Play and Academics: Debunking Either/Or False Choices about Pre-K Curricula

While there are many false dichotomies common in early education, the committee’s report notes that “perhaps the most unfortunate” false dichotomy is play and academics. Years ago when I was a pre-K teacher, this false dichotomy was evident in the mixed reactions I would receive upon informing people of my job: friends either imagined I spent the day going over worksheets with studious three-year-olds sitting in desks or, conversely, that my job was to try and control the anarchy of having a large group of young children unleashed to play without any guidance.

The true nature of my job, of course, lay somewhere in the middle of these two extremes. My pre-K students didn’t see a single worksheet during their time in my classroom, but that didn’t mean our time was only spent engaged in free play. Instead, the students spent much of their time rotating between centers that taught them math, literacy, and social-emotional skills. During the course of one morning, a student might spend 15 minutes playing with their classmates in the pretend kitchen area and another 15 minutes playing a game designed to help them identify the letters of the alphabet.

Research has confirmed the validity of this approach to early education, finding that young children need unstructured free time as well as playful learning under the guidance of a trained adult. Playful learning, meaning play that is guided by an adult with a clear learning goal in mind, seems to be particularly important for helping children learn math skills, with a greater positive effect than direct instruction on early math learning. As the report notes, the key is to “make academic content meaningful and engaging for young children,” a goal that can be more easily achieved with the help of a well-designed curriculum.

Closely related to the play and academics dichotomy is child-initiated play and teacher-directed instruction. This type of either/or thinking assumes that only two types of learning take place in an early education classroom: free play that is initiated and directed by children or direct instruction from a teacher that is focused on meeting a clear learning goal. The reality is that much of the learning that takes place in a classroom full of young children falls somewhere on a spectrum ranging from free play to teacher-directed instruction (see below). In fact, a large portion of the day of a young child in an early education classroom is spent in learning centers that vary along the spectrum. One center might be focused on pretend play directed by the children while another center might consist of a teacher-led, small group lesson focused on a specific math or literacy goal.

One last false dichotomy common in early education worth highlighting concerns comprehensive curricula and domain-specific curricula. Comprehensive curricula, also known as global or whole child curricula, is designed to support all domains of learning by including content across several domains. These types of curricula, such as Creative Curriculum and High Scope, are frequently used in pre-K programs across the country as well as Head Start programs. Conversely, domain-specific curricula, also known as content-specific curricula, are focused on a specific skill set, such as math, science, or literacy. The Building Blocks math curriculum is one example of a widely used domain-specific curriculum. While each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses, the reality is that educators use a wide variety of approaches when it comes to curriculum content, often using a domain-specific curriculum to supplement a comprehensive curriculum. In its conclusions, the committee notes that comprehensive curricula have typically shown smaller gains in domain-targeted outcomes, such as math and literacy, at kindergarten entry.

Thinking about a typical center activity focused on building math skills in a pre-K classroom provides a helpful example of why these dichotomies are unhelpful for understanding early childhood education. In this classroom, students are engaged in a group board game with four children at a table. Each child takes a turn rolling a dice and then moves their player on the board forward the same number of spaces that they rolled. Through this activity, students learn to translate one representation of three (dots on dice) to a different one (making three moves on the board), in addition to understanding that the greater number they roll, the farther they move on the board.

In this scenario, students are engaged in what looks like free play, but also learning math skills as well as social-emotional skills (taking turns, playing fairly, etc.). The board game was set up by the teacher to accomplish an explicit learning goal, but the children are able to play the game independently after being given directions. The game itself is from the domain-specific Building Blocks curriculum that the teacher is using to supplement the comprehensive Creative Curriculum.

The harm in these false dichotomies is that they assume a simple, correct answer to what are actually complex questions. Rejection of this type of either/or thinking can help lead to better instruction and policy. It’s essential that policymakers realize that decisions about pre-K curriculum are inherently complex and there are no simple solutions. At the same time, early educators need to have a firm grasp of the importance of playful learning to help young children gain skills in ways that are both engaging and developmentally appropriate. Only through rejecting simple either/or options when it comes to early childhood education can we begin to have a more informed, helpful conversation about the importance and value of pre-K curriculum.

Read more about improving pre-K assessment, data, and curriculum at our collection page.