This article was downloaded by: [faculties of the University of Ljubljana]On: 13 January 2015, At: 21:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

European Early Childhood EducationResearch JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/recr20

Symbolic play as a way ofdevelopment and learning ofpreschool children in preschoolinstitutionsLjubica Marjanovic Umek a , Petra Lesnik Musek a , Sonja Pecjaka & Simona Kranjc aa University of Ljubljana , SloveniaPublished online: 15 Jun 2007.

To cite this article: Ljubica Marjanovic Umek , Petra Lesnik Musek , Sonja Pecjak & SimonaKranjc (1999) Symbolic play as a way of development and learning of preschool children inpreschool institutions, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 7:1, 35-44, DOI:10.1080/13502939985208311

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13502939985208311

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms

& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

European Early Childhood Education Research Journal Vol. 7, No. 1, 1999

35

Symbolic Play as a Way of Development and Learning of Preschool Children in

Preschool Institutions

LJUBICA MARJANOVIC UMEK PETRA LESNIK MUSEK

SONJA PECJAK SIMONA KRANJC

University of Ljubljana Slovenia

SUMMARY The paper considers symbolic play in different age groups of children in preschool institutions. Symbolic play was stimulated through two different structured activi- ties and dictation of the preparation and the use of different toys and play materials (i.e. thematic symbolic play and play related to pictorial material). The children's play was videotaped in their home playrooms. The videotapes were analysed by competent observers using Smilansky" s scale for assessing dramatic and sociodramatic play. Analysis was aimed at establishing which elements determine the symbolic play of children of different age groups with regard to two different play situations, and how they determine it. At the same time, we wished to set out some critical points which significantly determine the nature and course of symbolic play in different age groups of children in preschool institutions.

The research also offers certain applied results, since psychological and educational elements of the analysis of the results can serve as a framework in the search for different options for blending the development and learning of preschool children through symbolic play.

RESUME Cet article traite du jeu symbolique d" enfants appartenant a diffdrents groupes d'dge d'institutions prFscolaires. Le jeu symbolique est favorisd a travers deux activitds diffdrentes et de par la consigne relative ~ la prdparation et l" utilisation des divers jouets et mat&iels (c" est-a-dire jeu symbolique ~ th~me et jeu lid ~ du matFriel pictural). Le jeu des enfants a dtd enregistrd dans les salles de jeu habituelles. Les enregistrements ont dtd analysds par des spdcialistes compdtents dl l'aide de l'dchelle d'dvaluation du jeu dramatique et socio- dramatique de Smilansky. Le but de l' analyse dtait de repdrer les dlgments qui ddterminent le jeu symbolique des enfants d'dges diffdrents selon les deux situations, et comment. Nous avons voulu en m~me temps mettre en dvidence quelques points critiques qui ddterminent de fafon significative la nature et le ddveloppement du jeu symbolique des enfants d'dges diffdrents dans les institutions prdscolaires.

Cette dtude apporte dgalement des rdsultats sur le plan de l" application, certains aspects psychologiques et pddagogiques de l' analyse pouvant servir de cadre dans la recherche de diverses possibilitds d'introduction du jeu symbolique en faveur du dFveloppement et l" apprentissage des enfants d'dge prdscolaire.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

36 European Early Childhood Education Research Journal

ZUSAMMENFASS UNG Der Beitrag befaJ3t sich mit dem symbolischen Spiel yon Kindern unterschiedlichen Alters in Kindergtirten. Das Spiel wurde angeregt durch zwei vorstrukturierte Situationen, in denen verschiedene Spielmittel und -materialien bereitgestellt wurden (themenzentriertes symbolisches Spiel und Spiel auf der Grundlage von Bildmaterial. Das Spiel der Kinder wurde in ihren Spielzimmern zu Hause durch Videoaufzeichnungen festgehalten. Die Aufzeichnungen wurden anhand der Skala von Smilansky zum soziodramatischen Spiel dutch kompetente Beobachter ausgewertet. Ziel der Analyse war festzus tellen, welche Elemente anhand yon zwei verschiedenen Spielsituationen das symbolische Spiel yon Kindern unterschiedlichen Alters beeinfluJ3t. Gleichzeitig thematisieren wit einige kritische Fragen fiber die Bedingungsstrukturen von symbolischem Spiel im Kindergarten.

Die Untersuchu ng hat auch einen praktischen Bezug: psychologische und pfidagogische Elemente der Ergebnisanalyse ki~nnen als Bezugspunkte ffir die Suche nach verschiedenen M6glichkeiten der Fi~rderung von Entwicklung und Lernen im Symbolspiel verwendet werden.

RESUMEN Aborda el tema del juego simbdlico en la educacidn infantil. El juego simbdlico de los nifios es estimulado mediante dos actividades diferentes y estructuradas que exigen la preparacidn y el empleo de diversos juguetes y materiales (por ejemplo, juego simbdlico temdtico y juego relacionado con material pictdrico). Las situaciones de juego simbdlico de los ni~os fueron grabadas. Observadores cualificados analizaron estos videos utilizando la escala e evaluacidn de la actuacidn dramdtica y sociodramdtica de la autora Smilansky. El andlisisfue hecho con el objetivo de descubrir cudles son los elementos que determinan el juego simbdlico de nifios de distintas edades en diferentes situaciones de juego. Al mismo tiempo se destacan algunos puntos crfticos que definen de una manera importante la naturaleza y el desarrollo del juego simbdlico de nifios de diferentes edades en los jardines de infancia. La investigacidn ofrece tambidn algunos resultados prdcticos, ya que los elementos psicoldgicos y pedagdgicos obtenidos con el andlisis de los resultados pueden servir como marco de referencia en la Misqueda de diferentes posibilidades de interconexidn del desarrollo y del aprendizaje infantil a travds del juego simbdlico.

Keywords: Preschool children; Symbolic play; Preschool institutions; Different play situations; Development and learning.

Introduction

Play is regaining its importance in preschool education. Despite the numerous defini- tions of play proposed by various authors using different criteria, all have in common the recognition of the importance of play for children's development and learning, especially in the preschool period (Moyles, 1995).

There is nothing new in the argument that children learn when they play and that children develop through play, or rather, play develops children. However, we have to emphasise that numerous experts in their latest research and studies have dealt with individual elements of children's play that in one way or another provide conditions for a spontaneous activity initiated by children, for learning in a context that is meaningful for children, and for activities where children are actively engaged in a process of interpretation and transformation of new information.

This article discusses one of the predominant forms of play in the preschool period: symbolic play, called by some authors fantasy play, make-believe or pretend play. Its emergence in a child's development is closely connected to the abil i ty/ capacity of representation (Vygotsky, 1977; Johnson, Christie & Yawkey, 1987; Duran, 1996) which makes it possible for a child to use different symbols to represent different persons, objects, situations and activities. In this way a bear becomes a baby, a wooden stick a thermometer, and gestures and verbalisations indicators of particular activities and situations.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

L. M. Umek, P.L. Musek, S. Pecjak, & S. Kranjc 37

Development of symbolic play and its significance for development of children

The development of symbolic play can be (from its very beginning) best illustrated by the development of three elements characteristic of symbolic play: decentration, decontextualisation and integration (Piaget, 1962; Werner & Kaplan, 1963 in: Hughes, 1995; Bretherton, 1984; McCune-Nicolich & Fenson, 1984; Fenson, 1986). Decentration is the level of children's direction or concentration on themselves and other people. As a rule, development typically evolves from activities focused on the child to activities directed towards others. It is a shift from autoreferential behaviour towards behaviour directed outwards. The next element of symbolic play, decontextualisation, is the use of one object as a substitute for another (Fenson, 1986 in: Hughes, 1995). Studies by various authors (Pulaski, 1973 in: Johnson, Christie, & Yawkey, 1987; Fein & Robertson, I974; Fein, 1975; Jeffree & McConkey, 1976; Elder & Pederson, 1978; Ungerer, Zelazo, Kearsley & O'Leary, 1981 in: Mann, 1984; Olszewski & Fuson, 1982; Johnson, 1983; McLoyd, 1983) show that younger children need realistic replicas of objects for play, their representation ability increases with age, and they gradually move away from the perceptive in play. Symbolic transformation evolves from the objective to the repre- sentative level (McLoyd, 1980; Pellegrini, 1987). The last element refers to integration (Fenson, 1986 in: Hughes, 1995), and is a gradual shifting and reshaping of uncon- nected, fragmentary play activities into complex, interconnected play themes.

Around their third year of life, an important change occurs in children's play - - the emergence of role play or role enactment (Christie, Johnson & Yawkey, 1987) that various authors (e.g. Eljkonin, 1981) consider the highest level of symbolic play. Make- believe activities become connected with the role that a child plays, and the role 'dictates', or defines, and controls these activities. Role enactment is, as confirmed by certain authors (e.g. Mead, 1932 in: Saltz & Brodie, 1982), connected with children's increased ability to take on another person's perspective, regarded as important for the development of children's understanding of other people's emotions and reactions.

With the development of children's verbal, cognitive, socio-cognitive abilities, and social skills and experiences, role play becomes more and more complex, planned and coherent. The highest cognitive level of play is reached when children are capable of symbolic transformation on the representative level supported by the appropriate, and crucial, role of language. Here it must be stressed that play develops from the social point of view as well, since in the preschool period symbolic play is strongly related to the social context, and this is the reason why we talk of the emergence of social fantasy play, which some authors call sociodramatic play. As Kitson (in: Moyles, 1995) argues, it is character- ised by designing a play theme together with at least one player, with interaction among the participants expressed in both actions and speech. The essence of sociodramatic play is defined by Smilansky and Shefatya (1990) as having six elements: imitative role play, make-believe with regard to objects, make-believe with regard to actions and situations, persistence in the play episode, interaction, and verbal communication. The first four are characteristic of the so-called dramatic play, while the last two elements, according to the authors, define sociodramatic, or social fantasy play.

In the background of symbolic play we can therefore recognise different mental processes (functions). Numerous authors have noticed that symbolic play, and specifi- cally social fantasy play, relates to, or connects with, the spheres of cognitive as well as social development, development of social cognition, and emotional development. Of course, there are important relations and interconnections between all the aspects.

Connections between symbolic play and the curriculum

In discussing play as a learning and developmental opportunity for children, sooner or later we encounter the question of what kind of programme, or curriculum, should

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

38 European Early Childhood Education Research Journal

be offered by preschool institutions. Research results (in: Johnson, Christie & Yawkey, 1987) regarding the relations between the curriculum and play are not monosemous; nevertheless we can recognise some common findings which have significance for the preschool curriculum:

symbolic play is more typical of programmes with fewer limitations; children must have enough time for their play to develop; make-believe is more common in play if the preschool teacher is a model for different forms and kinds of make-believe, and if the preschool teacher provides an adequate proportion of structured and unstructured play materials.

On the other hand, there will be fewer examples of this kind of play in programmes where children do not have enough time or room for play, or where preschool teachers themselves are uninterested in this kind of play, or under the mistaken impression provide children with few different, albeit realistic and structured, toys. A preschool teacher who dominates activities too much can lessen opportunities for free interac- tion among children, a necessary and crucial condition for rich symbolic play.

It is important, as Johnson, Christie and Yawkey (1987) have noticed, to define specific goals of symbolic play, which to a great extent define its form: dramatic play, sociodramatic, or thematic fantasy play. Each of the above-mentioned forms demands preparation of different toys and play materials, influences the size of the group, role definition, time and place for play, as well as different levels of a preschool teacher's involvement.

What has interested us in our research is which elements define the nature of symbolic play of children of different age groups with regard to different play situations, and how they define it.

M e t h o d

Sample

We observed play of smaller groups (3 to 7) of children in different age groups (average age: 4.2; 5.3; 6.3) in three preschool institutions in Ljubljana. Play as a children's activity occurs on a daily basis in preschool institutions. Children play in playrooms dominated by structured play material. The critical point of the presence of symbolic play in the life of children in preschool institutions is that play as a rule is subject to time constraints and is available to all children at the same time. We analysed the play of children, who in two different play situations ( 'doctor' and 'lost puppy') , played the central role. In each age group we analysed the play of three children in the role of a doctor and two in the role of the puppy.

Group Average Age Role: 'Doctor' Role: 'Lost Puppy' Number of Children Number of Children

1 4 years 2 months 3 2

2 5 years 3 months 3 2

3 6 years 3 months 3 2

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

L. M. Umek, P.L. Musek, S. Pecjak, & S. Kranjc 39

Instrument

For the analysis of symbolic play we used the Smilansky Scale for Evaluation of Dramatic and Sociodramatic Play (Smilansky & Shefatya, 1990), which includes six elements:

1. Imitative role-play. The child undertakes a make-believe role and expresses it in imitative action and/or verbalisation.

2. Make-believe with regard to objects. Movements or verbal declarations and /o r materials or toys are substituted for real objects.

3. Make-believe with regard to actions and situations. Verbal descriptions are substi- tuted for actions and situations.

4. Persistence in the play episode (for some period of time). 5. Interaction. There are at least two players interacting within the context of a play

episode. 6. Verbal Communication. There is some verbal interaction related to the play episode.

The level of a child's play was evaluated with regard to the presence, or absence, of each of the aforementioned elements, where each element has from 0 to 3 points (0 - the element is absent; 1 - the element is present in the play for a limited period of time; 2 - the element is moderately present; and 3 - the element is consistently present in numerous situations during the time of play). The observed play interval is five minutes.

Procedure

Two play situations were prepared for children in their playrooms:

"doctor' theme: children were given play materials (injections, bandages, a stetho- scope, boxes and medicine bottles, empty sheets of paper, doctors' clothes, etc.); they defined the roles and the development of the story themselves; 'the lost puppy' theme: the preschool teacher showed the children a picture with a defined situation- children find a lost puppy; the children first looked at the picture and talked with their preschool teacher about it, and then with a minimal help of toys and play materials (a dog-collar, a leash, ears for the puppy, and a bush) went on with the play alone. The content and the development of the play were not defined.

All the children had previous experience of these themes gained through listening to stories, by looking at (reading) picture books, or through direct contact (e.g. with a doctor in a preschool institution or a hospital, and with a dog at home, at a friend's home, on a visit...). They are among the most popular and frequent themes, even when children themselves decide on the content of the play.

The play was videotaped. On each videotape we analysed two five-minute play intervals of the children in central roles, i.e. the doctor and the puppy. Trained observers noted down anecdotal records of play for each of the five-minute intervals. On the basis of those records and with the help of the instrument (the Smilansky Scale), they evaluated the elements of symbolic play. We calculated their average values with regard to the age of children for both play situations.

Results and qualitative analysis

In the results we first show the elements for the 'doctor' and 'the lost puppy ' plays foI all age groups of the children.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

40 European Early Childhood Education Research Journal

"Doctor' play

2

1.5

group 1

. . . . . . group 2

group 3

0 . 5 "

0

IRP MBO MBS P IN VC

e l e m e n t s

FIGURE 1: Elements in the 'Doctor ' p lay

Legend: IRP - imi ta t ive role p l ay MBO - make-be l i eve wi th regard to objects MBS - make-be l i eve wi th regard to ac t ions and s i tuat ions P - pers i s tence IN - in terac t ion VC - verba l communica t i on

It is ev iden t from Figure 1 that imi ta t ive role p l ay in the 'Doctor ' p lay is of r e la t ive ly f requent occurrence in the y o u n g e s t as well as the o ldes t chi ldren. In all age g roups all the e lements for the eva lua t ion of symbol ic p l ay are p resen t too, bu t it is c lear ly ev iden t that ave rage values on the scale f rom 0 to 3 are h igher in the o ldes t chi ldren , and that the dif ferences be tween the y o u n g e s t and the o ldes t are greater in the pers is tence , in terac t ion , and verbal communica t i on e lements r a the r than in make-be l i eve wi th r ega rd to objects and make-be l i eve wi th regard to s i tua t ions . It is also in te res t ing that in the younges t and the o ldes t age g roups there is more make-be l i eve wi th r ega rd to objects than make-be l i eve wi th regard to s i tua t ions (in the midd l e age g roup the ave rage va lue is the same for both), which, to a cer ta in extent , can be exp la ined by the s t ruc ture of a p lay s i tua t ion - there were a lot of objects ava i lab le for the ch i ld ren to p l ay doctor , for example inject ions, pills, bandages , a s te thoscope, etc., and d u r i n g p l ay they used w o r d s and act ions re la ted to objects, or they subs t i tu ted the objects for o ther objects (e.g. a smal l bal l for a pill).

It is ev iden t from F igure 2 that ch i ld ren f rom the m i d d l e age g roup in this p l ay s i tua t ion achieve a h igher ave rage level in some e l emen t s of the imi ta t ive role p l ay than ch i ld ren from other two age groups , which is most clear ly ev iden t in the pers i s tence and make-be l i eve wi th regard to s i tua t ion elements . It is d i f f icul t to eva lua te the reason for this s u d d e n change, if we c ompa re the midd l e and the o ldes t age g roups , but de ta i led anecdota l records show that d i f ferent p l ay s i tua t ions l ead ing into d i f ferent types of p l ay are not an equa l ly power fu l incent ive for d i f ferent age g roups of chi ldren.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

L. M. Umek, P.L. Musek, S. Pecjak, & S. Kranjc 41

o o m

C

0

E

o~

o o

w

2.5 ,' , " " ' ,

2

1.5 - ' " , . "',

1

0.5

- - group 1

. . . . . . group 2

group 3

IRP MBO MBS P IN VC

elements FIGURE 2: Elements in the 'Lost Puppy' play

Legend: IRP - imitative role play MBO - make-believe with regard to objects MBS - make-believe with regard to actions and situations P - persistence IN - interaction VC - verbal communication

The average in make-believe with regard to situations is higher compared to the 'Doctor' play, since this is a play situation where verbal descriptions appear as substitutes for actions and situations. This kind of play is undoubtedly related to the structure of play and its conditions, since children had arguably fewer objects avail- able for the 'Lost Puppy ' play than for the 'Doctor' play that they could use as substitutes. As the children had fewer opportunities for using objects in play, they were somewhat forced to 'verbally' develop it. At the same time, the play situation offered a theme that the children pursued with a lot of persistence.

Following are comparisons of elements for two different play situations for each age group of children( Figures 3, 4, & 5).

If we compare Figures 3, 4 and 5, it becomes clearly evident that the 'Doctor' play encourages a higher degree of interaction and verbal communication among children as well as make-believe with regard to objects, while the 'Lost Puppy' play encourages persistence and make-believe with regard to situations and actions.

C o n c l u s i o n s

The results of the investigation show that the nature of symbolic play, regardless of the age of children, changes with regard to play situations in which children have been included. Thematically different play situations - - the 'doctor' and the 'lost puppy ' - - that also demand preparation of different play conditions encouraged, and focused on, different elements, typical of symbolic play regardless of the different age groups of children. As shown by comparisons of the elements of symbolic play in both play situations for each age group (Figures 3, 4 and 5), the 'Doctor' play gives, or rather offers, a child more opportunities for interaction, thus encouraging a higher degree of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

4 2 European Early Childhood Education Research Journal

2

1.8

1.6

1.4

8 ~.2 W

1 c

~ 0.8 E

0.6

0.4

- - D o c t o r

: . . . . Puppy

0.2

0

IRP MBO MBS P IN VC

e l e m e n t s

FIGURE 3: Elements in the 'Doctor ' and the 'Lost P u p p y ' p lays for Age G r o u p 1

2.5

p 2 o

(O9 1.5

¢:

E 1

0.5

/ - " \ / \

/ % f / \

/ \ \ /

\ \ / ~ Doctor

\ \ \ \ / 1 / i - Puppy %

IRP MBO MBS P IN VC

e l e m e n t s

FIGURE 4: Elements in the 'Doctor ' and the 'Lost P u p p y ' p lays for Age G r o u p 2

3 •

2.5 \ s" \ ~ / J ' /

0 o w

1.5 c

0

E 1

\ / \

\ \

zz \

\

0.5

0 IRP MBO MBS P IN VC

e l e m e n t s

Doctor i i PupPy I

FIGURE 5: Elements in the 'Doctor ' and the 'Lost P u p p y ' p lays for Age G r o u p 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

L. M. Umek, P.L. Musek, S. Pecjak, & S. Kranjc 43

Legend: IRP - imitative role play MBO - make-believe with regard to objects MBS - make-believe with regard to actions and situations P - persistence IN - interaction VC - verbal communication

verbal communication among them, and at the same time provides for a higher degree of make-believe with regard to objects. A differently structured play situation, 'the lost puppy ' , as confirmed by the results, encourages a higher degree of persistence in the imitative role play and make-believe with regard to actions and situations. The results thus reveal that it is possible with different types of symbolic play to encourage different mental processes, a fact which should not be overlooked when planning and organising symbolic play in preschool institutions. This dictates preparat ion of guide- lines for the conceptualisation of different play conditions, with which it is possible in various ways to ensure individual elements of symbolic play, and thus enable the development of different mental processes.

This is first and foremost to say that it is mistaken to talk about a (kind of) universal play situation or play, since it is the variety of situations that to a consider- able degree defines how and to what extent the individual elements are present and recognisable in play.

The results of the research cannot be generalised, since, at least in part, the play situation (organisation of the playroom) itself determines the mode of play. In a slightly different play situation, children would possibly play in a slightly different way. Nevertheless, we can at least recognise some universal rules concerning stages of development in play, regardless of the change in play situations.

Some other authors, who study the way in which toys and play materials determine symbolic play, have reached similar findings about how important it is to provide children with varied conditions for play. Thus, for example, the results of one of our former studies (Umek & Musek, 1998) confirm the findings of other authors that younger children (3-4 years) in the preschool period need structured material for symbolic play, while at the same time they show that older children in the preschool period need both structured and unstructured play materials for play, since only the latter enables cognitive flexibility and make-believe.

The analysis of the results also shows that symbolic transformation is present in (imitative) role play with the youngest as well as with older children in the preschool period, and that it is related to objects and situations. At the same time it became evident that, through a thematic context, play encourages interactions among children and their verbal communication, as well as determines persistence in role play.

An understanding of symbolic play in all its variety and size is therefore an indispensable condition for symbolic play in the preschool curriculum to in fact play a role in children's development and learning. At the same time this is the only way in which we can follow the principle of preschool education and learning in preschool institutions cited by Whitebread (1996) in his book 'Teaching and Learning in the Early Years', when he says: "young children's learning will be enhanced when they are encouraged to indulge their natural inclination to engage in imaginative play related to significant life experiences" (p. 61).

R E F E R E N C E S

DURAN, M. (1995) Dijete i igra (Jastrebarsko: Naklada Slap). ELDER, J. L., PEDERSON, D. R. (1978) Preschool children's use of objects in symbolic

play, Child Development, 49, 500-504.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15

44 European Early Childhood Education Research Journal

ELJKONKUN, D. B. (1981) Psihologija dec je igre (Beograd: Zavod za udz benike i nastavna sredstva).

GARVEY, C. (1991). Play (2nd ed.) (London: Harper Collins Publishers). HUGHES, F. P. (1995) Children, Play, and Development (Boston: Allyn and Bacon). JOHNSON, J. E., CHRISTIE, J. F., YAWKEY, T. D. (1987) Play and Early Childhood

Development (Glenview, IL:Scott Foresman). KITSON, N. (1995) "Please Miss Alexander:will you be the robber?" Fantasy play: a

case for adult intervention, in: MOYLES, J. (Eds.) The Excellence of Play (Bucking- ham: Open University Press).

MANN, B. L. (1984) Effects of Realistic and Unrealistic Props on Symbolic Play, in: YAWKEY, T. D., PELLEGRINI, A. D. (Eds.) Child's Play: Developmental and Applied (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum).

McLOYD, V. C. (1980) Verbally expressed modes of transformation in the fantasy play of black preschool children, Child Development, 51, 1133-1139.

McLOYD, V. C. (1986) Scaffolds or Shackles? The Role of Toys in Preschool Children's Pretend Play, in: FEIN, G.; RIVKIN, M. (Eds.) The Young Child at Play (Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children).

MOYLES, J. R. (1989) Just Playing? The Role and Status of Play in Early Childhood Education (Milton Keynes: Open University Press).

MOYLES, J. R. (Eds)(1995) The Excellence of Play (Buckingham: Open University Press). OVERTON, W. F., Jackson, J.P. (1973) The representation of imagined objects in action

sequence: a developmental study, Child Development, 44, 309-314. PELLEGRINI, A. D. (1987) Applied Child Study: A Developmental Approach (Hillsdale:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates). SALZ, E., & BRODIE, J. (1982) Pretend-play training in childhood: a review and

critique, in: PEPLER, D. J.& RUBIN, K. H. (Eds.) The Play of Children: Current Theory and Research (Basel: S.Karger).

SMILANSKY, S. (1968) The Effects of Sociodramatic Play on Disadvantaged Preschool Children (New York: Wiley).

SMILANKSY, S., SHEFATYA, L. (1990) Facilitating Play (Silver Spring: Psychological & Educational Publications).

UMEK, M. & MUSEK, L. (1998) Kako igra ce in igralni materiali doloc ajo naravo domis ljijske igre? Sodobna Pedagogika, 49 (2), 154-166.

VYGOTSKY, L. S. (1977).Play and its role in the mental development of the child, in: BRUNER, J. S.; JOLLY, A. & SYLVA, K. (Eds.) Play: Its Role in Development and Evolution (Harmondsworth: Penguin).

WHITEBREAD, D. (1996)Teaching and Learning in the Early Years (London: Routledge).

Correspondence about this paper should be addressed to:

Ljubica Marjanovic Umek & Petra Lesnik Musek University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Psychology

Askerceva 2, 1000 Ljubljana

Slovenia

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

facu

lties

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

jubl

jana

] at

21:

58 1

3 Ja

nuar

y 20

15