Literature Review on Intentional Play in the Classroom

Introduction

In the last few decades, national and transnational educational policy initiatives have called for enhanced learning outcomes delivery, greater educational accountability and improved academic standards (Ministry of Pedagogy and Research 2010; No Child Left Backside Human action of 2001 2002; OECD 2015). An early on delivery to such efforts is oftentimes underscored. In many national contexts, this has led to a greater focus on direct, instructor-led instruction in early childhood education (ECE) (see e.g. Hesterman 2018; Rogers and Evans 2007). In a number of countries, a growing concern has simultaneously been voiced regarding the 'alarming disappearance of play' from kindergarten and preschool practice (Nicolopoulou 2010, i). Likewise, calls for safeguarding children's spontaneous and free play accept been brought frontwards (e.one thousand. Sundsdal and Øksnes 2015). Popular discourse farther amplifies an paradigm of preschool pedagogy as a binary choice betwixt more learning, early assessment and focus on school preparedness, on the one paw, and free, kid-initiated and kid-led play with no developed intrusion, on the other. In improver to having potentially detrimental consequences, not least for preschool children with special needs (Klem and Hagtvet 2018), this may go out little room for nuance (Nicolopoulou 2010).

Confronting this backdrop, play-based learning (PBL) has gained currency every bit a recommended curricular arroyo in a number of national ECE contexts (Danniels and Pyle 2018). Although combining play with a feasible preschool pedagogy lies at the core of PBL, there is, nonetheless, no definitional consensus. As such, PBL continues to attract heated debate and controversy. Research literature has, in fact, warned that such definitional ambivalence makes PBL a potentially hard concept for ECE practitioners to translate into their professional practice (Rogers 2010a). By the same token, the educational potential of play may remain unrealized (Bennett, Wood, and Rogers 1997).

There is a substantial body of empirical research that has interrogated teachers' views on the connections betwixt play and learning in a range of national contexts. Despite its far-reaching significance and relevance for theory-building, practise, teacher education and future policy developments, we accept located only i previous study that has reviewed some of this literature in a systematic manner (Pyle, DeLuca, and Danniels 2017). Equally a scoping review, however, it included a vast range of both theoretical and empirical contributions, employing various methodologies and examining not only practitioners' just also other stakeholders' views on play and PBL, such as policy-makers, parents and children themselves. Moreover, information technology had a specific focus on children in the historic period bracket four to v years.

The principal aim of our written report was therefore to narrow the telescopic and systematically synthesize international empirical enquiry on ECE practitioners' ⁱ agreement of PBL in the context of their professional work with and care for children in the historic period bracket zero to six years. Zooming in on specifically teachers' voices from across different national and educational policy contexts, we wish to contribute to the scientific debate on PBL with identifying general trends and patterns while simultaneously paying attending to local idiosyncrasies and peculiarities. By focusing specifically on ECE practitioners rather than other stakeholders, our review also underscores their function as primal ECE policy agents impacting most directly the key beneficiaries of such policies, children themselves.

Play-based learning: theoretical and empirical insights

Although there is a long-established agreement virtually the axis of play in early childhood, conceptualizations and theories of play abound (Bennett, Wood, and Rogers 1997; Bergen 2014). Indeed, the vast scientific literature on play draws on multi-disciplinary perspectives and, rather than offering a universal definition, it bears witness to play'due south embedded conceptual diffusion and complication (come across e.g. Sutton-Smith 1997). Given the multifaced theoretical influences that likewise undergird learning, attempts at combining the 2 concepts have generated a wealth of scholarship with no definitional consensus either (Brooker, Blaise, and Edwards 2014, ane). As Brooker and colleagues fence, this is despite the fact that play is routinely recognized equally a basis for learning in early childhood.

Numerous taxonomies of play are in apportionment. They are synthetic along several inter-related themes. While some emphasize the content of play, distinguishing, for instance, betwixt functional, symbolic and rule-governed play (e.g. Vorkapic and Katic 2015), others circumduct around play behaviour types, such as concrete (e.grand. exercise or rough-and-tumble play), object (involving purpose-made toys) or pretense play (eastward.g. office or socio-dramatic play) (Smith 2005).

Another widespread variant focuses on participants in play, particularly the degree and nature of their interest. Essentially, child–adult participation in play may here exist visualized as a multi-dimensional continuum, with the and then-called kid-initiated and child-led free play with voluntary participation, no predetermined instructional aim and no developed intrusion at one end, and structured, developed-led non-play with an avowed instructional purpose (cf. direct educational activity) at the other (Bennett, Wood, and Rogers 1997; Wood 2009a, 2009b). Placed in-between free play and non-play, i may find variations of guided play and play-based learning. Forth this continuum, developed roles may range from parallel players, teammates, mentors and guides, to generally supervising outsiders (Wood, McMahon, and Cranstoun 1980).

Another essential dimension in the scholastic fence on play pedagogies is the question of play's beneficial effects on fostering children'due south evolution. Traceable to the 'theoretical giants' of the twentieth century – Freud, Erikson, Piaget and Vygotsky – (Bergen 2014, 14), this line of enquiry often makes distinctions between different developmental areas, specially cognitive, academic, social and emotional, and how these may exist supported through dissimilar forms and types of play. While the scope of electric current empirical evidence is substantial, it does not provide a uniform and consequent picture of the connections between different play forms and their distinct developmental benefits (see e.g. Pyle, DeLuca, and Danniels 2017; Lillard et al. 2013).

In contempo years, ECE scholars take challenged the dichotomization of play and learning every bit false and the 'free play' – 'non-play/direct education' continuum as misguided (Nicolopoulou 2010, ii). With recourse to sociocultural learning theories, where learning and development are seen as facilitated through shared co-construction of meaning, scaffolded help and guided participation in cultural action, such as play (Rogoff 1990; 2003; Vygotsky 1978), they underscore the post-obit: 1) the interwoven nature of play and learning, 2) the proactive and variable roles that adults may adopt in children'southward play and 3) how different play-based learning practices may contribute and foster non simply children's social, emotional and physical development but as well their academic and cognitive development in a holistic and mutually supportive fashion (Pyle, DeLuca, and Danniels 2017; Samuelsson and Johansson 2006; Stephen 2010; Wallerstedt and Pramling 2012). Within this framework, participants in imaginative play, for example, can prefer a form of double-subjectivity whereby they position themselves every bit being both within and exterior of play (Kravtsov and Kravtsova 2010; Kravtsova 2014). On the whole, this work advocates the enhanced value and meaning of learning through play in ECE curricula. Besides, it calls for nuancing pedagogies of play conceptually (Rogers 2010a; Walsh et al. 2010) and provides critical insights on the conceptualizations of play every bit both policy and practice (Hunter and Walsh 2014). At the same time, this scholarship underscores the importance of instructional differentiation in line with children's developmental needs, warning confronting the one-size-fits-all rationale in play pedagogies (meet Vogt et al. 2018).

A substantial body of literature has also investigated empirically teachers' views and beliefs about play and play's role in early childhood instruction, drawing on different theories and terminology. Broadly speaking, there is a wide-spread recognition that teacher behavior crucially influence practise as well as pre-service training and professional development (Vorkapic and Katic 2015; Hegde and Cassidy 2009; Hegde et al. 2014; Fang 1996). While it is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the various insights this literature has generated, suffice information technology to say that the apparent 'rhetoric-reality split up' has long been noted (Bennett, Wood, and Rogers 1997, 31) and 'the two competing theses' of consistency versus inconsistency between teacher beliefs and their enactment in exercise continue to attract much empirical involvement (Fang 1996, 47), as too studies included in our review bear witness to (see Table 1 for studies pursuing a combined interview/survey-observational blueprint).

Table 1. Listing of included studies (in alphabetical order).

In what follows, these theoretical concerns and empirical findings are used as a platform that in part informs our analytical approach to data and every bit a lens that affords a theoretically robust exploration of bug emerging from the synthesized studies.

Method

Methodically, this paper is informed by qualitative meta-synthesis. While at that place are disputes and disagreements among scholars equally to its precise definition, Thorne and colleagues argue that information technology represents 'a family of methodological approaches to developing new knowledge based on rigorous analysis of existing qualitative research findings' (2004, 1343). Meta-synthesis is integrative rather than interpretative (Saini and Shlonsky 2012) and aims to offer 'a coherent description or caption of a target event or experience' (Thorne et al. 2004, 1358). As in qualitative methodology in general, some of its central elements are the extraction of concepts or themes, their comparing and contrast as well as the synthesis of results across studies in the form of conceptual taxonomies. To arrive at robust explanations and descriptions of phenomena, it may get-go off with identifying a inquiry problem, stipulating inclusion and exclusion criteria and defining a strategy for how findings beyond the included main studies volition be synthesized (Sandelowski and Barroso 2007). Acknowledging the contextual and relational boundedness of qualitative data likewise as the complexity of the task at hand, Thorne et al. (2004) nonetheless underscore the demand for a common standard and methodical transparency. Below, nosotros provide a succinct overview of each methodical pace that has guided this study.

Inclusion criteria and issues of study quality

Given the aim of our review, we expected most of the included studies to take a specifically qualitative design with interviews as the primary data drove method, potentially combined with observations of practice. This supposition was corroborated through our search. In a few cases, questionnaires were employed, either exclusively or in combination with qualitative data collection methods. These studies were also included. In addition to these pattern conditions, we had the following inclusion criteria:

Sample: we limited our review to specifically empirical studies on ECE practitioners' understanding of PBL in the context of kindergarten and preschool/early school years. While definitions of ECE may include children as former every bit viii years of age, in many national contexts, children will normally enter school in the historic period subclass iv to six years. Wary of such national differences and in need of a cut-off indicate, we address studies that target primarily children between zero and six years.

Publication year: nosotros express the publication period to studies published later on 1995 and up to November 2018 when our database search was completed. Given the relative novelty of PBL as a concept and taking into account major education policy changes and reforms occurring in various national contexts since the plow of the millennium, this was considered a long plenty time span to capture the most relevant studies Given that this meta-synthesis was guided past qualitative epistemology, nosotros too considered this time span to provide sufficient grounds for reaching thematic saturation.

Linguistic communication of reporting: we targeted studies published in English, Norwegian, Swedish and Danish, given our shared linguistic competence in these languages. ^two

Thematic focus: studies were included if they specifically targeted ECE teachers' views of either PBL or the connections betwixt play and learning (i.east. play in relation to learning), such as play'due south potential learning benefits. Studies that did neither (i.eastward. focused exclusively on either play or learning) were excluded. While our literature search was broad and did not specifically target studies within the field of study of pedagogy or studies exploring diverse instructional approaches towards fostering the development of specific academic skills or subject field cognition, such equally literacy or science, that may potentially challenge the traditional dichotomy betwixt play and learning without explicitly drawing on PBL equally a concept, our concluding study sample does characteristic studies that could be categorized every bit such (e.g. Moon and Reifel 2008; Sundberg et al. 2016; Nikolopoulou and Gialamas 2015).

Study Quality: while there are a number of different checklists to assess the quality of qualitative studies, at that place is a swell deal of discrepancy between them in terms of their rigour, usefulness and applicability (Saini and Shlonsky 2012; Atkins et al. 2008). Having applied an adapted version of the CASP qualitative checklist in their systematic qualitative review, Atkins et al. (2008, 21), for example, argue that the disquisitional appraisal process became 'an exercise in judging the quality of the written study rather than the research procedure itself'. Aligning ourselves with Atkins and colleagues' view of no straightforward interdependence between rigorous awarding of methods and rigorous qualitative research, we decided to assess study quality by looking at the overall coherence between inquiry aims, methods practical and the reported findings in each study. Aiming at thematic jiff and bearing in mind each study's strengths and limitations (encounter also Saini and Shlonsky 2012, 137), no studies were excluded based on this procedure lonely.

Search strategy

We conducted a systematic literature search in three international research databases: 1) the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), two) the Web of Science (WoS) and 3) PsycINFO, in add-on to a search in Google Scholar. The systematic search in these databases was supplemented with a mitt search in the Nordic Early on Childhood Pedagogy Research Periodical (NECERJ). Apart from serving validation purposes, the rationale for including NECERJ rests on our access and linguistic possibilities of conducting systematic searches therein.

The search strategy used in the selected databases combined relevant keywords with the use of Boolean operators AND and OR and truncation* to cover variations in keywords. Our keywords included: (play* OR larn*) AND (preschool* OR kindergarten*) AND teacher* OR staff*). ^three The literature search was carried out in the period October - November 2018. ⁴

Screening process

Our review process started off with each author screening the titles and abstracts of the first 200 references in each of the three international research databases and Google Scholar. The 200-cut-off point was selected on the supposition that information technology would provide sufficient grounds for reaching thematic saturation. In improver to the hand search in NECERJ, we thus screened the titles and abstracts of 996 studies in total. This initial screening resulted in 126 potentially relevant studies. Each author and then read one 3rd in full-text, applying our inclusion and quality appraisal criteria. To validate our preliminary inclusion decisions made in this pace and, in some cases, resolve any inclusion doubts that may have arisen, 2 members on our team swapped ten studies with one another and conducted the same total-text inclusion evaluation procedure. This gave the full of 33 included studies.

Additionally, the get-go author conducted a screening review of all references (187) listed in a previously published scoping review on the subject, captured in our review process (Pyle, DeLuca, and Danniels 2017). Given that a degree of relevance to and an overlap with our conceptual design could be causeless, it resulted in the inclusion of additional 33 studies. Upon a full-text validation conducted by the 2d writer, 3 studies were subsequently excluded. This search thus resulted in 29 included studies. Combined, our screening procedure resulted in the final inclusion of 62 single studies (for a graphic visualization of the screening procedure, see Figure 1: Flowchart).

Information extraction and coding

To address the review question and proceeds an initial overview of the included studies, we extracted the following data in each example: (1) inquiry question, (two) first writer and year of publication, (iii) chief themes, (four) method, (v) main results every bit provided by the study authors and (6) main results addressing the review question. The information were duly recorded in an Excel sheet template. Table 1 shows selected characteristics of the included studies based on some of the extracted data (author/southward, publication year, state, method).

Nosotros then proceeded with a thematic analysis of each written report with the utilise of the computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software NVivo. This was mainly to ease data management and add necessary rigour and transparency to the analytical process (Richards 2009). Our coding structure was informed past theoretical insights as well as insights gained through our initial assay and a subsequent thorough reading of each included study. Equally such, it transpired as an iterative procedure where theory and empirical data were in a dialogic relation throughout the coding process (Creswell 2013).

As already noted above, our synthesis is grounded in specifically qualitative epistemology. A key analytical principle was ensuring the construction of a viable taxonomy that would most comprehensively capture the jiff of issues across the included primary studies. To heighten taxonomic validity through thematic saturation, the first writer coded the first half of the included studies (33) kickoff. This gave a provisional coding taxonomy. The 2d author coded the remaining half inside the same taxonomic structure, expanding and adjusting as deemed relevant. The final structure emerged upon a dialogue between the first and second author, involving steps such equally comparison analytical levels and considering the discreetness of nodes in consultation with theory. Following this process, we arrived at the following three overarching thematic nodes: (1) Teachers' behavior nigh PBL, (ii) Adult interest and roles in PBL and (3) Implementing PBL. These will guide our subsequent presentation of findings.

Results

The importance of context

A forcefulness of a systematic review is to see trends across contexts. The 62 studies, included in our meta-synthesis, span dissimilar corners of the earth, representing 24 countries with their unique attributes. We take clustered these into three main groups that may share linguistic, geographic and/or cultural features relevant to ECE: (ane) English language-speaking countries (e.thousand. The United Kingdom, Ireland, The U.s., Australia, New Zealand and Canada) with thirty included studies, (2) (Northern) European countries (e.grand. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland) with 8 included studies (iii) Asian countries (e.thousand. Hong Kong, Nihon, China, Sultanate of oman, Saudi-Arabia, Abu Dhabi) with 16 studies included in our review. Our dataset as well included 6 comparative studies and 2 studies that were not clustered. ⁵

Within each cluster, there are necessarily both national and local variations, represented by peculiarities in their ECE policy regimes and other country-specific idiosyncrasies. However, they may too share traits on a more global, structural level, such socio-cultural and language history. As Mosvold and Alvestad (2011) argue, in Scandinavian and Central European countries, ECE institutions are shaped by a social pedagogy tradition where much emphasis is placed on a holistic view of learning. Child-centredness, care, play and the development of socio-emotional competences are some of the hallmarks of ECE practice in these countries. On the other hand, the pre-master and kindergarten practice in English-speaking countries is significantly shaped by the master school curriculum (ibid.). Indeed, in our review, studies set in the Uk discuss PBL particularly in relation to what is variably labelled the reception year in England and Wales and P1 in Northern Ireland. On a similar note, as several studies in our Asian cluster foreground, their ECE policies traditionally place a much greater emphasis on school readiness and direct education from early on. Researchers have also drawn attention to the cultural connotations implicit in the construct of play itself, noting that particularly mother–kid or free play can exist seen as specifically Western constructs and play and learning as two downright incompatible concepts inside non-Western cultural traditions (Gaskins, Haight, and Lancy 2006; Marfo and Biersteker 2010; Rogers 2010b; Wu, Faas, and Geiger 2018).

Steeped in different traditions and cultures of learning, contextual features volition necessarily shape attitudes, beliefs and perceptions, withal also transnational trends affecting and instigating policy developments and reforms at more local scales. Wary of such nuances that necessarily complicate any course of synthesis that might be performed (Thorne et al. 2004), we nonetheless see the clusters as illustrating general contextual trends in terms of the extent to which PBL is thematized in policy too as research.

In what follows, nosotros will provide a systematic overview of each thematic category, as identified to a higher place. Where appropriate, nosotros will comment upon and dash the keen variety of national contexts and culturally conditioned communities of preschool practise through relevant examples.

Teachers' beliefs nearly play-based learning

Play and learning – compatible or incompatible concepts?

As a point of deviation, our offset thematic node relates to ECE teachers' beliefs virtually play-based learning. About importantly, our analysis shows that they take differing views on the degree of conceptual compatibility between play and learning. Many ECE teachers betoken to a natural link between play and learning, seeing learning equally something occurring naturally during play. Views of PBL as something dissimilar than play are, however, too prominent in our dataset. In addition, it is of special notation that beyond the included studies, teachers may utilise unlike or culling ways of labelling PBL. For example, when discussing situations where learning and play are combined, Moon and Reifel (2008) use the term 'integrated lessons'.

Behavior about the benefits of play-based learning

Supporting children's evolution is a key endeavor in early on childhood educational activity and care. This view is corroborated by a substantial number of studies in our dataset. Many ECE teachers written report that play contributes to children's holistic development as well as specific developmental areas such as social, emotional, cerebral and linguistic. Past the same token, many see play every bit laying the foundation for later learning (e.g. Hunter and Walsh 2014; Pui-Wah and Stimpson 2004). There are, however, also some voices that limited doubtfulness or even skepticism regarding the effectiveness of play and play-based activities for learning (see east.1000. Walsh and Gardner 2006).

1 finding emanating from our synthesis is that when disentangling the different views on this issue, information technology is important to consider not only teachers' implicit theories on the conceptual compatibility of play and learning but also their embrace of general pedagogical flexibility and variation. This indicate is demonstrated well in a study by Pyle, Prioletta, and Poliszczuk (2018). They identify ii different groups of teachers: ane that used mostly complimentary play in the classroom and ane that integrated a variety of play types. The start group reported that during free play children have ample opportunities to develop their oral linguistic communication and social skills through interaction with others. However, they also commented that the evolution of more complex language skills, such as reading, requires a more than formal and direct guidance that follows a structured, instructional plan. In contrast, the 2nd group of teachers believed that a flexible enactment of play types supported a range of skills, including the development of bookish learning (i.e. reading and writing skills).

Another finding we wish to highlight concerns the contextual independence, if non universality, of some behavior nigh play's learning benefits. In a number of studies across our three clusters costless play is often linked to opportunities for developing social competence, such as learning to collaborate with others (e.g. Vu, Han, and Buell 2015; Izumi-Taylor, Samuelsson, and Rogers 2010). In Izumi-Taylor, Samuelsson and Rogers' comparative study (2010) set in Japan, the US and Sweden, for example, teachers unanimously relate play to social skills, independently of land context. This illustrates that such views are not simply reserved to practitioners working in the traditionally child- and play-centered (Northern) European ECE tradition but are common well beyond.

Adult interest and roles in play-based learning

Adult–child interest – a balancing human action?

Our 2d thematic node revolves around adult involvement in play and the variable roles that ECE staff may prefer in play-based activities. In some studies, ECE teachers report that developed-led activities dominate. As might be expected, this is particularly prominent in contexts where preschool practice is traditionally shaped by school curricula, such as in the English-speaking and Asian clusters. Withal, we have too identified studies where the pendulum swings the other way and where play in this age grouping is first and foremost seen as a child-initiated and child-led action with no instructional purpose and no adult intrusion, such as amidst the German language participants in the comparative work of Wu and colleagues (Wu, Faas, and Geiger 2018; Wu 2014). In-betwixt these positions, we accept located voices in all three clusters that back up a more balanced view where PBL represents a form of kid–adult cooperation (Hope-Southcott 2013; Sundberg et al. 2016; Cheng 2001). In Cheng'south Hong-Kong study, for instance, one teacher participant argues that PBL requires children'due south active participation: 'They should not just sit downward and listen. They should accept pleasure in directing and managing their learning' (Cheng 2001, 863).

Types of roles and involvement

A finding across a number of studies is that the roles ECE staff may take in play-based activities modify according to the blazon of play children engage in but also during the act of play itself. In outdoor play, adults may prefer more of a supervisory role. In more structured activities that usually take identify indoor, they act more frequently equally play facilitators but may too, in some instances, variably enter a formal instructional office (e.g. Miller and Smith 2004).

Indeed, there is a large variation in the types of roles that ECE teachers place with and describe across our dataset. They can be placed on a continuum constructed effectually the nature of adult participation: at one terminate, one can place an administrative role where the adult identifies with being a knowledge transmitter and, at the other, the adult acts every bit an insider and a play-mate. Our analysis shows that facilitating play is by far the most mutual role teachers report to adopt. In Moon and Reifel's report (2008), ready in the United states of america, the participating ECE teacher describes play facilitation as, for example, setting upwardly the environment and providing different props and materials so that the children can choose what they want to play with, how and when.

Knowing when and how to arbitrate in children's play requires knowledge, feel and skills. This sentiment is echoed through many of the included studies (e.chiliad. Hunter and Walsh 2014; McInnes et al. 2011; Wood and Bennett 1997). For instance, ECE teachers in Wood and Bennett (1997) written report on being more comfy about their involvement in structured play activities rather than role play. They ground this in their reluctance to impose ideas on children while they are absorbed in play. Interestingly, one of the teachers saw her role in play equally a 'joint venture' with possibilities for sharing and discussing ideas, roles and props. The teachers intervened generally to deal with inappropriate behaviour. Similarly, Sundberg and colleagues' 3 case studies from the Swedish ECE context (2016) bring to light the numerous challenges, dilemmas and tensions that may arise in balancing adults' goals for play-based learning with letting children'south interest, imagination, creativity and voluntary engagement govern the activity. Implicit, fragmented and elusive learning objectives, lack of guidance in orchestrating pregnant-making activities and keeping sight of holistic skills development are among examples that clearly complicate teachers' enactment of viable PBL education with an avowed science content.

Additionally, some studies approve a view that ECE teachers' intervention in play needs conscientious and skilful timing if children's learning is to exist enhanced. A teacher in a study past Wang and Hung (2010), for example, describes a process of abiding reflection about her office in play. Among other things, she underscores that in social club to scaffold children'southward learning processes, a teacher needs to be observant of children'south developmental needs. In fact, having watched a video-recording of a play situation in which she herself co-acted, she critically notes that rather than intervening, she should have given children enough time to process the bachelor information.

Implementing play-based learning

Thirdly, our meta-synthesis revealed that teachers encounter a great variety of challenges and barriers to enacting play-based learning in their solar day-to-day practice. We have synthesized these as belonging to ane of six conceptual categories: 1) policy mandates and curricular concerns, 2) parental attitudes and beliefs, three) teacher education and qualifications, 4) collegiate peer pressure level, v) structural challenges and half dozen) children'south characteristics. Overall, the start category – policy mandates and curricular concerns – is past far the most represented and commented upon by teachers across the dataset and likewise one that is variably intertwined with most of the remaining bug.

Policy mandates and curricular concerns

More than than a quarter of all the included studies study that teachers consider policy mandates and curricular delivery pressure as considerable obstacles in their enactment of PBL. This is either expressed in terms of a general top-down policy vigilance or every bit specific reflections on the enhanced focus on early learning outcomes and schoolhouse preparedness. We see that this is particularly prominent in studies conducted in English language-speaking national contexts, where teachers place and talk over multiple tensions between specific curriculum objectives, their own professional philosophies besides equally children's play needs (e.g. Fesseha and Pyle 2016; Gray and Ryan 2016; Guilfoyle and Mistry 2013; Hope-Southcott 2013). A common grievance is a view of play as being without a purpose and thus non serving academic learning well. As teachers in Lynch's (2015, 358) netnography from the Canadian context note, information technology is 'instructions from the system' and 'education to certain standards' that leave no time for play, daily music and movement activities or even snack time.

Also studies from other contexts, particularly in Asia, report on this effect, fifty-fifty if the sets of challenges teachers face are qualitatively unlike. Rather than trying to residual new learning imperatives with a traditional focus on play pedagogies, teachers often describe situations in which they struggle to enact play-based activities in a preschool culture with an entrenched, direct instructional focus on academic learning (e.g. Wu 2014; Baker 2014b, 2015; Cheng 2001). In some studies, such as in Cheng's (2001) Hong-Kong written report, 'pinnacle-down interference' and an expectation of tangible learning results is reported to obstruct teachers' professional dominance, handled mostly as a routine requiring minimal effort and conducted in a mechanical manner. Additionally, administrative duties related to policy imperatives, such equally filling out various forms for the authorities, are reported to stand up in the way of engaging in play pedagogies in a way that would match teachers' own ambitions and aspirations. As one teacher in Aras' (2016, 1179) study from the Turkish context remarks in relation to this: 'Information technology is a miracle for my students if I play with them'.

Several studies report also on teachers experiencing uncertainties regarding the content and purpose of new preschool curricula which may stem from teachers' self-reported lack of familiarity with the policy text itself or with terms and concepts information technology may introduce, such as 'inquiry-based learning' (Greyness and Ryan 2016). This may translate into implementation anxiety, especially in planning time too as designing and managing appropriate content. As Lynch (2014) notes, reliance on the government and preschool management boards rather than teachers' professional judgement and authority may feature equally solutions.

Parental attitudes

Our analysis shows that parental ideas about and expectations of what their children'due south preschool omnipresence should correspond is for many ECE practitioners an additional challenge in translating play-based curricula into practice. This theme runs beyond a number of studies in the English language-speaking and Asian cluster (e.yard. Bakery 2015; Fesseha and Pyle 2016; Fung & Cheng, 2012; Gray and Ryan 2016; Hegde and Cassidy 2009). Teachers describe parents as variably focused on schoolhouse achievement and school preparedness from early on and, relatedly, as unwilling to admit the value of play in their children's preschool activities. For example, teachers in Fung'southward study (2009, 21) meet parents every bit 'a tacit intervening force' trapped in their own 'overwhelming bookish business concern' and equally an obstacle to conducting their professional duties in harmony with their own beliefs. Direct instructional time, an emphasis on worksheets, drills and homework are amongst examples reported as a mutual response to parental demands (Fung and Cheng 2012; Baker 2015).

Parental lack of knowledge about progressive approaches to early childhood instruction and misunderstandings near play every bit a platform for rich learning opportunities is another grievance expressed past teachers in this regard, in some cases adding to teachers' own existing uncertainties and ambivalence almost the merits of PBL (e.g. Fung and Cheng 2012). The culturally conditioned nature of such expectations is well illustrated in Baker's studies from Abu Dhabi (2014b, 2015) where information technology is the ethnic Emirati rather than English-speaking guest worker parents who reject play as an appropriate instructional approach in preschool and insist on directly teaching where tangible deliverables can more easily exist identified.

Teacher education and qualifications

Ofttimes discussed in parallel to both policy and parental expectations as barriers to engaging in play-based pedagogies is the issue of teacher education and qualifications. First of all, teachers report on their own express knowledge and comprehension of play theory or PBL as a concept (east.1000. Cheng 2001; Fung & Cheng, 2012; Gray and Ryan 2016; Howard 2010). In the face of such conceptual uncertainty, juggling curricular demands with parental expectations leaves little room for play and may also affect teachers' own dispositions and attitudes. For case, Howard's (2010) questionnaire study amongst 26 Foundation Year practitioners in Southern Wales reveals that they rated their theoretical understanding of play and their play training as moderate to low. When asked to name theoretical influences on their ain pedagogical do, more than a half of the sample chose to provide no details. Taking an even more extreme position, participants in Gray and Ryan's written report (2016, 199), all employed in a Foundation setting in Ireland, described play-based learning as downright 'faffing about wasting fourth dimension' and 'pointless'.

Too other studies discuss the consequences of limited familiarity with and sensation of the complexity and diversity of play theory, such as routine and repetitive instructional formats and a narrow understanding of play every bit gratuitous play simply (Greyness and Ryan 2016; Fung and Cheng 2012; Cheng 2001). In Fung and Cheng'south study, it is non a specific reference to play theory as such but rather teachers' credible belief in the conceptual incompatibility of play and learning that manifests itself as a deep frustration with, resistance to or a confusion surrounding the adoption of PBL in do. Conceptualizing play as a free, unstructured, child-directed activeness only, teachers as well notice it hard to plan for and integrate in often over-crowded preschool curricula (Grey and Ryan 2016). Additionally, lack of staff qualified in enacting play and PBL, collectively entrenched, traditional views of learning and limited opportunities for grooming and professional development are mentioned every bit factors that complicate the enactment of PBL in some ECE settings (e.g. Cheng 2001; Greyness and Ryan 2016). Managing and planning for play-based approaches but also lack of conviction in justifying an integration of PBL in daily activities to parents and other stakeholders feature amidst closely-related spin-offs.

Peer pressure – within and beyond ECE units

The fourth sub-theme related to implementation challenges in our dataset is peer pressure within and across ECE communities of practice. A number of studies study on hesitance and reluctance to appoint in collegiate debates on the merits of play, specially in contexts with strict curricular ECE regimes (e.chiliad. Cheng 2001; Foote, Smith, and Ellis 2004; Howard 2010; Lynch 2015). Lynch (2015), for example, provides empirical evidence from Canadian settings on some ECE teachers' fearfulness of existence perceived as lazy in prioritizing play-based methods over other, directly, teacher-led activities with articulate deliverables. Also, a fear of sticking out and adjusting tacitly to a communally sanctioned arroyo is mentioned as a reason for implementation difficulties (Cheng 2001; Howard 2010). In addition to horizontal, inter-collegiate attitudinal misalignment, differential understandings of PBL may also transpire vertically every bit a potential disharmonize between preschool staff and management and, also, cross-institutionally as a value-laden conflict between different preschools (Aubrey and Durmaz 2012) also as preschool and schoolhouse cultures of learning (Lynch 2014; 2015). This necessarily makes private, cantankerous-institutional mobility potentially problematic.

Structural challenges

Furthermore, a host of structural challenges are identified as relevant for the variable PBL enactment beyond contexts. The most prevalent i is time pressure. Teachers often express a sentiment that time is not stretching far enough in their mean solar day-to-day do to engage in play-based activities with children (due east.g. Fesseha and Pyle 2016; Hope-Southcott 2013; Hu et al. 2014). Constructed as dichotomous and incompatible, play necessarily gets in the way of learning and vice-versa. Play is, for example, described as a form of indulging (Baker 2014a) that may resonate with teachers' personal beliefs and professional person philosophies but gets de-prioritized in the face of strict curricular mandates. In Fesseha and Pyle's 2016 survey report from a Canadian setting, almost half of the respondents identify time as 'a moderate to extreme barrier' to enacting PBL. Every bit already noted above, fifty-fifty 'snack time' is past teachers in Lynch's report (2015) perceived negatively as an instructional fourth dimension thief.

In addition to time, teachers struggle to engage in play due to large grade sizes and, relatedly, understaffing (e.thousand. Hegde and Cassidy 2009; Lynch 2014). Alternatively, i could see this as yet some other configuration of time-related pressure to cater for the needs of too many children and thus sidelining play-based pedagogies for practical reasons. We take too noted funding and insufficient PBL resources, including digital ones, equally structural implementation obstacles across contexts (e.g. Baker 2015; Fesseha and Pyle 2016; Howard 2010).

Children's characteristics

Lastly, a few studies also thematize features related to children's behaviour and abilities as impeding possibilities for viable PBL pedagogies. Howard (2010, 97) has reported that children's variable ability to play features frequently as a perceived bulwark among her respondents: 'What practice you do with a play curriculum if a kid just doesn't know how to play?'. Working in an Abu Dhabi context, Baker (2014a; 2015) notes farther that children'south play behaviour may non friction match ECE practitioners' expectations for play which may, relatedly, accentuate their own difficulties to engage in play activities with these children. Additionally, children'southward limited second linguistic communication power only besides special concrete or emotional needs of some children are reported to work confronting PBL (Howard 2010; Baker 2015). A unique perspective is provided past a teacher in Lynch'due south report (2014, 340) who articulates a view of PBL as potentially obstructing the detection of early learning difficulties in immature preschoolers: 'I have had students with learning difficulties that haven't been identified because there was never any requirement to read or write or any assessment of skills or concepts'.

Summarizing give-and-take

As our presentation of findings makes clear, play-based learning is a topic that stimulates much interest and engagement amongst ECE practitioners beyond different national and cultural communities of ECE exercise. Our meta-synthesis is based on the inclusion of 62 studies, clustered into three main groups. Although these clusters cannot exercise justice to the host of nuances and local specificities that each private context may stand for, we believe it nonetheless aids in visualizing some general, overarching patterns beyond our dataset. While reflecting in part our search strategy and choices, the differential size of these clusters may in itself be seen equally an indicator of both the variable degrees of urgency with which debates surrounding PBL may characteristic beyond contexts and the respective empirical interest this may instigate in local research communities.

Representing past far the largest cluster, studies conducted in English-speaking countries provide multiple examples of the sets of problems surrounding the position of play-based pedagogies in their current ECE practices. Not only do these studies often advisable the term play-based learning every bit a vantage signal, they also about vocally frame recent policy mandates of an early focus on learning outcomes in terms of controversies and opposites to quondam traditions, practitioners' personal philosophies too as electric current theoretical insights. The Asian cluster also illustrates a ready of oppositions, all the same coming from a reverse policy direction, namely, how to implement play-based features in ECE cultures that traditionally value a commitment to an early, sustained learning try ensured through direct teaching and instruction. Interestingly, the third cluster equanimous of generally (Northern) European countries is the smallest and the issues the included studies enhance are qualitatively different. Nosotros note that the term play-based learning itself does not seem as central in these studies. Instead, play and learning are here by and large constructed through a spider web of mutual relations that may pull in various directions. However, these are generally broad cluster commonalities and should, therefore, be approached with due analytical circumspection and vigilance.

In terms of our main thematic categories, nosotros see that teachers participating in the reviewed studies may position themselves as both proponents or opponents of the inherent compatibility of the terms play and learning. This gets either articulated directly through their reflections on the outcome itself or transpires more tacitly through ways in which they construct their views on the developmental benefits of play-based pedagogies, their own function and interest in play but besides their personal experiences of enacting PBL in their day-to-solar day practice. While potentially also situationally primed by the investigating researcher in the interview setting or through specific survey items, an understanding of play and learning every bit incompatible binaries will necessarily present a major claiming to embracing PBL both as a meaningful concept and every bit a useful pedagogical approach. As our review shows, this may materialize as well as a time direction concern for many, since, past implication, play and learning represent mutually exclusionary activities infringing upon each other. Almost importantly notwithstanding and in line with much previous scholarship (east.1000. Pyle, DeLuca, and Danniels 2017; Nicolopoulou 2010; Samuelsson and Johansson 2006), we believe such bifurcate understandings of learning through play may stand in the style of capitalizing on the opportunities PBL potentially offers.

However, our review shows too that many teachers emphasize the intertwined nature of these concepts and underscore a holistic view of child evolution through play. We meet that teachers report on a range of positions they adopt in play, stretching from either fully participatory or not-participatory, with many shades and hews available between these poles. Adopting a flexible arroyo, switching between roles while paying due attending to children's individual needs besides as situational and other contextual demands seem mutual across the dataset. Notwithstanding, a number of studies besides dash these views through practitioners' testimonies of struggles with positioning themselves in play and with keeping a balance betwixt leadership, involvement and co-participation that would be non-intrusive and respecting of children'southward agency equally autonomous players and learners. Every bit already pointed out by existing scholarship (Bennett, Wood, and Rogers 1997; Wood 2009b), this underscores a dire need for a continuous appointment and refinement of the concept of play-based learning in early childhood didactics as well every bit further critical interrogations of a range of related issues, particularly the exact nature, timing and extent of developed involvement in play.

By extension, we wish to highlight the importance of providing tailored professional evolution to practitioners on how to engage in play while respecting the participating child as an agent and a dialogic partner in play just also how play may provide a platform for scaffolding essential emotional, social and academic skills in an age-appropriate and sensitive manner (Samuelsson and Johansson 2006). Interestingly, our review identified professional person qualifications and instructor education as an area of business organisation for teachers across many national contexts. Traditional views of learning likewise as express knowledge and comprehension of play theory were amid factors practitioners listed as limiting opportunities for a viable PBL enactment. Understaffing and underqualified staff were likewise identified as barriers, every bit were withstanding collective peer pressure in a professional person environs dominated by staff with traditional views or when launching innovative instructional approaches. On this bespeak, we applaud calls for professional development opportunities, where 1 could build on i's knowledge and competence inside play theory and play-based pedagogies, as in fact articulated past authors of some of the reviewed studies (Fung and Cheng 2012; Hegde and Cassidy 2009). Given the theoretical and conceptual complexities play and PBL represent (Sutton-Smith 1997; Bergen 2014; Rogers 2010a) and the lack of consensus that exits in the research community on these matters (Brooker, Blaise, and Edwards 2014), this could too provide a fruitful ground for mutually-benign enquiry-exercise collaboration. We also suggest that workplace-based, collaborative reflections on own practise, including cross-collegiate observations and guidance, may correspond a valuable tool for practitioners on which they could capitalize. Professional confidence gained through such efforts may likewise evidence useful in edifice successful domicile-kindergarten/early school collaboration, particularly in the face of parental pressure for directly teaching simply also in offsetting collegiate force per unit area for condition quo. While parental pressure is more often than not thematized in the English-speaking and Asian clusters, we believe that, in our globalized world, with migrants of diverse ethnolinguistic heritage crossing borders and settling in new national settings and, by implication, oftentimes in need of communicating with their children's pre-school and school institutions, teachers' awareness of various parental expectations and a competence in handling these in a professional manner are imperative across all contexts.

Lastly, nosotros run across that policy mandates function as a very real PBL implementation challenge for many ECE practitioners that ship many echoes through their professional person practice. As reports from studies conducted in the English-speaking cluster bear witness to, an increasing policy pressure on school preparedness and raising academic standards may translate into professional resistance and uncertainty with important spin-offs such as time management concerns. In countries with an entrenched focus on direct education in academic skills, it may be novel play-based policy directives that cause similar sentiments. While potentially a issue of our search strategy pick, the significant absence of studies in our European cluster is of annotation in this regard, particularly given that policy changes are non restricted to specific national contexts but rather a part of transnational trends. Despite this absence, experiential reports from ECE teachers working in other, comparable contexts have a potential transferability value and may serve equally a platform for reflection well across. Nosotros see peculiarly professional confidence, fostered through continuous collegiate dialogue and opportunities for professional development, just also successful practise-enquiry partnership, every bit primal machinery for offsetting some of these pressures.

Final remarks

Conducting qualitative reviews in early on childhood education and, arguably, other areas inside the social sciences, where human interaction, situational specificities and socio-cultural contexts call for nuancing rather than a great purlieus-setting, is by no mensurate an like shooting fish in a barrel chore. In our meta-synthesis, balancing contextual attention with a search for broader patterns served every bit an analytical principle, enabling the states to shed calorie-free on the complex sets of issues practitioners are likely to encounter both within and across research settings. In line with much scholarship on specifically qualitative systematic reviews (eastward.g. Thorne et al. 2004; Sandelowski and Barroso 2007; Saini and Shlonsky 2012), we would like to draw attention to the importance of conducting systematic syntheses of qualitative research with necessary rigour, transparency and consistency, whereby methodic choices are laid out clearly and potential caveats interrogated with a critical middle. We admit that some of our methodical decisions necessarily impact our findings. For example, the choice of including studies published in scientific journals only precludes potentially relevant studies published as volume manuscripts, scientific anthologies and research reports. Furthermore, our focus on studies published in English and, to some extent besides, Scandinavian languages necessarily creates a certain linguistic, thematic and geographical bias. As with whatever scientific review, these decisions reverberate in part limitations and possibilities of our own digital and physical access as well as shared linguistic competence. Last merely not least, we have chosen to look at studies based on teachers' beliefs constructed through self-reports rather than studies on actual PBL practice in ECE settings. As much research underscores (Fang 1996; Vogt et al. 2018), the theory-practice misalignment can be a very real i. Despite these potential shortcomings, nosotros see a systematic insight into teachers' behavior, perspectives and experiences with PBL equally a core issue in the field of early years that has importance and relevance for a wide range of policy agents, including national policy stakeholders, educators, ECE practitioners but also parents and, most importantly, children themselves.

sotoflued1959.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1350293X.2019.1678717