www.ChildCareExchange.com PLAYGROUND DESIGN 89 MAY/JUNE 2018 EXCHANGE

playgrounds and creative playgrounds of the 1960s–1980s. Today, playgrounds for young children seem to either be composed of brightly colored sterile plastic and metal constructions set in wood mulch, rubber mats, or ground tires, or nature playgrounds.

As the early childhood field faces new STEM curricula, playground safety requirements, insurance costs, and competing ideas about the very purpose of early education, it is easy to be confused about playground design and equipment. Here I propose that the cognitive play stages of Jean Piaget and Mildred Parten’s social play stages be used as a framework for designing playgrounds for young children. Playgrounds should be designed and equipped to enable children to fully engage in each of these stages as they grow, develop, and learn.

Contemporary Playgrounds for Young Children

Many programs today have play-grounds comprised of brightly-colored powder-coated metal and plastic constructions that are safe, perma-nent, static, unresponsive to the child, almost maintenance free — and very boring. These playgrounds are often built on a continuous, flat fall zone of rubber mats, ground tires, or wood

Approaches to caring for and educating young children have changed and progressed over the years; so, too, have ideas about the design of playgrounds for young children. These ideas have been influenced by educational move-ments, physical exercise advocates, equipment manufacturers, and nature enthusiasts (Frost, 1992). Beginning with Friedrich Froebel’s view of the impor-tance of outdoor play, which essentially involved the creative use of the entire outdoor environment with young children (Froebel, 1887), the design of playgrounds for young children has followed a path that has included sand gardens, outdoor gymnasiums, the use of physical fitness equipment, and equip-ment that looked more like rockets and space vehicles than equipment children would actually play on, to the adventure

Do You Want to Build A Playground?

by Francis Wardle

mulch. In fact, an award-winning model creative playground I designed and built with the help of parents and a great deal of community support for a local Head Start program fell victim to this very approach to playgrounds, being replaced by one of these attrac-tive, maintenance-free constructions. The original playground, funded by a grant from Head Start, included tire nets, slides, towers, play houses, balance beams, platforms, tricycle paths, swings, wonderful concrete culverts and mounds of dirt, a garden, several bridges, and a large grass area for games and family picnics (Wardle, 1987).

In contrast to these steel and plastic playgrounds, nature playgrounds developed as a result of the publica-tion of several books that emphasized the critical importance of nature for the healthy growth and development of all children (Louv, 2005), and an emerging movement to include nature throughout early childhood, including outdoor play (Keeler, 2008; Wike, 2015). To a large extent, this approach is a return to Froe-bel’s original notion, in which nature itself became the playground, with streams, trees, tree stumps and dams, flower and vegetable gardens, bridges, all sorts of pets, and a large grass area for picnics, games, and Singspiel — a German tradition combining music, dance, and acting (Froebel, 1887).

Francis Wardle, Ph.D., teaches for the University of Phoenix (online) and Red Rocks Community College. He has been a Head Start director and national program evaluator, and is currently the president of the Colorado chapter of Partners of the Americas, and a board

member of Partners of the Americas International. He has four multiracial children, and is the director of the Center for the Study of Biracial Children. He has designed and built playgrounds in the US and Brazil, and conducted playground safety reviews for Head Start nationwide. He is working on his ninth book, Oh Boy! Strategies for Teaching Boys in Early Childhood, which will be published by Exchange Press.

Copyright © Dimensions Educational Research FoundationAll rights reserved. A single copy of these materials may be

reprinted for noncommercial personal use only.Visit us at www.ChildCareExchange.com or

call (800) 221-2864.

Francis WardleExchange Leadership InitiativeChildCareExchange.com/leadership

90 PLAYGROUND DESIGN www.ChildCareExchange.com EXCHANGE MAY/JUNE 2018

Most programs today have playgrounds dominated by one of these two other options: a sterile, plastic and metal struc-ture set in wood mulch, ground tires, or on rubber mats with concrete pathways, but little grass, no sand or water, and few real physical challenges; or natural playgrounds with grass, trees, rocks, wood, water, and lots of natural colors and textures, but no tricycle pathways, swings, high slides, or equipment that encourages upper-body development and provides children with the thrill of being high above their world.

Purpose of the Early Childhood Playground

It seems to me that neither of these two approaches is satisfactory as a complete outside environment for young children (Spencer & Wright, 2014). In order to examine this issue, I think we should consider the purpose of a playground for children from toddlers to age eight. To me, the central purpose of the playground is to encourage all kinds of developmentally appropriate play. And,

with this in mind, I believe Jean Piaget’s cognitive play stages and Mildred Parten’s social play stages can act as guides (Johnson, Christie & Wardle, 2005).

Jean Piaget’s theory of the four stages of cognitive play is a progressive hierarchy of cognitive play developed by Sarah Smilansky from Piaget’s well-known cognitive developmental theory (Smila-nsky, 1968). Mildred Parten’s social play stages describe a hierarchy of social play, beginning with the most simple and immature and progressing to the most sophisticated and mature (Johnson, Christie & Wardle). Children progress through each of these stages based on overall maturity, mastery of the stage, need for new challenges, and interest in exploration and human interactions. However, no one stage should be viewed as superior to another; children often retreat to a lower stage for a variety of reasons, including stress and a need for privacy.

Further, these two scales should not be viewed as separate and mutually exclu-

sive; rather, they should be combined, so when a child is playing at a stage in one scale (e.g. Piaget’s symbolic play) the child is also playing at a stage in the other scale (e.g. Parten’s cooperative play), or the child is engaged in the solitary play of Parten and the constructive play of Piaget (Smilanksy, 1968). As this last example illustrates, it is important to note that children do not necessarily play at the same level in each scale (e.g. solitary and functional).

Piaget’s Cognitive Play Stages

Piaget’s play stages follow a developmental sequence, from functional play to games

with rules. Children progress though each stage as they mature and become familiar and comfortable; however, unlike with Piaget’s stages of cognitive development, children can — and do — go back to earlier stages from time it time (Smilanksy, 1968).

Functional play involves using the functional properties of objects and the body in play: rolling, sliding, climbing, swinging, stacking blocks, digging in the sand, banging nails on the workbench, and so on. In functional play there is no end goal (for example, building a fort or painting a picture); it’s purely about having fun with the physical proper-ties of the body and different materials. Functional play is encouraged through climbing equipment, slides and swinging structures, sand boxes, water, tricycle paths, and a variety of hills and valleys. Traditional playgrounds seem to be designed only for this most basic level of Piaget’s stages.

Constructive play is many children’s favorite kind of outdoor play (Ihn, 1998; Johnson, Christie & Wardle, 2005), and includes using the body, objects, and materials to create something else: to do a dance, paint a picture, build a house in the block area, construct a car at the workbench, or build a fort (Wardle, 2015). Unfortunately, constructive play is often ignored in outdoor playgrounds because loose parts are not returned to their original place at the end of the day, and therefore become unsightly or dangerous tripping hazards (Frost & Sweeney, 1996). Playgrounds strewn with loose parts can also look messy and uninviting, especially to adults and administrators focused on aesthetics and order.

Constructive play is encouraged by sand, water, art easels and large wooden blocks, pieces of wood, old tires, found objects, and plastic milk crates. Programs wishing to use loose parts can also benefit from a storage shed (maybe

Phot

o by F

ranc

is W

ardle

www.ChildCareExchange.com PLAYGROUND DESIGN 91 MAY/JUNE 2018 EXCHANGE

• Meets local and national standards for early childhood education• Beautifully crafted and durable

• Precisely tuned for harmonious sounds• Specifically designed for outdoor use

OutdoorMusical Instruments

Music!

freenotesharmonypark.com970.375.7825

We invite you to visit our website to experience the unique sounds.

Introduce young children to the joys of

92 PLAYGROUND DESIGN www.ChildCareExchange.com EXCHANGE MAY/JUNE 2018

built by parents or grandparents in the program) (Wardle, 2016). A concrete or asphalt area just outside the classroom is a great place to bring the classroom outside, including block play and art activities, drawing and painting on the concrete, setting up the easel, the wood-work bench, and so on.

Symbolic play, also called fantasy and dramatic play, involves using the body and materials to represent something else: a child becomes a doctor or football player, a piece of wood is used as a cell phone, and children become adven-turers, explorers, teachers, and builders (Johnson, Christie & Wardle, 2005). Loose parts encourage symbolic play, as does bringing dramatic play props from the classroom onto the playground (care must be taken to avoid items such as neckties, necklaces, and ropes that can be a strangulation hazard on climbing equipment); large hollow blocks can be used to build playhouses and other fantasy structures on flat areas of the playground. Playhouses, forts, tunnels, bridges, and castles all encourage symbolic play. When I built a stage on a playground, it immediately encour-aged all sorts of dramatic play activities (Spencer & Wright, 2015; Wardle, 1983).

Further, studies show that specific kinds of play equipment encourage specific kinds of play behaviors, including symbolic play (Wardle, 1983).

Games with rules—Simon Says, tag, Red Light, Green Light, and Duck, Duck, Goose, are all games with rules. They are organized games that depend on a teacher (or older student) to enforce the rules. A large, flat grassy area is the best place to engage in these games, and many programs use local parks for these activities. Singspiel — used by Froebel in his kindergartens — is also a form of games with rules.

Mildred Parten’s Social Play Stages

Like Piaget’s play stages, Parten’s play stages are also progressive, beginning with solitary play and ending with coop-erative play. And like Piaget’s stages, a child who achieves a certain level of play can, and will, go back to earlier levels when they choose to (e.g. many adults love to play Solitaire, which is clearly a form of solitary play). Children prog-ress through each level as they become familiar with the social play dynamics of each level; however, they cannot be

forced through the process (Johnson, Christie & Wardle, 2005).

Solitary play—just like it sounds — is a child playing by himself. It begins in infancy, when the baby plays with his toes or enjoys shaking a rattle. Toddlers love to sit in the kitchen and bang on pots and pans, oblivious of anyone around them, or play with soap and water in the kitchen sink. Sand and water, with a vast array of accompa-nying tools, are wonderful materials for encouraging solitary play, as are large rocks to climb on, swings, slides, and climbers.

Gardens also encourage solitary play, especially for activities where mastery is required, such as weeding the garden and picking ripe strawberries, corn, or tomatoes. Watering the garden is a solitary activity. Working at a woodwork bench (e.g. using a hammer to hit a nail or using a saw to cut a piece of wood) is a solitary play activity. Workbenches can be brought outside in good weather. Playing on wheeled toys is often solitary, although children also want to do so as a group.

Parallel play allows children to progress from totally egocentric play (focusing on their own individual needs) to coop-erative play in which the child has the ability to suppress individual needs for the good of the group and the play episode (Johnson, Christie & Wardle, 2005). In parallel play, children tend to play next to peers and engage in similar play activities. Swinging together is a great example, as is playing together in the sand box but ignoring each other. Children want the physical proximity, but don’t really know what to do with it!

Associative play encourages children to interact with each other while playing: imitating a peer’s construction in the sand, trying to take her toy, or physi-cally trying to enter the play activity. However, the child’s focus is still on her

Phot

o by F

ranc

is W

ardle

Sand is a wonderful material to encourage constructive play and cooperative play

www.ChildCareExchange.com PLAYGROUND DESIGN 93 MAY/JUNE 2018 EXCHANGEEarly Play

Early Play

Designing and building outdoor play environments for over 30 years.

Recycled and natural products that connect young children with the natural world.

Kid KitchensRecycled plastic & stainless steel “appliances” with-stand all weather, year round. No plumbing required.

www.NatureofEarlyPlay.com (800) 43-PLAYSWoman-Owned Small Business

94 PLAYGROUND DESIGN www.ChildCareExchange.com EXCHANGE MAY/JUNE 2018

Ihn, H. (1998). Analysis of preschool children’s equipment choices and play behaviors in outdoor play. Early Child-hood News, 10(4), 20–25

Johnson, J.E., Christie, J.R. & Wardle, F. (2005). Play, development, and early educa-tion. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Keeler, R. (2008), Natural playscapes. Creating outdoor play environments for the soul. Redmond, WA: Exchange Press.

Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods. Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.

Smilansky, S. (1968). The effects of socio-dramatic play on disadvantaged children. New York: Wiley.

Spencer, K.H., & Wright, P.M. (2014). Nutrition and fitness for all children. Young Children, 69(5), 28–34.

Wardle, F. (1983). Effects of complexity, age, and sex on the social and cognitive levels of young children’s play in an outdoor setting. Doctoral dissertation. University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Wardle, F. (1987). Outdoor play: One Head Start’s solution. Children Today, 16(2), 16–19, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Wardle, F. (2015). The importance of constructive play. Community Playthings. Retrieved: www.communityplaythings.com/resources/articles/2015/ constructive-play.

Wardle, F. (2016, May/June). Gardening with grandpa. Exchange, 229, 87–90.

Wike, J. (2015, September/October). You can do it! Improving contained outside spaces. Exchange, 225, 24–27.

— n —

Let Them Play

Playgrounds for young children have garnered considerable interest through the years, from theorists including Froebel, and policymakers, including those concerned with children’s lack of connection with nature. Like curricula, best practices, and overall educational movements, playgrounds for young children have experienced their own fads over time, fueled by historical events, physical fitness trends, new materials and equipment designs, and safety concerns (Frost, 1992).

Today’s early childhood playgrounds fall generally into two contrasting types: the total immersion of children into nature to encourage the growth and development of the whole child, and sterile, glossy plastic and steel edifices that please adults (especially those concerned with safety and liability), but offer few real challenges for the young child. Here I proposed a framework for thinking about playground design that combines both of these perspectives by focusing on ways to assist children in progressing through Parten’s and Piaget’s play stages. Playgrounds that provide ample opportunities for chil-dren to progress through each of these stages offer children social and cognitive challenges at their developmental level, creating and maintaining interest, chal-lenge, and engagement.

References

Froebel, F. (1887). The education of man. W.N. Hailmann, trans. New York: D. Appleton Century.

Frost, J.L. (1992). Play and playscapes. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishing

Frost J.L., & Sweeney, T. (1996). Causes and prevention of playground injuries and litigation: Case studies. Wheaton, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.

own needs, and she is not ready yet to engage in full cooperative play.

Slides, swings, sandboxes, and water all encourage the development of associa-tive play. Tricycles, wagons, and other wheeled equipment can help in this development as well, along with all kinds of loose parts, from tires and milk crates, to pieces of wood and found objects. A garden is also a good place for these kinds of social play to develop, as children can begin to learn how to work together: weeding, picking flowers and harvesting vegetables, and picking rocks out of the soil.

Cooperative play is the ability of chil-dren to play together while controlling their individual needs for the benefit of the group and the play activity (Johnson, Christie & Wardle, 2005). Constructive play activities such as building a fort or house together, and dramatic play such as pretending to be a doctor and patient in the operating room or family members in the waiting room, are examples (Johnson, Christie & Wardle). Again, it is important to remember that one cannot instruct children on how to engage in cooperative play; they have to progress through each of Parten’s stages at their own rate to be able to engage in cooperative play. Also, while we want children to be able to engage in cooperative play, each play stage is equally important for children’s social play development, and each should be encouraged on the playground. Progress through the stages cannot and should not be forced.

Gardening, playhouses, forts, bridges, and tunnels (to reenact nursery rhymes and fairy tales) all encourage coop-erative play. Providing loose materials that encourage working together to explore materials, mess around with the environment, and build structures also support cooperative play.