3. Approaches for Promoting Meaning-Making

Play is key to the development of young children.

DeVries has 4 interpretations of Play, that educators have. They are divided into 4 groups.
1- Play is peripheral to learning and academic work. 
2- Play is a disguise for academic work. 
3- Play is integrated with social and emotional developmental goals. 
4- Play and work are integrated with social, emotional, moral, and intellectual development. 

Points 1 and 2 are the same, though we don’t see 1 anymore. For 2, activities are “sugar-coated”, to try to appeal. But children are still not genuinely interested, they do them because the teacher wants them to do. I do that, as there are concepts I have to teach children, to meet curriculum objectives. In another country, it might be possible to have a 100% play-based curriculum, but in Singapore, it is not possible. I do hear comments from children that there is “nothing to do”.

When observing children during Play, I ensure I am passive and allow children to solve their problems. I would plan group activities that integrate play with work, so it is open-ended but there is an objective to meet. I would not solve their arguments, but instead allow them to solve on their own, to build their social skills. So, in my classroom, it is a range of points 2 to 4. I have group activities that encourage play, but there is a balance of play and work in the learning centres.

Jones and Prescott see Play from the perspective of the child.
1- Play is open-ended and self-directed.
2- Work is when there is a product, and the worker feels a sense of accomplishment.
3- Labour has no personal meaning or significant product.

Labour needs punishment to ensure the child does the task, for instance, penmanship. Writing can be done in art, so language skills are used but there is a product for the child to feel proud of. In my class, I use sketchbooks for children to note down their reflections about what they have learned about the child-directed themes. I encourage writing by giving them books I have read to reference from, and also for them to create their unique stories. Labour is a no-no to include, but play and work can be done. If I see children in labour, I should reflect upon my lesson.

The play-based approach is also called curriculum integration. To facilitate curriculum integration, there are a few approaches. Project-based and inquiry-based approaches are two of such philosophies.

The project-based approach was first introduced by Katz, and it involves a “research effort deliberately focused on finding answers to questions about a topic posed either by the children, the teacher, or the teacher working with the children.” Research is the key. Last year I combined this with the Inquiry-based approach, to create a book and a song for 2 terms. The key is in children’s interests, but the teacher plans the curriculum accordingly.

As for Inquiry-based learning, thinking forms the key focus in this approach. Teachers scaffold children’s thinking, to bring them to a higher level.

However, closely following any of these approaches do not mean the activities are appropriate for children. The NAEYC has this stance on Developmentally Appropriate Practices, or DAP for short. The 3 key components are Safety, Ownership, and Conceptual Understanding. I shall continue to elaborate on these.

For safety, it refers to the physical and psychological aspects. Are the materials non-toxic? Do the materials discriminate or lower children’s competency?

Ownership is about giving children ownership of materials. It builds their self-regulation skills, and they find the activities challenging enough but not too difficult. Children choose to engage in the activity, and not forced by adults, and causing them to constantly turn to the teacher for help.

As for Conceptual Understanding, concepts can be acquired while building critical thinking skills, and children are not rushed to complete the activity.

Overall, having a quality approach is not about teaching concepts to children, but about inculcating critical thinking dispositions, that can carry them even through adulthood. Knowledge will turn obsolete. Who knows, patterns might be useless in 5 years. We might not even use the Alphabet. I am just exaggerating, but it is teaching children to think critically that can help them in the future when they are dealing with issues by themselves.

References
Chen, D. (2020). ECE102 Children as thinkers and meaning makers (study guide). Singapore: Singapore University of Social Sciences.