http___psikologhalekahyaoglu.com__p_100_1.xml
1.1 2.1 2.2 3.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 7.1 7.2 7.3 8.1 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 10.1 11.1 12.1 12.2 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 19.1 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 20.5 20.6 20.7 21.1 22.1 22.2 22.3 23.1 23.2 24.1 24.2 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 26.1 27.1 27.2 27.3 28.1 28.2 29.1 29.2 30.1 30.2 31.1 31.2 31.3 32.1 32.2 33.1 34.1 34.2 34.3 35.1 36.1 36.2 37.1 38.1 39.1 40.1 41.1 41.2 41.3 41.4 41.5 42.1 42.2 42.3 42.4 42.5 42.6 43.1 44.1 45.1 46.1 46.2 46.3 46.4 46.5 46.6 47.1 47.2 47.3 47.4 47.5 48.1 48.2 48.3 48.4 49.1 50.1 51.1 52.1 53.1 54.1 55.1 55.2 55.3 55.4 55.5 55.6 56.1 57.1 57.2 58.1 59.1 59.2 59.3 59.4 59.5 60.1 61.1 61.2 61.3 62.1 62.2 63.1 64.1 64.2 64.3 64.4 64.5 65.1 65.2 65.3 66.1 67.1 67.2 67.3 68.1 68.2 68.3 68.4 69.1 69.2 70.1 71.1 71.2 72.1 72.2 72.3 73.1 73.2 73.3 73.4 73.5 74.1 75.1 75.2 75.3 75.4 75.5 76.1 77.1 77.2 77.3 78.1 78.2 78.3 80.1 80.2 81.1 82.1 82.2 82.3 83.1 83.2 83.3 84.1 84.2 84.3 85.1 85.2 86.1 86.2 86.3 87.1 87.2 87.3 88.1 88.2 88.3
BİLİMSEL YAYINLARIM 1) A. Kahyaoğlu, H. ( 2014 ). Play as seen by children and pre-school teachers in Turkey, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 149 – 153. Link: 2) A. Kahyaoğlu, H. and Walter, M. (2014) An Overview of Adult Attitudes to Children and their Play in Turkey and England. Paper Presented at 19. IPA World Conference, İstanbul Technical University, İstanbul, 20-23 May (pp. 434-437), İstanbul: Active Life Association, İstanbul Technical University and Ministry of Education. An overview of adult attitudes to children and their play in Turkey and England Hale A. Kahyaoğlu MA. (phd- still) and Meynell Walter MPhil., Cert Ed. ABSTRACT The paper compares two different cultures and explores adult attitudes towards their children’s play: both the choice of play materials [toys] and where the children are permitted to play [roam]. Although the choice of play materials is largely influenced by parents and teachers at school, a childs own preferences are still important (Uğurlu et al, 2012). It is generally observed that Turkish parents preferred more gender based toys for their kids whereas there is a rising campaign within the UK to resist gender stereotyping (Jennett 2013, Way 2011). While early years practitioners allow children to undertake more independent play within the nursery environment, these practitioners strictly monitor children’s play due to the health and safety policies in the UK. Parents are also more cautious about outdoor play in terms of the potential dangers of big cities. (Hart, 1997) Moving from parents to teachers, they think play is important however there is a lack of knowledge for how to combine education and play in the curriculum in Turkey. For this reason, they use their own ways of knowing in play (A. Kahyaoğlu, 2011). It can be clearly seen that in some contexts traditional childhood games are played less than in previous years with more technology based games becoming the norm across both cultures. Key words: Attitudes, adults, England, Turkey, play INTRODUCTION Children’s play choices are influenced and guided by adults’ own perspectives and attitudes about play. Such perspectives and attitudes include: how children can play; which toys they should play with; where children can play; understanding of children’s play rights; children’s age and gender; how far children can go to play from their house (home range/roaming); learning traditional games (Kahyaoğlu, 2011; Uğurlu et al, 2012). In general children are not alone while in toyshops choosing which toys they want to play with. Parents will help and guide or direct the children’s play materials’ choice. In addition, it is not only parents who lead children to play with certain materials. Teachers and early years institutions decide what children should play and with what during the time they spend in the nursery or kindergartens. There are few studies that specifically investigate parents’ or adults’ play materials choice in Turkey or England (Uğurlu et al, 2012; Özdemir and Ramazan, 2012; Ahioğlu, 2012; Onur, 1997; Hartwell& Walker, 2006). Previous research conducted on Mothers from two different cities within Turkey culture found that mothers cared about children’s wishes for their toy choices (Onur et al, 1997). It is also important that parents buy toys that are developmentally appropriate or age appropriate and that the toys are safe for use by children (Onur et al. 1997). Recent research in Turkey has showed that, parents in general, though, mothers in particular, will choose toys that are oriented towards a specific gender. For example, baby dolls, house games play materials and jig-saw puzzles are the most preferred games chosen by parents for the girls. Cars, airplanes, ball game are the favorite ones selected by parents for the boys (Uğurlu et al, 2012). It is important that parents understand their children’s play right and choice of play materials. Some toys that parents would like to buy may not be perceived as play toys from child’s perspective and would therefore be unwilling to play with such toys (Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Related to this, research has shown a shift in the types of toys purchased by parents over the last two of decades, with, parents buying more educational- or developmental improvement based play materials to improve children’s school success and “intelligence” (Sutton & Smith, 1986). Across both cultures, parents are hesitant to buy toys which are considered violent or age-inappropriate such as guns in Turkey and the recent ‘crystal-meth lab’ in England. For children living in major urban centres there is a very limited environment for children to play. Current research along with child welfare groups support a more child friendly environmental design (O’Brien, 2000). Most children in these large cities, do not have the same freedom and independence of previous generations (Hartwell, 2006) and their parents are not reluctant to allow them go to out to play until they are at least 8 or 9 years old (O’Brien, 2000; Churchman, 2003). Even then, parents are unwilling to allow their children to go far from their homes as they do not feel comfortable, letting their children out of their sight. In large urban spaces such as Istanbul, children have just three choices for places to play; they will go outside to play but stay very close to an apartment where their parent or career can see them from the window; They can stay in the home with parent, but play computer games on a home computer or games console; The final option is to have a more green and safe area around the house where children can play outside. First, kids can freely go outside and enjoy playing games with their peers. The second option, children will not have many opportunities to do outdoor play and staying at home and playing games on home computer or games console will often gain disapproval from parents. The third option is becoming increasingly common in Turkey, particularly, with families from middle and upper socio-economic status. For example, there are now high-rise apartments that are surrounded by safe perimeters, such as a long wall, with this perimeter enclosing park area for children and families. In this situation, parents are considerably more comfortable allowing their children to freely play outside and away from home as it is perceived as secure. In the UK, adults’ attitude towards play are similar in terms of the play spaces but parents in the UK are considerably more concerned about the health and safety of their children in such open play-spaces, even when they are there with their children. Although the UK has a far individualistic culture compared to Turkey, seen by parents supporting their children’s independence (Kağıtçıbaşı, 2005), these parents are more likely to be present, while their children are playing in order to provide safer environment and to monitor their children’s activities. This issue is related more to parental anxiety regarding the perceived risk and dangers, rather than actual risk, and results in little if any chance of children going out to play and playing with other children in the neighborhood, and thus little, if any opportunities to engage in outdoor play and games, with the associated physical and social benefits (Valentine and McKendrck, 1997). Similarly, in controlled environments within the UK such as pre-schools, kindergartens and nurseries, there are often restricted areas in which children can play, and health and safety regulations are often one of the most important points for early years practitioners. In contrast, children in Turkey will often have a large outdoor space in which to play. However, if there are insufficient staff, it is a considerable challenge to follow the children’s safety during outdoor play. CONCLUSION The types of play engaged in by children across both cultures has changed over time (Valentine and McKendrck, 1997). Instead of playing the more traditional and outdoor games engaged in by their parents and grandparents, children now are rarely seen playing outside, primarily due to health and safety concerns, or parentally-perceived dangers. In addition, the types of toys used by children has changed significantly compared to those toys used by their parents. Parents, particularly those from more affluent backgrounds, are now more likely to purchase toys and games for their children that are designed to improve intelligence or development and lead to increased academic success. The problem with such choices is a disparity of perception of toys and play between parents and child, with children rarely being given the opportunity to decide their own choice of toys. Recent unpublished research has suggested that adults should engage their children more in the choice of toys and games (A. Kahyaoğlu, 2011). REFERENCES Kahyaoğlu, H. (2011). Pre-school teachers and Children’s Perception of Play in Turkish Culture. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Swansea University Human and Health Science. - Churchman, A. (2003). Is There a Place for Children in the City?, Journal of Urban Design, 8 (2), 99–111. - Hart, R. A. (1997) Children’s Participation: The Theory and Practice of Involving Young Citizens in Community Development and Environmental Care. London: Routledge. - Hartwell-Walker, M. (2006). 12 Tips for Choosing Toys for Your Child. Psych Central. Retrieved on May 8, 2014, from http://psychcentral.com/lib/choosing-toys-for-your-child/000538 - Jennett, M. (2013) Challenging gender stereotypes through primary education, Write4Children, 4(2). - Kagitcibaşi, Ç. (2005) Autonomy and Relatedness in Cultural Context: Implications for Self and Family. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, (36), 403-422. - Lindberg E.N. (2012) Changes in Child’s Play over Two Generations. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(2), 395-410. - O’Brien, M., Jones, D., Sloan, D. and Rustin, M. (2000). Children’s Independent Spatial Mobility in the Urban Public Realm, Childhood (7), 257. - Onur, B., Çelen, N., Çok, F., Artar, M. ve Şener-Demir, T. (1997). Türkiye’de iki kentte annelerin bakış açısıyla çocukların oyuncak gereksinmesi, A.Ü. Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 30, (1), 45-74. - Uğurlu S. E., Özet, F., & Ayçiçek, D. (2012). 1-3 yaş grubu çocuğu olan annelerin oyuncak seçimi konusunda bilgi ve uygulamalarının incelenmesi. International Journal of Human Sciences. - Valentine, G, and McKendrck, J. (1997). Children’s outdoor play: Exploring parental concerns about children’s safety and the changing nature of childhood. - Way, N. (2011) Deep Secrets: Boys’ Friendships and the Crisis of Connection, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 3) A. Kahyaoğlu, H. ( 2014 ). Perception of Play in Turkish Pre-school Teachers and Kindergarten Children, Paper Presented at 19. IPA World Conference, İstanbul Technical University, İstanbul, 20-23 May (pp.476-481), İstanbul: Active Life Association, İstanbul Technical University and Ministry of Education. PERCEPTION OF PLAY IN TURKISH PRE-SCHOOL TEACHERS AND KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN Name Surname: Hale A. Kahyaoğlu Author’s Details: Maltepe University, Phd in psychology; Developmental and therapeutic play specialist, Balıklı Rum Hospital. Affiliation: Swansea University, Master of Arts- Graduated Phd student- Maltepe University e-mail: hale2_k@hotmail.com Abstract: This study replicated the previous research conducted by Howard (2002, 2004) to understand children’s and teacher’s perception of play within the Turkish Culture. The study was carried out in two private kindergartens in Turkey with sixty-one children and ten teachers. Activity Apperception Story Procedure (AASP) was used to determine their perception of play. A series of photographic stimuli showed typical classroom scenarios, and the children and teachers were asked to decide if the Activity being depicted was play or not. They were also interviewed in an attempt to understand the reasoning behind the choices. The data analysis showed several important results. First, it was found that teachers and children have similar perceptions of play which is in line with Howard’s study (2002a, 2004). Second, the children’s perception changes with age- younger children gave more play choices compared to older ones. Third, contrary to what is expected (Howard, 2002a, 2004), adult’s presence did not seem to affect children’s perception of play while teachers believe that an adult’s presence can influence the children’s perception of play. Last, Activity type (open or close) and location (table or flor) both influenced children’s play judgment. Adult’s AASP answers also showed similar with children’s result in the way to perceive Activity type and location. Teacher’s seem to be aware of the importance of play in the classroom however, the existing curriculum and teacher’s preparation activities need to be improved support such implementations. Keywords: Perception, Play, Children, Teacher, Curriculum INTRODUCTION Play is as important as children’s primary needs such as eating and sleeping (Hutt et al, 1989). It is widely known that play enhances children’s learning and development in social, emotional and cognitive domains (Muys, Rodger, & Bundy, 2006). Many researchers discuss the importance of play and many even attempt to define what play actually is. However few, if any, are able to offer explanations that fully encompass it (Hughes, 1991 cited in Bennett et al, 1997). According to Bennett et al (1997) play promotes the development of warm relationships between children and adults and makes children happy. Further, play enables children to make a connection between play and work, real world and play world (Wood and Attfield, 2005). Play is difficult to define and isolate as a dependent variable (Thomas et al, 2006). Empirical evidence shows that play is important for children’s development, well-being and problem solving skills, as well as their creativity and performance under the playful conditions (McInnes et al 2009; Whitebread et al, 2009). Children’s experience forms their perception of play and also leads to improvements in their skills based on the physical and emotional atmosphere of the environment. For this reason, although the curriculum style and especially the quality of early-years teachers education is significant, many curricula implementations suffer from the problem of a lack of clear understanding of the expectations of the curriculum, the lack of appropriately qualified teachers and a lack of available resources (for example, anything from simple equipment such as pens and paper, to a shortage of classrooms). Professionals are often confused as to how to implement play, how much they need to use play in the classroom and what the benefits are for children’s development. In this research, early-years teachers’ perceptions of play and the issues related to the curriculum will be investigated in Turkey. What’s more, understanding children’s perception of play is vital for improving the education and learning in school life (Howard, 2002). In terms of what children like to do or what they do not enjoy leads us to change the curriculum in such a way that can enable children’s success in the school (Howard, 2002). This study is a partial replication of (McInnes et al, 2009), a study of perception of play in both children and teachers. There are basically three aims of this study: - What characteristics do children in Turkey use to categorise play and non play activities? - What characteristics do teacher in Turkey use to categories play and non play activities? - What value do teachers in Turkey place on learning through play? METHOD Participants Sixty-one nursery-school children were chosen from two nursery-schools in the Kuşadası region of Aydın in Turkey. The children’s ages ranged from three to six years, with a mean age of 4.3 years. Thirty-two children were female and twenty-nine were male. Ten teachers also participated in this study. There ages ranged from nineteen to twenty-nine, with a mean age of twenty-two and with an average of 3.6 years working experience. Each teacher was working with children of specific ages. Nurseries Both nursery schools were located in the outskirts of Aydin and have large outdoor play areas for the children to play. Both nurseries were independent of any primary school, but their curriculum is maintained by the Turkish Ministry of Education, called the Pre-school Education program in children between 36-72 months of age (2002). Ethical Procedure All school stuff is explained what the study is about. Parents were informed of the study one-week prior to the agreed study start date and they were advised that they could withdraw their child from this study at any time before, during or following the study start date. All parents gave full informed consent in writing to the nursery and to the researcher. After the parental consent forms were signed and returned, the researcher spend one week with children for ‘familiarization’. This allowed getting an approval from children. DESIGN In this study, both qualitative and quantitative methods are used to analyse the data. Activity Apperception Procedure was given to the children and the Quantitative data was analysed through excel by looking at the frequency of play choices. In addition, the qualitative data from the semi-structured interview done with the pre-school teachers was transcribed and analysed using the principles of thematic analysis of Braun and Clarke (2006). Analysis will be mainly qualitative method although the number of responses per photographic cue will be considered in relation to play and not play. Justifications will be transcribed and categorically organized (e.g. responses relating to teacher presence or activities being fun). - C) MATERIALS In the study there are mainly two materials used to measure children’s and teacher’s perception of play in Turkish culture. First of all, Activity Apperception Story Procedure (AASP) which allows children to express their opinions regarding the differentiation of play, work and learning aspects through photos is partly used (Howard, Jenvey & Hill, 2006). AASP originally has 24 photographic stimuli and shows a number of pre-school environment scenarios either with an adult present or absent. Each photograph depicts a number activities, such as painting, role play (mum & dad, doctor or nurse and so on), with either a single child or a number of children engaging in parallel or cooperative activities, and with these activities being shown either on the floor or a table (Howard et al, 2006). In the current research, the researcher used her own photographic stimuli consisting of 12 photographs of children taken without distracting children’s attention while they were playing in the nursery during both outdoor and indoor activities. A semi-structured interview was used to understand the teacher’s ideas relating to play in more detail. The Interview questions are designed in terms of teachers’ role, their understanding of play, their opinion about the curriculum, their education level in child development area and play-planning. Both for children and adults, the audio-recording was employed during the study. - D) PROCEDURE Activity Apperception Procedure is adopted and used both children and adults. Two empty letter boxes, 12 photos (reverse side showing so the children could not see the pictures), assent forms and audio recording were put on the middle of a table with two chairs located next to each other. Each photograph was numbered from one to twelve on the reverse. Each child was taken into the class and made them feel comfortable by talking or asking general questions. When the researcher felt that the children were comfortable, each photograph was randomly presented one at a time. Each child was given the same instructions, read by the researcher from a cue card. During testing, there was no time limit imposed on the children, and the researcher waited until the child made a response. The procedure for the teachers was the same as for the children, with all teachers being shown the same AASP stimuli as the children and the responses of the teachers recorded in the same way. Following the AASP, the teachers were then interviewed in an attempt to provide more details as to their thoughts and opinions regarding play. RESULT In this current research, the perceptions of play of ten teachers and sixty-one children have been investigated. Results show that both children and teachers have clear ideas about what is play and what is work, a finding that is in line with finding from previous work (Howard, 2002; Howard, 2004, McInnes et al, 2009) As stated, one of the important points investigated in this research is how children and teachers perceive play in terms of both similarities and differences (McInnes et al, 2009). This research was a replication of Howard (2002), though using different cues. It is felt that this particular method addresses some of the limitations of other methods, such as interviews or direct observation, particularly when working with children. In the original research, Howard (2002) carried out research on 111 children aged between three and six years using AASP. Results showed that children basically reported two types of activities; play and work. For children, play involves outside activities, for example construction, sand pit or role play. Work activities include writing, reading and using paper. Generally, children see play as “not learning”, and work as learning, with these perceptions of play, work and learning being developed by experiences. CONCLUSION In this current study, it is found that there is a difference between children’s and teacher’s perception of play. Children think that adult’s presence in the play settings does not make any difference on their play choices using AASP whereas teachers believe that adult’s presence affects their play answers in AASP. On the other hand, both children and adult have similar views of the type (open & close) and the location of activity (table & floor). This is in contrast to other work done using AASP (Howard 2002, 2004; McInnes, 2009) which found that adult’s presence made a significant difference on their play choices. The reasons for these differences are not immediately clear, but the fact that this current research was a replication of McInnes et al (2011) using children based in Turkey could indicate some important cultural differences that merit further research. REFERENCES - Bennett, N., Wood, L., Rogers, S. (1991). Teaching Through Play. Berkshire; Open University Press. - Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), pp. 77-101. - Howard, J., Jenvey, V. and Hill, C. (2006). Children’s Categorisation of Play and Learning Based on Social Context, Early Child Development and Care, 176(3&4), 379-393. Eliciting young Children’s perceptions of play, work and learning using the activity apperception story procedure, Early Child Development and Care, 127, 489-502. - Hutt, S.J., Tyler, S., Hutt, C. and Christopherson, H. (1989). Play, Exploration and Learning: A Natural History of The Pre-School. London: Routledge. - McInnes, K., Howard, J., Milles, G., Crowley, K. (2011). Differences in Practitioners’ Understanding of Play and How this Influences Pedagogy and Children’s Perception of Play. Early-years, First Published on: 17 May 2011 (iFirst). - McInnes, K., Howard, J., Miles, E.G., Crowley, K. (2009). Behavioural Differences Exhibited by Children When Practising a Task Under Formal and Playful Conditions. Educational & Child Psychology, 26 (2), 31- 39. - Muys, V., Rodger, S. and Bundy, A.C. (2006). Assessment of Playfulness in Children with Autistic Disorder: A Comparison of the Children’s Playfulness Scale and the Test of Playfulness, OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 26(4), 159-170. - Thomas, L. Howard, J. and Miles, G. (2006). The Effectiveness of Playful Practice for Learning in the Early Years. The Psychology of Education Review. - Whitebread D., Coltman, P., Jameson, H & Lander, R. (2009). Play, Cognition and Self Regulation: What exactly are children learning when they learn through play? Educational and Child Psychology, 26(2), 40-52. - Wood, E., Attfield, J. (2005). Play, Learning and Early Childhood Curriculum. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 11.1 12.1 13.1 14.1
Oyun çocukların temel ihtiyaçları olan yemek yemek, uyumak kadar önemli birincil bir ihtiyaçtır (Hutt et al, 1989 in A.Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Oyun, çocuklar için öğrenmeyi, sosyal, duygusal, fiziksel ve zihinsel gelişimi arttırıcı ya da ilerletici etkisiyle bilinmektedir (Muys ve ark., 2006 in A.Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Bunların yanında oyun, çocukla yetişkin arasında sıcak bir ilişki geliştirir ve çocuk oyun ve reel hayat ayırımını yapmasını sağlar (Bennett et al, 1997 in Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Yapılan araştırmalarda oyunun farklı çeşitlerinin çocukların farklı gelişim alanlarında etkili olduğunu ortaya koydu. Örneğin, -mış gibi yapma oyunu (pretend play) çocukların yalnızca problem çözme, meto-kognitif ve sosyal biliş alanlarında gelişmelerine değil aynı zamanda bilimsel yetenekler, matematik ve dil gelişiminde de ileri bir düzeye gelmelerini sağlar (Gmitrova and Gmitrov, 2003 in Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Moyles (1989), Smith ve ark.(1977, 1981,1987) de bu görüşü destekleyerek çocuklarda -mış gibi yapma oyununun konuşma akıcılığını, hikâye anlatma yeteneğini ve çok boyutlu düşünme özelliğini geliştirdiğini ileri sürmüşlerdir. Oyun çeşitlerinden bir diğeri ise fantezi (hayal kurma) (fantasy play) oyunudur ki bu oyunun sosyal-bilişsel yetenekleri ve sosyal davranışları geliştirmeğe yardımcı olduğu düşünülmektedir (Gorvey, 1977; Smilansky, 1967 in Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Sosyo-dramatik oyunun çocukların dil gelişimine katkısı olduğu da pek çok araştırma tarafından gösterilmiştir. Smilansky (1968) 4 grup İsrailli çocukla Sosyo-dramatik oyunun çocukların dil gelişimleri üzerindeki etkisine bakmıştır. Gruplardan 2’sine Sosyo-drama oyunu eğitimi verilirken, kalan gruplara hiç Sosyo-drama oyunu eğitimi verilmemiştir. Araştırmanın sonuçlarına göre, oyun eğitimi verilen gruplarda, Sosyo-dramatik oyunun ve nitelikli oyunun çocukların sözcük dağarcığını ya da kelime haznesini geliştirdiği ve konuşabilmeğe dair özgüvenlerinin arttığı tespit edildi (Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Lovinger (1974) de Smilansky’nin çalışmasını Amerikalı çocuklar üzerinde tekrarladı ve sonuçlar Smilansky’nin bulgularıyla paralel çıktı; oyun eğitimi alan çocuklar almayanlarla karşılaştırıldığında dil gelişimi açısından daha ileri düzeyde oldukları tespit edildi. Benzer şekilde Levy (1984) de oyunun çocukların dil gelişimi üzerindeki etkilerini araştırdı. Yaptığı çalışmanın sonucunda oyun ile dil gelişiminin güçlü bir şekilde korale (bağlantılı) olduğunu ortaya koydu. Levy’ e göre 5 yaşındaki çocuklar oynarken yeni kelimeler öğrendiğini, meta-linguistik farkındalık kazandığını ve oyunun çocuğun konuşmasını motive edici özelliklerini vurgulamıştır (1984). Oyunun çeşitlerine bakıldığında, sandplay (kum oyunu), rough and tumble play (itişip kakışma oyunu), socio-dramatic play, messy play (dağınık, karışık oyun), pretend play (-mış gibi yapma oyunu), symbolic play (sembolik oyun), fantasy play (hayal kurma & kurgu oyunu), house games (evcilik oyunu), role making (rol yapma oyunu), dressing game (kostüm giyme oyunu), water game (su oyunları), creative- art play (resim yapma, parmak boyası), puppets game (kukla oyunu), story-telling game (hikaye anlatma oyunu), physical games (fiziksel oyunlar) gibi pek çok oyunun çocuğun farklı yaş gruplarına göre tercih ettiği ancak her yaş grubunda da oynanabilecek oyunlar olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Oyunların çocuğun dil; konuşmada akıcılık, yeni kelimeler öğrenme ve zihinsel gelişime; yaratıcı düşünce, çok boyutlu düşünce, problem çözme katkıda bulunmasının yanı sıra, oyun çocuğun duygusal, sosyal ve fiziksel gelişimine de katkıda bulunmaktadır (Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Oyunun çocuğun yaşamındaki önemi ve oyunun çocukların “hakkı” olduğu pek çok ülke ve devlet tarafından başta “Birleşik milletler Çocuk Hakları Örgütü (1989)” ve İngiltere Okul öncesi ve okul dönemi eğitim kitapçığında da (Early Years Foundation Stage) belirtilmiştir (Moyles, 2010). Türkiye’de ise okul öncesi eğitimde oyunun önemi anaokulu öğretmenleri tarafından anlaşılmış olsa da oyunu hayata geçirmede zorluk yaşadıkları anlaşılmıştır (Kahyaoğlu, 2011). İlköğretim okullarında ise oyun saati çocuklara ancak “boş zaman” aktivitesi olarak verilip, çok fazla geliştirilmeye yönelik çalışma yapılmamaktadır (Kahyaoğlu, 2011). Okul Öncesi Eğitim müfredatı her ne kadar çocukların oyunla öğrenmesine açık bir sistem olsa da Türkiye’de oyuna yönelik özel eğitim ve kursların eksikliği ve var olan kurslarında nitelikli uzmanlar tarafından (akademisyenler, oyun konusunda master ya da doktora yapmış olanlar) verilmediği için alandaki açık devam etmektedir. Henüz Türkiye’de İngiltere’de ya da Amerika’da olduğu gibi “playworker” (oyun çalışanı), “play therapist” (oyun terapisti) olma gibi eğitimler üniversitelerde verilmemekte bu alana yönelik özel master ya da doktora programı bulunmamaktadır. Türkiye’ de Oyun Terapisti kimliğindeki kişiler genelde sertifika eğitimi alarak bu alanda Türkiye’de eğitim vermektedir ancak uzmanların oyun terapisi uygulayabilmeleri için bu alanda minimum MASTER derecesini tamamlamış olmaları gereklidir. REFERANSLAR - Bennett, N., Wood, L., Rogers, S. (1991). Teaching Through Play. Berkshire; Open University Press. - Gmitrova, V. ve Gmitrov, J. (2003). The Impact of Teacher Directed and Child-Directed Pretend Play on Cognitive Competence in Kindergarten Children, Early Childhood Education Journal, 30(4), 241-246. - Hutt, S.J., Tyler, S., Hutt, C. Ve Christopherson, H. (1989). Play, Exploration and Learning: A Natural History of the Pre-School. London: Routledge. - Kahyaoğlu, H.A. (2011). Children and Pre-School Teachers’ Perception of Play in Turkey, Unpublished Master Thesis, Swansea University,Swansea- The UK. - Moyles, J. (2005). The Excellence of Play. Second Edition, Berkshire: Open University Press. - Muys, V., Rodger,S., ve Bundy, A.C. (2006). Assessment of playfulness in Children with Autistic Disorder: A Comparison of the Children’s Playfulness Scale and the Test of Playfulness, OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 26(4), 159-170.