Article Critique
Varea, Valeria. (2018). Exploring play in school recess and physical education classes. European Physical Education Review, 24(2), 194–208. doi: 10.1177/1356336X16679932
The article “Exploring play in school recess and physical education classes”, by Valeria Varea seeks to investigate how PE teachers used the concept of play, how it was understood by student participants, and how the participants engaged in the different phases of play. The abstract effectively summarizes the approach and results of the study and hooks the reader with tidbits of information that encourage a thorough reading of the paper.
Play is a concept understood and used all over the world; every man, woman and child instinctively understand what it is to play. This study looked at play from the child’s point of view and found that the form and mode of play were critical elements in determining whether the students believed they were in fact “playing”. Varea points out that currently there is little research looking into how children play and what they consider to be play.
Using Huizinga’s five characteristics that play must have: “(1) play is free; (2) play is not ‘ordinary’ or ‘real’ life; (3) play is distinct from ‘ordinary’ life both as to locality and duration; (4) play creates order; and (5) play is connected with no material interest, and no profit can be gained from it.” (p.195) Varea asks the question, is whether what is presented in PE classes may be considered as ‘play’ using a Huizingian theoretical approach, given that PE is not done during ‘free time’. Using the work of Pavı´a, Varea states that ludic play happens when it is considered exclusively as play, free from later implications while, non-ludic play occurs when players are involved in an activity that has a play form but in which, paradoxically, players are restricted from playing freely in a ludic way.
Her results are clear, PE teachers used the concept of play to propose activities, therefore employing play as a pedagogical tool and creating non-ludic or unauthentic “play”. Yet the students were still able to find time for ludic play, what we would typically view as misbehavior or being “off task”. Children engaged in these short ludic breaks during instructional time, when not being observed, by modifying the activity (or cheating), when asked to assist with equipment, and while waiting their turn.
This article brought forth a better personal understanding of the behaviours happening in my gymnasium. Moving forward I, as a PE teacher, need to investigate more what it means for the students to play, particularly in a ludic mode. In what ways could this improve the atmosphere in the gym, and can this improve my practice? As Varea states in conclusion, more research is needed to determine which approaches to play are more appropriate to use in PE classes and how can they most effectively assist teachers in delivering quality programs.
The article “Exploring play in school recess and physical education classes”, by Valeria Varea seeks to investigate how PE teachers used the concept of play, how it was understood by student participants, and how the participants engaged in the different phases of play. The abstract effectively summarizes the approach and results of the study and hooks the reader with tidbits of information that encourage a thorough reading of the paper.
Play is a concept understood and used all over the world; every man, woman and child instinctively understand what it is to play. This study looked at play from the child’s point of view and found that the form and mode of play were critical elements in determining whether the students believed they were in fact “playing”. Varea points out that currently there is little research looking into how children play and what they consider to be play.
Using Huizinga’s five characteristics that play must have: “(1) play is free; (2) play is not ‘ordinary’ or ‘real’ life; (3) play is distinct from ‘ordinary’ life both as to locality and duration; (4) play creates order; and (5) play is connected with no material interest, and no profit can be gained from it.” (p.195) Varea asks the question, is whether what is presented in PE classes may be considered as ‘play’ using a Huizingian theoretical approach, given that PE is not done during ‘free time’. Using the work of Pavı´a, Varea states that ludic play happens when it is considered exclusively as play, free from later implications while, non-ludic play occurs when players are involved in an activity that has a play form but in which, paradoxically, players are restricted from playing freely in a ludic way.
Her results are clear, PE teachers used the concept of play to propose activities, therefore employing play as a pedagogical tool and creating non-ludic or unauthentic “play”. Yet the students were still able to find time for ludic play, what we would typically view as misbehavior or being “off task”. Children engaged in these short ludic breaks during instructional time, when not being observed, by modifying the activity (or cheating), when asked to assist with equipment, and while waiting their turn.
This article brought forth a better personal understanding of the behaviours happening in my gymnasium. Moving forward I, as a PE teacher, need to investigate more what it means for the students to play, particularly in a ludic mode. In what ways could this improve the atmosphere in the gym, and can this improve my practice? As Varea states in conclusion, more research is needed to determine which approaches to play are more appropriate to use in PE classes and how can they most effectively assist teachers in delivering quality programs.
exploring_play_in_school_recess_and_physical_education_classes.pdf | |
File Size: | 177 kb |
File Type: |
Photo used under Creative Commons from Harold Litwiler, Poppy Big Oak Photography