Play Episodes

On October 18, 2008, I engaged in a play episode with my friend's daughter (TC) at the living room of her home. The TC is two years old, Hispanic, and her family consists of mom, dad, and older brother and sister. I entered the episode as TC was playing with her Dora house. I first participated in parallel play, picking up the doll and moving them around the house as she placed furniture and food in the house and in a box. As I was playing, I accidentally bumped the house and knocked a doll and some furniture off from the second story. TC looked at the fallen items, then at me. I responded with and, "Uh-oh!" She began to laugh. When she laughed, I knew that this was the moment I could engage her in a play episode. We continued this game of falling furniture for about ten minutes.

In order to determine whether or not TC and I were engaged in a play episode, I had to analyze it according to the criteria given in my EC 544 class by Dr. Andrew Gunsberg. I first determined how the play was framed. In the play episode, I responded each time to the objects falling with an exaggerated, "Uh-oh!," and gesture of surprised eyes and hand covering my mouth. The voice and gestures, along with the repetition of the even, are what framed this play episode. I also had to determine what the pleasurable effect was. After analyzing the episode, I discovered that the pleasurable effect was my pretend dismay at the objects falling. In order for the play to continue, I had to repeat this dismay.

There were several behaviors that allowed this play format to continue. First I had to walk around the house with my doll and bump into it. When I made the furniture and doll fall, I had to say, "Uh-oh!" The TC and I then had to replace the objects on the second floor of the dollhouse, and I had to repeat walking around again.

These behaviors also led to the rules we had to follow in order for the play episode to continue. I had to maintain my exaggerated response every time the objects fell to maintain the pleasurable effect. TC also had to control her waiting between the play spikes. If she had not waited for me and knocked the objects down herself, the play episode would have ended. I also had to maintain my patience to extend the time between each play spike instead of just rushing into the pleasurable effect. We also had to place the furniture and doll back together on the second story each time. I also had to knock the objects off from the back of the house.

The repetition of the play format had a great effect on both TC and myself. As I continued to play, I reached a greater level of flow. The challenge of how to repeat the pleasurable effect decreased, and my skill level of how to continue increased. I became more aware of her and her reactions, as I could focus less on my intentions. The repetitive nature of the play allowed me to reach a comfort level and to be a better teacher for her.

TC also grew during this play episode and achieved a level of flow. The challenge of how to get me to reproduce the pleasurable effect lowered and her skills increased throughout the play. By me lengthening the time between play spikes, her attention span increased and she became more aware of my movements. This awareness allowed her to pay attention to detail, noting my every movement and sound. She also developed a higher level of anticipation and ability to predict outcomes.

During this play episode, there were two instances of elaboration. The first was my extending the wait time between play spikes. Each time, I made TC wait a little bit longer by making the doll go different places, or moving more slowly. By doing this, I helped to increase her attention span and sense of anticipation.

The second elaboration I added after about the sixth or seventh repetition. I decided to add the elaboration for two reasons. The first was because I was beginning to get a little bored with the game. The second reason was that I knew she was beginning o enjoy rote counting. The second elaboration I added was asking her if she would like two or three objects to fall when we replaced the furniture and doll. She would respond by telling me a number and I would count the objects as I placed them back in the house. After about three times of doing this, I encouraged her to count the objects with me. She would, and we would repeat the game. This elaboration allowed her to extend her rote counting ability to one-to-one correspondence. I do not believe she understood the concept, however, it was a valuable introduction.

This play episode was very valuable for several reasons. Berk and Winsler discuss Vygotsky's ideas of scaffolding and the zone of proximal development (p. 48). By engaging in the repetitive nature of the play episode, I was able to enter flow. Once in flow, I was able to increase my skill of being aware of TC's reactions. This awareness allowed me to determine her zone of proximal development in the areas of attention span, and attention to detail. I saw that she was able to wait consistently for the same amount of time during the initial repetitions. I therefore was able to scaffold upon this, and extend the wait periods between spikes. As a result, she began to learn to wait longer, increasing her attention span.

This scaffolding also led to my ability to scaffold TC's attention to detail. During the initial repetitions, I noticed that she would watch only the doll and listen to my voice while waiting for the pleasurable effect. I decided to engage in medium level distancing by slowly keeping my voice more monotone, so that one of her cues would be removed. I simultaneously began making grander gestures with my arm and shoulders, and she began to pay more attention to the gestures of my entire body and face in search of cues. This greater attention to detail also allowed her to become more consistent in predicting when the pleasurable effect would occur.

Berk and Winsler also cite the idea of joint attentional focus while discussing Vygotsky's theories of early childhood development. This occurs when both adult and child are engaged in a "collaborative gazing and adult labeling" of objects targeted by the child (p. 23). TC and I participated in this during the counting elaboration. She had already targeted the furniture and doll as one of the causes of the pleasurable effect. We were both "gazing" at the items while waiting for them to fall. I began the "labeling" of the items when I counted them. The numbers she would rote count were now given a new meaning. The meaning would expand her vocabulary.

Because of their investment and curiosity, children are more likely to add words

for these new experiences to their vocabulary. Adults, in turn, surround joint

attentional focus with a rich linguistic context, providing "tools of the mind" for

toddlers to appropriate into their own repertoire and creating conditions

especially suited for spurring cognition forward (p. 23).

The final reason this play episode was valuable to TC's development was because it aided in developing her private speech (p. 34-37). Vygotsky believed that private speech was the tool that allowed children to "function at a more 'executive,' or planful, level". According to the Berk and Winsler text, private speech is a result of social interactions. By socially conversing with others, children develop a sense of language and regulation of behaviors through others. This social speech begins to turn into private speech "for the purpose of self-regulation" (p. 37).

The repetition of the play episode between TC and I began with her telling me "again" after the furniture fell. After a few repetitions, she stopped asking. She began utilizing her beginning stages of private speech by internalizing the "again". She was able to tell herself that if she just began replacing the objects, I would repeat the play format. She did not need to ask anymore. Her private speech allowed her to regulate her behaviors to ensure the pleasurable effect would continue to occur.

TC also engaged in private speech when I began to increase her wait time. I did not have to give her verbal cues or gestures to wait for me to knock the furniture over. Her private speech told her that she needed to wait for me, and if she didn't, that the rules would have been broken and play would have ceased. She was able to regulate her behavior in order to experience that excitement of the pleasurable effect.

Overall, I believe that this was a very successful play episode. I was able to scaffold upon skills that TC possessed in a fun and entertaining manner. The play episode did not put any pressure on the child to advance. In fact, it made it pleasurable. TC chose the activity and the pleasurable effect, which ensured her enjoyment. By repeating the actions, I was able to identify her zone of proximal development and scaffold her abilities while also having fun. This experience definitely strengthened my belief in the importance of play.

Source:

Berk, L., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding Children's Learning: Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. DC: NAEYC.