Human Growth and Development: Children at Play

The place I chose to conduct this particular field observation was a play area located in the Flatirons Mall in Broomfield, Colorado. The play area itself is commonly referred to as the "Dinosaur Playground." It is in indoors. The following observations were carried out on a Saturday afternoon (3/24/2007). They were conducted at about 1 pm to 3 pm. I felt the time and day I chose were the most opportune periods to conduct my observations. Weekends and afternoons seem to be a period of increased activity for many families in this country.

Once inside the play area, I simply sat down on the floor, alongside a group of parents, with my notebook and pen, and I began to write down my observations. I thought it was odd the parents and their children did not seem to mind my presence. Despite my nearly incessant writing and constant gazing, both children and parents alike seemed more interested in the activities at hand. This worked to my benefit. I was able to write down my observations at my own leisure without being disturbed. Although part of me did truly want to, I never did personally engage with any of the children. I did my best to blend in--and be as close to the play as possible--without becoming an active participant.

Concerning the description of the play area, it was surrounded by a padded wall. There were chairs and an elongated couch for the parents to sit. There was a sign that stated the maximum height a child was allowed to be in order to play. This height was 42". I believe this stated maximum was in place to keep older children, who might be too rough for the youngsters, out. Also, as an added benefit, it aided in my judgment of the approximate ages of the children. Based solely on height, the children were between the ages of 2 and 5. Inside the area, there were dinosaur shapes (Brontosaurus) of varying sizes for the children to crawl and climb upon. The floor, as a safety precaution, was padded in the event of a fall. All in all, the play area exhibited both primary and secondary prevention to protect the children from harm. I did not notice a professional monitor to safeguard the children. It seems Flatirons Mall had left the responsibility of adult supervision to the parents.

Here are a few of the many observations I made:

1) There was a game being played by two children in which they both took turns leaping from the back of one dino to another. The first child would leap the distance without fear. Still, he did seem to have some sense of self-preservation. His movements were calculated and controlled to some degree. He did not simply take the jump blindly. The second child, quite possibly a younger sibling, approached the task with a greater sense of trepidation. Before jumping, his face would become very serious (it would squench up in determination), and although he would ultimately jump, it seemed it took a serious amount of effort and time for him to do so. I watched this play for a good while, and I never did see the second child make the jump with the same ease and grace as the first child. However, I do think that without the guidance of the older child, the second child would have never attempted the jump to begin with. Notice, "Generally, children learn motor skills from other children, rather than through adult instruction. According to sociocultural theory, learning from peers is the best way for children to master skills they will need" (Berger, 2005, p. 203). Thus, in the case of these two children, I may have been witnessing sociocultural theory first-hand.

2) Concerning language (I originally planned to base my observations on language only), there was not a great deal of oral communication occurring between the children. Some played in silence. Other children simply laughed aloud. Nonetheless, there was one child who climbed to the highest point of the largest dino and said the word "helicopter" repeatedly. From his perspective, I imagine he must have felt awfully high in the air. Further, by saying "helicopter," over and over again, the child was employing "symbolic representation" to the experience of elevated height (Villiers, 2007, p. 102). Would the association of helicopters and elevated height be evidence of fast-mapping? I am not sure. However, if I would have been able to observe this child more, I may have discovered he had already categorized helicopters, airplanes, space ships, balloons, etc. into this same language map. Certainly, it would be interesting to have heard other phrases or words this child might have used to explain the experience. Additionally, it would have been interesting to see to what degree the child was able to group these words into phrases. Mark Baker (2005) believes, "It is plausible to think that children's minds come equipped with an innate phrase-building mechanism, which stands ready to group whatever words the child happens to learn into larger phrases" (p. 104). Further, Kathleen Berger (2005) discusses a process called logical extension: "After learning a word, children apply it to other, unnamed objects in the same category [...] It is as if children use their available vocabulary to cover all the territory they want to talk about" (p. 226). With this in mind, and if the experience of height could be considered an object, it is possible the word "helicopter" did literally mean height for this child.

3) The most attention-grabbing play event I observed involved theory of mind. Children who have not obtained theory of mind are "too egocentric to grasp other perspectives" (Berger, 2005, p. 226). To illustrate this, I observed an older child (about 5 years of age) bump right into another child much younger than herself (around 2 years of age). Immediately following the collision, the older child expressed interest in the younger child's safety. She pulled the younger child to his feet and asked him if he was okay. Of course, the younger child was perfectly fine and ran off to play. He obviously did not make much of the collision, and he never responded. All the same, it was evident to me that the older child, due to her age, was beginning to grasp the idea that there were perspectives other than her own. Her perception of the world was beginning to take other perspectives into account.

To conclude, there were numerous observations I made during this observation. Others include an Indian father physically guiding his son through the various obstacles of the play area. (Parents from other cultural backgrounds did not do this. This stresses there could be cultural differences in how parents raise their children). Additionally, with no involvement from the parents, I observed children take turns sliding down the neck of the largest dino. I was surprised there was no pushing or shoving in this activity. (Does this have something to do with the development of the prefrontal cortex and how it can regulate a child's emotional behavior? Only the oldest children played on the largest dino.) Finally, and worth mention, I did listen to a child talk to himself for a brief moment. After taking his turn to slide down the largest dino's tail, he announced, to nobody in particular, "You have to go up the tail...then, jump to here." For me, this was a perfect example of Vygotsky's private speech in which "people talk to themselves and through which new ideas are formed" (Berger, 2005, p. 222). Altogether, as I made my observations, I became distinctly aware these children were not just playing. Their parents had brought them here for a particular reason and goal in mind. Whether it be social skills, motor development, or language acquisition, the children were there to learn.

References
Baker, M. C. (2005). Mapping the Terrain of Language Learning. Language Learning & Development, 1(1), 93-129.
Berger, Kathleen S. (2005). The Developing Person Through the Lifespan (Sixth Edition). New York: Worth.
Villiers, T. (2007). Why Pierce Matters: The Symbol in Deacon's Symbolic Species. Language Direct, 29, 88-108.