This article was downloaded by: [Tufts University]On: 19 November 2014, At: 07:10Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20

Children’s play preferences:implications for the preschooleducationVlasta Gmitrova a , Mária Podhajecká b & Juraj Gmitrov ca Methodological and Pedagogical Center in Prešov , SlovakRepublicb University of Prešov , Slovak Republicc Pro Vitae Hospital , Slovak RepublicPublished online: 27 Apr 2009.

To cite this article: Vlasta Gmitrova , Mária Podhajecká & Juraj Gmitrov (2009) Children’s playpreferences: implications for the preschool education, Early Child Development and Care, 179:3,339-351, DOI: 10.1080/03004430601101883

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430601101883

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Early Child Development and CareVol. 179, No. 3, April 2009, 339–351

ISSN 0300-4430 print/ISSN 1476-8275 online© 2009 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/03004430601101883http://www.informaworld.com

Children’s play preferences: implications for thepreschool education

Vlasta Gmitrovaa*, Mária Podhajeckáb and Juraj Gmitrovc

aMethodological and Pedagogical Center in Pre[scaron] ov, Slovak Republic; bUniversity of Pre[scaron] ov, Slovak Republic; cPro Vitae Hospital, Slovak RepublicTaylor and FrancisGECD_A_210127.sgm10.1080/03004430601101883Early Childhood Development and Care0300-4430 (print)/1476-8275 (online)Original Article2009Taylor & Francis Ltd0000000002009

Previously we found in preschool that child-directed pretend play in small playinggroups importantly improves cognitive competence in mixed-age environmentand that the effect is based on close coupling between affective and cognitivedomain. To foster affective and cognitive intertwining, it is reasonable to select themost favored pretend plays evoking maximum positive emotions during theplaying process. The goal here was to investigate play preferences in mixed-agedand gender classes. We found that girls significantly preferred pretend play (meannumber of players ± standard error of the mean, number of analyzed plays: girlsversus boys, 2.35 ± 0.03, n = 3006 versus 2.13 ± 0.04, n = 3001, p < 0.0001) asopposed to boys, who favored constructive play (boys versus girls, 2.47 ± 0.04, n= 2884 versus 2.27 ± 0.04, n = 2883, p = 0.0004). The most preferred pretend play,acceptable for both genders, arise from family environment, comprising apotentially effective ‘carrier’ of the cognitive skills by easy and pleasurablemanner.

Keywords: cognitive gain; constructive play; free children play; kindergartenteacher; pretend play

Introduction

Play has been a well-established curriculum component of childhood education. Thereis a growing body of evidence supporting many connections between cognitivecompetence in children and high-quality play, especially pretend play. Pretend playrequires the ability to transform objects and actions symbolically; it is furthered byinteractive social dialog and negotiation; and it involves role-taking, script knowledgeand improvisation. Many cognitive strategies are exhibited during pretense, such asjoint planning, negotiation, problem-solving and goal-seeking. Play is an importantpart of an integrated, reciprocally developing system of language and cognition(Bergen, 1998; Isenberg & Quisenberry, 2002). Recently a ‘cognitive theory ofpretense’ has been proposed (Nichols & Stich, 2000), which suggests that there is a‘separate mental workspace’ within the human brain that can explain the phenomenonof the pretense. However it is more likely that pretend play engages many areas of thebrain because it involves emotion, cognition, language, and sensori-motor actions.These may promote the development of dense synaptic connections (Bergen &Coscia, 2001) – important anatomical determinants of the cognitive gain.

*Corresponding author Email: gmitrovj@yahoo.com

s s

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

340 V. Gmitrova et al.

Another important factor significantly impacting the cognitive gain is the agecomposition of the children in the classroom. Findings suggested a significant positiveeffect of mixed-age grouping on children’s pro-social behavior and cognition. Inmixed-age groups, children of at least a two-year age span and diverse ability levelsare grouped in a single classroom and are encouraged to share experiences involvingintellectual, academic and social skills (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987; Katz et al., 1990;Gmitrova & Gmitrov, 2003, 2004). Recent empirical findings demonstrate academicgains for students participating in mixed-aged classrooms (Nye et al., 1995). Consis-tency over time in relationships among teachers, children and parents is viewed as oneof the most significant strengths of the mixed-age approach, encouraging greaterdepth in children’s social, academic and intellectual development (Nye et al., 1995).Additional support for the benefits of the mixed-age classroom is generated byresearch demonstrating that behaviors elicited in younger children when relating tochildren older than themselves include more matured and cognitively complex play(Goldman, 1981; McClellan & Kinsey, 2002). While the youngest children in thegroup need free time to explore and discover, the older members will respond favor-ably to challenges that reinforce their skills. Mixed-aged and gender grouping reflectsnatural playing environment enabling easier adaptation to every day life.

Previously we found that a modification of child-directed pretend play in small,spontaneous playing groups gently managed by the teacher importantly improvedcognitive competence in mixed-aged classes compared with teacher-directed frontalmanagement of the playing process (Gmitrova & Gmitrov, 2003). We showed that apossible mechanism of the superiority of the child-directed pretend play is a closecoupling between affective and cognitive domain. A positive correlation betweencognitive and affective behavior during child-directed pretend play suggested posi-tive emotions, motivations aroused in the playing groups, as an important facilitatorof the cognitive competence (Gmitrova & Gmitrov, 2004). To increase affective andcognitive intertwined, it is very important to have knowledge about most favoredchildren’s play, and on a larger scale implement them into educational process. Thegoal here was to map the distribution of different types of children’s play in mixed-age preschool, and to analyze gender difference in play preferences, making easierselection the most favored pretend play themes with potentially larger educationalpotential.

Methods

Classification of children’s play

In our study we used the classification of the children play according to Holécyováet al. (1959) implemented in the current educational system in the Slovak Republic.The authors classify children’s play into two main groups: children’s play withoutrules and children’s play with established rules.

Child-directed creative play without rules

Intrinsic children activity generates a playing process including spontaneous initiation,development and finishing. Children’s play without rules is divided into pretend play,constructive play and dramatic play.

Pretend play is free children play based on pretense. Children pretend to be some-body or something, creating different characters, their activities and the relationship

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

Early Child Development and Care 341

between pretend persons (Figures 1 and 2). The theme of the pretend play is generatedfrom children’s impressions from their nearest social environment, family, kindergar-ten, etc.Figure 1. Pretend play ‘on flower shop’. Three girls and one boy participated in the play; girls strongly dominated conducting the playing processFigure 2. Pretend play ‘on medical doctors’. The number of the participants was balanced; three girls and three boys participated in the playIn constructive play children are instinctively creative builders. Providing childrenwith the opportunities to play with manipulatives in a safe, stimulating environmentis very important to their healthy development. Manipulatives enhance fine motordevelopment by requiring the controlled use of hand and finger muscles; they alsohelp to develop important hand–eye coordination (Figure 3). As children experimentwith building, they learn about important concepts such as gravity, stability andpatterning, importantly distending their playing potential. During constructive play,children have many opportunities to re-create experiences and express their own ideasabout the world.Figure 3. Constructive play with Lego. Constructive play was preferred by boysDramatic play is where children play roles of different fairytale-ish beings on thebasis of previously heard fairytales.

Children’s play with rules

Teacher-directed frontal plays occur when all children in the class are simultaneouslyinvolved in a playing process directed by the teacher onthe basis of predefined rules.These plays have a strict structure including the aim of the play, rules, playing activity,results and the enclosure of the play process. Children’s plays with rules are dividedinto didactic plays and motional plays.

Figure 1. Pretend play ‘on flower shop’. Three girls and one boy participated in the play; girlsstrongly dominated conducting the playing process.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

342 V. Gmitrova et al.

Didactic plays are based on mental activity, have strict rules and the success of theplay depends on the stringent observance of the rules; for example, plays with puzzles.The main designation of the didactic plays are training, repeating and fostering ofskills and competences in affective and cognitive domains acquired in pretend andconstructive plays.

Motional plays are based on physical activity to develop motional skills.

Child-directed pretend play facilitated by the teacher

A specific cluster comprised our modification of the pretend play – child-directedpretend play facilitated by the teacher in mixed-age classes. After an initial stimulusby the teacher, children played in small, flexible groups of mixed age and gender,formed spontaneously and adapted during the lesson. The teacher unobtrusively facil-itated and managed the children’s play by providing a stimulating environment in linewith the goals of the lesson and by encouraging the children to take part, cooperatewith one another and solve problems together. For example, a group of children wantedto play ‘on a bus’, and constructed a bus from chairs like the one they saw during theteacher-directed play ‘on a bus’. The children decided for themselves who should bethe driver and where they were traveling to, and so on. The children also developedand improvised changes to the play, which had not been included in originally designedprevious, teacher-directed play. For example, a playing boy decided that he wants tobe a policeman and stopped the bus. The teacher helped to develop the child-directed

Figure 2. Pretend play ‘on medical doctors’. The number of the participants was balanced;three girls and three boys participated in the play.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

Early Child Development and Care 343

play by, for example, showing how a policeman behaves after stopping a vehicle,importantly allowing free further flow and the development of the playing process. Thistype of children play has several advantages compared with the ‘classic’ frontal teacher-directed children play by rules, increasing cognitive competence and making the educa-tional process easier, flexible and pleasurable; open for improvisation of new situationsand therefore more close to real life (Gmitrova & Gmitrov, 2003, 2004).

Participants, data collection and statistics

Our research was performed from March to April 2005 in 123 kindergartens of theEastern Slovakian Region under the guidance of the Methodological and PedagogicalCenter in Pre[scaron] ov within the borders of a postgraduate educational program for kinder-garten teachers. A total of 1916 children participated in 8801 plays during 963lessons in mixed-age and gender classrooms. The number of children participating inall plays was 51,401 (25,881 girls and 25,520 boys) (each child participated in severalplays). Children were from the Central European geographic area with the sameethnic and socio-cultural background. The age span of the playing children was fromthree to six years, which is the age spread in Slovakian kindergartens. Each teacherperformed 7–10 lessons (one lesson daily) from 07:30 to 10:00 a.m. local time, fivedays per week during two consecutive weeks. Teachers with same educational level(four years of pre-school teacher training with at least 10 years practice) carried outlessons in their own classrooms in an environment familiar to children using themethodology of constructivism. Teachers selected play themes themselves according

s

Figure 3. Constructive play with Lego. Constructive play was preferred by boys.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

344 V. Gmitrova et al.

to their everyday practice. The investigation of the playing process incorporatedsurveillance, recording and analysis of the playing activity. The lesson protocolincluded the date and hour of the observation, the number of children in the class-room, the number of boys and girls participated in each play, the age span, name andclassification of the observed plays, and the description of teacher’s activity duringplaying process. Emphasis was made on pretend play as on a basic type of the freechildren’s play. Before initiation of the surveillance, teachers graduated a 30-hour‘play education’ course including theoretical learning, methods of play classificationand methods of intervening in the playing process, illustrated by video-recordings ofmodel situations during different types of children’s play. The protocol for eachlesson and the classification of plays were additionally controlled by the Methodolog-ical and Pedagogical Center consultant at the end of the educational course as apractical part of the certification.

A comparison of the percentage distribution of the main children’s plays was thenmade (Figure 4). In addition we analyzed the differences in the number of playingchildren in pretend and constructive play, taking into account the gender of the partic-ipants, using one-way analysis of variance (Figure 5). p <0.05 was considered statis-tically significant.Figure 4. Percentage distribution of different plays in mixed-gender and mixed-age environments. PP, pretend play; CP, constructive play, DrP, dramatic play; DiP, didactic play; MP, motional play.Figure 5. Gender differences in the number of participants in pretend (PP) and constructive (CP) plays. PP + CC, total of pretend and constructive plays. The values represent the mean of the participant in one play type ± standard error of the mean. *Statistical significance with p < 0.05.To eliminate influence of variations in the number of children in different kinder-gartens, and during different lessons, in addition to real values a comparison of thepercentage distribution of the playing children was made using a t-test or the Mann–Whitney Rank Sum Test as required (Figure 6).Figure 6. Gender difference in percentage distribution of participants in different plays. PP, pretend plays; CP, constructive play; DrP, dramatic play; DiP, didactic play; MP, motional play. *Statistical significance with p < 0.03

Results

Analysis of the percentage distribution of different plays revealed that both girls andboys preferred plays without rules: child-directed pretend play, constructive play anddramatic play (34.3%, 33% and 18.4%, respectively).

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of different plays in mixed-gender and mixed-age environ-ments. PP, pretend play; CP, constructive play, DrP, dramatic play; DiP, didactic play; MP,motional play.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

Early Child Development and Care 345

Figure 5. Gender differences in the number of participants in pretend (PP) and constructive(CP) plays. PP + CC, total of pretend and constructive plays. The values represent the mean ofthe participant in one play type ± standard error of the mean. *Statistical significance with p <0.05.

Figure 6. Gender difference in percentage distribution of participants in different plays. PP,pretend plays; CP, constructive play; DrP, dramatic play; DiP, didactic play; MP, motionalplay. *Statistical significance with p < 0.03.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

346 V. Gmitrova et al.

In teacher-directed plays with rules, the proportions of dominated motional anddidactic plays were 10.5% and 2.7%, respectively (Figure 4).

The number of girls and boys participating in child-directed play (pretend +constructive) did not differ significantly (Figure 5). A significantly larger number ofgirls participated in pretend play as opposed to boys, who favored constructive play(Figure 5). Analyzing separate ‘girl’ or ‘boy’ clusters, the boys were observed tosignificantly prefer constructive play to pretend play. Girls’ playing activity wasbalanced, and there was no significant difference between the number of girlsparticipating in pretend play or in constructive play (Figure 5). The percentage distri-bution of the participants in different plays supported data in real values (Figure 6).We did not find a gender difference in play preferences in teacher-directed play(Figure 6).

The most frequent types of pretend plays and gender differences in play prefer-ences are presented in Table 1.

Discussion

A close coupling between affective and cognitive behaviors was found to be an impor-tant mechanism of the cognitive gain in high-quality pretend play (Gmitrov &Gmitrova, 2004). Supplying teachers with reliable information about children’s playpreference helps to select pretend play with better emotional and cognitive intertwined(therefore with larger educational potential) and then effectively use it as a carrier ofthe cognitive skills in the line of educational goals of the lesson.

Possible implications

We found that the favorite and most widespread pretend play arose from family envi-ronment and occupations, which is consistent with previous Polish investigationconducted in the 1960s by Dyner, when a similar children’s play preference was found(Dyner, 1971). This indicates a long-lasting preference of ‘classic’ household andfamily-related pretend play themes. Girls participated in pretend play in a significantlylarger number to boys, who preferred constructive play (Figures 5 and 6). Prior studiesindicated that social–dramatic pretend play occurs more among girls fostering socioe-motional and expressive skills, and that construction play occurs more among boys(Hughes, 1991; Lloyd & Duveen, 1992); continued participation in goal-orientedtypes of play may foster instrumental skills (Lever, 1976; Block, 1983; Etaugh, 1983;Leaper, 1994; Leaper & Gleason, 1996). Girls preferred plays were associated withfamily life (‘plays on household’ and ‘on mothers’) as opposed to boys who favoredactivities associated with construction and male professions (‘plays on means of trans-portation’, ‘on builders’, ‘on policemen’) (Table 1). A greater preference by girls’ forpretend play involving domestic situations was reported previously (Hughes, 1991;Lloyd & Duveen, 1992). In contrast, the construction activity preferred by boys tendsto emphasize more task orientation and problem-solving (Leaper & Gleason, 1996).The preschool girls were found to be more likely to describe or plan their play, whileboys were more likely to enact their themes in pretend play. Boys were more likelythan girls to generate pretend themes completely unrelated to props in the room. Girlswere more involved in maintaining collaborative group activities (Figures 1 and 2)characteristic of pretend play, while boys were more concerned with pursuing theirown individual interests (Garvey, 1990; Diamond, 1994) (Figure 3).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

Early Child Development and Care 347

Tabl

e 1.

The

dis

trib

utio

n of

dif

fere

nt t

ypes

of

pret

end

play

.

Num

ber

(%)

of p

laye

rs

Typ

e of

pre

tend

pla

yN

umbe

r (%

) of

pla

ysG

irls

+ b

oys

Gir

lsB

oys

Sum

of

all

play

s an

d pl

ayer

s pa

rtic

ipat

ed i

n pl

ays

indi

cate

d be

low

2954

(10

0%)

13,4

09 (

100%

)70

64 (

100%

)63

65 (

100%

)O

n ho

useh

old

(pre

tend

ing

diff

eren

t ac

tivi

ties

in

hous

ehol

d)38

4 (1

3.0%

)15

66 (

11.7

%)

1006

(14

.2%

)56

0 (8

.8%

)O

n m

othe

rs (

pret

endi

ng m

othe

r ac

tivi

ties

)43

1 (1

4.6%

)15

15 (

11.3

%)

1125

(15

.9%

)39

0 (6

.2%

)O

n tr

ansp

orta

tion

(ac

tivi

ties

ass

ocia

ted

wit

h di

ffer

ent

mea

ns o

f tr

ansp

orta

tion

)38

4 (1

3.0%

)14

52 (

10.8

%)

276

(3.9

%)

1176

(18

.5%

)O

n m

edic

al d

octo

rs (

pret

endi

ng m

edic

al d

octo

rs a

ctiv

itie

s)25

5 (8

.6%

)11

38 (

8.5%

)65

7 (9

.3%

)48

1 (7

.6%

)O

n re

adin

g (a

ctiv

itie

s as

soci

ated

wit

h bo

oks,

rea

ding

)19

8 (6

.7%

)10

65 (

7.9%

)59

1 (8

.3%

)47

4 (7

.4%

)O

n tr

ade,

mar

ket

(pre

tend

ing

diff

eren

t ac

tivi

ties

in

trad

e, m

arke

t, se

llin

g or

bu

ying

)18

0 (1

1.3%

)90

3 (4

.8%

)54

8 (7

.7%

)35

5 (5

.6%

)

On

mus

icia

nshi

p (p

rete

ndin

g di

ffer

ent a

ctiv

itie

s as

soci

ated

wit

h m

usic

ians

hip)

80 (

2.7%

)64

1 (4

.8%

)36

6 (5

.2%

)27

5 (4

.3%

)O

n an

imal

s (p

rete

ndin

g di

ffer

ent

anim

als)

123

(4.2

%)

627

(4.7

%)

259

(3.6

%)

368

(5.8

%)

On

buil

der

(pre

tend

ing

acti

viti

es a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith

buil

ding

s, e

.g. p

rete

nd

pain

ting

the

wal

l in

the

cla

ssro

om)

133

(4.5

%)

549

(4.1

2%)

138

(1.9

5%)

411

(6.5

%)

On

prof

essi

ons,

car

eer

(pre

tend

ing

peop

le w

ith

diff

eren

t pr

ofes

sion

s)12

2 (4

.1%

)49

1 (3

.7%

)19

0 (2

.7%

)30

1 (4

.7%

)O

n ha

irdr

esse

r (p

rete

ndin

g ha

irdr

esse

r, a

nd h

aird

ress

er c

usto

mer

)14

6 (4

.9%

)43

8 (3

.3%

)35

4 (5

.0%

)84

(1.

3%)

On

banq

uet,

feas

t (p

rete

ndin

g ac

tivi

ties

ass

ocia

ted

wit

h ba

nque

t, fe

ast)

25 (

0.8%

)42

2 (3

.1%

)22

9 (3

.2%

)21

3 (3

.3%

)O

n tr

avel

ing

(pre

tend

ing

trav

elin

g)45

(1.

5%)

353

(2.6

%)

159

(2.2

%)

194

(3.0

%)

On

scho

ol (

pret

endi

ng d

iffe

rent

act

ivit

ies

in s

choo

l an

d le

arni

ng)

67 (

2.3%

)34

4 (2

.6%

)22

0 (3

.1%

)12

4 (1

.9%

)O

n ta

king

a p

hoto

grap

hs (

pret

endi

ng t

akin

g ph

otog

raph

s)37

(1.

3%)

240

(1.8

%)

122

(1.7

%)

118

(1.8

%)

On

fair

y ta

ils

(pre

tend

ing

acti

viti

es a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith

fair

y ta

ils)

40 (

1.4%

)22

0 (1

.6%

)10

2 (1

.4%

)11

8 (1

.8%

)O

n fl

ower

s (d

iffe

rent

act

ivit

ies

asso

ciat

ed w

ith

flow

ers)

30 (

1.0%

)17

2 (1

.3%

)95

(1.

3%)

77 (

1.2%

)O

n a

poli

cem

an (

pret

endi

ng a

ctiv

itie

s as

soci

ated

wit

h po

lice

)46

(1.

6%)

167

(1.2

%)

25 (

0.35

%)

142

(2.2

%)

On

visi

tati

on (

pret

endi

ng a

vis

it, g

uest

s, h

osts

)31

(1.

0%)

155

(1.2

%)

97 (

1.4%

)58

(0.

9%)

Wit

h do

lls

(dif

fere

nt p

lays

wit

h do

lls)

44 (

1.5%

)15

2 (1

.1%

)11

7 (1

.6%

)35

(0.

5%)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

348 V. Gmitrova et al.

Tabl

e 1.

(Con

tinu

ed).

Num

ber

(%)

of p

laye

rs

Typ

e of

pre

tend

pla

yN

umbe

r (%

) of

pla

ysG

irls

+ b

oys

Gir

lsB

oys

On

thea

ter

(pre

tend

ing

diff

eren

t ac

tivi

ties

in

the

thea

ter)

20 (

0.7%

)12

9 (0

.96%

)59

(0.

83%

)70

(1.

1%)

On

spor

ting

(sp

orts

and

spo

rtin

g)13

(0.

4%)

44 (

0.3%

)20

(0.

3%)

24 (

0.4%

)O

n co

mpu

ter

(dif

fere

nt a

ctiv

itie

s w

ith

pers

onal

com

pute

r)9

(0.3

%)

29 (

0.2%

)14

(0.

2%)

15 (

0.2%

)O

ther

pla

ys (

vari

ous

pret

end

play

s oc

curr

ed in

sm

all n

umbe

r, le

s th

en 0

.2%

of

all

play

s)31

(1.

0%)

155

(1.2

%)

97 (

1.4%

)58

(0.

9%)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

Early Child Development and Care 349

The selection of the play themes respecting gender preferences is very impor-tant because it helps to choose play acceptable and favored by girl and boy players.This promotes cross-sex interactions, the development of harmonic relationships ina mixed-age and mixed-gender playing environment acquiring important social andemotional life skills. For example, from our data-set it follows that one of the mostacceptable play areas for both genders is a play ‘on doctors’ (Table 1 and Figure2). Accordingly we propose that this theme cluster should be effective in mixed-gender playing collectives. The favored thematic of the pretend play is generatedfrom the nearest social environment, domestic situations and family life. We foundthat the most favored pretend person is mother (mothers were much more pretendthen fathers). Family-related pretend play should be widely used for pleasurable‘transfer of knowledge and skills’, especially in mixed-age groups with a preva-lence of girls as opposed to a pretend play ‘transportation’ cluster, which should bemost effective in playing groups of largely boys. We suggest preschool teachersshould make their own individual analysis of children’s play preferences in theclassroom, and then widely use favored play themes in the line of educational goalsof the lesson.

Employing our modification of child-directed pretend play in mix-age and mixed-gender small playing groups gently managed by the teacher (Gmitrova & Gmitrov,2003, 2004), we recommend the following approach:

(a) Teacher selects favored pretend play in accordance with the educational goalsof the lesson.

(b) Teacher teaches children how to play selected pretend play using instrumentsof teacher-directed play.

(c) Gently entering the playing process, the skillful teacher urges children todevelop the proposed pretend play theme by themselves in the line of theeducational goals of the lesson, expecting a larger effect in cognitive andemotional gain.

This approach is in accordance with Vygotsky’s theory of the zone of proximaldevelopment (Cole et al., 1978). Vygotsky offered reasons for teachers to intervenein the playing process, leading to providing a kind of strategic assistance to childrenin learning new tasks, and to extend the ‘zone of proximal development’. A creativeevolvement of the ‘favorite’ pretend play theme seems to be an ideal instrument toextend the zone of proximal development. A similar approach is probably possible inother modifications of the pretend play.

Limitations of the study

The relationship between current positions of children’s play in the preschool curric-ulum in Eastern Slovakian cannot be directly translated into a broader association withother countries of different cultural and socioeconomic background. However, webelieve that general patterns of children behavior during pretend plays did not change.The differences may occur in distribution of the preferred pretend play themesrespecting peculiarities of ethnic and socioeconomic composition of the classroom,cultural background, and so on. On the other hand, similar results obtained in a differ-ent social and cultural environment (Dyner, 1971) indicate the consistency of theeffect in a cross-cultural condition and its persistence in a longer time period. This

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

350 V. Gmitrova et al.

may have separate significance, pointing to larger employment of selected ‘classic’(household, family-related…) preferred play themes. We also cannot exclude that theinteraction between different genders modulates play preferences, indicating the needfor a similar study in same-age and same-gender classes in which the play preferenceprobably differs from the mixed-age and mixed-gender environment. The intendedsearch for a favorite play cluster should be the priority task, to then use it as the mosteffective carrier of the education goals.

Conclusion

The press for ‘academic readiness’ through concentrated and direct teaching of alpha-bet, number, color and other skills is now affecting the amount of time allocated forplay in preschools. However, cognitive skills that are demonstrated in pretense are asimportant (or even more important) for academic readiness and later school successthan memorizing the standard set of information officially targeted as early childhoodcompetencies. This trend has had a negative effect on social pretend play, whichrequires extended uninterrupted time periods to develop complexity (Bergen, 1998).One of the main objectives of teacher-directed play should be to teach children toperform self-sustained creative pretend plays. We believe that our findings point to theimportance of the selection of high-quality pretend plays to promote wider implemen-tation of free children play in preschool curriculum.

ReferencesBergen, D. (1998). Stages of play development. In D. Bergen (Ed.), Readings from … Play as

a medium for learning and development (pp. 71–93). Olney, MD: Association for Child-hood Education International.

Bergen, D., & Coscia, J. (2001). Brain research and childhood education: implications foreducators. Olney, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.

Block, J.H. (1983). Differential premises arising from differential socialization of the sexes:some conjectures. Child Development, 54, 1335–1354.

Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scriber, S., Souberman, E., & Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind insociety: the development of higher psychological processes (E. Souberman, Ed.)Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Diamond, J. (1994). Sex differences in museums. Curator, 37, 17–24.Dyner, W.J. (1971). Zabawy tematyczne dzieti w domu i w przedszkolu [Pretended children’s

play in family and preschool]. Wroclav–Warszava–Kraków: Zaklad narodowy imieniaOssoli[nacute] skich) (in Polish).

Etaugh, C. (1983). The influence of environmental factors on sex differences in children’s play,in: M.B. Liss (Ed.), Social and cognitive skills: sex roles and children’s play (pp. 1–19).New York: Academic Press.

Garvey, C. (1990). Play (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Gmitrova, V., & Gmitrov, J. (2003). The impact of teacher-directed and child directed pretend

play on cognitive competence in kindergarten children. Early Childhood Education Journal,30, 241–246.

Gmitrova, V., & Gmitrov, J. (2004). The primacy of the child-directed pretend play on cogni-tive competence in mixed-age environment, possible interpretations. Early Child Develop-ment and Care, 173, 267–279.

Goldman, J.A. (1981). Social participation of preschool children in same- versus mixed-agegroups. Child Development, 52, 644–650.

Goodlad, J.I., & Anderson R.H. (1987). The nongraded elementary school. New York: TeachersCollege Press.

Holécyová, O., Klindová, L., & Berdychová, J. (1959). Hry v materskej [scaron]kole [Plays in thekindergarten]. Bratislava: SPN (in Slovak).

n

s

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

Early Child Development and Care 351

Hughes, F.P. (1991). Children, play, and development. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Isenberg, J.P. & Quisenberry, N. (2002). Play: essential for all children. Childhood Education,

Fall, 33–39.Katz, L.G., Evangelou, D., & Hartman, J.A. (1990). The case for mixed-age grouping in early

childhood education programs. Washington, DC: National Association for the Educationof Young Children.

Leaper, C. (1994). Exploring the consequences of gender segregation on social relationships,in: C. Leaper (Ed.), Childhood gender segregation: Causes and consequences (NewDirections for Child Development, No. 65, pp. 67–86). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Leaper, C., & Gleason, J.B. (1996). The relationship of play activity and gender to parent andchild sex-typed communication. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 19,689–703.

McClellan, D.E., & Kinsey, S.J. (2002). Children’s social behavior in relation to participationin mixed-age or same-age classrooms. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 1, 36–42.

Nichols, S., & Stich, S. (2000). A cognitive theory of pretense. Cognition, 74, 115–147.Nye, B.A., Cain, V.A., Zaharias, J.B., Tollett, D.A., & Fulton, B.D. (1995). Are multiage/

nongraded programs providing students with a quality education? Some answers from theschool success study. Paper presented at the Annual Conference on Creating QualitySchools, Oklahoma City, OK.

Lever, J. (1976). Sex differences in the games children play. Social Problems, 23, 478–487.Lloyd, B., & Duveen, G. (1992). Gender identities and education: the impact of starting

school. New York: St Martin’s Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tuf

ts U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

10 1

9 N

ovem

ber

2014