Play Strategy For Scotland: Learning About Play - Investigating Play Through Relevant Qualifications In Scotland

Section B: Literature Review & Evalution Criteria

1. LITERATURE REVIEW

"We need to change the image of the worker (with children) "from technician to reflective practitioner, researcher, co-constructor of knowledge, culture and identity" (Moss and Petrie, 2002, p. 137).

Courses under the Standard for Childhood Practice (QAA, 2007), or meeting the requirements for teacher registration in Scotland, (GTCS, 2012) are also intended to prepare students for work in early learning and childcare, as well as services for children and young people of school age. Training and qualifications therefore must prepare students for early learning and childcare settings where they are delivering the Curriculum for Excellence, especially Building the Curriculum 2 (Scottish Executive, 2007) which focuses on early learning through play, in terms of the concept of active learning.

In terms of childhood and indeed teaching practice, theories, research and knowledge about how children learn and develop are essential underpinnings to students' practice. It is argued, therefore, given the centrality of play to children's learning and development, that evidence of such course content is also an indicator of the inclusion of play in the training and qualifications reviewed, and should certainly be a focus of all degree level and postgraduate level courses.

Play has a place in supporting children gain new skills and knowledge, and in enhancing their quality of life, without necessarily always working towards specific instrumental outcomes, even as they are supported through play. Nevertheless, play has a firm place within early education and learning settings, as it is spontaneous and, indeed, purposeful play (from the both child's and adult perspectives) which underpins development and learning.

In order to support children's rights and development, it is essential to understand that play, development and learning often cannot be prised apart, and there are many ways to plan for and facilitate play, even with a purpose, without losing the self-directed agency of the child in their play choices.

The workforce in early learning and care, in particular, in out of school care in Scotland, are amongst the main participants in playwork qualifications, therefore, it is important that there is continued progressive learning and qualifications on play focused theory and practice, up to and beyond degree level. There should also be a rich understanding, for playwork and all practitioners, of how play is central to child development, even with an initial focus on early years, as many theories and theorists are very relevant to those in a play and care setting for any age. Within the briefly outlined historical summary, the shared roots of many of the principles and philosophies of playwork and early child development theories might become quite clear.

In addressing fears that BA level courses in childhood practice are not relevant enough for those with a play sector background, or as being too "early years focused" Davis and colleagues point out "findings indicated that degree level qualifications have a significant impact on private and public sector managers' knowledge of children's rights and play. This finding confronts myths to the contrary put forward by managers who have not studied at degree level and tend to be located in out of school care, and some playgroups"(Davis, Bell and Pearce, 2014, p. 24). They suggest better marketing of the benefits of managers gaining skills in linking theory to practice and self-reflection, in terms of the impact both on the quality of the service and relevance to all sectors. They found only one manager who had completed a course and found it to be too much about active learning and not enough about play (Davis et al, 2014).

A fundamental understanding of how young children learn and develop though play, and the role of the adult in facilitating this process, can be a foundation of understanding overall child development, while understanding children's rights and agency are also central to this process. Of course, when discussing child development, it should account for the rich diversity of each child's own engagement with their family, community and culture, and their own specific and "rich" range of talents and interests they bring to such engagement (Super and Harkness, 1986, Bronfenbrenner, 1979, Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2007, Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 2008).

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) is a foundation of much policy around children and childhood in Scotland, and includes children's rights to play (Article 31) and Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC), includes play in measures of wellbeing (Scottish Government, 2008a), therefore content on either or both implicitly, or explicitly, contains play.

Brief Historical Perspective

Throughout history, there have been many different theories about why children play e.g. Plato (429-347 B.C.E.) saw that very young children have a natural propensity to play, while in his view older children should learn through play in terms of their future role in society, e.g. to become a future builder, they must play with bricks (Plato, 1921, 1955). While he connects the play process with both an education and social function, with a priority of the development of a virtuous, moral character, therefore, older children's play, should not have free play, encouraging subversion, but must be directed to practising their roles.

The concept of children starting as, almost, a "blank slate"; there to be moulded by parents and the "right" type of educators to whatever form is desired, is the well-known empiricist view of John Locke's (1632 - 1704) in which knowledge is derived mainly through the senses and experience. Locke, Like Plato, saw the main purpose of education was to create virtuous characters, but he was interested in harnessing children's own activities, including play, to make the learning process more enjoyable, rather than the more punitive methods of teaching, prevalent in his time and culture. He was amongst the first to point out that early childhood experiences and associations helped shape the future character and warned against nursemaids filling children's heads with negative and frightening associations with stories of "goblins at bedtime". His views were highly influential and contributed towards viewing childhood as a particular stage of human development (Locke, 2004/1735, 2013/1884). Locke's views were taken up by the enlightenment radicals of the time including Rousseau (1712-1778).

In Émile (1762), Rousseau set out that the main object of childhood is that children should be happy; therefore, he took an opposite and radical view of play to the prevailing Puritan ethic. He believed that what children learned from each other through play was worth more than any classroom learning, as in the games they play there are always materials for learning, without them even knowing learning is taking place. Play, in Rousseau's view, was an instinct provided by nature to promote growth of the body and development of the senses, and as play gives children pleasure and contributes towards their happiness, it is the best way for children to learn.

Rousseau's emphasis on nature and the need for the "natural child" to interact with the natural environment can be seen as a precursor of many of the present day warnings about the erosion of children's liberties and restrictions on their free access to nature or roaming outdoors (Louv, 2010, Gill, 2007).

He also believed that children went through distinct stages in their development and that education should be tailored to those stages, rather than the didactic book based teaching of conventional schools. Many others took up Rousseau's recognition of the role of nature and the self-realisation process of education through playful learning, discovery and experiments, but one, in particular, was Friedrich Froebel (1782 - 1852) the creator of the first kindergartens.

Froebel was also inspired by Pestalozzi (1746 - 1827) who first taught the holistic, "head, hands and heart" philosophy of learning, still prevalent in social pedagogy today (Smith, in Info Ed.org n. d.). Ground breaking in the holistic approach to the whole child, and understanding children's need for play and creativity as necessary for child development, in his classic book on childhood education, The Education of Man (1826/ 2012), Froebel identified the fundamental principles upon which he based the now widespread kindergarten (children's garden) system.

Froebel espoused "self-activity" and play as essential factors in early learning, maintaining that the teacher's role is not to drill or indoctrinate but to encourage self-expression through play. His method banished mechanical and rote activities in favour of creative play, fostering the growth of artistic capacity. The wooden geometric and pattern building blocks in playrooms, and their modern variants, can be traced to the Froebel "gifts" of such blocks which he created as playful learning activities to support development. He believed that "Play is the highest expression of human development in childhood, for it alone is the free expression of what is in a child's soul" Froebel (1826/ 2012).

At New Lanark in his new model community, Robert Owen ((1771-1858) established the first play based infant schools and the first out of school care in Scotland, as part of a wider social experiment in attending to the needs of workers and their families who worked in the mill. Children had free play and social opportunities in settings with natural materials of interest (not specific toys or books, as they had each other to play with); dancing and singing were also a core part of all children's education. Owen set out that children were to be happy and learn to be kind, again reflecting Pestalozzi (Donnachie, 2003), as well as Rousseau's view of childhood as a distinct period of life where their happiness is paramount. Of course, there was also the instrumental aim of having contented and productive current and future workers.

Froebel also influenced John Dewey (1859-1952), who agreed that children should have play and learn through activity by doing practical things, and not through passively absorbing instruction; he demanded better child centred environments for children's education and established what came to be known as the progressive movement in education.

He saw positive social relationships, as well as being active and involved members of the community, as essential for children's development (Dewey, 1897). The outdoor garden nurseries developed by Margaret McMillan (1860 - 1931) with her sister Rachael, and their philosophy of access to nature, use of natural materials, good nutrition and outdoor play, demonstrate that they too were influenced by Froebel (Steedman, 2004). Another early pioneer was Maria Montessori (1870-1952), who created specific child scale environments for learning, indoors and out, planned carefully to develop all of the child's senses, enabling the child to interact and learn through their purposeful activities (although not specifically play).

Influenced by Steiner and Anthroposophy, the Camphill Movement in Scotland (Camphill, website n.d), are communities supporting children and adults with learning and other disabilities, they provide services and support for work, learning and daily living. Hands on experiences such as play and crafts are central to this approach, as is the holistic "head, hands and heart" philosophy, first advocated by Pestalozzi ((1746 - 1827) and core to the Camphill practice. The BA in Social Pedagogy at Robert Gordon University Aberdeen (Table 9 in appendix), is linked to the community.

Waldorf or Steiner schools also emphasise creativity, use of the senses and carefully designed environments where children interact and learn through the arts, play, and other creative focused activities, at their own pace and time. They set out to address the physical, emotional, intellectual, cultural and spiritual needs of each child. Based on the ideas of Rudolph Steiner (1861 - 1925), who founded Anthroposophy, the present day Waldorf schools hold on to the above practice ideas, but have abandoned the commitment to Anthroposophy (Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship (website, n. d.).

Play as an Evolutionary Process

Play is often assumed to be universal across cultures and history; indeed, it is seen also in young animals, leading to speculations about play as preparation and practice for future essential survival skills. Karl Groos (1861-1946) presented a biological explanation for play in The Play of Animals (1898) and The Play of Man (1901) Groos argued that play was the expression of an instinct necessary to the survival of the species. The human child, due to its prolonged dependency on adults, did not need the instinct, but still used play to practice and develop future capacities.

Play is at the heart of the evolutionary process as it is through play children learn how to adapt, and play also supports the flexibility and brain plasticity, which is needed to cope with change and is a survival trait both for the species and the individual, according to Sutton-Smith (1997). Another biological evolutionary theory of play has historical antecedents in the work of Baldwin (1894) and Hall (1904) and is more recently taken up by Hughes (2001). The concept of recapitulation is that each individual mind passes through the evolutionary stages that the human race has previously been through. For Hall (1904), therefore, play was the recapitulation of an earlier evolutionary state.

At the end of the 19^th century, following Darwin, the idea of race recapitulation was quite pervasive across different disciplines, and indeed the view that children, without adult moral teaching and restraint, would revert to "savage" behaviour is also a thread running through literature such as Lord of the Flies (Golding, 1995, 1954).

Hughes takes the view that children need to be able to go through these successive stages in play, and indeed, he warns if they do not have the opportunities to do so this will lead to problems in later life. Hughes equates play deprivation as a precursor to adult serious or violent criminal behaviour. Hughes stages are:

• animal - children interacting with the elements
• savage - cruel interaction with other species
• nomad - ranging for mental mapping
• pastoral - mastery play e.g. gardening
• tribal - membership of gangs and clubs (Hughes, 2001)

There are a number of issues with recapitulation theories, not least, in terms of the cultural views of these late 19^th century biologists and psychologists, who were positing a linear, westernised, worldview of human development, which presumed their own superiority over other models of society and civilisation. They confuse biological stages of human individual development with the stages in the development of society; using a staged theory based only on one model of society.

Hughes' modern take is still highly difficult to prove given that a lack of love and affection, or a cruel environment for a child, could be part of the cause of later stunted adult development or capacity for criminal behaviour, with play deprivation a consequence rather than a cause, in itself.

Brown (2009) also worked on models of play deprivation, with valuable insights into the transformative value of play to the lives of play deprived, Romanian, children, again the positive changes he discovered through planned play interventions, could also have been an effect of the wider value of human contact and social relationships with caregivers, also previously missing from their lives.

For example, the work of Rutter et al (2001) showed that once adopted into loving adoptive families, many children who experienced severe institutionalised neglect were able to catch up with their UK peers by age six. Nevertheless, Brown's action, with colleagues, undoubtedly, positively changed the lives of the children involved and the play provided would likely have been an essential component of their improved development.

Hughes also made other major contributions to play theory: in his study of the effects of the troubles in Belfast on children's play, from which he produced a concept of "adulterated play", that is play highly influenced by adults and aspects of the negative social environment on children. He also contributed a breakdown of play types in which he lists 16 different kinds of play (Hughes, 2006); these play types are often in the content of playwork based and play linked qualifications.

Play is a Precursor to Culture

Play is a necessary (although not sufficient) condition of culture, according to the work of Huizinga, first published in 1938, Homo Ludens or "Man the Player" (alternatively, "Playing Man"). He argues that play always has the following five characteristics:

1. Play is free, is in fact freedom.
2. Play is not "ordinary" or "real" life.
3. Play is distinct from "ordinary" life as to both locality and duration.
4. Play creates order, is order. Play demands order absolute and supreme, e.g.: play has rules
5. Play is connected with no material interest, and no profit can be gained from it (Huizinga, 1949 pp 7-13 )

Huizinga saw that all creative cultural pursuits, adult as well as children's leisure activities, have their roots in play as a precursor to culture; while culture is a product only of human beings, animals play, but have not developed cultural activities. His all-encompassing definition includes adults playing games, such as the rules for bridge, or cricket, or in rituals across different societies and history.

"Ludic" is the word for play in Latin, and Huizinga was especially interested in the language around play, across different cultures, he especially liked the English word "fun" as clear descriptor of one of the elements of play, although he also understood that play could be deadly serious too (Huizinga, 1949).

Vygotsky (1933/1966, 1978) too understood the seriousness and indeed the "not fun" aspect of play, given the nature of the rules of games, there are often winners and losers, and, as Huizinga pointed out (1949), "spoilsports" are given even more disapprobation than those who may be cheating or deceiving, but are appearing to play the game. Play is not all about joy, it can be the source of inclusion or exclusion, teasing, hazing, bullying and mean behaviour, and indeed, within playwork there are various debates on the scope and scale of adult intervention in such situations.

Current Play Concepts, Playwork and the Playwork Principles

In the views of leading play theorists a central belief is that in free play, children do what they want to do, and the learning and psychological growth that result are by products, not conscious goals of the activity. Sutton-Smith encapsulated the uncertainties and difficulties in defining play in the title, and subsequent discussions in the "Ambiguity of Play" (1997, p.1) explaining that we all know what it is to experience play and playfulness but when we attempt to define it, we fall into "silliness". Lester and Russell in their wide-ranging review (2008) suggest that play should be valued as it stands, rather than as any means to particular ends, despite the clear connections between many aspects of child wellbeing and play. Indeed the very process of trying to externally determine and measure the outcomes of play contradicts the inherent quality of children's play (Lester and Russell, 2008).

In The Benefits of Play literature review, Rogers, Pelletier and Clarke (2009), looked at the play needs of middle childhood and they concluded that play benefits children in a number of ways, for example, overall emotional health and social functioning is supported through make believe play and play supports cognitive development. Children's spatial abilities and physical understanding of the world is facilitated by physical play and it has been demonstrated that children who had a lot of time to play end up as happier adults (Rogers et al, 2009). Cole-Hamilton (2011) provided a range of evidence on play to inform the Play Strategy for Scotland (Scottish Government, 2013b) and Greave and Cole-Hamilton produced another wide ranging review in 2012, A World without Play, both of which covered a range of perspectives, studies and cross cutting themes, including addressing issues of inclusive play and disability.

Common to all reviews is the recognition that defining play is not a simple task, and there are difficulties involved in providing the empirical evidence to demonstrate the links between play and the wide range of outcomes, generally asserted in the theoretical literature. Button's review (Scottish Government, 2014b) in scoping out the literature on play to provide an outcomes model and to support the delivery of the national play strategy action plan (Scottish Government, 2013a) warns that there is no direct, linear, causal relationship between play and the potential benefits set out.

However, in summarising the assertions of the first three reviews above, alongside other play and more general evaluation reports, for example, from lottery funded projects, and studies looking at the how physical play addresses obesity, Gill (2014) believes that they do demonstrate the following interconnected benefits of play:

"Cognitive development (including language skills, problem solving and independent learning skills, self-efficacy, gaining perspective, representational skills, memory and creativity);

Physical health and development (including physiological, cardiovascular and fine and gross motor skills development as well as increased physical activity);

Mental health, happiness and emotional well-being (including building confidence, improved child parent attachments, coping with stress, tackling anxieties and phobias, aiding recovery in therapeutic contexts, and alleviating the symptoms of ADHD for some children);

Social development (including working with others, sharing, negotiating and appreciating others' points of view); and

Risk management and resilience through experiencing and responding to unexpected, challenging situations" (Gill, 2014 pp 8-9)

"Furthermore, it has been claimed that the benefits of playing can be seen in evidence from brain studies and neuroscience (Cole-Hamilton 2012, Lester and Russell 2008)" (in Gill 2014, pp 8-9).

Gill's 2014 study attempts to bring in this missing empirical evidence to back up some of these assertions, he finds systematic reviews (on physical play and activities) which demonstrate the value of play in addressing childhood obesity. He also discusses the importance and effect of school break time (see break time in focus study), and interventions improving outdoor play facilities and materials in schools.

Case studies of such interventions demonstrated improved classroom performance and lower levels of misdemeanours (Gill, 2014). A small number of examples were provided of after school care services where children have opportunities for free play supported by suitably trained adults, and the wider, positive, effects on community and family in children accessing such services, as well as through the provision of public spaces to play and unsupervised playgrounds (Gill, 2014).

Nevertheless, while he disagrees with Lester and Russell (2008) in terms of the impossibility of empirical verification of the outcomes of play, he does see that there are huge gaps and an overwhelming need for more empirical studies. He too bears in mind that the value of play in itself and as a right is important, but he explains this has to be balanced with pragmatically seeking out the evidence, which policy makers and funding bodies might require, to justify supporting play interventions (Gill, 2014).

Building on Sutton-Smith's concept of the play cue (1984), and following on from (Huizinga, 1949), Sturrock and Else (1998) created the term Psycholudics to describe therapeutic play processes to assist workers in developing insights into the richness of the play experience provided through the activity, exchange or artefacts in use. They introduced concepts such as the play cycle, the play return and the play frame:

"The play cycle consists of the full flow of play from the child's first play cue, the perceived return from the outside world, the child's response to the return, and the further development of play to the point where the play is complete" (Sturrock and Else, 1998 website). Again, they discuss the concept of "adulteration" of children's play processes, which can break a play cycle and lead to what they term "dysplay" - more urgent and perhaps contradictory engagement of the child with the environment as the child's natural play drive is suppressed. Observation is therefore a key skill as is identifying invitations or cues to join in play, or to not disrupt a play cycle in process (Sturrock and Else, 1998).

A further concept of Ludocentric play was developed by Russell, Sturrock and Battram (Russell, 2008) which contrasts over-didactic adult leadership and strict control of the play process and environment with the opposite extreme of neglectful, chaotic and ego-centric provision, which is unsafe and unreliable. In between these two is the ludocentric approach which is about children's play, rather than any adult agenda and this is where the 'edge of recalcitrance' is located. Playworkers need to understand where along the continuum their practice lies, and to also understand and be aware of their own feelings in balancing this process.

Lester and Russell also developed a model of play interactions loosely based on Bronfenbrenner's ecological system theory (1979), which is often termed the "Manchester Circles" in playwork theory (Lester and Russell, 2004, in Else, Sexton and Nuttall, 2010, p. 5).

Brown (2003) has suggested a theory of compound flexibility: the interrelationships between the flexibility and adaptability of the play environments and the development of flexibility and adaptability in children. The role of the playworker is to create such positive environments for play, which are generally lacking in children's lives, linking to the creative use, for example, of loose parts play, rather than fixed, unimaginative, playground equipment.

When considering free play within professional practice it is important to highlight playwork and the playwork principles as the theories, practices and principles, which provide the benchmark for professional practice supporting free play. Although there are specific playwork qualifications, many other childcare qualifications also contain aspects of playwork.

Playwork is the professional movement, which supports and facilitates free play opportunities for children and young people and in the UK; this is underpinned by the playwork principles. The playwork movement is a relatively new one and was only given professional recognition in 1992 (Bonel and Linden, 2009). There is a clear distinction between play and playwork: play is the natural activity of children but playwork relates to the involvement of adults supporting and helping children's play.

Playwork has its modern roots in Danish junk playgrounds started in the 1940s where children were free to make their own constructions from junk, the philosophy behind it being that children would be supported and facilitated, but direct adult intervention would be kept to a minimum. It is acknowledged (Bonel and Linden, 2009; Hughes, 2001) that Lady Allen of Hartwood introduced this concept into Britain and was instrumental in campaigning for the establishment of junk playgrounds resulting in the first adventure playground set up in Camberwell, London in 1948.

In England, adventure playgrounds and stand-alone play services have a stronger tradition than in Scotland where many play services have instead been attached to childcare or early learning services. Bonel and Linden (2009) acknowledge that childcare services which operate on a closed-door basis can prove to be more challenging to run in terms of facilitating the scope and play flexibility provided by open-door play services. It is still possible for good quality services to offer both free play and care for the attending children, e.g. the after school example in Gill (2014).

A playworker's role is one that supports and develops a children's play repertoire by providing new play experiences and opportunities within a safe and stimulating environment yet does not actually direct the child's play (Tassoni, 2003, in Brown et al, 2009). The child's experiences, desires and wants must always be the starting point for playworker interactions, which should be carried out in non-judgmental ways and the worker must suspend all prejudices for playwork to be effective (Brown, 2003). The playworker does not take control, but instead joins in sensitively to where the child is at that moment, and through this, a strong relationship can be developed (Kaufman 1995, in Brown, 2003).

The playwork principles underpin playwork; the first two principles provide a definition of play; the third principle describes the essence and focus of playwork and the final four principles discuss the role of the playworker.

"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 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.

• "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 wellbeing of individuals and communities.
• 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.
• 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.
• For playworkers, the play process takes precedence and playworkers act as advocates for play when engaging with adult led agendas.
• The role of the playworker is to support all children and young people in the creation of a space in which they can play.
• 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.
• Playworkers recognise their own impact on the play space and also the impact of children and young people's play on the playworker.
• 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 wellbeing of children"(Playwork Principles Scrutiny Group, 2005).

Although the playwork principles could be used in more formal education settings, Bonel and Linden say that playworkers "are not attempting to step into the role of children's teacher who has a responsibility for their education in the context of schooling. Playworkers can support and extend children's learning but in a different context from school, and with some opportunities that are not available to teachers" (Bonel and Linden, 2009, p. 67).

Focus on break time:

Overlapping play research, folklore, educational psychology, health development and learning, is the linking topic of children and young people's break time in school, as well as the games, jokes and culture of the playground and children at play together over time.

Peter Blatchford and Ed Baines led the work of the Breaktime Research Project, which pulls together their key UK research on children's play times, break times or recess in schools, as well as linking to associated US research. The site also includes links to concurrent research on classroom assistants and playground staff. They found that children and young people place a high value on break times, viewed positively for their social relationships and freely chosen play and activities, negatively where bullying behaviour impinged on their breaks. Data shows increasing reduction of break times and lunchtime breaks in schools, and adult's negative perceptions of children's behaviour, with increased adult oversight and control of playgrounds, often due to perceptions about behaviour issues (Blatchford & Baines, 2013).

The various studies also investigate gender and ethnic differences in how children use their free time in school. It is pointed out that while the value of play time is still appreciated for primary school pupils, the needs of young people at secondary school level for breaks and time to be with friends is undervalued. This is why the researchers use the term break time rather than play time. The social activities and the value of this for young people in secondary schools is not always apparent to adults, there are both benefits and issues for 16 year olds consulted for the project, both in having valuable contact with peers and in addressing issues about where to go and what is allowable (Breaktime website).

This is supported by a Scottish study of secondary school pupils (S3 and S4), which investigated why they left school to purchase food at lunchtime, initially focusing on perceptions of school food quality and choice. "Out to Lunch" (Lawton, Audain and Shoolbread, 2008), demonstrated that social factors, being with friends, including friends from other schools, were just as important to them. Having adult like autonomy and choice, opportunities for exercise and a real break from school were also key factors.

Recent research for Grounds for Learning Scotland (Robinson, 2014a, 2014b & 2014c) provided the evidence for the importance of space for play and leisure in schools, especially the design of outdoors spaces, and found that young people experienced issues in terms of the "affordance" of play. This included "confusion over what play is allowed or expected, peer pressure restricts play types and locations, a lack of privacy stifled social play, there is not enough time at lunch, little affordance of risky, different or unusual play, being allowed inside and no play policies" (Robinson, 2014b, p. 5).

Physical space problems included: "A lack of shelter and seating, unattractive (to pupils), large, hard edged spaces dominate, little variation in provision, lack of visual and physical stimulus, pedestrian and pupil entrances less inviting than car and visitor entrances and a lack of engagement with decisions on play and space decisions" (Robinson, 2014b, p. 5).

Examples of solutions suggested are art spaces, with graffiti walls, more planting of greenery, providing space for sports and activities other than football, much more seating, shelters and attractively designed landscapes. Play policies should be in place, including risk, involving young people in developments, as well as staff managing resources, and providing better entrances, exits and linking with the immediate community (Robinson, 2014b, pp 13 -16). The third report (Robinson, 2014c) offers ideas and suggestions on how to improve school settings and make them more play friendly.

The Opie Project Group is a collaboration between the Universities of London, Sheffield and East London with the British Library, the project aimed "to develop our understanding of children's playground games and songs, building on the Opie collection at the British Library. It has added new material, developed a new archive, website, film and computer game prototype, and investigated the connections between the vernacular lore of the playground and children's media cultures in the digital age" (Centre for the Study of Children Youth and Media, 2011, p.3). The British Library Website has a range of archive and new materials on children's playground culture - with narration by the former children's poet laureate Michael Rosen. http://www.bl.uk/playtimes

The Centre for the study of Children, Youth and Media, reported that "play was alive and well, more diverse in some respects than ever, and drawing on resources which had both a long historical lineage as well as ones from contemporary media cultures", Centre for the Study of Children Youth and Media, 2011, p. 3). This wide ranging and in depth project included a two year ethnographic study into contemporary children's games and lore and they found that children's playground culture of games, songs, rhythms, jokes is not in quite the major decline that popular media reports.

Play, Child Development and Learning

A typical sample of contents, which would indicate child development and learning theories, which could include play, are topics such as: socio-cultural theory, social constructivism, schemas, equilibrium and disequilibrium, attachment, guided participation, communities of practice, scaffolding, socio-environments, or cultural environment, developmental niche, ecological theory, shared sustained thinking, children's spaces, playful pedagogies, Active Learning, Reggio Emilia and reference to Te Whariki.

Historical and contemporary perspectives, which demonstrate that the role of caregivers in supporting children's need to establish, trust, autonomy, (and to be able to experiment), include e.g. Erikson's stages of development, (1995/ 1951) or aspects of moral development such as Kohlberg (1981, in Wood et al, 2006), and language development (Chomsky, 1995, in Oates and Grayson, 2004). Classic theories such as Behaviourism (Skinner, 1953), imitative social learning, with the (in)famous Bobo doll (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1961), Ainsworth's "strange situation" (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970), as well as Freudian developmental perspectives, could also be in foundation courses.

Researchers and theorists on child development and learning, indicating inclusion of play or linked to play environment, include Piaget (1955, 1965), Vygotsky (1933/1966, 1978, 1987), Bronfenbrenner (1979, 2007) and, of course, the classics establishing early learning and childcare nurseries and related principles; such as the McMillians (Steedman, 2004), Froebel (2012), Montessori (Pollard, 1990), Dewey (2012) and Steiner (2002). The work of Laevers (1994, 2001) measuring engagement of children, through focused observation, and Wood, Bruner & Ross (1976) on scaffolding, are all relevant to play. Schaffer (1996) covered child development in depth, while Woodhead, Faulkner, and Littleton (1998) provided a range of cross-cultural studies, including Trevarthen (1998) on how children need to learn a culture.

Prout and James (2004/1997), Rogoff (2003), Rogoff, Mistry, Göncü & Mosier (1993), Bruner, Lave and Wenger (1991), Super and Harkness (1986, 1992), bring in developments of socio-cultural perspectives, socio-cultural childhood studies and the concept of the developmental niche. Including a Vygotskian perspective, Siraj-Blatchford (2002, 2009) discussed the concept of sustained shared thinking, relating it to concepts such as Mercer's "interthinking" (Siraj- Blatchford, 2009). Bruce (2001) emphasised the importance of play for young children, Moyles (2010) and Goouch (2008) discussed playful pedagogies and different perspectives on play and learning.

Malaguzzi, in Edwards, Gandini, & Forman (2008), affirms the 100 languages of children, and the concept of the rich child in terms of their own talents, interests and engagement, rather than seeing children and childhood via a deficit needs model. Moss and Petrie (2002), argued for children's spaces, including rights perspectives and more child centred policy, while challenging the needs deficit model and the exclusion of children's own perspectives.

Meaningful consultation with children in terms of their participatory rights is relevant for anyone working with children in play, playwork, early learning and childcare and education settings e.g.: Schiller and Einarsdottir (2009) on engaging with children in research, Clarke and Moss (2001), and Clarke (2011) described the Mosaic approach in listening to children. Kellett (2005, 2009a, 2009b and 2010) brought in children as researchers, within an emancipatory rights paradigm. Ethics and methodology of engaging with children in research include Alderson and Morrow (2004) on ethics, using drawings and photography (Docket and Perry, 2005, Einarsdottir, 2005) and multi-modal literacy (Flewitt, Nind & Payler, 2009). Central to all of these approaches, and socio-cultural theory, is the concept of the child as an active agent in their own right, who has affect on others and their environments.

The social constructivist approach has major influence in the UK, as Piagetian or neo-Piagetian theories have influenced on the design and practice of early learning and childcare settings, with a strong focus on observation of the child, the play environment and play with peers. Young children work through their play in making meaning through interactions with their environment, and Piaget (1955, 1962), introduced an analysis of processes of learning; characterised by concepts such as accommodation, assimilation, equilibrium, disequilibrium and schemas (Piaget, 1962).

A child's schema might be apparent as they become absorbed in performing particular actions in a discovery process, until they have assimilated the associated learning of new information, e.g. learning to use trajectory skills in throwing a ball (which they may repeat many times). Piaget (1955, 1962) argued that it is through the child's experiences manipulating and changing the world that the child acquires knowledge about relations within and between people and objects. His staged theory of development also posits particular stages of development, in a spiral of growing capabilities.

However, Bronfenbrenner's (1978, 2007) socio-cultural and bio-ecological theory of development, showed that the construction of meaning through children's play, learning and interactions within their environments takes place within a complex of network of interacting cultural forces, therefore, learning does not happen in a vacuum, and circumstances for learning, or play, are not universal across all cultures.

The immediate environment is also variable in terms of the symbols and objects within it, those which draw the child into giving it attention, exploring, manipulating, using opportunities to elaborate and which kindle their imagination. (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2007), while personal characteristics, reciprocal interactions between children and children or adults, are part of the circumstances in which play can happen, alone or in groups.

The key skills of observation and reflection on children's play are central to Piaget's understanding of how children learn, and the views of Piaget and Vygotsky are often compared as opposites, but as Siraj-Blatchford (2009) points out, they have both made a significant contribution in showing that children have emergent dispositions to learn. Such emergent dispositions might match the concept in play theory in that the child has emergent dispositions to play.

The socio-cultural theory of Vygotsky (1978, 1986, 1966) demonstrates how children learn, through interactions with a more knowledgeable other, and though socio-dramatic, and other forms of play. For Vygotsky, individual development, including higher mental functioning, has its origins in social sources. Much of children's routine activities take place in what Vygotsky (1978, p. 86) calls the zone of proximal development (ZPD); the difference between what a learner can do without help and what he or she can do with help, in order to support development the actual and proximal stages should both be considered. Learners participate in a broad range of joint activities and internalise the effects of working together, they acquire new strategies and knowledge of the world and culture, the child or novice learns through their interactions with the more knowledgeable other.

Vygotsky was interested in both what more knowledgeable other brought to the interaction, and in what the child brought to the interaction, as well as how the broader cultural and historical setting shaped the interaction. He points out that the child is "always striving to be a head taller" and "The relationship of play to development should be compared to the relationship between instruction and development … Play is a source of development and creates the zone of proximal development (Vygotsky 1978, p. 74). Therefore, this emergent disposition, this striving, gives the observant adult the opportunity to create the conditions, within their social, historical and cultural relationship, e.g. through play or talk, or the provision of resources, which support development.

This underpins the concept of scaffolding (a term Vygotsky did not actually use), developed by others such as Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) to demonstrate how the more knowledgeable other creates the steps or breaks down the task and models the skills. The concept of situated learning in a Community of Practice, developed by Lave and Wenger (1991), also builds on the socio-cultural approach, emphasising the socio-cultural attributes of the setting that the novice must learn, learning how to fit into this community of practice, is through a process of social interaction, activities and engagement.

Trevarthen (1998) reflects on how children need to learn a culture, and within this socio-cultural approach, there has to be an understanding of the child's own agency and affect (Prout and James, 2004/1997), e.g. in what the child brings to their own learning and culture. In particular, the cross cultural perspective e.g. Rogoff, Mistry, Göncü, & Mosier's, (1993) examination of young children's play demonstrated the differences in their play across cultures and the different roles of parents and other children in play engagement.

The cross-cultural understanding and the socio-cultural perspective all point to the need to understand issues of diversity and inclusion, and warns that developmental theories developed on one form of cultural practice do not necessarily transfer to different cultures with contrasting constructions of the child.

Super and Harkness (1986, 2002) developed the concept of the developmental niche, which encompasses, cultural, historical and social systems, within which children interact, in their play, work and learning, and this can also apply to the particular niche of children with disabilities. Rogoff (2003) also draws attention to differences in themes in pretend play cross-culturally, finding that in communities in which children participate in the 'mature life' of a community, they often play at adult work and social roles. However, if children are segregated from the adult community, their play less commonly reflects 'mature activity': the sources they might emulate are more from television or film, e.g. playing at superheroes (Rogoff, 2003).

As Vygotsky examined different components of play and the way they affect the young child's emerging mental functions he concluded that play 'is not the predominant form of activity, but is, in a certain sense, the leading source of development in preschool years' (p. 6, 1967, in Bodrova,2008 p 359). Children learn to understand rules in their socio-dramatic play with peers, and this contributes to their cognitive functioning; representational play creates an imaginary situation that permits children to deal with their unrealizable desires and so promote self-regulation, while such play always contains rules for behaviour (Vygotsky, 1933/1966).

Child agency and the UNCRC (UN: 1989) is the focus of later theory and methods in working with children, for example, the work of Kellett (2005, 2009a, 2009b, 2010) in training and facilitating young researchers to conduct their own action research projects. With the concept of children's spaces, Moss and Petrie (2002) were concerned with creating environments conductive to their wellbeing, creating space for children as equals in communities and valuing the role of their own self-directed play. They state:

"We need to change the image of the worker (with children) "from technician to reflective practitioner, researcher, co-constructor of knowledge, culture and identity" (Moss and Petrie, 2002, p. 137).

They were also critical of the role of the school in social control of children, indeed in educators not viewing children as active strong and engaged citizens in society in their own right. They also, linking to play theory, note the concept of risk, as social control, meeting external non-child centred standards and fears of transgression.

The nature of storying events, co-construction of fantasies and stories, between the practitioner and child in day-to-day practice, is a type of playful pedagogy that Goouch (2008) examines, including the nature of the practice, architecture and play spaces where this occurs. The foundation of playful pedagogies is in understanding that "play is the essential pedagogical strategy to enhance children's deeper learning" (Moyles, 2010, p. 8).

While the Leuven involvement scale for young children Laevers (2011) is a tool to measure the wellbeing of children in an early learning and childcare environment, much of the features of the scale resonate with the intensity, duration, absorption and pleasure children take in their deep engagement with play activities. Children need to be involved in their learning and it has to be real and meaningful to them, the quality of the interactions between the adults and children, and the environment of the setting are all aspects promoting wellbeing (Laevers, 2011).

Also concerned with what works best for children's learning and development through play in early years settings, is the work of Siraj-Blatchford and colleagues, in developing the concept of sustained shared thinking, (2002), she also places the development of this concept within a Vygotskian continuum (Siraj Blatchford, 2009). It is stressed that there must be sensitivity to the child's agency in leading their play, using observation and gentle, timely, conversations and scaffolding interactions to extend their play and understanding, again using a co-constructive approach.

Active Learning is based on the actions of the learner and what they themselves bring to the learning situation, through freely chosen purposeful activities the learner is engaged in a discovery process, where again, taking a Vygotskian perspective, the skills of observation, reflection, and sensitive intervention to extent their thinking is a key part of this process. In early learning and childcare in Scotland, for example, play is the conduit of the active learning process. Guidance on the use of Active Learning (Scottish Executive, 2007), emphasised the role of play (see CfE in the Play in Education section). Settings for early learning and childcare in Scotland, may not find the concept difficult to assimilate, as this could already be a major feature of their understanding and practice, in how children learn and develop, through play.

A major change through CfE and the 2007 guidance, in particular, for the teachers of the youngest schoolchildren in P1 and P2, is that play is now expected to be part of the children's daily experience of learning. As Martlew, Stephen & Ellis (2011) point out, in their investigation of the introduction of this new pedagogy of play into the classroom, there is a need for teachers to be trained in understanding how valuable different types of play are for children. They suggest, following, Pramling, Samuelsson and Johansson (2006, in Martlew et al, 2011) for teachers to integrate both dimensions of play and learning together and not to see them as entirely "separate entities". They found that teachers had different interpretations of active or play based learning, with variable understanding and delivery, with some play only at the peripheral level, too related to curriculum content and not fully integrated into children' learning activities (Martlew et al, 2011, p. 71).

Teachers also found it difficult to find ways of capturing and recording the learning, taking place through play, although this was addressed, in some cases, by using a method of capturing evidence of the process of learning, through using portfolios, a Reggio Emilia approach, which makes the process visible (Martlew et al, 2011). The portfolios containing photos, artwork, documentation, relating to the child's learning journey. In this approach, through their drawing, sculpting, dramatic play, writing, and painting there is representation of children's development of thinking processes and theories. As children work through problems and ideas, they are encouraged to depict their understanding, using many different representations.

Children are seen as equal partners in child led projects, with their teachers, and parental involvement too, and the environment is considered to be the third teacher, and must be rich with possibilities, included hands on clay materials, art, space and light and nature, or wood and nails, as children work through their activities. According to Lois Malaguzzi, the founder of the Reggio Emilie approach, there are a "hundred languages of children", all of them rich with possibilities, (Edwards et al, 1998) and children need to be able to use them all in their co-construction of knowledge. Traditional learning approaches can stifle and not listen to the children's many ways of communicating their ideas; therefore, they need access to creative, cultural tools, which enable expression of such ideas:

"...So despite everything, it is permissible, to think that creativity or rather learning and the wonder of learning... can serve as the strong point of our work. It is thus our continuing hope that creativity will become a normal traveling companion in our children's growth and development" (Mallaguzzi, in Reggiochildren, 2010, p. 8).

The socio-cultural approach has also influenced policy development on children's learning and development in many other countries, and this includes a curriculum for children aged 0-6 which is explicitly founded on such values in New Zealand; e.g. Te Whāriki: "The early childhood curriculum has been envisaged as a whāriki, or mat, woven from the principles, strands, and goals defined" (New Zealand Government, Ministry of Education, 1996). Taking a Vygotskian approach, and recognising the diversity of the different programmes, environment, local cultural values, which will create their own distinctive patterns of the whāriki. One of the distinctive approaches is in working with Whānau: members of an extended family and its supporting network who form a context for the care and guidance of a child.

The case study below concludes the review of a sample of relevant literature, as it demonstrates the centrality of children's play, play breaks, and play as processes of playful teaching and playful learning, within educational practice in Finland. This case study has relevance for the examination of teacher training, especially in terms of supporting play in active learning and outdoor learning in schools, and links with the review of play theory and theorists.

Case Study: Finnish School System: Play as a Process

The work of Pasi Sahlberg, including a number of linked newspaper articles from his blog, gives an overview of the Finnish education system, which is much admired internationally, but has to be seen in the Finnish social and cultural context of how children, childhood and play are viewed, and, especially, in how educators are valued and trusted in their work.

According to Sahlberg, Finland's universities offer world-class academic studies free of tuition fees for all students (including foreign students), and most degree programs are offered in English (Washington Post, 2014). Finnish teachers are recruited from the top students and are expected to be academically trained in teaching to MA level. Teaching has the same social status as, e.g., doctors and lawyers, and they are expected to continue with research on learning, and engage in professional collaboration, throughout their career, and in day to day practice (Pasisahlberg.com, 2014a).

Children do not start school until aged seven, while the school day is broken up into 45 min classroom and 15 minutes recess, each hour, with additional time for lunch and little or no homework to impinge on children's leisure time after school. School days are also shorter when compared, for example, to the US (Sahlberg, 2014c, our italics). There are long summer school holidays to make the most of the summer, and further breaks midwinter and mid-terms. Therefore, Finnish children spend a lot less time in the classroom than their peers in many other countries, yet: "Finnish students consistently score near the top in the Program for International Student Assessment, or PISA, for reading, mathematics and science. The 2012 PISA results tell us that in these three subjects combined Finland ranks third after Korea and Japan" (Sahlberg, 2014c)

Sahlberg (2014a) explains the reasons behind this as being about highly qualified and autonomous, respected and trusted teachers; who have time built in for their professional collaboration with colleagues, leadership of schools by experts from their own sector e.g. primary teachers leading primary schools, where a secondary trained teacher leads a secondary school. The curriculum is flexible to local needs and individual teachers. Children are not subject to standardised tests and there is only one period of testing at the end of high school.

There is social equity in the delivery of the educational system, including, for example, free, nutritionally balanced, hot lunches. The national curriculum focuses on the whole child, and attends to health and wellbeing through free health care, counselling and transport, if needed, as well as providing extra funding and support for children with additional educational needs (Professional Voice, 2014). There is subsidised daycare and early education, free at age six and pre-school at age five, which has an emphasis on play and social education (Smithsonian.org, 2011).

The key to the Finnish educational system is in understanding the centrality of play (Sahlberg, 2014b) and children's needs for play and breaks from formal learning.

Investigating how fourteen teachers, in two northern areas of Finland, view and use play in kindergarten and elementary education, (Hyvönen, 2011) found that teachers played the roles of leader, allower and afforder of play. The research identified aspects both of playful teaching, in such roles, and an integrated playful learning process, especially in the role of afforder of play. Whilst this good practice was demonstrated by at least five teachers in the study, Hyvönen (2011) suggests there is still a need for more teacher education on teacher enabled, but child led process play, and how it aids development and learning, as well as more learning about the value of play in itself for children.

Using grounded theory analysis, Hyvönen identified eight different play types from interviews with the teachers, including identifying some of their unease in using process play techniques. The first three types of play identified are educational, cheering and physical play, driven by the needs of the curriculum, which Hyvönen (2011, p. 71) identifies as instrumental play. Music, songs, memory games, puzzles and board games are all considered educational play within the classroom.

"Cheering play" is used liven up things or to relax together, at the start or end of a lesson, while physical play, is often used to energise or warm up the class, and to develop: "Important cognitive, social and emotional" competencies, including motor skills (Hyvönen, 2011, p. 72). There was an observed enrichment of the local play culture with teachers and children alike using games developed in the context of their own setting with local games called "the slimy fairy" or "ambulance tag" (Hyvönen, 2011, p. 72).

Teachers reflected on bringing in more creative child led practice, although some were worried they would not achieve (local) curriculum targets, through using different methods, however all realised that teacher led "chalk and talk" approaches were not the only or best way to support learning. Another issue they identified is that sitting in the classroom is stifling for children, as in their free play in the breaks, playing out; they speak out and appear more confident. More attention could be given to outdoor learning processes too, according to Hyvönen (2011, p 73) and there are increasing examples of this approach, see, YouTube video "Skogsmulle in Finland" (Svenska Idrott, 2014) [in Swedish].

In terms of the teacher's role as "allower", this is under the categories of pretend, authentic, traditional and free play. In all four, the goal is not specific educational outcomes but supporting the development of friendships and social skills, and through this; rule construction, creating and breaking boundaries, negotiation, disputes, teasing and conflict, as identified by (Corsaro, 2003; Dunn, 2004, in Hyvönen, 2011, p. 74). Pretend play is child led imaginative, creative and role-play, while Authentic play is child led in using natural materials such as snow, stones, sticks etc. Traditional play includes outdoor games such as: "soccer, ten sticks on the board, dodge ball, cops and robbers, and different types of tag...popular among boys and girls" (Hyvönen, 2011, p. 74). Free play is an unstructured child-initiated activity, relaxing with friends and re-energising, indoors or outdoors.

Teacher afforded process play, using a playful learning process, has distinct phases of orientation, playing and elaboration (Hyvönen, 2011, p. 75). While the teacher designs the overall plan, process play is a child led, voluntary activity, where process is considered more important than product, the learner sets the pace, it is highly, and deeply, engaging and therefore helps increase knowledge and understanding (Hyvönen, 2011). Every day play is integrated seamlessly into the curriculum, it is linked to the concept of the play frame (Broström, 1996, in Hyvönen, 2011, p. 76) and emphasises fun and enjoyment for the children and the teacher. Hyvönen does not identify, in this small sample, the five teachers using this method, but it is significant that the kindergarten teachers had a richer understanding of play-based learning.

This summary does not do justice to the theoretical depth of this research, but it demonstrates the different kinds of play valued and available within Finnish school settings, and local critical reflection on this work. It links closely with issues teachers here might grapple with in terms of delivering more play in schools. Hyvönen (2011) also links her analysis with ideas of leading play theorists, such as Sutton Smith (2001).

Conclusion

The literature review, from specific play and playwork theories, example of historical classical and emerging approaches to child development, especially through socio-cultural theory, child agency and rights, as well as the focus on break time and bringing in the above Finnish study provides the broader context for the research and the evaluation tools used for analysis of the findings.

It is clear from the literature that play, is an integral component of child development, is valued and is intertwined in classical theory as a precursor to both current thinking in child development and the more focused stands addressing play in early learning and care and play in playwork practice. This is extended to also show the value of play and break time within schools for children of school age. The play and learning environment, including the biological, cultural, social and political arenas, and the interactions between them, is also very relevant, and this includes child agency and affect.

In addressing the main question of this enquiry, namely to discover the extent to which play is covered within the training and qualifications of the workforce in Scotland with a role in supporting children's play, this review demonstrates that the evaluation goes beyond simply analysing this in in terms of the specific modern play and playwork theorists.

Where it is possible the analysis of course contents should also reflect the classic theorists of child development and modern and emerging theories, such as the social cultural approach, and UNCRC paradigms, as well as developments within early learning and care and formal education, where play has a focus.

2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

In creating categories for analysis to address the core questions, it is acknowledged that the themes overlap, and aspects could be missed, such categories are really there to prove a structural, thematic framework. Accepting that the more in depth playwork theoretical perspectives may be confined to this particular discipline, nevertheless, evidence to varying degrees, (depending on the level and points of the qualification units or qualification courses), contents relating to specific play theorists, concepts, and the playwork principles, form one category for the evaluative purposes in discovering play content.

Classical and contemporary theories and practice, guidance and policy relating to play as central to child development, or learning, is another main evaluative category. This in order to discover where play is included in qualifications which are not as specialist as playwork, but this should be in aspects of play and playwork courses, as well as those covering the developing and learning child.

Three further sub categories are identified from the literature review; the environment for play and learning (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2007), as this is recognised as crucial, children's rights and global, modern/post-modern theory, including child agency, and, specific curriculum contents where play enables learning is also included, alongside further evidence of a focus on creativity, and socio-cultural based curriculum guidance.