Let’s Get Physical: Examining Physical Playful Learning Activities and Spatial Language Use

• In Event: Poster Session 08
  In Poster Session: PS 08 Topic - Language, Communication

Abstract

Children spend only 20% of their waking hours in school (Meltzoff et al., 2009). Playful Learning Landscapes optimizes the other 80% by transforming spaces and activities into centers designed to increase the kinds of social interactions known to generate strong language and STEM skills. A bus stop infused with puzzles, for example, prompts the use of spatial language (e.g., on, next to; Hassinger-Das et al.2019) and does so more than activities that promote literacy (Neuman, 2019). Given the relationship between spatial language and math skills (Mix, 2016; Pruden & Levine, 2017), providing supports for spatial language can then target particular child outcomes.
Play Streets, a community-based program that transforms city streets into neighborhood playful learning spaces led by teenage Play Captains, offers one example of a Playful Learning Landscape designed as a summer pop-up activity. Play Streets invited neighborhood children to engage in a series of activities ranging from high- (e.g. football, relay races, and obstacle courses) to-low (e.g. book reading, Uno, and arts and crafts) physicality. Trained Play Captains served as the play facilitators on the Play Streets. Observations coded whether and which of the activities sparked more spatial language and physical activity. We hypothesized lower physical activity would generate less spatial language used by Play Captains and children than medium or high physical activities.
Playful Learning activities on Play Streets were measured across 387, five-minute observations over 5 weeks. Children observed on the Play Streets ranged from 1-19 years old. The average group size was 3.6 children (SD=3.59). Physical activity was coded as either low (0-1 instance), medium (2 instances), or high (3+ instances). Spatial term ranges (i.e., 0, 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 20+) used by children and Play Captains during each observation were coded as ordinal variables (i.e., 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, respectively). Observers were trained to criteria on the observational coding instrument so that they reached 100% agreement.
Student’s two-tailed t-tests revealed that Play Captains and children used less spatial language during low physical activities (M=.95, SD=1.01) than in medium (M=1.17, SD=1.01); t(209)=-1.57, p=.12, d=0.21 and highly physical activities (M=1.22, SD=1.10) ; t(281)=-2.11, p=.03, d=0.24. To examine the relations between Play Captains spatial language, child spatial language, and physical activity level, we ran a series of Bivariate correlations. Correlations indicated a significant, positive relation between Play Captain spatial language and child spatial language (r=.34, p=.000), as well as between children’s physical activity level and Play Captain spatial language (r=.13, p=.02). Level of physical activity was not significantly associated with child spatial language use (r=.05, p=.35).
Play Captains offers a low-cost implementation that serves as a two-generational solution to increase learning goals like the use of spatial language known to promote early mathematical skills. Not only do children profit from the broader use of spatial vocabulary, but so too did the teens who now enjoy richer interactive skills when conversing with children. Targeting learning goals through playful pop-up activities holds the promise of providing safe and stimulating experiences that can benefit children within their communities.

Authors

• Allyson S. Masters, Temple University
  Presenting Author

• Rachael Todaro, Temple University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Molly Schlesinger, Temple University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Rebecca Fabiano, Fab Youth Philly
  Non-Presenting Author

• Roberta M Golinkoff, University of Delaware
  Non-Presenting Author

• Kathy A Hirsh-Pasek, Temple University
  Non-Presenting Author