Never such innocence again.
– Philip Larkin
You left your imaginary friend in the far corner.
You ran over the tarmac in tightly fastened shoes, watching the tiny cobbles of
black scatter. There was somebody close to you, striving to get within touching
distance – and you danced, laughing, sometimes shrieking, the adrenaline
jumping in your ears. ‘Tig – you’re it!’
This is a memory seemingly
shared. But for how much longer?
A recent BBC report has
revealed that a number of primary schools are taking measures to shorten their
school days, holding increasing power to alter timetables. This means, in some circumstances, ‘playtime’ at break and lunch
becomes shortened. (1)
The adult bureaucracy may be
thinking itself smart – cutting down on this ‘free’ time, perhaps to allow for more
lessons, earlier finishing times and so on. Yet this appears part of a culture where
what is considered ‘free time’ is equated with a lack of usefulness, even
laziness. Even children typically are
taught not the importance of relaxation, but that, exclusively, of aspiration –
with ever-growing focus on scores and league tables.
Yet whilst aspirations are
often beyond immediate grasp, we can learn all the time to feel happy with the
skin we’re in – especially essential as a young person.
Play provides an immediacy
which should not be undervalued. The subjectivity of the term, suggesting that
adults cannot equate it with meaningful value, leads to it being snuffed. Yet
to the child, or at least I can remember, the prospect of ‘playtime’ brought
with it a tingling sense of excitement. It was fun, the opportunity for fresh
air and to interact with friends. At a deeper level, it fosters the exploration
of the imagination, not just as a mental process (as in reading) but physically.
For
‘play’ is within the power of individual, involving free choice and personal
direction. Playing games, group play with others, getting involved in
imaginative scenarios – the list goes on. The environment of the playground
especially, can be informative in the way of free interaction getting children
to learn about others, for themselves.
In this way, play is a valuable process of
self-education.
Furthermore, research
gathered out by the National Children’s Bureau reveals widely acknowledged
benefits of ‘playtime’ for children, especially according to that conducted by
Blatchford and Baines (2006)(2). This can be categorised into areas such as
physical benefits – including the opportunity to exercise and children becoming
more aware of their own capabilities, as well as emotional benefits – such as
providing opportunities to interact with and understand the behaviour of
others. ‘Play’ allows for untrammelled thinking and encourages children to
apply, as well as expand their own rationale, as is evident in the ‘invention’
of new games; some which are surprisingly complex!
Within the
all-too-typical focus on
curriculum, ‘learning’ seems to be cast as something imposed, delivered in a
transaction between teacher and student. Yet whilst ‘curriculum’ may mean very
little to a child, ‘play’ holds prospect and promise – and should be celebrated
as a process through which children can learn themselves. They are their own teachers; they have their own authority, and this
matters. Yet in shortening school
days and play with it, we are not only reducing chances for this, but perhaps
even the life chances of children. For some, playtime may be their only
opportunity to interact with other children and adults in a safe environment.
Further research confirms the detrimental effects of
cutting playtime. Pellegrini, for
example, found that the longer the amount of time children spent on
standardised tasks without a break, the less attentive they became(4). The very
language involved here is interesting – in terms of ‘standardised’. This emphasizes
the highly regulated structure of much of the school day. This is not
necessarily negative, but it is imposed from above – whereas play, out in the
yard for example – is a process through
which children can learn to regulate themselves. People ‘look out’ for
each other, build dens, forts, feel excited. The anticipation of going on the
school field was enough to fill me with enthusiasm for the day.
I certainly felt the difference at high school, when
instead of ‘looking out’ for each other, much of ‘breaks’ consisted of ‘looking
in’ to mobile phones, media updates, the television blaring on the wall of the canteen. Even
then, in my first year, I sill attempted
games of ‘tig’ – until running around outside in a more constricting uniform
and under looks of disapproval by welfare staff brought it an eventual end. It
was never the same as primary school anyway, where playtime was simple,
acceptable, free.
Are we rationing fun to fuel the need for speed?
If we carry on as if ignoring that play matters to
children, the we seem to be heading in the direction suggested by McCulloch,
‘creating a generation under stress(4)’. Both cutting play and the school day
often seem advocated as a way of ‘saving time’, getting children home faster,
allowing teachers to mark work and plan quicker. It is this sense of rush which
is significantly fabricated by societal demands, and a pressure which should
not compromise children. And if ‘saving’
is desirable – what is wrong with ‘spending’ time? Quality time to explore one’s
own thoughts and immediate surroundings is simple, yet valuable. An opportunity
for children’s freedom should not be treated as an inconvenience. As worryingly
revealed research showed in The
Guardian, carried out through Children’s
Society’s annual Good Childhood report with
The University of York, the UK’s children are some of the unhappiest in
school in Europe, with 11% actually in
state of consistent dissatisfaction over their school experience(5). With
concepts such as ‘play’, ‘games’ and
even ‘free time’ coming increasingly characterised as optional, a reward
or even negative in some educational environments – is it any wonder? The
phrase ‘that’s enough fun and games for now’, as a kind of discipline, is used
with surprising frequency, for example.
Although changes are needed to address this, a number of
factors suggest that cutting playtime isn’t one of them. Through play we learn
the pace of life, the rate of others responses – rather than having it imposed
always from above. Research has shown that there is a strong positive correlation between
ample time for play with ‘free time’ enjoyed in childhood, and adult social
success too(6), so we shouldn’t jump to believe that too much ‘play’ may
threaten future adult interaction.
I am writing this because I miss the concept of play, and
how it is less of a reality for me now. I hope that other children have the fun
like I once did, simply involving myself and others in the school playground
- no mobile phones, no fancy equipment,
not even a ball. I am not deriding technology, and of course it offers
extensive benefits for children, such as in the classroom, but in the playground
– that is where it is possible to become connected to something else entirely.
Through
play, children can connect with their childhoods, their imagination, their
innocence. The authorities’
way of ‘playing’ with school hours and times is a whole different concept –
governed by ulterior motives and ‘savings’.
One notable aspect is the Ofsted banners often embossed
over school railings. It is a kind of
symbolism, I sometimes think; in this way the sight of children playing is
subservient to the state of educational bureaucracy plastered on top.
Play holds its own value and something which I believe still
can be seen as ‘it’ – the chaser in the playground, the thundering energy, the
enthusiasm for the day. Something we
need to uphold. Whatever savings are
made, play can’t be bought back. And that’s a hard lesson.
(4)
http://mentalhealth.org.uk/content/assets/PDF/publications/a-generation.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment