Content area
Full text
Introduction
SOME RESEARCHERS and early education practitioners seem ambivalent about play. A core developmental activity central to many early childhood programs, play-or the idea of it-is supported by most early educators (National Association for the Education of Young Children 2020), and many researchers view it as an essential learning tool for young children (Hedges 2014; Pyle and Danniels 2017; Weisberg et al. 2016; Zosh et al. 2018). Advocates argue that play promotes child development socially, mediating stress (Yogman et al. 2018), and that playful learning particularly supports the development of twenty-first-century skills (Hirsh-Pasek et al. 2020). They also contend that guided play produces larger measured learning outcomes than direct instruction or free play (Cavenaugh et al. 2017; Fisher et al. 2013; Han et al. 2010; Skene et al. 2022). For example, children evidenced larger gains in shape knowledge (Fisher et al. 2017; Schmitt et al. 2023) and improvements in sound knowledge (Cavenaugh 2017) in supported play contexts like games than they did in free play or directed learning.
Not everyone agrees, arguing that the primary goal of early childhood education must be learning that prepares children to succeed in school. Some see play, the focus of whole-child curricula, as too indirect to develop vital skills for school readiness (Jenkins and Duncan 2017). Critics advocate for a skills-based approach that empowers traditionally marginalized children (Delpit 1986). Further, content-specific math and literacy curricula are associated with more tested growth in math and reading scores than whole-child, play-based curricula. These outcomes affect marginalized children differently (Jenkins and Duncan...





