Advocacy Actions: Play Pedagogies in Early Education, ECE310

This paper addresses the crucial need for advocating play pedagogies in early childhood education, particularly in the Australian context. It begins by highlighting the importance of play-based learning for social and academic outcomes and the growing pressure to formalize early education. The paper then outlines key actions for advocacy, including transforming school culture by promoting a more integrated view of play, garnering support from teachers, parents, and the community, establishing supportive policies that prioritize play, forming partnerships with relevant stakeholders, and adjusting standardized testing to accommodate child-centered learning. The paper emphasizes the need for a unified approach to strengthen the emphasis on play-based pedagogies and create a cohesive voice in children's education. The paper references various studies and government documents to support its arguments, providing a comprehensive overview of the issue and potential solutions. It also emphasizes the importance of teacher training, curriculum alignment, and parental involvement in successfully implementing play-based learning.

Running head: ACTIONS 1
Actions Needed to Advocate For Play Pedagogies in Early Education Paper
Student Name
Institution

ACTIONS 2
Actions Needed to Advocate For Play Pedagogies in Early Education
1. Introduction
Currently, play-based learning is considered as a vital instructive method in the
enhancement of both social and academic outcomes (Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff,
2013). In the contemporary years, there have been debates about the progressive suppression of
play, and the value of education in early learning (Barblett, Knaus, & Barratt-Pugh, 2016). These
concerns have put mounting pressure on the formalization of education in early childhood, both
in Australia and globally, as a means of resolving the decline in educational outcome and the
time allocated for children’s play within the classroom walls (Ang, 2014). In Australia, this
move was facilitated by the introduction of quality assurance systems for Early Childhood
Education and Care (ECEC) known as the National Quality Standard for Early Childhood
Education and Care, and the School Age Care National Quality Standard (NQS), particularly for
providing pedagogical and maintainable leadership (Grant, Danby, Thorpe, & Theobold, 2016).
This paper, thus, discusses and justifies the actions needed in the advocacy of play pedagogies in
early childhood in Australia so as to ensure continuous quality improvement.
2. Advocacy Actions
2.1. Transforming School Culture
In most of the schools in the country, the perception of play has led to the allocation of
limited chances for the young learner’s play since it has been restricted to break and eat times
(Hunkin, 2014). In primary school, extra-curricular is similarly confined due to the formal and
academic nature of the learning process (Hännikäinen, & Rasku-Puttonen, 2010). The emphasis
on academic success alters pedagogical methods, thereby resulting in a learning process that is
more instructional and teacher-centered. According to recent studies, most junior primary school

ACTIONS 3
teachers are forced into these practices by curriculum essentials that oblige them to meet formal
achievement targets (SCSA, 2018). Historically, these timetables and curriculum imperatives
have given rise to less time for sustained routine play and recreational activities in early
education classrooms. Consequently, the general understanding of play-based pedagogies in
early education is mainly limited to active child inquiry, dramatic play instances during lessons,
structured learning games, and other manipulative or hands-on events (Grant, Danby, Thorpe, &
Theobold, 2016).
Implementing a more incorporated view of the value of education and play lays bare the
possibility for the acceptance of play-based education, and practices which utilize playful
elements through which young children may become active participants of their own educational
process (Hännikäinen, & Rasku-Puttonen, 2010). According to the Queensland Government,
play is vital because children tend to more efficiently acquire knowledge in active settings. It
also states that the current school culture grossly misinterpreted the Australian Curriculum owing
to the propagation of more formal teaching methods. In fact, there are several pedagogical
approaches endorsed in the Australian Curriculum specific to the age, background, and
experience of children at school (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority,
2010). Foundations papers released by the Queensland Government also outline a series of age
appropriate pedagogies applicable in early education, as well as instructional learning and
teaching programs relevant for play-based learning. School administrators and teachers should,
therefore, ensure that all teachers are conversant with the relevant pedagogical methods
appropriate for their students, and ensure their proper use (Department of Education and
Training, n.d.).
2.2. Garnering Support

ACTIONS 4
During supervised play, the instructor’s obligation is to control, and ensure intentional
learning and teaching through purposeful and attentive actions (DEEWR, 2009). Based on a
study conducted by McInnes, Howard, Miles and Crowley (2011) which sought to teachers’
comprehension of play, established that the target group bore limited knowledge on the subject
matter. Aside from having limited preparation in play teaching methods, they preferred to use
adult-focused activities because they were uncertain of how best to employ play-based methods.
Hynoven’s (2011) research also suggests that most teachers find it difficult to include play in the
learning process because they apprehensive about not attaining the formal goals of the
curriculum. Play-based pedagogies in early childhood, therefore, requires that a teacher not only
fully understands the curriculum, but also has the ability to categorize the learning process in a
manner that would prove effective in attaining all educational goals (Weisberg,
2013).Consequently, for the continuous improvement of play pedagogies in early education,
support must be given to all parents and caregivers.
Sources reveal that providing life-long support to every adult engaged pre-primary
services is necessary in fostering a strong awareness of the tool in early education. Support may,
therefore, involve the creation of awareness on unique learning needs, such as, unraveling the
basics of play-based teaching through knowledgeable investigations. Similarly, the enhancement
of public awareness and support of learning through play may be facilitated by empowering
parents to understand their role in availing meaningful play experiences at home, and in
encouraging them to be fully invested. By garnering public interest and support, the demand for
learning will improve institutional commitment to the method, and prompt them to recognize the
benefits of play pedagogies in early childhood education (Hyvonen, 2011).
2.3. Policies

ACTIONS 5
Studies show that the unifying of learning systems is also based on the creation of an
enabling environment using policies. This process involves the merging of interrelated financial
and social aspects with political factors, in the promotion of a successful early childhood
education system. Often, these initiatives entail the allocation of a specific time and place for
play, the resourceful use of desk-top exercises, and the promotion of learner opinion during play
pedagogies. However, the establishment of unifying policies may also be useful in ensuring
continuous quality improvement of play pedagogies. For example, in support of the international
Education for Sustainability (EfS) initiative, the Australian civic administration developed new
policies and legislations stipulating that EfS, in relation to play pedagogies, should star early, and
span across all age groups. The Australian Government Sustainability Curriculum Framework
(DEEWR, 2009) also states that EfS learning should be a unified process based on the teaching
and acquisition of knowledge that will have an equally significant impact on the economy,
environment, and society in general. By so doing, the government advocated for the fusion of all
learning systems using distinct and directive instructions that foster child-centered learning,
rather than a teacher-centered approach. By making serious considerations in the development of
future policies, playful learning will be considered a serious matter, and will ensure national
prosperity across a variety of sectors.
2.4. Partnering for Change
Useful partnerships with ministerial leadership, and the investment sector may also
facilitate better advocacy for play pedagogies in early education. Those ministerial headship
positions, who are already aware of the importance of play pedagogies, could be used to enhance
public visibility of the issues affecting all strategic and implementation plans. In addition, such a
partnership may ensure easier coordination of this philosophy across other sectors, for the

ACTIONS 6
purpose of ensuring future continuity (Reid, 2009). Similarly, partnerships with the public and
private investment sectors may be used to acquire much-needed financing in the purchasing of
relevant learning materials, or the acquisition of professional support to help make a stronger
case for play (Miller & Almon, 2009).
2.5. Adjusting Standardized Testing
Another challenge that exists in the successful implementation of play pedagogies is the
pressure often placed on teachers by the education system with regard to standardized tests
(Miller & Almon, 2009). For example, according to the National Assessment Program –
Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), standardized analysis requires teachers to attain set targets,
as well as the consequential effects of teaching on tests (Klenowski & Wyatt-Smith, 2012).
These results are then periodically published on a website known as MySchool, so as to allow for
proper comparison between learning institutions in Australia. Thompson (2013) states that this
change was due to reforms by the Federal Government to enhance the quality of education, and
facilitate transparency. Unfortunately, Reid (2009) believes that this mode of testing has led to
the narrowing of the curriculum, at the expense of the propagation of a more wholesome
teaching and learning experience. This drive to generate better test results have impacted all
school levels, including children in kindergarten who often have up to five years before sitting
for their first NAPLAN tests (Thompson, 2013). A study conducted in the United States also
revealed that formal instruction currently occurs as early as Year 1, whereby young children are
required to sit and finish their class activities at the desk as their teachers openly commented on
their test scores (Alford, Rollins, Padron, & Waxman, 2015).
Nonetheless, with the rise in use of country-wide tests as the gauge for educational
proficiency, both the syllabus and play teaching methods are at high risk of negative influence.

ACTIONS 7
Learner stress and anxiety levels are also highly likely to increase based on the stunted
curriculum. While studies agree that there is need for openness and accountability, the gauging
of school effectiveness should not solely rely on structured tests, but rather on the rights of
children to position their individual priorities (Klenowski & Wyatt-Smith, 2012). These tests
should, therefore, be adjusted to allow for the proper accommodation of child interests and
development, as well as their attitudes towards their education. As such, as is also endorsed by
the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF), testing should be adjusted to allow for learning
through active and play-based methods (DEEWR, 2009).
3. Conclusion
In general, a supportive environment should be facilitated in advocating for the
importance of learning using play. Using an integrated and unifying system based on informed
policies, strategic partnerships, transformation of outdated school cultures, improved testing
methods, and general societal support may further strengthen the emphasis of play-based
pedagogies in early education, and create a unified voice in the education of all children’s lives.

ACTIONS 8
References
ACARA. (2010). Australian Curriculum and Assessment Reporting Authority. Retrieved April
11, 2019, from ACARA:
www.acara.edu.au/_resources/National_Report_on_Schooling_in_Australia_2010_liv
Alford, B., Rollins, K., Padron, Y., & Waxman, H. (2015). Using systematic classroom
observation to explore student engagement as a function of teachers’ developmentally
appropriate instructional practices (DAIP) in ethnically diverse pre-kindergarten through
second grade classrooms. Early Childhood Educational Journal, 44(1), 623-625.
Ang, L. (2014). Preschool or prep school? Rethinking the role of early years education.
Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 15(2), 185-199.
Barblett, L., Kanus, M., & Barrat-Pugh, C. (2016). The pushes and pulls of pedagogy in the early
years: Competing knowledges and the erosion of play-based learning. Australasian
Journal of Early Childhood, 41(4), 36-43.
DEEWR. (2009). Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for
Australia. Retrieved April 11, 2019, from Australian Government:
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/belonging_being_and_becoming
DET. (n.d.). Age appropriate pedagogies for the early years of schooling. Retrieved April 11,
2019, from Department of Education Training:
http://deta.qld.gov.au/earlychildhood/about/successful-transitions/age-
appropriatepedagogies/
Grant, S., Danby, S., Thorpe, K., & Theobald, M. (2016). Early childhood teachers’ work in a
time of change. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood. Australasian Journal of Early
Childhood, 41(3), 38-45.
Hännikäinen, M., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2010). Promoting children's participation: the role of
teachers in preschool and primary school learning sessions. Early Years. An International
Journal of Research and Development, 30(2), 147-160.
Hunkin, E. (2014). We’re offering true play-based learning: Teacher perspectives on educational
dis/continuity in the early years. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 39(2), 30-35.
Hyvonen, P. (2011). Play in the school context? The perspectives of Finnish teachers. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 36(8), 65-83.
Klenowski, V., & Wytt-Smith, C. (2012). The impact of high stakes testing: the Australian story.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 19(1), 65-79.
McInnes, K., Howard, J., Miles, G., & Crowley, K. (2011). Differences in practitioners’
understanding of play and how this influences pedagogy and children’s perceptions of
play. Early Years, 31(2), 121-133.

ACTIONS 9
Miller, E., & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the kindergarten: Why children need to play in school
(1 ed., Vol. 1). College Park MD: Alliance for Childhood.
Reid, A. (2009). Is this a revolution? Curriculum Perspectives, 29(3), 1-13.
SCSA. (2018). School Curriculum and Syandards Authority. Retrieved April 11, 2019, from
Schools Curriculum and Standards Authority: http://www.scsa.wa.edu.au/
Thompson, G. (2013). NAPLAN, MySchool and accountability: Teacher perceptions of the
effects of testing. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 12(2),
62-84.
Weisberg, D., Hirsch-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. (2013). Guided play: Where curricular goals
meet playful pedagogy. Mind, Brain and Education, 7(2), 104-112.