Play is Play

Weighing in on the words we use... (again)

Recently I read a social media post that pitched adult-led play against child-led play

Adult-led Play. v Child-led Play
Begins with an agenda v Begins with an observation
Seeks Control v Seeks connection
Focuses on structure v Focuses on areas of interest
Reveals skill development v Reveals motivations

To begin with I think both these descriptions are over simplified, and those of you who have been reading my work for a long time will know that I am not a big fan of over simplification.
For a start I think adult-led play can start with an observation, be rooted in connection, be focused on areas of the children’s interests and can reveal motivations not just skill development. Just as child-led play can have an agenda, can be about control, can be about the structure of the play and can also reveal skill development.

Adult-led play is play initiated by the adult and freely participated in by the children as co-players - because in PLAY there is equity.
What I think the above is trying to compare is an adult-led “playful activity” where there is no choice for the children, where a pedagogical agenda steers all decisions and the outcome is known.
In play the outcome is not known - regardless of whether it is adult-led or child-led.
Of course, adult-led play requires play literate adults - who understand the essence of play, understand their own power and impact on both children and play, and are reflective of their practice in order to be a part of the collective play flow on equal terms.
Many, but not all, adults can not do this - as pedagogical or parental agendas cloud their ability to participate without controlling the direction of the play flow - and therefore risking destroying the play.

There is nothing wrong with fun activities rooted in playfulness - they are much better than worksheets and learning by rote etc all the time. But they should never replace actual autonomous play only lessons.

I also think we should not be afraid of playing with children. I do think we need to be mindful when we do play and that our actions are about creating joy, trust and connection. In this sense play is an act of love and care.

When I was asked about whether on not we should replace adult/child-led with adult/child initiated my response was that this term failed to recognise the interactions of the adult in the play - it was started by a child or an adult,
but adults can participate in both child and adult initiated play. By continuing to use adult-led play we are making the point of adult involvement throughout the play.

What I am suggesting is that we need to make the distinction between adult-led play and adult-led activities. Because sadly the latter tends to be counted as play - and as I have shared above already - if the children are engaging in activity with extrinsic motivation (ie the adult agenda is motivating them to partake, and there is little to no choice) then it is not play. Play is intrinsically motivated - and an adult attuned to the children can create a situation where the children are intrinsically motivated to participate, and if the adults play with the children as a play partner, on equal terms (rather than as the deciding teacher/parent) there is the possibility of sustaining the play and entering flow with the children. Being in flow with children is a beautiful way to gain trust, build community and ultimately through the collective joy of play create a sense of solidarity.

But maybe the right term is intergenerational play when referring to play that is not limited to only children?

We do need to be constantly reflecting on how much autonomous play children have time, space and permission for - how often adults adults interfere with play - through actions, rules, attitudes, looks or how we design the environment.
How much autonomous play do the children have in your setting? Do you think it is enough?

I use play responsive teaching instead of play-based learning...
Because my teaching is a response to the children's play - which means I need autonomous play so that, as an educator, I can observe and be informed as to how I can teach so that children enter learning flow...
I am all about flow and autonomy - because I think it is the perfect state for the brain to be in, in order to learn deeply, experience the world and feel good (safe, brave, joy-filled, connected, loved, seen etc etc)

I always say - a film based on a true story isn't the true story its been changed and has become something else, but very similar. The makers of the film have used a “creative license” in their storytelling.
The same is true of play - learning based on play is not actually play but looks very similar. The teachers have used “pedagogical license” in their teaching to turn play into a tool instead of a state of being.

I think the school system instills within us all the idea that children and play cannot be trusted (John Holt said this a long time ago, so it’s not just me saying this) and if we live our entire lives not being trusted, how do we trust, as adults, in play despite knowing deep down the truth of play?
I also think that the fact that there is a growing gap between the haves and the have-nots means that there is increasing pressure on parents to ensure that their children have the skills that their children need in order to have a life where they can thrive instead of struggle... so they seek out guarantees - and the very nature of play is in it's uncertain outcomes. If we start to guarantee the outcomes of play it ceases to be play.

From the perspective of Original Learning we need a mix of play, play-based learning (facilitation) and teaching- and all of it should be about autonomy and play/learning flow. This allows us to teach in a way that guarantees outcomes, but that is in tune with the learning brain, allowing intrinsic motivation to aid learning flow, instead of dragging children through a curriculum.

The Original Learning Approach creates space for children’s autonomous play - where as adults we take on the role of playworkers (or focus in the play). The play informs us how to teach for flow, by noticing the skills, knowledge, interests of the children and knowing how to motivate learning, and what skills children need to work on in order to be autonomous learners. We provide lessons, in our teacher role, that allow children to learn new skills, new knowledge and new abilities in accordance with the curriculum. As facilitators we co-regulate with the children as they practice skills, scaffold their learning and playfully engage with them.
The more we observe the autonomous play, the more in tune the teaching will be and the more effective the learning will be. Instead of collecting facts to recall at a test, children will be understanding the world. And with understanding comes creativity, collaboration and solidarity.

Sometimes I think the education system does not actually want children to be autonomous learners - but to become dependent citizens.

Image I took when visiting several AnjiPlay kindergartens in the county of Anji in China. Here there was a focus on children having adequate time for autonomous play where the children could safely make mistakes, laugh about them, try again, and test many different experiences over and over. Then there was time to reflect on their experiences. The teachers were learning from the play, just as much. This was not a teaching free environment - there were most certainly lessons - what is important is that there were large chunks of time dedicated to autonomous play that the adults carefully observed and learned from. The teachers as learners. And I think this is something that is frequently forgotten in school systems.