loose parts are key to stimulating play in otherwise dull spaces and playworkers providing these have understood what Portchmouth meant when he said: ‘it helps if someone, no matter how lightly, puts in our way the means of making use of what we find’ (1969:7). Playwork Principle 5 tells us that the role of the playworker is to support all children and young people in the creation of a space in which they can play and this of course includes finding and modifying spaces that already exist in the public realm. But this cannot be done without equally understanding and practising the fourth playwork principle:  ‘For playworkers, the play process takes precedence and playworkers act as advocates for play when engaging with adult-​led agendas.’ A thesaurus search on the word ‘advocate’ reveals the following adopt, advise, argue for, campaign for, champion, countenance, defend, encourage, endorse, espouse, favour, justify, press for, promote, propose, recommend, subscribe to, support, uphold, urge…

151

152

152

Reflective Playwork

It will take all of these ways of advocating by all of us to make a difference in a world where the United Nations recently found it necessary to put out General Comment No.17 to press all governments to recognize and realize Article 31 of the United Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) –​children’s right to play. The International Play Association summarized the General Comment as follows: Rising urban populations, violence in all its forms, the commercialization of play provision, child labour and increasing educational demands are all affecting children’s opportunity to enjoy their article 31 rights. In general, where investment is made, it is in the provision of structured and organized activities, but equally important is the need to create time and space for children to engage in spontaneous play, recreation and creativity, and to promote societal attitudes that support and encourage such activity. The Committee on the Rights of the Child is concerned by the poor recognition given by governments to these rights.

Only when we speak up on children’s behalf and challenge existing adult attitudes and beliefs can we really reclaim both public and natural space to be playable space and bring play back into the whole community where it has always belonged to enrich all of our lives. The former mayor of Bogota who was intent on creating a child-​friendly city –​famously said in an interview that ‘children are a kind of indicator species. If we can build a successful city for children, we will have a successful city for all people’ (Penalose, 2004). As Beunderman (2010:xv) said of playworkers, they ‘see their role not as isolated from neighbourhoods and communities but as connected to the wider context of their locality. They increasingly work beyond the boundaries of their site to explore and expand play opportunities, thereby changing the culture and possibilities within the public realm at large. In this respect, play providers are at the forefront of public services innovation’. We indeed all have a role to play that can benefit children and consequently all of us. We conclude this chapter with Solomon’s invocation (2014:9): We can learn how outdoor spaces can aid in helping kids negotiate their way in the world. Using scientific information, we can re-​evaluate our current spaces and find ways to offer more variability and unexpected conclusions. Let’s make sure that these reinvented spaces do their job well and in the most effective, exciting, responsible and inexpensive way possible. Successful spaces cannot solve all of children’s challenges, but they can provide chances for kids to mature, to grow emotionally; to become more competent and confident. We can no longer feign surprise that kids avoid playgrounds. We have curbed their excitement and fearlessness. We can, however, begin to reassess and redress the situation in hopes of providing more opportunities to kids and better spaces for us all.

Further reading/​Resources http://​playgroundideas.org –​for low-​cost sustainable local play spaces http://​playgroundideas.org/​new/​loose-​parts-​manual www.childrenandnature.org

153

Playable Spaces

www.freeplaynetwork.org.uk/​playlink/​exhibition/​woepossibility  –​a photographic exhibition of outdoor play areas www.playengland.org.uk/​resources-​list www.playwales.org.uk/​eng/​publications Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/7-childmindercase-study/

153

154

155

newgenprepdf

8 Continuing Professional Development

Chapter Outline Introduction Playwork and other professions –​what we have in common Cognitive dissonance Reflective practice Continuous professional development Areas of research in play and playwork related studies A research example from Julia Sexton: ‘There’s a right buzz here’ –​using creative methods to capture the affective atmosphere of an adventure playground In conversation with Suzanna Law and Morgan Leichter-​Saxby of Pop-​Up Adventure Play Conclusion

155 156 157 158 160 161

162 164 167

Introduction As this book has been written for playworkers and people who want to use the reflective playwork approach, this chapter will look at what playwork has in common with other professions where people work with children. It will then look at issues related to people who do not usually use the playwork approach but might like to do so and what to consider. It will outline aspects of continuous professional development that are relevant to anybody who is practicing playwork and give

156

156

Reflective Playwork

an example of the sort of research that is being undertaken in the field of play and playwork. The chapter will give some different perspectives to the playwork approach in conversation with two people involved in playwork reflection and research.

Playwork and other professions –​what we have in common Every profession and all parents and carers have their unique qualities and so when they are working with or bringing up children they have a particular approach; in the case of parents this will be based on things like the way they were brought up themselves; their life experience; their desires for their children; role-​modelling other parents they know; professionals that may have been consulted; their personalities; their child’s personality; general state of health; the culture in which they live; their socio-​economic bracket and so on. Organizations where people are employed to work with or on behalf of children are affected by all the same things but are also guided by the aims and objectives of that particular profession or organization and/​or the content of any associated qualifications. If you work for an officially recognized organization, it will have at its heart the desire to support children in some way, even if the underpinning theory is different and/​or the general philosophies and practices are different. Here are some areas where we consider there is probably similarity of intent: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

Best interests of the child Health and well-​being of the child Safety and security of the child A good foundation for the life of the child as they are developing Giving every child an equal chance

There are also similar skills that are required if we want to work with children. These again may manifest themselves differently but the underlying ability should be there. Ability to ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

communicate well with children; listen actively to them; understand them; show respect to them; empathize with them; understand theories of child development; observe children and learn from what they say and how they behave; know how and when to use theory; know how and when to use legal frameworks; know how and when to intervene; and know own strengths and weaknesses

157

Continuing Professional Development

Figure 8.1  ‘Playing in school’. Permission granted by Law

Cognitive dissonance These intents, however, will be manifested in different ways and if we work within more than one discipline or we want to change the way we work or behave when we are with children we will have to be prepared to change. We will begin by looking at the notion of cognitive dissonance which refers to situations involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviours. If the ideas behind playwork practice, as described in the previous chapters, are very different to your existing ideas about working with children you may have more difficulty incorporating aspects of the playwork approach into your work –​you may have to be prepared to change some of your attitudes and behaviour related to working with children. Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger 1957) applies to situations involving attitude formation and change. We tend to seek consistency between our beliefs and our actions and where these clash, we try to resolve the inner tension this causes. For example, if we believe that a child’s best chance of a good future comes from early intervention and formal schooling, we will almost certainly want children from a young age to attend nurseries/​schools that follow a structured educative approach; we will consider scheduling their lives with ‘classes’ in order that they gain skills that are useful to their all round development and hence for their adult life; we will consider their academic or sporting prowess to be of major importance; we will want emphasis on their social and moral development so that it conforms to our beliefs and we will expect that if a child goes to a playwork or care setting that they will have a programme of worthwhile activities that will aid their development and so on. We are unlikely to believe –​although many others do –​that a free-​range

157

158

158

Reflective Playwork

early childhood, with lots of unstructured play, will give them just as good a foundation, if not better, for their present and onward lives; that during free play children acquire the skills that are personal to their own desires; that play enables children to be happy in the here and now and that in early childhood it is more important than scheduling activities related to specific areas of development and so on. It is difficult for people to unlearn deeply held attitudes and beliefs, entrenched perhaps over time and maybe following training and education that emphasizes the importance of particular approaches. Two factors affect the strength of the dissonance: the number of dissonant beliefs, and the importance attached to each belief. According to McLeod (2014) there are three main ways that people can change their attitudinal and behavioural responses: 1. If there’s the will, they can just change one or more of their dissonant beliefs  –​attitudes, behaviours and so on –​so that they are no longer inconsistent, and they can then more easily take on new conflicting ideas. 2. They can acquire new information so that they develop more consonant beliefs that outweigh their existing beliefs and therefore they are able to make a change. 3. They can reduce the importance of their existing beliefs in order to give them scope for incorporating new ideas. Without one of the above, those people who do not already believe in the power of play, the competence of children, their ability to manage risk and their need for freedom from adult-​led agendas will experience difficulty accepting such claims and the possibility of incorporating the playwork approach into their practice.

Reflective practice Reflexive reflective practice The reflexive process requires introspection, an examination of how we influence our own thoughts, feelings and behaviour by what we think we know. So as we reflect on different elements of the playwork approach and our own practice, we should also examine why we are thinking what we are thinking; how we feel about it and why we feel that way; and why we choose to respond in the way that we respond. This may sound like a laborious process but allowing ourselves time will nourish our reflections, make us more self-​aware and help us to improve our practice. We give a real example of this type of reflection related to a specific situation in the Appendix.

Reflective practice –​playwork theory Playwork practice is based on both an experiential and theoretical basis. Your experience may not have led you to the same conclusions and any theory that currently supports your conclusions may be different. It is therefore important to reflect upon the playwork theory presented in this book and beyond to see whether it has any resonance for you. Perhaps it may convince you to make small changes to your practice –​if only to play more yourself!

159

Continuing Professional Development

Reflective practice –​the child within us all As discussed in Chapter 1, ‘reflective practice’ is a vital part of the playwork approach, and being able to particularly reflect back on your own childhood and how you and your friends felt is really important as this enables us to re-​examine our adult thinking about how everything that happens in childhood affects our future and our development. It also enables us to remember how very much in the present we lived as children. Playwork is absolutely about being in the here and now, with the belief that free play is a vital part of our future too.

Reflective practice –​the role of adults What do you think is the role of adults where children are concerned –​that is, do you, for example, believe that children have the capacity to think for themselves, take responsibility for themselves, know what they need, or do you believe that it is the role of adults to do things for children and to teach them? What are your intentions when you are with children playing? It is important to reflect on your reasons for incorporating the playwork approach into your practice. Using the playwork approach means that at least part of your goal is to provide the wherewithal for children to play freely during which time they will develop certain skills and knowledge; if your goal is to teach children specific skills and knowledge then the playwork approach is not so appropriate. If your goal is to enable children to socialize with other children during play then the playwork approach is perfect. If your goal is to guide children’s social development so that they will become co-​operative sharing members of society, the playwork approach is not geared for this although that may well be the outcome of playing. If your goal is to help a child get over a particular problem that they have experienced, using play as the medium through which you are working with them, some aspects of the playwork approach may well already be part of your practice, but some will be totally inappropriate. Reflecting on your own intentions and expectations will help you decide what aspects of the playwork approach can be used and why.

Reflective practice –​ action What can you realistically do in your setting? What is the ethos of the setting where you work and what beliefs do your managers hold? Would you be coming up against dissonance in them and how might you do that (i.e. use play memories, familiarize yourself with current and recent research to support your arguments etc.)? You, our readers, will have your own particular circumstances in which you work, practice, live, operate with children and a range of different roles that you play. Obviously there are some playwork ideas that will be easier to incorporate than others and some of the theory will be more useful to you than other bits. It is important to reflect on what you can realistically do that will not unnecessarily infringe any rules and regulations that you are bound by or cause too much annoyance to neighbours and so on. For example if you only have a small space in which to operate, with little room for storage, you may only be able to use fairly small loose parts, which can be stored in one container. If your health and safety rules and regulations seem so oppressive that very little

159

160

160

Reflective Playwork

is possible, perhaps you could do a risk/​benefit analysis of some activity that you consider worthwhile and show it along with some relevant information to a senior person in order to advocate on behalf of children’s play.

Figure 8.2  ‘Reflect on this.’ Permission granted by Clegg

Continuous professional development Using the playwork approach or some aspect of it cannot happen overnight and even if you consider yourself to be a practicing playworker, it is important that you keep up to date with both new and old theory and practice and also continue to reflect upon the notions that are the basis of this way of working with children at play. How can you go about ensuring that your thinking is not static but is constantly fed? Here are some ideas: 1. Occasional volunteering at an adventure playground, holiday playscheme, after-​or before-​ school club, playground duty or some such, or just a visit to observe what goes on and chat to the workers. 2. Informal observations and/​or formal recordings of play –​for example who is playing with whom and with what, what cues, returns and frames are in evidence, what feelings are expressed, what risks are taken? 3. Audits of different play environments and play spaces  –​for example what play types are accessible, what elements are available, what materials are in evidence, what loose parts are possible, which spaces are favoured and how are they used?

161

Continuing Professional Development

4. Reading books and articles and browsing and downloading material from relevant websites –​ we give some suggestions in our further reading sections. 5. Reflective journal or log –​recording thoughts and questions that come up from your observations, work with children, in discussion or from reading. 6. Attendance at playwork conferences –​at the time of going to press the following initiatives are being implemented: Spirit of Adventure Play in Wales; National Playwork Conference in England; International Playwork Association Conference every four years, at different locations in the world; National Play and Playwork Conference in Melbourne, Australia; Playwork Campference in the United States. 7. Supervision and/​or mentoring carried out by people knowledgeable in playwork. 8. Reflective group discussions centred around some aspect of the playwork approach. 9. Undertake some playwork training  –​in some parts of the world there are local and/​or national courses available (e.g. Hong Kong, Australia), but there are also some playwork courses online (although we cannot vouchsafe for their quality and/​or ease of access).

Areas of research in play and playwork related studies There are a growing number of people who are doing or who have completed post-​graduate studies in play and playwork related areas at UK universities, who are now required to adhere to an open access policy that makes papers and dissertations available to the public. The main universities offering such research are Leeds Beckett and Gloucester as these both offer post-​graduate playwork courses –​see further reading for the links. In 2017 two books are due for publication that refer to or reproduce aspects of recent research on play or playwork, namely Practice Based Research in Children’s Play edited by Russell, Lester and Smith and Researching Play from a Playwork Perspective edited by King and Newstead. As well as this, more publications such as the following: ●●

●●

●●

The International Journal of Play, a new interdisciplinary journal, published in association with The Association for the Study of Play that focuses on all facets of play and offers an international forum for papers and scholarly debate on all aspects of play theory, policy and practice from across the globe and across the lifespan, and in all kinds of cultural settings, institutions and communities. The Journal of Playwork Practice which aims to advance playwork research and practice by providing the first interdisciplinary platform for the publication and dissemination of scholarship relevant to playwork practice. The journal bridges the playwork theory-​practice divide by facilitating practitioner access to research relevant to their practice and enables researchers interested in ‘playwork’ to access a hitherto inaccessible field of practice and its literature. The American Journal of Play, an interdisciplinary publication of The Strong and a forum for discussing the history, science, and culture of play, which aims to increase awareness and

161

162

162

Reflective Playwork

●●

understanding of the role of play in learning and human development and the ways in which play illuminates cultural history. It is peer reviewed and written for a wide readership. IpDip, an ‘Online Magazine for Professionals in Play’, is free and regularly features both academic and practical articles and papers from around the world that are play-​related and encourages reader participation and contribution.

As recent research has become more available, we have been interested in accessing and reading some of these for two reasons. First, because some research is producing evidence to back up notions and instincts many in the playwork sector have held for years. This is important, as it is too easy sometimes for passionate playworkers to make lofty claims about the benefits of playing that have actually not been ‘proven’ –​just because it feels and seems obvious doesn’t necessarily make it true! Second, we are interested and excited by research that is both exploring new ideas and making links with related research from other subjects and professions. We have room for only one example here to whet your appetite; there are many others also worth reading.

A research example from Julia Sexton: ‘There’s a right buzz here’ –​using creative methods to capture the affective atmosphere of an adventure playground Using an adventure playground as her research venue Julia completed an MA in Play and Playwork from the University of Gloucester. Employing observation, video-​making and story-​telling to record the situations that she analysed, her area of research was looking at the affective environment; an atmosphere charged with emotional aspects that are difficult to translate into words but are communicated in the feelings they arouse –​or in other words the positive ‘feel’ or ‘buzz’ of an adventure playground that is recognized by adults and children alike but is hard to pin down and describe. Julia used a ‘post-​humanist approach’ to her research, which meant considering everything within a situation as having equal contributory importance, that is not just a playing child’s experience, but everything else in the surrounding environment, right down to the genetic material that things and people are made of. She also applied the theory of ‘intra-​action (which refers to the relationship between organisms and matter) to how an atmosphere is created by multiple aspects such as sounds, movements, rhythms, temperature, materials and bodies; not as separate entities joining together but as a whole assemblage, which in itself keeps changing. Using this perspective Julia observed three boys playing on a rope swing over some grass in the adventure playground. The boys and their words, ideas, thoughts and feelings connected to other people, the movement of their limbs and the grass beneath their feet; the texture and sound of the rope as it swished through the air; the warmth of the sunshine, the goldenness of the light; other playing children and Julia herself as observer, all contributed to the ever-​changing affective qualities of the atmosphere.

163

Continuing Professional Development

We think that this approach to thinking about observation and affective play spaces helps with the idea of co-​creating play spaces with children, rather than ‘being in charge’! We can only go so far by providing an ambience and resources within a play environment (as suggested in Chapter 5) because the children are the main part of the assemblage and even when we observe we may be changing what is going on by the way we think about and respond to it.

Reflective questions Do you think that you can change what is happening when you observe children playing? How do you best feel you can be part of a play space? Can you see how everything has an effect on everything, particularly how a place feels?

Julia shows in her research that there is so much more to a play space (which could be any place) than being ‘a mere container’ for children playing. She explores the notion that in creating atmospheres we are ‘in it’ together and by ‘we’ she does not just mean humans but all things, human, non-​human or more than human right down to the particles that everything is made of. She suggests that it is impossible to ‘capture’ the atmosphere of a place through observation alone but that if you attend to what is going on and use varied and creative methods you are more able to draw out different details and gain a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness of everything. In other words Julia says we are more than a sum of our parts, and she suggests that people should notice and reflect on how things are constantly assembling, changing and altering in the play environment and that the more we attune ourselves to this, the more understanding we will gain of affective atmospheres and how they are co-​created and how play is supported within them. We agree and think there is much to philosophically explore here –​as Kane similarly says, ‘material, affective, physical and other forces are considered to be at play, that is be playing’ (2015:50); an idea that Guilbaud (2011) also investigates in her Phenomenological Inquiry into the Possibility of Played-​With-​Ness in Experiences with Things. Reflecting on this we wonder whether Sturrock’s ‘Ludic Third’ should therefore contain a ‘Fourth’, that is everything else in the environment besides the child and the adult, as this too affects the playing. There is much still to ponder and it is also great to see more playwork women researching and writing! Playwork is not one thing; it is many and people come to it from different directions and with some different perspectives, but all who stick with it seem to do so because they see that unadulterated play is important –​it is one of the drivers of life –​and that with humility they can accept that children are experts in their own play without the interference of adults, but also recognize that adults can play an important part in protecting children’s right to play and help them in this by protecting and providing rich environments that are suitable for their play and resources (including themselves) that will enhance possibilities for play. We decided to also talk with two playwork people who are making a difference and helping to spread some playwork ideas both within and beyond the traditional playwork approach. Of course there are many others with whom we could have also spoken but exploring and documenting all these would fill several

163

164

164

Reflective Playwork

more chapters and so we must be constrained! We chose Suzanna Law and Morgan Leichter-​ Saxby because we felt their work in making playwork understandable and accessible to a wide range of people and professionals across the world, and their reflection on their experiences to date and where this is taking them, were absolutely in keeping with the aims of this book. We have also included their playwork histories, as they are not untypical of many others who fall into playwork almost by accident.

In conversation with Suzanna Law and Morgan Leichter-​Saxby of Pop-​Up Adventure Play We asked Suzanna and Morgan how they got into playwork. Suzanna explained that she had studied music and for a time had been a musician. She had pursued a degree in chemistry but after this whilst working for a multi-​national home furnishing company, she had also worked in an after-​school club (which she subsequently realized, did not really practice playwork). However she loved working with children; got a job as a play ranger and undertook all the playwork qualifications going, including a further degree, a BA in Playwork, at what was then Leeds Metropolitan University in England (now Leeds Beckett University). It was whilst trying to organize experiential learning in the United States for this degree that Suzanna met Morgan, who hails from the United States and wanted to set up a project promoting play there. The result of this meeting was that Suzanna joined the not yet official Pop-​Up Adventure Play as an intern and subsequently became a founding member of Pop-​Up Adventure Play. She is now undertaking a PhD, through Leeds Beckett University, related to the potentially emerging play movement in the United States looking at the rise of interest in adventure playgrounds and the traits of people who seem to move play projects forwards. Morgan originally never wanted to work with children but was interested in the use of public space and undertook a degree in architecture followed by anthropology. Following her degree she looked for an internship and got one doing research on playgrounds. Whilst doing this, she met Bob Hughes, one of the ‘gurus’ of the playwork movement and delivered a talk based on her research about forts and dens, at his Play Education Conference. After this, Penny Wilson hired her to work at an adventure playground in London. Morgan was fascinated by the whole business of adventure play and after working in Cardiff setting up a pop-​up play space in an empty shop unit, she realized that this could be the vehicle to introduce the playwork approach to the United States. She has also since decided to undertake a PhD in ‘Ethnographic Playwork’ through Leeds Beckett University. Using academic reflection, Morgan is researching playwork practice and looking at how the playwork role generates research through reflection. She is particularly interested in how playworkers are in the play space; what trigger moments cause them to intervene; how playworkers carry their history with them; how this affects their practice and so on. We asked Morgan and Suzanna about the development of their major ventures ‘Pop-​Up Adventure Play’ and the ‘Playworker Development Course’.

165

Continuing Professional Development

They explained that they developed their online Playwork Development Course and attracted American students with different areas of interest in children’s play and hailing from a variety of different backgrounds:  for example, teachers, movement specialists, health workers, children’s museum workers, foster carers, early years educators, academics, parents, grandparents, retired people and so on. They also decided that they should introduce Americans to the actual practical application of playing with loose parts alongside running the Playwork Development Course so that students could see the theory in action. This would give American children the chance to experience playing freely with loose parts constructing and creating; having fun without interference from adults; taking the risks that they wanted to take whilst playing, whilst still feeling secure because adults were present. Morgan and Suzanna decided that in order to make this acceptable and doable in the United States they would need to set up events that people would want to come to, rather like a series of play days. These events needed to take place in a public space, using easily available materials and presented in such a way that everybody would feel welcome, but also so that some of the playwork approaches embedded in it could be demonstrated and discussed if there was an interest –​for example loose parts as play resources; children’s ability to play and take risks without adulteration; when and how to intervene. They thought that interested people would be able to take the idea, without in-​depth playwork training, and offer pop-​up play events in their own communities. Thus Pop-​Up Adventure Play was born and after trialling the idea in a few local locations in the United States, news of ‘Pop-​Ups’, as they are now known, spread via various social media. Building on the contacts they had made through the Playworker Development Course, Morgan and Suzanna decided to take their Pop-​Up Adventure Play events further out into the United States. They connected interested and isolated people together and ran a very successful and well-​received road trip around the United States for two months; holding thirty events (workshops and play events) in sixteen different locations. Pop-​Up Adventure Play has subsequently run a ‘round the world’ trip with events being held in United Kingdom, United States, Costa Rica, Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong and finishing at an adventure playground in Sheffield, England. We asked Morgan and Suzanna what they had learnt from their travels and if they had noticed different attitudes to children’s play in other parts of the world. They told us they had learnt that there is a tension between the simplicity and complexity of play and playwork understanding but that people can get started on it from all different levels. However they have found that people like to be told what to do and the notion that ‘if you are doing playwork right, the knowledge comes from inside and changes from day to day depending upon the children involved and many other factors’ can be quite difficult to comprehend. They have learnt that all sorts of different people benefit from studying the ideas in playwork even if they do not become playworkers. Both of them feel that they have become ‘better’ people from studying playwork theory and feedback from many of their students suggests that it has affected them similarly –​we can also concur with this in our own lives and those of people we have taught over the years. By ‘better’ we agreed that we mean more grounded, self-​aware, reflective, open, empathic, creative and playful and more able to relate to others, to confidently advocate for children’s play and to more effectively support children in their playing.

165

166

166

Reflective Playwork

These were some of their findings from all the places that they had visited: ●● ●● ●●

●● ●● ●● ●●

●● ●●

●●

●●

●● ●●

Children’s play is generally not a priority but people are beginning to think about it. Adults are broadly very risk averse. Some people think that their understanding of and provision for play are the same as playworkers, when it is not. White middle-​class English speaking women are the most vocal about play. Play deprivation and economic deprivation are not necessarily linked. There are different priorities for the role of a playworker in different communities. Any one of the following may be the most important role: being a regular reliable person; talking to parents; having materials; giving permission to play. Changing adult attitudes is sometimes the most important thing that needs to be done. Different loose parts are appropriate for different communities and this requires sensitive understanding. The world looks to the United States for good practice; the United States looks to the United Kingdom and the United Kingdom looks to Finland. The United States has not signed up to the UN Rights of the Child because there are simply not enough people clamouring for it. Children with parents from the Far East seem to have the most over-​scheduled lives. Reflecting on practice and admitting mistakes may be very frightening for some people if their particular culture does not encourage them to talk about feelings, admit weaknesses or do anything that may make them lose face.

We asked Morgan and Suzanna what advice they would give to playworkers who are just starting out with using the playwork approach: ●●

●●

●●

●●

Make incremental changes, for example don’t go from a rule-​based regulated activity provision for children to a completely free and open play based one, in one go –​slowly does it. Introduce risk-​taking incrementally, for example if you would eventually like to have a big fire that children are involved in building and where children can sit round and cook things, start with a candle and when everyone respects the lesser risks involved and how to manage them, move onto a small barbecue and so on. If you want children to be able to use a saw when constructing things, start with a plastic knife. Move on to a metal knife, then a sharper one, then a small hacksaw and so on. One of their mantras is ‘you can’t go from zero to chainsaw in play’. Know your community and ensure that what you are offering is appropriate, for example in some parts of the world people earn money from recycling plastic bottles and cardboard boxes and other scrap so loose parts would have to involve a different kind of scrap. In some parts of the United States black children’s play behaviour can be misinterpreted so it’s not always safe for children to play in public spaces. Study more; start small; start now; keep going.

Good advice we feel for many of our readers who are new to playwork but want to try to put into its approach into practice.

167

Continuing Professional Development

Conclusion We expect that you, our readers, will come from a variety of backgrounds, disciplines and professions. Many of you will be working with children in some capacity or studying how to do so. Some of you will be studying and not practising and your field of study will be related to children and young people in some way, or to play in some way or even to playwork itself. Some of you may be parents, step-​parents or grandparents who are interested in how the children in your lives may feel and behave or you might just want to know more about play. Whatever your reason for picking up this book, we hope we have done you justice and that you find at least some of the chapters relevant and interesting. Most of all, we hope that our words, our anecdotes and both our successes and our mistakes enable you to apply the playwork approach to the children in your lives. In this way we can all develop our respect and support for children and their play, thereby giving them greater freedom to be themselves and the wonderful capable competent people they are. In closing we would say that we have also learnt 1. that children are amazingly forgiving when we are genuinely trying but get it wrong, so don’t hold back; and 2. that whoever we are, each of us has a part to play in changing society’s attitudes to children and their need to play, so get involved where you can. As Amnesty International’s motto reminds us that ‘it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness’ or, as attributed to The Dalai Lama, ‘if you think you’re too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito!’ We wish you well.

Further reading/​Resources American Journal of Play, http://​www.journalofplay.org/​about For free subscription to IpDip, http://​www.ip-​dip.org/​index.php/​magazine-​subscriptions.html International Journal of Play, http://​www.childwatch.uio.no/​publications/​journals-​bulletins/​int-​journal-​ of-​play.html Journal of Playwork Practice, https://​policypress.co.uk/​journals/​journal-​of-​playwork-​practice Leeds Beckett University Research Repository, http://​libguides.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/​research/​repository University Of Gloucestershire Research Repository, http://​eprints.glos.ac.uk/​ Online resources for this chapter can be found at:

https://bloomsbury.com/cw/reflective-playwork-second-edition/online-case-studies/8-using-theplaywork-approach-case-study/

167

168

169

Afterword When we were children –​a long time ago now –​there was no need for adult playworkers because we were lucky enough to have freedom to roam and to interact with our peers without unnecessary adult interference; adults were nearby if we needed them but otherwise we were left to our own devices. This of course had its good points and bad points –​the latter meant we sometimes incurred injuries and occasional exclusion and/​or rejection –​but these were a small price to pay for our freedom, for lessons learnt, skills gained, feelings experienced and the growing sense of well-​ being and self-​esteem that we realized. For many many children these days, there is little of this freedom or even recognition of their need for it. Adults make decisions on their behalf, watch over them constantly, regularly interrupt to ‘teach’ them all they need to know and rush to protect them from anything that is deemed harmful. Adults often do not see children’s growing competencies and capabilities, their need to express themselves and make their own mistakes. Sadly for many other children, the opposite is true and for them there is insufficient or absent adult care and oversight as they struggle to find themselves and survive. We hope that by developing an increasing understanding of the playwork approach, we can all find a better balance in both our professional, parental and familial roles with children –​one that respects and nurtures their drive to play and gives them back their innate ability to make sense of themselves and the world around them through their playing. We wish you well in this never-​ ending and life-​affirming quest.

170

171

Appendix Reflective account Several years ago, four boys aged between nine and ten turned up at our community playscheme. I recognized them from the park where I walked my dogs, but they had never been to playscheme before. As I  was giving them a welcome and getting them to sign in, they asked for a football. Knowing I could have found a football somewhere, I found myself saying ‘really sorry lads, we haven’t got any footballs here. Tell you what though; I’ll do a deal with you. Have a look around and see what you fancy doing today and if by the end of the day, you’re desperate for a football, I’ll make sure we’ve got one tomorrow’. Why did I say that? Was I right? What’s wrong with playing football? Am I biased because I’m not keen on football? They agreed to the deal however and actually, two weeks later, these boys had still not come back and asked for a football. In the meantime, they had made a life-​sized cardboard car (and travelled the world in it), built a wooden go-​kart, made new friends, played wide games with others, dressed up, gone canoeing, had water fights and many more such experiences. Hughes’s IMEE model (1996) is a useful reflective tool to help us consider what we feel, know, experience and have learnt when applied to a particular event or situation. So I can think about my actions by considering my personal intuition, my childhood memories, my experience of working with children and the evidence from literature and research. My first response was intuitive –​‘I found myself saying’. My gut instinct said no to providing a football and said it quite strongly, even though we did have a few footballs and children did sometimes play with them. I have learnt over the years to listen to such strong feelings as they will always tell me something about the situation in hand or about myself. I played football a lot as a child with my brothers and their friends but I was the only girl and felt I had to run faster in order to get the ball passed to me and then kick harder to prove myself. I remember the feeling of periodic triumph but mostly the frustration and worry as well as the occasional shame when I missed. Was I projecting my own past feelings here? My experience of working with children both in schools and in play settings has shown me that many of them love playing football or ‘footie’ and for some it is the first thing they want to do once out of the house or classroom. They clearly enjoy running and tackling, arguing the toss, changing the rules and especially scoring and celebrating goals. My experience also tells me that socio-​culturally this tends to involve mostly boys, the majority of whom hate losing and really want to win and those with the most skill are well regarded by their peers. With regard to child development, playing footie clearly gives scope for physical development, for building relationships and group dynamics and for increasing emotional moderation and

172

172

Appendix

resilience. My understanding from playwork theory is that the role of the playworker is to support freely chosen play, take a low-​intervention approach and also to consider modifying and enhancing play environments in order to increase options and possibilities for playing. So why did I seemingly disregard their play preference? With further reflection I made the decision I did because 1. lots of local lads played football almost every day in the park and on the local recreation ground. Football was easily and regularly accessed. 2. the opportunities for play available on the playscheme covered a wide range of possibilities that would have been occasionally or even never accessed by many local children and young people. 3. many boys play football because it is expected by their peers –​some are even pressurized to do so. It may have been the preference of a couple of these boys but I felt instinctively that was not the case for the others; it was just their default mode. I wanted to meet their play needs (or the needs that I as an experienced playworker attributed to them), rather than their play preferences and give them the chance to try out and experience other things that they probably don’t normally do. But isn’t play freely chosen and personally directed? Wasn’t I stopping them from doing what they wanted to do? In the short term yes, but this second playwork principle is not a mindless mantra to be observed at all costs. On reflection I felt my saying ‘no’ was justified by the fact that they were given a wider range of options and they did not return for a football. I would have kept my word and given them one later if they had asked. Children can only make choices based on what they already know, what they have experienced and what they have been allowed to do. It is part of the playworker’s role to widen this, to, as Hughes (2002:72) suggests, intervene in a compensatory way; to make up for environmental and biological deficits and to support play as a ‘comprehensive experience’–​otherwise play settings will only ever offer football and computer games. I wanted kids at our schemes to have rich experiences, find themselves and go away with great memories.

173

References

Aamodt, S. and Wang, S. (2012:129), in S. Solomon (2014), The Science of Play: How to Build Playgrounds That Enhance Children’s Development, US: University Press of New England Allen, Lady M. (1968), Planning for Play, London: Thames & Hudson Argyris, C. and Schon, D. (1974), Theory in Practice:  Increasing Professional Effectiveness, San Francisco: Jossey-​Bass Aries, P. (1962), Centuries of Childhood, New York: Vintage Books Australian Government Social Services (2009), National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children (2009–2020), Council of Australian Governments Bandura, A. (1977), Social Learning Theory, New York: General Learning Press Bateson, P. and Martin, P. (2013), Play Playfulness Creativity and Innovation, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Bekoff, M. and Byers, J. (eds) (1998), Animal Play: Evolutionary, Comparative, and Ecological Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Benjamin, J. (1974), Grounds for Play, London: Bedford Square Press Beunderman, J. (2010), People Make Play –​The Impact of Staffed Play Provision on Children, Families and Communities, London: NCB Bishops, J and Curtis, M. (2001), ‘Introduction’, in J. Bishop, and M. Curtis (eds), Play Today in Primary School Playgrounds, Buckingham: Open University Press Bolton, G. (2010), Reflective Practice –​Writing and Professional Development, London: Sage Bowlby, J. (1969), Attachment and Loss, London: Institute of Psychoanalysis Brockliss, L. and Rousseau, G. (2003), The History Child, Oxford Magazine, 0th week Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979), The Ecology of Human Development:  Experiments by Nature & Design, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Brooker, L. and Woodhead, M. (ed.) (2012), ‘Healthy environments’, Child & Youth Studies Group, Open University, No. 8, Early Childhood in Focus Series Brown, F. (2003), ‘Compound flexibility: the role of playwork in child development’, in F. Brown (ed.), Playwork Theory and Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press Brown, F. (2008), ‘The fundamentals of playwork’, in Fraser Brown and Chris Taylor (eds), Foundations of Playwork, Maidenhead: McGraw-​Hill, Open University Press Brown, F. and Patte, M. (2013), Rethinking Children’s Play, London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic Bruner, J. S. (1986), Actual Minds, Possible Worlds, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Bruner, J., Jolly, A. and Sylva, K. (1976), Play: Its role in Development and Evolution, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin

174

174

References

Bucher, P.  (1990), ‘Growing up in the eighties:  changes in the social biography of childhood on the FRG’, in L. Chisholm, P. Buchner, H. H. Kruger and P. Brown (eds), Childhood, Youth and Social Change: A Comparative Perspective, London: Falmer Press Building Blocks (2005), ‘Reflective practice’, Handout for Playwork Level 3 Occupational Standards Training Day Burghardt, G. M. (2005), The Genesis of Animal Play: Testing the Limits, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press Chatterjee, S. (2006), Children’s Friendship with Place: An Exploration of Environmental Child Friendliness of Children’s Environments in Cities, Ph.D. Thesis, Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University Chown, A. (2014), Play Therapy in the Outdoors, London: Jessica Kingsly Publishers Confucius in Jones, E and Jones, A. (1977), Chambers Dictionary of Quotations, Edinburgh: Chambers Harrap Cornell, E. H. and Hill, K. A. (2006), Children and Their Environments, Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press Corsaro, W. (2005), The Sociology of Childhood, 2nd edition, London: Sage Corsaro, W. (2011) ‘Interpretive reproduction of children’s play’, American Journal of Play, 4 (4). Available at:http://​www.journalofplay.org/​sites/​www.journalofplay.org/​files/​pdf-​articles/​4-​4-​article-​corsaro-​ interpretive-​reproduction-​in-​childrens-​play.pdf (Accessed 24 March 2017) Crowe, B. (1983), Play Is a Feeling, London: George Allen & Unwin Cunningham, H. (2006), The Invention of Childhood, London: BBC Books Dahlberg, G. (1997), ‘The child and the pedagogue as co-​constructors of culture and knowledge’, Voices about Swedish Childcare, SoS Report, Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen Damon, W. (1977), ‘Play’, The Social World of the Child, San Francisco: Jossey-​Bass deMause, L. (1974), The History of Childhood, New York: The Psychohistory Press Derr, T. in D. Spencer and M. Blades, M. (ed.) (2006), Children and Their Environments, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Duncan, P. A. (2015), ‘Pigs, planes, and Play-​Doh’ Children’s perspectives on play as revealed through their drawings’, American Journal of Play, 8 (1). Available at: http://​www.journalofplay.org/​sites/​www. journalofplay.org/​files/​pdf-​articles/​8-​1-​article-​pigs-​planes-​and-​play-​doh.pdf (Accessed 23 March 2017) Eager, D. and Little, H. (2011), ‘Risk deficit disorder’, Paper presented at an International Public Works Conference, Sydney, Australia. Available at:  http://​www.aomevents.com/​media/​files/​IPWC%20 Presentations/​SESSION%205/​1500%20S5-​%20David%20Eager.pdf (Accessed 12 July 2016) Ehrenreich, B. and English, D. (2005) in H. Montgomery (2013) ‘Different cultures different childhoods’, Open Learn, The Open University. Available at:  http://​www.open.edu/​openlearn/​history-​the-​arts/​ history/​different-​cultures-​different-​childhoods (Accessed 23 March 2017) Ekman, P. (1972), ‘Universal and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion’, in J. Cole (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Vol. 19, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 207–​83 Elkind, D. (2007), The Power of Play: How Imaginative, Spontaneous Activities Lead to Healthier and Happier Children, Cambridge: Da Capo Lifelong Books Ellis, M. (1973), Why People Play, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Else, P. (2008), ‘Playing: “The space between” ’, in Fraser Brown and Chris Taylor (eds), Foundations of Playwork, Maidenhead: McGraw-​Hill Open University Press Else, P. (2014), Making Sense of Play, Berkshire, England: Open University Press, McGraw-​Hill Education

175

References

Else, P. and Sturrock, G. (1998), ‘The playground as therapeutic space: playwork as healing’; a paper for Play in a Changing Society: Research, Design and Application, USA: The IPA Triennial National Conference Erikson, E. (1950), Childhood and Society, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Festinger, L. (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press Finlay, L. (2008), Reflecting on Reflective Practice, Open University, PBPL 52. Available at: http://​www. open.ac.uk/​opencetl/​sites/​www.open.ac.uk.opencetl/​files/​files/​ecms/​web-​content/​Finlay-​(2008)-​ Reflecting-​on-​reflective-​practice-​PBPL-​paper-​52.pdf (Accessed 23 March 2017) Freud, S. (1914), The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, New York: Macmillan Frost, J. L. (1992), Play and Playscapes, New York: Delmar Publishers Garvey, C. (1977), Play and the Developing Child, London:  Fontana/​Open Books and Open Books Publishing Gesell, A. (1943), Infant and Child in the Culture of Today, Manhattan: Harper & Brothers Gill, T. (2007), No Fear –​Growing up in a Risk-​averse Society, UK: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation Gladwin, M. (2008), ‘The concept of risk in play and playwork’, in F. Brown and C. Taylor (eds), Foundations of Playwork, Berkshire, England: Open University Press McGraw-​Hill Education Gleave, J. and Cole-Hamilton, I. (2012), A World Without Play: A Literature Review, London:  Play England Goleman, D. (1995), Emotional Intelligence, New York: Bantam Books Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-​Pasek, K. and Singer, D.G. (eds.) (2006), Why Play = Learning: How Play Motivates and Enhances Children’s Cognitive and Social-​Emotional Growth, Oxford: Oxford University Press Gordon, C. (2002), ‘Riskogenics part 2 –​playtonics’, One Heart, Many Pulses, The Proceedings of the 15th Play Ed. Cardiff: In conjunction with Cardiff Council’s Children’s Play Services Groos, K. (1901), The Play of Man, New York: Appleton Guilbaud, S. (2003), ‘The essence of play’, in F. Brown (ed.), Playwork Theory and Practice, Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press Guilbaud, S. (2011), Phenomenological Inquiry into the Possibility of Played-​With-​Ness in Experiences with Things, Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Leeds Metropolitan University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Available at:http://​www.playful.org.uk/​3.html (Accessed 22 November 2016) Guldberg, H. (2009), Reclaiming Childhood Freedom and Play in an Age of Fear, Oxon, UK: Routledge Haglund, M., Nestadt, P., Cooper, N., Southwick, S.  and Charney, D.  (2007) ‘Psycholobiological mechanisms of resilience: relevance to prevention of treatment of stress-​related psychopathology,’ Development and Psychopathology 19, pp. 889–​920 Hall, G. S. (1904), Adolescence: Is Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education, Vol. 1, New York: Appleton Hanawalt, B. A. (1993), ‘Growing up in medieval London:  the experience of childhood’, History, Oxford: Oxford University Press Hanscombe, A. (2016), ‘Balanced and barefoot:  how unrestricted outdoor play makes for a strong confident and capable child’, in V.  Strauss (2011), ‘Why adults have to stop trying so darn hard to control how children play’, Answer Sheet Blog, The Washington Post. Available at: https://​w ww.washingtonpost.com/​news/​answer-​sheet/​wp/​2015/​12/​11/​why-​adults-​have-​to-​stop-​ trying-​so-​darn-​hard-​to-​control-​how-​children-​play/​ (Accessed on 21 June 2016)

175

176

176

References

Hendricks, B. (2001), Designing for Play, Aldershot, England; Burlington VT: Ashgate Hendricks, B. (2011), Designing for Play, 2nd edition, Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Henrig, R. M. quoting M. Bekoff (2008), ‘Taking play seriously’, The New York Times Magazine. Available at:http://​www.nytimes.com/​2008/​02/​17/​magazine/​17play.html (Accessed on 21November 2016) Howard, J. and MCinnes, K. (2013), The Essence of Play, Oxon, UK: Routledge Hughes, B. (1996), Play Environments: A Question of Quality, London: Playlink Hughes, B. (2001a), Evolutionary Playwork and Reflective Analytic Practice, London and New  York: Routledge Hughes, B. (2001b), The First Claim: A Framework for Playwork Quality Assessment, Cardiff: Play Wales Hughes, B. (2002a), The First Claim –​Desirable Processes. A Framework for Advanced Quality Assessment, Cardiff: Play Wales Hughes, B. (2002b), A Playworkers Taxonomy of Play Types, 2nd edition, London: PlayLink Hughes, B. (2006), Play Types Speculations and Possibilities, London: The London Centre for Playwork Education and Training Hughes, B. (2012), Evolutionary Playwork and Reflective Analytic Practice, 2nd edition, London: Routledge Huizinga, J. (1950), Homo Ludens:  A  Study of the Play Element in Culture, London:  Routledge & Kegan Paul IPA Scotland (2011) ‘I’d play all day and night if I could’, A report on children’s views on their right to play. Available at: http://​www.ipascotland.org/​projects/​right-​to-​play-​report-​2011/​ (Accessed 23 March 2017) IPA Summary of United Nations General Comment No.17. Available at:  http://​ipaworld.org/​childs-​ right-​to-​play/​article-​31/​summary-​gc17/​ (Accessed 2 November 2016) Ip-​Dip (2010), ‘Everyday Intervention Approaches (EIA System)’, Ip-​Dip 18, pp. 4–​5 John, A. and Wheway, R. (2004), Can Play Will Play – Disabled Children and Access to Outdoor Playgrounds, London: National Playing Fields Association Johns, C. (1995), ‘Framing learning through reflection’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22, pp. 226–​34 Johnson, D. (2013), ‘The brain gain: why video games can make people happy’, IpDip, 306, pp. 13–​14. Available at: http://​www.smh.com.au/​comment/​the-​brain-​gain-​why-​video-​games-​can-​make-​people-​ happy-​20131008-​2v63o.html (Accessed 9 November 2016) Jones, P. (2009), Rethinking Childhood, London: Continuum Kane, E. (2015), Playing Practices in School-​age Childcare:  An Action Research Project in Sweden and England, Stockholm: Stockholm University Kane, E. W. (2013), Rethinking Gender and Sexuality in Childhood, London: Bloomsbury Kane, P. (2004), The Play Ethic, London: Macmillan Kelly-​Byrne, D. (1989), A Child’s Play Life: An Ethnographic Study, New York: Teachers College Press Kids (2004a), All of Us – Inclusion Checklist for Settings, London: Kids. Archived in June 2016 from, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/529214/Sen_ Inclusion_Checklist_for_Settings_archived14june2016.pdf (Accessed 23 November 2016) The Kidsactive Playwork Inclusion Project, PIP (n.d.), All of Us – The Framework for Quality Inclusion Kids, DFES, Sure Start Kilderry (in press) in A. Nolan and B. Raban (2015), Theories into Practice Understanding and Rethinking Our Work with Young Children: Teaching Solutions. Available at:http://​www.earlychildhoodaustralia. org.au/​shop/​wp-​content/​uploads/​2015/​06/​SUND606_​sample.pdf (Accessed 23 March 2017)

177

References

Kilvington, J. (2007), Performance notes. Unpublished Kilvington, J. (2010), ‘Everyday intervention approaches (EIA System)’, IpDip for Professionals in Play (18), Eastbourne: Playwork Development and Training Community Interest Company Kilvington, J. and Wood, A. (2016), Gender Sex and Children’s Play, UK: Bloomsbury Kilvington, J., Wood, A. P.  and Knight, H. (2006) ‘Affective play spaces’, Paper presented at New Directions in Children’s Geographies Conference, Northampton University, Northampton Kilvington, J., Wood, A. and Knight, H. (2006), ‘Affective play spaces’, Unpublished paper presented at New Directions in Children’s Geographies Conference, Northampton University, Northampton King, F. (1988), ‘The right to play towards a policy for children’s play in Bristol’, Unpublished discussion paper King, M. T. (1934), Mothercraft, London: Simpkin Marshall Ltd. King, P. and Newstead, S. (eds.) (2017), Researching Play from a Playwork Perspective. Abingdon: Routledge Lanza, M. (2012), Playborhood: Turn Your Neighborhood into a Place for Play, California: Free Play Press Leach, P. (1989), Baby and Child, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Leichter-​Saxby, M. (2009) ‘Playwork’, Play Everything, a blog at Wordpress.com. Available at:https://​ playeverything.wordpress.com/​play-​and-​playwork/​(Accessed on 24 May 2016) Lester, S. and Maudsley, M. (2007), Play, Naturally, London: National Children’s Bureau Lester, S. and Russell, W. (2008a), Preview: Play for a Change, London: Play England Lester, S. and Russell, W. (2008b), Play for a Change, London: National Children’s Bureau Liedloff, J. (1975), The Continuum Concept, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Lillemyr, O. F. (2009), Taking Play Seriously, Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc. Lindon, J. (2007), Understanding Children & Young People, London: Hodder Arnold Livingstone, S. (2016), ‘A day in the digital life of teenagers’, IpDip, 301, pp. 19–​21. Available at:https://​ theconversation.com/​a-​day-​in-​the-​digital-​life-​of-​teenagers-​58553? (Accessed9 November 2016) Louv, R. (2005), Last Child in the Woods:  Saving Our Children from Nature-​Deficit disorder, North Carolina: Algonquin Books Magaluzzi, L. (1993), ‘For an education based on relationships’, Young Children, 11 (93), p. 10 Marsh, J., Brooks, G., Hughes, J., Ritchie, L., Roberts, S. and Wright, K. (2005), ‘Digital beginnings: young children’s use of popular culture, media and new technology’, Literacy Research Centre, University of Sheffield. Available at: http://​www.digitalbeginnings.shef.ac.uk/​DigitalBeginningsReport.pdf Mayall, B. (2002), Towards a Sociology for Childhood, Buckingham: Open University Press McLeod, S. A. (2014), ‘Cognitive dissonance’, Simply Psychology. Available at:www.simplypsychology. org/​cognitive-​dissonance.html (Accessed on 15 November 2016) Melville, S. (2004), Places for Play, London: Playlink Mero, E.  B. (1908), American Playgrounds:  Their Construction, Equipment, Maintenance and Utility, Boston: American Gymnasia Co. Michelle, J. (Reviewer) (2014), ‘Post Traumatic Stress Disorder’, in Kids Health: The Nemours Foundation: Available online: http://kidshealth.org/en/parents/ptsd.html (Accessed 25 November 2016) Montessori, M. (1996), The Secret of Childhood, New Edition, New York: Random House Inc. Moss, P. and Petrie, P. (2002), From Children’s Services to Children’s Spaces, London: Routledge Falmer Nasaw, D. (1986), Children of the City: At Work and at Play, US: Oxford University Press Newstead, S. (2004), The Buskers Guide to Playwork, Eastleigh: Common Threads

177

178

178

References

Nicholson, S. (1971) ‘How not to cheat children: the theory of loose parts’, Landscape Architecture, 62 (1), pp. 30–​34 Nolan, A. and Raban, B. (2015), Theories into Practice Understanding and Rethinking Our Work with Young Children, Teaching Solutions. Available at:http://​www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/​shop/​ wp content/​uploads/​2015/​06/​SUND606_​sample.pdf (Accessed 23 March 2017) Norozi, S. A. and Moen, T. (2016), ‘Childhood as a social construction’, Journal of Educational and Social Research, 6 (2). Available at:http://​www.mcser.org/​journal/​index.php/​jesr/​article/​viewFile/​9151/​8837 (Accessed 23 March 2017) NPFA (2000), Best Play: What Play Provision Should Do for Children, London: National Playing Fields Association Olfman, S. (2009), The Sexualization of Childhood, Westport, CT: Praeger Oyster, E. (2015), ‘ “Screentime” for kids is probably fine’, IpDip, 306, pp. 10–​12. Available at:  http://​ fivethirtyeight.com/​features/​screen-​time-​for-​kids-​is-​probably-​fine/​ (Accessed 9 November 2016) Palmer, S.  (2003), ‘Playwork as reflective practice’, in F.  Brown (ed.), Playwork Theory and Practice, Buckingham: Open University Press Palmer, S. (2006), Toxic Childhood, London: Orion Parten (1932) in Hughes, P., (2010) Children Play and Development, London: Sage, pp. 100–​103 Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians (1804), The Holy Bible, Ch. 13, v. 12, British and Foreign Bible Society Pellegrini, A. (2009), The Role of Play in Human Development, New York: Oxford University Press Pellis, S., Pellis, V. and Bell, H. (2010), ‘The function of play in the development of the social brain’, American Journal of Play, 2 (3), p. 289 Penalose, E. and Ives, S. (2004), ‘The Politics of Happiness’, reprinted from Land and People (2002), with permission from Trust for Land. Available at:  www.yesmagazine.org/​issues/​finding-​courage/​ the-​politics-​of-​happiness (Accessed 1 November 2016) Penn, H.  (2005), Understanding Early Childhood:  Issues and Controversies, Maidenhead:  Open University Press Piaget, J. (1969), The Psychology of the Child, England: Basic Books Play Wales (2013), Play – Inclusive Provision, Cardiff: Play Wales Playboard (1987), Neighbourhood Playwork Training Scheme –​ Pilot Project 2, –​Resource Pack, Playboard Playlink (2002), Play as Culture: Incorporating Play in Cultural Strategies, London: CPPF, Children’s Play Council, DCMS, DTLR and Dept. for Education and Skills Playwork Principles Scrutiny Group (2005), The Playwork Principles, Cardiff: Play Wales Plutchik, R. (1980), Emotion: A Psychoevolutionary Synthesis, New York: Harper & Row Pollock, L. (1983), Forgotten Children:  Parent-​ child Relations 1500–​ 1900, Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press Portchmouth, J. (1969), Creative Crafts for Today, London: Studio Vista Postman, N. (1994), The Disappearance of Childhood, New York: Vintage Books Pringle, M. K. (1975), The Needs of Children, London: Routledge Prout, A. and James, A. (1977) (eds), Constructing & Reconstructing Childhood, London: Falmer Books Putnam, R. D. (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon & Schuster Reaney, M. J. (1916), The Psychology of the Organised Game, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Rich-​Harris, J. (1998), The Nurture Assumption, New York: Touchstone

179

References

Rissotto, A. and Guiliani, M. V. (2006), Children and Their Environments, Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press Roberts, R. (1995), Self-​esteem and Successful Early Learning, London: Hodder & Stoughton Rossie, J.-​P. (2005), ‘Children’s play and toys in changing Moroccan communities’, in F. McMahon, D. Lytle and B. Sutton-​Smith (eds), Play: An Interdisciplinary Synthesis. Play and Culture Studies Vol. 6, Maryland, US: University Press of America Russell, W. (2005), ‘The unnatural art of playwork: BRAWGS continuum’, Therapeutic Playwork Reader II, Sheffield: Ludemos Associates Russell, W.  (2007), Reframing Playwork:  Reframing Challenging Behaviour, Nottingham:  City of Nottingham Russell, W., Lester, S. and Smith, H. (eds) (2017), Practice Based Research in Children’s Play, Bristol:  Policy Press Sexton, J. (2016), There’s A Right Buzz Here. Using Creative Methods to Capture the Affective Atmosphere of an Adventure Playground, MA diss., Play and Playwork, University of Gloucestershire Sharnette, H. (1996), ‘Tudor childhood’, Elizabethi.org. Available at:http://​www.elizabethi.org/​contents/​ essays/​childhood.htm (Accessed 28 November 2016) Shorter, E. (1976), The Making of the Modern Family, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Skinner, B. F. (1953), Science and Human Behaviour, New York: Macmillan Smith, P. (2010), Children and Play, Chichester, UK: Wiley-​Blackwell Sobel, D. (2002), Children’s Special Places, Detroit: Wayne State University Press Solomon, S. G. (2014), The Science of Play:  How to Build Playgrounds That Enhance Children’s Development, Lebanon and New Hampshire: University Press of New England Spock, B. (1945), Baby & Child Care, London: W. H. Allen & Co Sroufe, L. A. (1997), Emotional Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Stone, L. (1990), The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500–​1800, London: Penguin Stott, L. H. (1967), Child Development, London: Holt, Reinhart & Winston Sturrock, G. (1995), The Sacred and the Profane, Sheffield: Ludemos Associates Sturrock, G. (2002), The Idea of Unplayed Out Material, Sheffield: Ludemos Associates/​BITP Sturrock, G. (2003), The Ludic Third, Sheffield: Ludemos Associates/​BITP Sturrock, G. (2007), ‘Towards tenets of playwork practice’, IpDip (1)17, Eastbourne: Playwork Development and Training Community Interest Company Sturrock, G. and Else, P. (1998), The Colorado Paper –​The Playground as Therapeutic Space: Playwork as Healing, Sheffield: Ludemos Associates Sturrock, G., Russell, W. and Else, P. (2004), Towards Ludogogy Parts 1, 11 and 111: The Art of Being and Becoming through Play. The Birmingham Paper, Sheffield: Ludemos Associates Sutton-​Smith, B. (1997), The Ambiguity of Play, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Sutton-​ Smith, B., in A. Gonku and E. Klein, E. (2001), Children in Play, Story and School, New York: Guildford Press Sutton-​Smith, B. (2003), The Ambiguity of Play, 2nd edition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Sutton-​Smith, B. and Kelly-​Byrne, D. (1984), ‘The idealization of play’, in P. Smith, Play in Animals and Humans, Oxford: Basil Blackwell Tamminen, B. and Chown, S. (2000), ‘Behind bars:  children’s experience of visiting the play facility at Wakefield Prison’, New Playwork –​New Thinking, The Proceedings of Play Education, Ely: Play Education

179

180

180

References

Tarr, J., Whittle, M. and Evans, G. (2011), ‘Safeguarding Children & Young People’, in Oliver, B. and Pitt, B., Working with Children, Young People and Families Thorne, B. (2002) in Jones, P.  (2009:  11), Rethinking Childhood Attitudes in Contemporary Society London: Continuum Tovey, H. (2007), Playing Outdoors:  Spaces and Places, Risk and Challenge, Maidenhead:  Open University Press Tsabary, S., in E. Segran (2016), ‘How overachieving parents can avoid ruining their kids lives’, in Device Daily.com. Available at:http://​www.devicedaily.com/​pin/​how-​overachieving-​parents-​can-​avoid-​ ruining-​their-​kids-​lives/​ (Accessed 15 November 2016) UNICEF (n.d.), Fact Sheet: ‘A summary of the rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child’, UNICEF, Available online: http://www.unicef.org/crc/files/Rights_overview.pdf (Accessed 9 August 2016) UNICEF (1990), The United Nation Convention on the Rights of the Child, Unicef, available online: http://www.unicef.org.uk/Documents/Publication-pdfs/UNCRC_PRESS200910web.pdf (Accessed 9 August 2016) UNICEF (2013), Summary United Nations General Comment No. 17, IPA, available online: HYPERLINK “http://www.ipausa.org/pdf/IPASummaryofUNGCarticle31_FINAL.pdf%20Accessed%2009.08.16” http://www.ipausa.org/pdf/IPASummaryofUNGCarticle31_FINAL.pdf (Accessed 9 August 2016) United Nations Children’s Fund (2013), Child well-being in rich countries, a comparative overview: Innocenti Report Card 11: Florence, United Nations children’s Fund, Innocenti Research Centre Valentine, G. (2004), Public Space and the Culture of Childhood, Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd Voce, A. (2015), Policy for Play: Responding to Children’s Forgotten Right, Bristol: Policy Press Vygotsky, L. S., van der Veer, R. and Valsiner, J. (1994), The Vygotsky Reader, Oxford: Blackwell Wada, M. (1994) in Roopnarine, J., Johnson, J., and Hooper F. (eds) (1994), Children’s Play in Diverse Cultures, Albany: State University of New York Press Watson, J. B. (1970), Behaviourism, New York: W. W. Norton Wheatley, M. J. (2006), Leadership and the New Science –​Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, San Francisco: Berrett-​Koehler Publishers Inc. Wilber, K. (1996), Up from Eden, New York and Wheaton, IL: Quest Books Wilson, P. (2008), Liminal Spaces. Available at:http://​theinternationale.com/​pennywilson/​55-​2/​ (Accessed 1 November 2016) Winnicott, D. (1997), Playing and Reality, London: Routledge Winter, R., Buck, A. and Sobiechowska, P. (1999), Professional Experience and the Investigative Imagination: The Art of Reflective Writing, London: Routledge Wood, A. (2005), ‘Playwork resources’, Handout Building Blocks, Birmingham: Building Blocks Wood, A. and Kilvington, J. (2007), ‘The gentle art of agonism –​speculations and possibilities of missing female perspectives in playwork theory’, in W. Russell, B., Handscomb and J. Fitzpatrick (eds), Playwork Voices in Celebration of Bob Hughes and Gordon Sturrock, London: The London Centre for Playwork Education and Training Wood, A. and Kilvington, J. (2008), Personal communication Wyness, M. (2006), Childhood and Society, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Young, J. Z. (1978), Programs of the Brain, Oxford: Oxford University Press

181

Index

abuse 110, 112–​13, 115–​16 adaptive variability 28 addiction 113 adventure playgrounds 4, 128, 160 advocates for play 5, 42, 151 after-​school club 10, 59 attachment theory 70 Beckoff, M and Byers, J 37 behaviourism 71 Benjamin, J 4 bereavement 113 biological drive 6 boredom 48, 118 brain 23, 34 growth and development 29, 37, 38 neuroscience 71 and play types 55 and risk 60 and video games 63 Brooker, L and Woodhead, M 137, 149 Brown, F 23, 28, 35, 37, 50, 59 Bruner, J 23, 71 bullying 63, 76, 114, 130 Burghardt, G. M 71 Camp counsellors 25 childcare regulation 129 childhood 27, 66–​70, 73–​4 reflecting on 13, 28, 158, 159, 171 Children’s holiday representatives 25 children’s rights 110, 111, 112, 113, 130 to play 147 reflection on 141 children’s workforce 75 Chown, A 91

cognitive dissonance 42, 157–​8 combinatorial flexibility 37 community cohesion 144 contamination 99 continuing professional development 155 Corsaro, W 67, 72, 74 creating play environments 83, 85–​7 Crowe, B 107 cultural development 43 Cunningham, H 67, 69 depression 117, 120 development child 8, 26, 42, 67, 70–​3, 75, 131, 157–​8 continuing professional 155–​6 emotional 137–​8 and play 23, 24, 27, 29, 33–​6, 38, 95 physical 29 dynamic risk/​benefit assessment 109, 124–​6 early pregnancy 113 early years workers/​educators 24–​5 elements of a good play environment 88–​93 Else. P 23, 43, 46, 61, 63, 107, 117 emotion linked to play 23, 24, 32 regulation 38 related to space 138–​41 empathetic emergence 29 equalities 126–​31 equality of opportunity 127 evolution consequences 70 evolutionary history linked to play 53, 56, 57 evolutionary playwork theory 36–​9

182

182

Index

First Claim 89, 102 flexibility 28, 91 combinatorial 37 compound 35, 37 physical 51 forest school leaders 26 freely chosen 5, 22, 31, 42, 55, 60, 118, 172 child intervention 104 Garvey, C 22 gender constructs 75 equality 163 and the media 62, 63 Gill, T 58, 59, 76 Gladwin, M 57, 58 Gordon, C 57, 59 Guilbaud, S 22, 22, 27, 163 Guldberg, H 59, 63, 88, 114 health and safety 10, 25, 86, 120–​1, 121, 159 Hendricks, B 34, 135, 146 Hughes, B 23, 28, 37, 37, 46, 51, 56, 59, 70, 84, 85–​6, 89, 90, 92, 138, 150, 164, 171, 172 identity 7, 28, 29, 32, 50, 53, 76 illnesses 114–​15 IMEE 92, 95, 99, 138, 171 immersion of adults observing play 4 of children in play 126 inclusion 25, 110, 130–​1 indicators ambience 86, 88 content 90 indoor play 92–​3 indoor spaces 9, 92 injuries 92, 113, 114, 121, 123 Integral Play Framework 43–​44 intellectual advancement 29 intervention 5, 24, 66, 83, 86, 99–​100, 101–​8, 114, 130, 133, 136, 157, 172 everyday intervention approaches 104–​5, 216 range 103 reflecting on 136, 172 styles 102–​3

intrinsically motivated 5, 22, 55 child intervention 104 Kane, Emily 74 Kane, Eva 22, 78, 163 Kane, P 39, 50 King, P and Newstead, S 161 language construction 29 Lanza, M 63, 142, 144 Law, S 164–​6 Leichter-​Saxby, M 4, 83, 164–​6 Lester, S 23, 38, 60, 149, 161 life satisfaction 29 Lillemyr, B. 50, 62 Livingstone, S 63 loose parts 24, 25, 87, 90, 143, 148, 151, 159, 160, 165, 166 theory of 97–​8 Ludic Third 84, 101–​2, 163 Malaguzzi, L 74 maturationists 70 Moss, P and Petrie, P 66, 69, 74, 76, 80, 81 nature-​nurture debate 70 neophilic 87, 118 neuroscience 37 observation 34, 54, 98–​101, 162–​3 open access 9 outdoor play 26, 63, 145 Palmer, S 8, 42 paradigms of children's play 37 reflective 18 of risk 57 parents and carers 63, 156 participant observer 46, 99 participation 27, 72, 76, 77, 78, 110, 128, 131 pedagogues 25–​6, 80, 81 pedagogy 80 personally directed 5, 22, 42, 55, 172 child intervention 104 play behaviour 8, 22, 37, 43, 55–​6, 96, 104, 126, 135

183

Index

play deprivation 37, 60–​2, 117 play environment 18, 83–​93, 101, 109, 122 play mechanisms 56 play memories 6, 138, 148, 159 play opportunities 5, 121, 123, 146, 147, 152 play organisations 146 play process 5, 17, 42, 44, 47, 47–​50 play rangers 10, 150 play resources 94–​8 play setting 92 play spaces 24, 90, 118, 133, 134, 135, 136, 138, 141, 142, 145, 146, 147, 150, 151, 152, 160, 163, 164 affective play spaces 134, 135, 136, 163 affordances 89, 91, 93, 137 ambience of 84, 85–​6, 87, 88, 92, 109, 121, 135, 163 compensatory spaces 9 indoor spaces 9, 92 modification of 101, 130, 150 outdoor spaces 9, 152 play places 149–​51 play therapists 24 play types communication play 52 creative play 23 deep play 46, 50, 52, 95 dramatic 52 exploratory play 51 general 22, 54, 55, 56, 94, 95, 100, 130 fantasy play 52 imaginative play 23 locomotor play 95 mastery play 53 object play 50 recapitulative play 53 role play 53 rough and tumble play 51 social play 29, 50, 52, 73 socio-​dramatic play 51 symbolic play 51 play value 18, 96 playcentre 10 playground 8, 25, 49, 59, 93, 147 playground supervisors 25 playscheme 142, 145, 151, 160, 171, 172 playwork approach 1, 4–​5, 10, 42–​3, 56, 61, 103, 107, 109, 110, 132, 157, 158, 160, 161, 165, 166

playwork curriculum 89–​91 playwork practice 84–​108 playwork sector 30, 38, 147, 162 Postman, N 66, 68, 69 post-​traumatic stress 113 practice theory 70 pressure to over-​achieve 113 props 7, 49, 89–​90, 134, 135, 151, see also loose parts protected characteristics 127 psychoanalytic theory 72 psycholudics adulteration 48, 49, 105–​7 containment 48, 49 decay/​termination 48, 49 metalude 48 play cue 48, 49, 104, 107 play cycle 41, 47–​50, 55, 117 play flow 48, 49 play frame 44–​7, 55, 104 play return 48 study of 47 qualifications 4, 22, 147, 156, 164 ranging 53 recapitulation 37 reflection 2, 3, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 66, 92, 93, 106, 131, 156, 158, 164 reflective practice 3, 11–​15, 18, 107, 155, 158–​60 reflexive practice 17, 73, 78, 158 rejection 113, 118 resilience 10, 29, 39, 60, 80, 118 rhetorics 28, 35 Rich-​Harris, J 74 risk 13, 52, 57–​60, 62, 106, 121 risk/​benefit assessment 113, 114, 121–​4, 124–​6 Russell, W 11, 23, 31, 38, 60, 161 safe emergencies 32 safeguarding 112–​14, 132 sensory involvement 34 Sexton, J 155, 162–​4 sexualization 63, 80 social capital 142 social competence 29 social constructions 67

183

184

184

Index

socio-​cultural theory 72 sociology of childhood 73–​4 Solomon, S. G. 57, 146, 152 species survival 29 spiritual experience 29 stress 29, 60, 61, 63, 119–​20 post-​traumatic 116–​17 Sturrock, G 32, 61, 84, 102, 103, 107, 163 survival 27, 29, 37, 42, 70 skills 52, 59 Sutton-​Smith, B 23, 23, 28, 31, 50, 139

termination 49 therapeutic 32, 51, 91 playwork 31, 32 training 5, 10, 15, 25, 42, 99, 139, 147, 158, 161, 165 trauma resolution 29

teachers 24, 150

Youth workers 25

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 69, 110–​11 un-​played-​out material 106 Winnicott, D 23