How long does it take to play?

Reflections of play observations

Over the years I have been writing and talking that it takes about 30 minutes to get into the swing of play… of course play happens before then but that it takes about that length of time to enter a state of deeply engaged play, or a state of aeon - where a sense of time melts away.

Yesterday I presented in Karlstad (Sweden) for the sports movement association - focusing on play as a way to get children moving. I talked about risky play.

After me came Pilo Stylin who shared his work with “kamplek” which translates as battle/combat/war/wrestle/tussle play (as you know words are important - often in Swedish schools "bråklek" is used - meaning brawl/trouble/trouble/dust-up etc and has a more negative tendency because bråka gets used when children are not getting on and are arguing. Pilo comes from the sporting world of Budo and martial arts - so it makes sense to name a play-form that is connected with that.

Inga-Lill Emilsson and Mona Persson also presented about creating play worlds through musical learning, and music and singing is often one of those things that feels risky for many adults to do in front of others, especially peers.

Those who came with people they knew well seemed to engage in the play much quicker - I assume because play requires a certain level of trust and the ability to understand each other’s play cues

I also think that making mistakes, or doing it wrong, is a big factor - and the older a human gets the more inhibited they become in their play by the fear of not getting it correctly - several people asked if they were doing it right.

The music play was much more intimidating than the more physical play - mostly I think because there were many elements where you were being watched as an individual - and people forget that "performing" in front of others can be very scary (no matter how fun). There was also a lot more eye contact in the singing/music/sound play which was the main reason for me to pull out - I couldn't deal with the eye contact of so many people I didn’t know (some interactions being one on one close up) this is due to being autistic - but I assume it can be tricky to be so intimate for others too (I think people forget the intimate nature of eye contact).

I am a play observer when I don't know people (well adults) so I was watching - and I am so glad I did. It was fascinating to watch how some entered a state of play much easier than others...
But also how it took almost 30 minutes for some to warm up to the musical play - when things got louder and more confident sounding as well as more smiles and relaxed body language (indicating to me that inhibitions were now dissolving)
Just as I observed last week (at Orleans House Gallery Play Works exhibition in London) that the school group settled into play at about 25-30 minutes after a hectic checking everything out.
It surprised me that this was the same for adults.

While I think the adults took 30 minutes to feel relaxed enough to feel a sense of flow it was more the case of the children needing to explore and test everything before they could settle into their flow - in other words the adults needed to feel brave while the children needed to calm down from their excitement.

Why then are “breaks” for play so short in schools (or worse in early years settings)? It means children won't be able to enter a state of play? Of course some will get there sooner, while others need longer.

Why not design the school day so that there are longer periods of play between lessons - like why not up to two hours - where playworkers can ensure all children can enter a state of play and enjoy its flow.

The games that Pilo offered would be fantastic playful additions to any school (or preschool) - as they give children the opportunity to safely, under the scaffolding of adults, to practice the skills for their own rough and tumble play. So much is learned through this kind of play (and observing the adults yesterday I could see just how much they were smiling and laughing - so despite it being facilitated it can quite easily flow into a state of play if the adult knows when to step back)

The games played were low impact physical - in the sense that they provided an opportunity for physical rough and tumble with limited physical touch - which could be increased through rule changing as the participants understand the rules of engagement.

What I also observed was that there were many different ways to engage - some threw themselves into it immediately and it was big and loud and you could hear how their breathing showed they were fully committed - while others were smaller movements, more gentle, slower - and there were those in between. Everyone seemed to be enjoying themselves in their own way. The cues given mean that participants in this game have to work out what kind of level their partner wants to play and to try and match that - so that they play is enjoyable for both. This requires practising the ability to read facial and body language, listening to what is being said, and being self regulated enough to respond to that, to have empathy for the needs of others, to have spatial awareness as well as a good sense of their own physical literacy - do they know how their body moves? These are all important life skills. What happens when a high energy participants meets an anxious participant or one with limited movement or one that does not enjoy physical contact or…? Are both children aware of the risks and the bravery of each other to be able to participate somewhere in the middle? And how do we as educators makes sure that the children swap partners enough so that they can experience a variety of needs and interactions. Because high energy on high energy, and low energy on low energy can be great matches - but it is not going to challenge them and enable them to experience different ways of participating - which can lead to new strategies as well as new confidence.

I think it is an art form to be able to facilitate a group of children to engage in this kind of rough and tumble play. Because it’s not easy - the child needs to learn the skills to be able to self regulate, to recognise body language, to listen, to be spatially aware, to know and understand their own physicality etc. This form of play is one form of many that children need to build these skills. It reminds me of the years I worked philosophically with a group of preschoolers… the philosophy sessions were helping them learn how to listen, self regulate, articulate their ideas etc - but I also facilitated in other activities so they could practice these skills so that they could participate in philosophy sessions. This is the same for rough and tumble play. It is not an isolated event that teaches children these skills, but is woven into the complex fabric and is dependent on the other threads as they are of the rough and tumble threads.

Just as I have used song and music play with children to support a sense of community, joy and belonging - so really philosophy, rough and tumble and singing were all connected - they help each other to evolve in ways where the children have both play and learning flow.

And because we are teachers we are also thinking about the curriculum. How does this fit in?

Risk is not just physical - it is also social, emotional and cognitive. Learning how to do benefit-risk assessments through play, and playful activities/teaching will positively impact them - it is building up their own sense of self esteem and confidence - which is so necessary in learning - dare I answer that question? dare I be curious about this subject? dare I try something new? dare I write this essay/create the art/participate in the team etc? Often children in school play it safe in fear of getting it wrong - we need brave learners for a creative now and future. Also children engaging in rough and tumble are also developing their sense of empathy - a class that cares about each other and is aware of different needs is going to be more understanding and more supportive - this in turn will make the space more equitable and feel safer for more children and easier to feel brave - even academically.

I don’t understand how the education system fails to recognise the importance of play.

On Thursday while on the train to Karlstad I was reminded by the trees I was passing how trees together are not always a forest - just as children doing fun activities is not always play…

This is what I wrote

70% of Sweden is covered in trees.
Of that only 25% is actual forest - the rest is commercial land to grow trees to make money - a so called "renewable resource"
It takes 60-120 years before a tree has grown enough to be harvested (to make profit) and is the reason why skinny teenage trees are left behind to do the job of a mature tree - because the older ones are more profitable- and there's not enough patience to do what is right for nature.
A real forest - like real play - is complex. It's more than the trees, it includes the microorganisms under the earth (apparently 50% of the forest biodiversity is underground - and clear cutting destroys this)

Just as in schools social skills, emotional regulation etc are the invisible skills in the play and learning ecosystem - and if we are not providing adequate time and space for a rich and varied repertoire of play this diversity of skills are lost due to just the straight lucrative "academic " trees being focussed on.
The forest is more than the trees. Just as play is more than having fun.
In a forest there a great many different trees that grow in different ways in response to their surroundings
In Sweden non-native contorta trees are planted because of their faster growth with little to no room for native trees in these areas. This means native animals are at a disadvantage (not having a full range of food and shelter etc) and the trees being all the same age in one area are vulnerable to beetle attacks - a mixed age forest has dead and dying trees to feast on - a plantation of same age trees means beetles have to eat living trees or die. Which of course is bad for business - and then there is an outcry of beetles killing the forest - they are not killing forests, they are damaging profits.

Mixed age play also provides benefits that only same age play cannot (which happens by segregating children by age in the school system - and creating hierarchies)

Don't fall for the lie that Sweden is covered by 70% of forest - because it's not - and what is left is under threat (where the big trees are left) - just as, don't fall for the lie that children access adequate autonomous play - because most is adult led sports and activities.

There is nothing wrong with sports and adult lead activities if there is adequate autonomous play - in fact I say they play a vital role - and Pilo’s “kamplek” is evidence of this - opportunities to safely practice the skills needed in their autonomous play.

Autonomous play is on the brink of extinction. So I think it is important with opportunities for children to learn how to engage in rough and tumble (when it has been denied to them as a play form for so long) so that they can reclaim it - and autonomous play will not just survive but also thrive, bloom and flow.

tussle play by AI - interestingly - Pilo talked about how this form of play is found in most mammals and talked about puppies

As always - if you have a thought, reflection or question - please use the comment button below.