JCPSLP Vol 17 No 3 2015

47 / 64

JCPSLP Volume 17, Number 3 2015 157
Summary and clinical implications
The four appraised articles contained minor methodological
flaws and variations in delivery and/or content of play-
based learning approaches. However, they present
preliminary evidence to suggest that play-based curricula
can lead to similar, and at times greater, improvements in
educational outcomes including language for children in
early primary school, compared to usual didactic teaching
strategies.
Play-based learning in the classroom is likely to support
educational outcomes in oral language, literacy, and maths,
and dispositions towards learning for primary school
children. Successful techniques investigated through the
appraised articles included: scaffolding, elicited explanation,
worked examples, feedback, teacher responsiveness to
child interests, child-initiated activities, and a caring and
sensitive dialogue between teachers and students (Alfieri
et al., 2011; Blanco & Ray, 2011; Reynolds et al., 2011;
Sproule et al., 2009).
Considering that all other appraised articles suggested a
positive effect of play-based learning on children’s learning
outcomes, Sproule et al.’s (2009) finding that there was no
long-term negative effect of a play-based curriculum and
increased interest in learning can be viewed as a finding
supportive of play-based learning. This positive effect on
young students’ attitudes towards learning is also reflected
in Reynolds et al.’s (2011) findings that children receiving
a play-based curriculum were less socially disconnected
and disruptive at school. This not only decreases problem
behaviours and social disconnection, but can also
be directly linked to improved educational outcomes,
particularly for children from low SES areas (Reynolds et al.,
2011; Sproule et al., 2009; Weisberg et al., 2013).
These findings are congruent with current expert opinion
that recommends the use of play-based learning in primary
school curriculum delivery and highlights that the child
should always be an active participant in their learning
rather than a passive recipient (Miller & Almon, 2009;
Rautio & Winston, 2013; Weisberg et al., 2013). There is
evidence that play-based learning in early-primary school
classrooms can support educational outcomes for some
children. Speech pathologists can draw upon this evidence
when collaborating with educators to promote children’s
educational outcomes.
Acknowledgement
Our thanks to Ms Kim Adams, speech pathologist,
Department of Education and Child Development, South
Australia, for posing and assisting with refining this clinical
question, and reviewer and editorial support in shaping this
article.
References
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P., Aldrich, N., & Tenenbaum, H. (2011).
Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?
Journal of Educational Psychology , 103 (1), 1–18.
Allen, L., Leitão, S., & Donovan, M. (1993). School
age oral language assessment (SAOLA) manual . South
Fremantle, WA: Language-Learning Materials, Research
and Development.
Blanco, P., & Ray, D. (2011). Play therapy in elementary
schools: A best practice for improving academic
achievement. Journal of Counseling and Development,
89 (2), 235–243.
Fantuzzo, J., Sutton-Smith, B., Coolahan, K. C., Manz,
P. H., Canning, S., & Debnam, D. (1995). Assessment of
Test (Hresko, Peak, Herron, & Bridges, 2000). There were
greater combined outcomes for the treatment group
compared to the control group, amounting to statistically
significant differences from pre-test to post-test with
the effect size for the treatment group double the effect
size for the control group. The study employed rigorous
methodology; however, generalisation to wider populations
of children and play-based learning in educational settings
is limited due to the specific intervention and small sample
size within a certain geographical location and population.
Reynolds et al. (2011) compared the outcomes for
oral language, play abilities, and social competence for
a cohort of children (n = 31) aged between 4.83–6.16
years participating in a play-based curriculum to those in a
traditional curriculum. The students attended a school with
a low socioeconomic demographic in Australia. Outcomes
were measured using the School Age Oral Language
Assessment (Allen, Leitão, & Donovan, 1993), the Child
Initiated Pretend Play Assessment (Stagnitti, 2007), and
the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (Fantuzzo, 1995).
This study utilised a rigorous methodology, although could
have been strengthened with blinded administration of all
assessments. The findings indicated that the play-based
curriculum had a greater positive impact than the traditional
curriculum on the learning of children in low socioeconomic
status (SES) schools across developmental social, language
and play domains. Nevertheless, caution is required when
generalising the findings to educational outcomes and
wider populations of children due to small sample size and
specific demographic profile of the children in the study.
Finally, the longitudinal study by Sproule, McGuinness,
Trew, Rafferty, and Walsh (2009) evaluated the long-term
outcomes for a total of 3,414 children in 24 Irish schools
providing a play-based curriculum compared with traditional
didactic curricula. Three cohorts of children within each
school were included in the study: one group followed
the previously existing didactic curriculum (control); one
group followed the play-based curriculum in its first year
of implementation; and one followed the play-based
curriculum in its second year of introduction. Educational
outcomes were evaluated across several learning domains
including literacy, oral language, and maths using the
Performance Indicators in Primary Schools (PIPS, 2001),
the Wechsler Objective Language Dimensions (WOLD,
1996), and child and teacher self-rating scales. There
were no long-term differences in outcomes for children in
the two groups following play-based curriculum for 77%
of comparisons of reading and mathematics. However,
educational outcomes were improved for the schools with
a higher level of disadvantage, with 20% of all comparisons
showing statistically significant improved outcomes for
the children who received play-based curricula. Children’s
self-evaluation measures showed that the play-based
curriculum had a significant positive effect on their learning
dispositions. To illustrate, children who received the play-
based curriculum reported having stronger belief that they
could influence and shape their own learning, higher levels
of motivation, greater curiosity, and a greater ability to take
on and accept mental challenges and more difficult work
compared to children who received the didactic curriculum
(Sproule et al., 2009). The primary challenge in interpreting
the findings is the lack of detail regarding selection of
cohorts, increasing the risk of selection bias. The study
stated that schools volunteered to participate, however it
is unclear how the cohorts of children were selected within
the schools, or whether a process of selecting or excluding
specific schools took place.