Early childhood researchers have regarded children's play as highly valuable in the developmental process. Theorists such as Piaget, Vygotsky, Parten, and Smilansky have all stressed the importance of allowing children, in essence, to "practice" for later developmental stages by acting out what may appear to be inconsequential play; in reality, children are rehearsing for more complex developmental roles. In addition, play has been strongly linked to creativity, which, in turn, has been linked to intelligence. Clearly, then, an analysis of the value of children's play, whether it be dramatic play, group play, individual play, or creative play, is an investigation into an essential component of the process toward later development.
A broader definition of learning is necessary if play is to receive the credit it deserves in the classroom. As Stone (1995) points out, "We must not succumb to the narrow notion of learning that undervalues or eliminates play as a curricular tool in the classroom" (Bergen, 1988, cited in Stone, p. 45). When children are playing--a process which appears random and chaotic--some observers would be inclined to ask, "When is learning going to begin?" The question can best be answered that learning has already begun--although it may be unscripted, amorphous, and independent of a teacher's plans. The truth is that the children are acting out an internal script--one that is as essential as it may be mysterious.
As Stone (1995) says in her article advocating play in the primary grades, "Play is deemed by many experts (Piaget and Vygotsky among them) as vitally important to the growth of the whole child . . . and the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) supports children's play as 'a primary vehicle for and indicator of their mental growth'" (p. 45). Stone (1995) goes on to give an even more biological model of play as essential to human mental and physical growth, as she...