early childhood education journal articles

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BMJ Glob Health
• v.4(Suppl 4); 2019

Early childhood development: an imperative for action and measurement at scale

Linda richter.

1 Centre of Excellence in Human Development, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg-Braamfontein, South Africa

Maureen Black

2 RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

3 Early Childhood Development, Unicef USA, New York City, New York, USA

Bernadette Daelmans

4 Department of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland

Chris Desmond

5 DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Human Development, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

Amanda Devercelli

6 Early Childhood Development, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

7 Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland

Günther Fink

8 Household Economics and Health Systems, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland

9 Global Health and Population, Harvard University T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Jody Heymann

10 Fielding School of Public Health and WORLD Policy Analysis Center, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA

Joan Lombardi

11 Early Opportunities, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

Chunling Lu

12 Division of Global Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Sara Naicker

Emily vargas-barón.

13 RISE Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

Experiences during early childhood shape biological and psychological structures and functions in ways that affect health, well-being and productivity throughout the life course. The science of early childhood and its long-term consequences have generated political momentum to improve early childhood development and elevated action to country, regional and global levels. These advances have made it urgent that a framework, measurement tools and indicators to monitor progress globally and in countries are developed and sustained. We review progress in three areas of measurement contributing to these goals: the development of an index to allow country comparisons of young children’s development that can easily be incorporated into ongoing national surveys; improvements in population-level assessments of young children at risk of poor early development; and the production of country profiles of determinants, drivers and coverage for early childhood development and services using currently available data in 91 countries. While advances in these three areas are encouraging, more investment is needed to standardise measurement tools, regularly collect country data at the population level, and improve country capacity to collect, interpret and use data relevant to monitoring progress in early childhood development.

Summary box

• New knowledge of the extent to which experiences during early childhood shape health, well-being and productivity throughout the life course has prompted action to improve early childhood development at the country, regional and global levels.
• Advances have been made in three areas of measurement needed to achieve these goals: population-level child assessments, population proxies of children at risk of poor childhood development, and country and regional profiles of drivers and supports for early childhood development.
• Regular, country-comparable, population-level measurements of childhood development, as well as threats to development and available supports and services, are needed to drive progress and accountability in efforts to improve early childhood development.

Introduction

Scientific findings from diverse disciplines are in agreement that critical elements of lifelong health, well-being and productivity are shaped during the first 2–3 years of life, 1 beginning with parental health and well-being. 2 The experiences and exposures of young children during this time-bound period of neuroplasticity shape the development of both biological and psychological structures and functions across the life course.

Adversities during pregnancy and early childhood, due to undernutrition, stress, poverty, violence, chronic illnesses and exposure to toxins, among others, can disrupt brain development, with consequences that endure throughout life and into future generations. 3 4 Children whose early development is compromised have fewer personal and social skills and less capacity to benefit from schooling. These deficits limit their work opportunities and earnings as adults. 5 A corollary of early susceptibility to adversity includes responsiveness to opportunities during these early years. As a result, interventions during the first 3 years of life are more effective and less costly than later efforts to compensate for early adversities and to promote human development. 6

It is estimated that, in 2010, at least 249 million (43%) children under the age of 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) were at risk of poor early childhood development (ECD) as a consequence of being stunted or living in extreme poverty. 7 This loss of potential is costly for individuals and societies. The average percentage loss of adult income per year is estimated at 26%, increasing the likelihood of persistent poverty for these children, families and societies. 5 Assuming 125 million children are born each year with a global average of poor infant growth, 8 the estimated annual global income loss is US$177 billion. 9 These impacts have serious consequences on economic growth. Recent World Bank estimates suggest that the average country’s per capital gross domestic product would be 7% higher than it is now had stunting been eliminated when today’s workers were children. 10 At the global level, human capital accounts for as much as two-thirds of the wealth differences between countries. ECD is the foundation of human capital. 11

Supported by a growing body of evidence and increasing global interest in this field, ECD is included in the 2015 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Target 4.2 is ‘improved access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education’. Progress towards achieving this target is measured by indicator 4.2.1, ‘the proportion of children under 5 years of age who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being, by sex’. ECD is closely linked to other SDGs as well, for example, eradicate poverty (1), end hunger and improve nutrition (2), ensure healthy lives (3), achieve gender equality (5), reduce inequality in and among countries (10), and promote peaceful societies (16), and it is implied in several more. 5

The United Nations Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health, 2016–2030 synthesises the 17 SDGs in three strategies: survive, thrive and transform. Survive refers to sustained and increased reductions in preventable deaths of women, newborns, children and adolescents, as well as stillbirths; thrive refers to children receiving the nurturing care necessary to reach their developmental potential; and transform refers to comprehensive changes in policies, programmes and services for women, children and adolescents to achieve their potential. 12

ECD has also become an important component of other global agendas, including Scaling Up Nutrition, the Global Partnership for Education, the Global Financing Facility for Every Woman Every Child, the Every Woman Every Child movement, the work plans of the WHO, Unicef and the World Bank Group, the G20, 13 international funding agencies, and philanthropic foundations. 7

These multifaceted findings have generated political momentum to improve ECD as a critical phase in the life course, making it urgent to develop measurement tools and indicators to monitor progress globally and in countries. Advances in measurement are needed to support efforts to motivate and track political and financial commitments, and to monitor implementation and impact. This means that we must be able to determine how many and which children are thriving, and on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being.

Measurement of children’s progress in childhood is acknowledged to be challenging because development is by nature dynamic and children have varying individual trajectories. Well-validated instruments of individual development are complex and require extensive training and expertise. These challenges are amplified in efforts to make measurements across populations of children. Taking these limitations into account, we review progress in three areas of measurement that are contributing data to the current political momentum for ECD and efforts to monitor implementation and impact. Progress is being made to construct a feasible country-comparable measure of young children’s development that could be incorporated into national surveys, to improve proxies of population levels of young children at risk of poor early development, and to generate country profiles of determinants, drivers and coverage for early childhood development and services, using currently available data.

A new initiative to construct a population measure of ECD

A direct measure of the development of children 0–5 years that could be administered globally and used both within and across countries is urgently needed. Efforts have been made since the 1980s to develop a globally applicable measure of ECD, with the major challenges being individual and cultural variations in the onset of early skills. 14

Currently, the Early Child Development Index (ECDI) is included as the indicator of SDG goal 4, target 4.2. It is a composite index, first introduced in Unicef’s fourth Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) in 2010. It is derived from 10 caregiver-reported questions designed for children aged 36–59 months to assess four domains of development: literacy-numeracy, learning/cognition, physical development and socioemotional development. Some items are acknowledged to be unsuitable for assessing development, 15 and efforts are under way to revise the index, as well as to include items applicable to children younger than 3 years of age.

Three research efforts have collaborated to create the Global Scale for Early Development (GSED): the Infant and Young Child Development from the WHO, 16 the Caregiver-Reported Early Development Instrument from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, 17 and the Developmental Score from the Global Child Development Group at the University of the West Indies. 18 The goals of the GSED are to develop two instruments for measuring ECD (0–3 years) globally: a population-based instrument and a programme evaluation instrument, as described in table 1 .

Global Scale for Early Development: population and programme measures

The GSED takes advantage of large-scale and cohort studies from many countries and is harmonising efforts to generate population-based and programmatic evaluation measures of the development of children aged 0–3 years old that can be used globally ( table 2 ). The scale will be available for country testing in 2019. The aim is to have the population-based measure incorporated into national surveys, including Unicef’s MICS and the US Agency for International Development’s Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), to produce globally comparable monitoring data. Efforts are also under way to harmonise the revision of ECDI and the development of GSED to align on child outcome measurement from birth to 59 months of age.

Development and validation of the Global Scale for Early Development

CREDI, Caregiver-Reported Early Development Instrument; D-score, Developmental Score; IYCD, Infant and Young Child Development.

A country-comparable proxy for population levels of risk of poor childhood development

Information about children’s risk for poor development is important, as is identifying areas for intervention. To track these, a proxy measure of population levels of young children at risk of suboptimal development has been calculated.

Stunting and poverty were used in the first published estimation in 2007 of the global prevalence of risk to children’s development. The initial choice of indicators was based on evidence that they both predict poor cognitive development and school performance. 19 20 Additional advantages are that their definitions are standardised and many countries have data on both indicators. 21

Lu et al 21 updated the earlier values to 2010, using the 2006 WHO growth standards and World Bank poverty rates (US$1.25 per person per day), leading to an estimate of 249 million children or 43% of all children under 5 years of age in LMICs being at risk of poor childhood development. The accuracy and comparability of the later estimates benefited greatly from major advances in both data availability and estimation methods. 21

To estimate the long-term consequences of poor ECD, studies focus on estimating the impact on subsequent schooling and labour market participation and wages. The current estimate, that the average percentage of annual adult income lost as a result of stunting and extreme poverty in early childhood is about 26%, is supported by follow-up adult data from early life interventions. Two programmes have found wage increases between 25% in Jamaica attributed to a psychosocial intervention 22 and 46% in Guatemala attributed to a protein supplement. 23

In order to improve the estimate of risk, efforts are under way to include additional risks experienced in ECD known to affect health and well-being across the life course. For example, adding low maternal schooling and exposure to harsh punishment to stunting and extreme poverty, for 15 countries with available data from MICS in 2010/2011, increased the number of children estimated to be at risk of poor childhood development substantially. 5

Country profiles of ECD

Population-based measures of early child development and proxies of children at risk give an indication of prevalence, and indicators of disparity can be derived according to gender, urban–rural location and socioeconomic status. However, they do not include drivers, determinants nor coverage of interventions that could improve childhood development.

The Countdown to 2015 for Maternal, Newborn and Child Survival , established in 2005, set a precedent by creating mechanisms to portray multidimensional aspects of progress towards improving maternal and child health, and is testimony of its value. 24 Countdown to 2030 , which tracks maternal, child and adolescent health and nutrition goals, has expanded to address the broader SDG agenda, including ECD, health in humanitarian settings and conflict, and adolescent health and well-being. 25 26 It includes coverage and equity of essential interventions, as well as indicators of determinants and the enabling environment provided by policies.

This approach has been applied to ECD using the Nurturing Care Framework, 27 launched at the 71st World Health Assembly. The concept of nurturing care was introduced in the 2017 Lancet Series Advancing Early Child Development: From Science to Scale . Nurturing Care Framework comprises conditions for early development: good health and nutrition; protection from environmental and personal harm; affectionate and encouraging responses to young children’s communications; and opportunities for young children to learn through exploration and interpersonal interactions. 7

These early experiences are nested in caregiver–child and family relationships. In turn, parents, families and other caregivers require support from a facilitating environment of policies, services and communities. Policies, services and programmes can protect women’s health and well-being, safeguard pregnancy and birth, and enable families and caregivers to promote and protect young children’s development. 6

The Nurturing Care Framework has been used to produce ECD profiles for 91 LMICs. 28 Countries were selected either to ensure alignment of ECD with Countdown to 2030 , or because more than 30% of children are estimated to be at risk of poor ECD in 2010, using the methods described in Lu et al 21 and Black et al . 7

These country profiles, which consist of currently available data from LMICs, are laid out to represent the Nurturing Care Framework. The profiles consist of the following sections:

• Selected demographic indicators of the country relevant to early child development: total population, annual births, children under 5 years of age and under-5 mortality.
• Threats to ECD, including maternal mortality, young motherhood, low birth weight, preterm births, child poverty, under-5 stunting, harsh punishment and inadequate supervision.
• The prevalence of young children at risk of poor child development disaggregated by gender and rural–urban residence, and lifetime costs of growth deficit in early childhood in US dollars.
• The facilitating policy environment for caregivers and children, as indexed by relevant conventions and national policies.
• Support and services to promote ECD in the five areas of nurturing care: early learning, health, nutrition, responsive caregiving, and security and safety.

Most of the existing data are published in Unicef’s annual State of the World’s Children. Convention and policy data come from, among others, the United Nations Treaty Collections and the International Labour Organization.

Figure 1 shows an example of the country profiles, with the country name replace by ‘Country Profiles’.

An example of an early childhood development (ECD) country profile. CRC, convention on the rights of the child.

In a forthcoming paper, Lu and Richter (2019) describe in detail the updated estimates of children at risk of poor childhood development using the newly released poverty line of US$1.9 per person per day to estimate that, in 2015, 233 million children or 40.5% of children under 5 years of age were at risk of poor childhood development. Figures 2 and 3 show the estimates of risk for poor ECD across a decade, from 2005 to 2010 and 2015, and using the 2010 data variations between children at risk living in rural and urban areas. Gender is not illustrated here because, in most countries, the differences are small and not statistically significant.

Decline in the number of countries with high proportions of young children at risk of poor development between 2005 and 2015.

Differences in risk of poor development among urban and rural children in 63 countries (most recent years with available data).

Figure 2 shows that, between 2005 and 2010, countries with two-thirds of young children at risk (>67%) declined in both central Europe and South-East Asia. There was little change in countries with high proportions of young children at risk in sub-Saharan Africa during this period, and by 2015 countries with the highest proportion of children at risk were in Central and Southern Africa.

Estimates on the prevalence of children at risk of poor development in urban and rural areas were derived using DHS, MICS and country data for 63 countries with available data in most recent years ( figure 3 ). The differences are strikingly high, with more rural children at risk than their urban counterparts in 50 countries (differences of more than 20%). Almost all countries with 40% point differences were in sub-Saharan Africa. 28

There are additional indicators that ideally should be included in a monitoring framework, but currently lack comparable country data. Data are usually unavailable because reliable, valid instruments feasible for multicountry administration are still in development, or the instruments are not yet included in representative surveys. In particular, there are as yet no global population-based indicators for assessing responsive caregiving. Suggestions have been made that data should be collected on whether information about ECD and caregiver–child interaction is publicly disseminated, whether home visits or groups are provided for parents at high risk of experiencing difficulties providing their children with nurturing care, and whether affordable good quality child day care is available for families who need it. 29 National data on laws and policies that support responsive caregiving are also insufficient, for example, wages and other forms of income to enable families to provide for their young children. 30

Additional data gaps concern risks arising from poor parental mental health, 31 low maternal schooling, and maternal tobacco and alcohol use, among others, prevalence of childhood developmental delays and disabilities, 32 and maltreatment and institutionalisation of young children. 33 There is also no comparable information on government budget allocation to ECD or household expenditure on ECD services care, among others.

Multidisciplinary scientific evidence and political momentum are focusing on ECD as a critical phase in enhancing health and well-being across the life course. Additional measurements and indicators for monitoring and evaluation are urgently needed to support expansions in implementation and investment, and to report progress. New data will stimulate global, regional and national action, and in turn motivate for more areas of ECD to be covered in national surveys.

The Nurturing Care Framework provides a platform for three important areas of work. First, very significant progress is being made through the revision of the ECDI and the development of the GSED, a short caregiver-reported population measure of ECD that could feasibly be included in DHS, MICS and other nationally representative household surveys. The GSED will enable ECD to be tracked at population levels, and for programmes and services to be monitored and evaluated in comparable ways.

Second, a country-comparable proxy of the risk of poor ECD developed from 2004 data and updated with 2010 data has been extended to 2015, enabling comparisons to be made globally, regionally and by country across the last decade. Plans are in place to update these estimates regularly, and to add new risks as data for more countries become available.

Third, using these estimates, data included in Countdown to 2030 , and additional data from MICS and policy databases, initial profiles have been constructed for 91 LMICs. The profiles are organised according to the ecological model of the Nurturing Care Framework with policies, services and programmes supporting families and caregivers to provide good health and nutrition, security and safety, opportunities for early learning, and responsive caregiving for young children to thrive. The further development of these profiles is overseen by a multiagency committee as part of Countdown to 2030 and are freely available ( http://www.ecdan.org/countries.html and https://nurturing-care.org/?page_id=703 ). Unicef will update the country data annually and the profiles will be reproduced every 2 years.

However, as indicated earlier, substantial gaps in national and global data on topics of concern to ECD remain. The current global estimation on burden of risks, for example, does not include known risk factors other than stunting and extreme poverty, as a result of which the existing burden calculation is considerably underestimated. 5 The limited information on ECD investments at the country and global levels is exacerbated by the lack of appreciation of what constitute essential and continuous services, standard indicators for measuring ECD interventions and policies, as well as systematically collected data. Country capacity needs to be strengthened and ECD costing modules integrated into existing household income or expenditure surveys, and routinely collected from specific types of programmes. Clear definitions are needed to track donor contributions to ECD, and efforts should be made to address data issues, including collecting data from emerging donor countries (eg, China), foundations and international non-governmental organisations that are playing an increasing role in financing ECD, as has been called for by the G20. 33 National policies, strategic plans and laws which support ECD through nurturing care should be tracked for this intersectoral area.

To improve measurements of risks, intervention coverage, policies, financial commitments and impact on young children’s development, more investment is needed to regularly collect and disseminate data at the national and subnational levels. Analytical gaps at the country and global levels exist, especially with respect to equity analyses by household wealth, maternal education and rural–urban location, as well as by gender and child age within 0–5 years.

In conclusion, progress has been extremely positive, but too slow and too fragmented for the bold global agenda of ECD and the Nurturing Care Framework. The alliance with Countdown to 2030 is helpful as there is much to be learnt from the initiative’s experience under the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), as well as collaboration with the SDGs. The country profiles boldly portray what we currently know about ECD in some of the most at-risk conditions and will prove a valuable tool for advocacy and implementation, including to improve measurement. Successful implementation and impact are dependent on accountability supported by regularly updated reliable and valid information.

Acknowledgments

Robert Inglis (Jive Media Africa, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa) and Frank Sokolic (EduAction, Durban, South Africa) for assistance with the country profiles and maps.

Handling editor: Seye Abimbola

Contributors: All authors meet the conditions for authorship: substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version published; and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Funding: This study has been funded by Conrad N Hilton Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Competing interests: None declared.

Patient consent for publication: Not required.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Data sharing statement: Data on the country profiles are publicly available on the websites cited in the paper.

• NAEYC Login
• Member Profile
• Hello Community
• Accreditation Portal
• Online Learning
• Online Store

Popular Searches:   DAP ;  Coping with COVID-19 ;  E-books ;  Anti-Bias Education ;  Online Store

The Power of Playful Learning in the Early Childhood Setting

You are here

Play versus learning represents a false dichotomy in education (e.g., Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff 2008). In part, the persistent belief that learning must be rigid and teacher directed—the opposite of play—is motivated by the lack of a clear definition of what constitutes playful learning (Zosh et al. 2018). And, in part, it is motivated by older perceptions of play and learning. Newer research, however, allows us to reframe the debate as learning via play—as playful learning.

This piece, which is an excerpt from Chapter 5 in  Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth Through Age 8, Fourth Edition (NAEYC 2022), suggests that defining play on a spectrum (Zosh et al. 2018, an idea first introduced by Bergen 1988) helps to resolve old divisions and provides a powerful framework that puts  playful learning —rich curriculum coupled with a playful pedagogy—front and center as a model for all early childhood educators. ( See below for a discussion of play on a spectrum.)

This excerpt also illustrates the ways in which play and learning mutually support one another and how teachers connect learning goals to children’s play. Whether solitary, dramatic, parallel, social, cooperative, onlooker, object, fantasy, physical, constructive, or games with rules, play, in all of its forms, is a teaching practice that optimally facilitates young children’s development and learning. By maximizing children’s choice, promoting wonder and enthusiasm for learning, and leveraging joy, playful learning pedagogies support development across domains and content areas and increase learning relative to more didactic methods (Alfieri et al. 2011; Bonawitz et al. 2011; Sim & Xu 2015).

Playful Learning: A Powerful Teaching Tool

This narrowing of the curriculum and high-stakes assessment practices (such as paper-and-pencil tests for kindergartners) increased stress on educators, children, and families but failed to deliver on the promise of narrowing—let alone closing—the gap.  All  children need well-thought-out curricula, including reading and STEM experiences and an emphasis on executive function skills such as attention, impulse control, and memory (Duncan et al. 2007). But to promote happy, successful, lifelong learners, children must be immersed in developmentally appropriate practice and rich curricular learning that is culturally relevant (NAEYC 2020). Playful learning is a vehicle for achieving this. Schools must also address the inequitable access to play afforded to children (see “Both/And: Early Childhood Education Needs Both Play and Equity,” by Ijumaa Jordan.) All children should be afforded opportunities to play, regardless of their racial group, socioeconomic class, and disability if they have been diagnosed with one. We second the call of Maria Souto-Manning (2017): “Although play has traditionally been positioned as a privilege, it must be (re)positioned as a right, as outlined by the  United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 31” (785).

What Is Playful Learning?

Playful learning describes a learning context in which children learn content while playing freely (free play or self-directed play), with teacher guidance (guided play), or in a structured game. By harnessing children’s natural curiosity and their proclivities to experiment, explore, problem solve, and stay engaged in meaningful activities—especially when doing so with others—teachers maximize learning while individualizing learning goals. Central to this concept is the idea that teachers act more as the Socratic “guide at the side” than a “sage on the stage” (e.g., King 1993, 30; Smith 1993, 35). Rather than view children as empty vessels receiving information, teachers see children as active explorers and discoverers who bring their prior knowledge into the learning experience and construct an understanding of, for example, words such as  forecast  and  low pressure  as they explore weather patterns and the science behind them. In other words, teachers support children as active learners.

Importantly, playful learning pedagogies naturally align with the characteristics that research in the science of learning suggests help humans learn. Playful learning leverages the power of active (minds-on), engaging (not distracting), meaningful, socially interactive, and iterative thinking and learning (Zosh et al. 2018) in powerful ways that lead to increased learning.

Free play lets children explore and express themselves—to be the captains of their own ship. While free play is important, if a teacher has a learning goal, guided play and games are the road to successful outcomes for children (see Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2013 for a review). Playful learning in the form of guided play, in which the teacher builds in the learning as part of a fun context such as a weather report, keeps the child’s agency but adds an intentional component to the play that helps children learn more from the experience. In fact, when researchers compared children’s skill development during free play in comparison to guided play, they found that children learned more vocabulary (Toub et al. 2018) and spatial skills (Fisher et al. 2013) in guided play than in free play.

Self-Directed Play, Free Play

NAEYC’s 2020 position statement on developmentally appropriate practice uses the term  self-directed play  to refer to play that is initiated and directed by children. Such play is termed  free play  in the larger works of the authors of this excerpt; therefore, free play is the primary term used in this article, with occasional references to self-directed play, the term used in the rest of the DAP book.

Imagine an everyday block corner. The children are immersed in play with each other—some trying to build high towers and others creating a tunnel for the small toy cars on the nearby shelves. But what if there were a few model pictures on the wall of what children could strive to make as they collaborated in that block corner? Might they rotate certain pieces purposely? Might they communicate with one another that the rectangle needs to go on top of the square? Again, a simple insertion of a design that children can try to copy turns a play situation into one ripe with spatial learning. Play is a particularly effective way to engage children with specific content learning when there is a learning goal.

Why Playful Learning Is Critical

Teachers play a crucial role in creating places and spaces where they can introduce playful learning to help all children master not only content but also the skills they will need for future success. The science of learning literature (e.g., Fisher et al. 2013; Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2013; Zosh et al. 2018) suggests that playful learning can change the “old equation” for learning, which posited that direct, teacher-led instruction, such as lectures and worksheets, was the way to achieve rich content learning. This “new equation” moves beyond a sole focus on content and instead views playful learning as a way to support a breadth of skills while embracing developmentally appropriate practice guidelines (see Hirsh-Pasek et al. 2020).

Using a playful learning pedagogical approach leverages the skill sets of today’s educators and enhances their ability to help children attain curricular goals. It engages what has been termed active learning that is also developmentally appropriate and offers a more equitable way of engaging children by increasing access to participation. When topics are important and culturally relevant to children, they can better identify with the subject and the learning becomes more seamless.

While educators of younger children are already well versed in creating playful and joyful experiences to support social goals (e.g., taking turns and resolving conflicts), they can use this same skill set to support more content-focused curricular goals (e.g., mathematics and literacy). Similarly, while teachers of older children have plenty of experience determining concrete content-based learning goals (e.g., attaining Common Core Standards), they can build upon this set of skills and use playful learning as a pedagogy to meet those goals.

Learning Through Play: A Play Spectrum

As noted previously, play can be thought of as lying on a spectrum that includes free play (or self-directed play), guided play, games, playful instruction, and direct instruction (Bergen 1988; Zosh et al. 2018). For the purposes of this piece, we use a spectrum that includes the first three of these aspects of playful learning, as illustrated in “Play Spectrum Showing Three Types of Playful Learning Situations” below.

The following variables determine the degree to which an activity can be considered playful learning:

• level of adult involvement
• extent to which the child is directing the learning
• presence of a learning goal

Toward the left end of the spectrum are activities with more child agency, less adult involvement, and loosely defined or no particular learning goals. Further to the right, adults are more involved, but children still direct the activity or interaction.

Developmentally appropriate practice does not mean primarily that children play without a planned learning environment or learn mostly through direct instruction (NAEYC 2020). Educators in high-quality early childhood programs offer a range of learning experiences that fall all along this spectrum. By thinking of play as a spectrum, educators can more easily assess where their learning activities and lessons fall on this spectrum by considering the components and intentions of the lesson. Using their professional knowledge of how children develop and learn, their knowledge of individual children, and their understanding of social and cultural contexts, educators can then begin to think strategically about how to target playful learning (especially guided play and games) to leverage how children naturally learn. This more nuanced view of play and playful learning can be used to both meet age-appropriate learning objectives and support engaged, meaningful learning.   

In the kindergarten classroom in the following vignette, children have ample time for play and exploration in centers, where they decide what to play with and what they want to create. These play centers are the focus of the room and the main tool for developing social and emotional as well as academic skills; they reflect and support what the children are learning through whole-group discussions, lessons, and skills-focused stations. In the vignette, the teacher embeds guided play opportunities within the children’s free play.

Studying Bears: Self-Directed Play that Extends What Kindergartners Are Learning

While studying the habits of animals in winter, the class is taking a deeper dive into the lives of American black bears, animals that make their homes in their region. In the block center, one small group of children uses short lengths and cross-sections of real tree branches as blocks along with construction paper to create a forest habitat for black bear figurines. They enlist their friends in the art center to assist in making trees and bushes. Two children are in the writing center. Hearing that their friends are looking for help to create a habitat, they look around and decide a hole punch and blue paper are the perfect tools for making blueberries—a snack black bears love to eat! Now multiple centers and groups of children are involved in making the block center become a black bear habitat.

In the dramatic play center, some of the children pretend to be bear biologists, using stethoscopes, scales, and magnifying glasses to study the health of a couple of plush black bears. When these checkups are complete, the teacher suggests the children could describe the bears’ health in a written “report,” thus embedding guided play within their free play. A few children at the easels in the art center are painting pictures of black bears.

Contributed by Amy Blessing

Free play, or self-directed play, is often heralded as the gold standard of play. It encourages children’s initiative, independence, and problem solving and has been linked to benefits in social and emotional development (e.g., Singer & Singer 1990; Pagani et al. 2010; Romano et al. 2010; Gray 2013) and language and literacy (e.g., Neuman & Roskos 1992). Through play, children explore and make sense of their world, develop imaginative and symbolic thinking, and develop physical competence. The kindergarten children in the example above were developing their fine motor and collaboration skills, displaying their understanding of science concepts (such as the needs of animals and living things), and exercising their literacy and writing skills. Such benefits are precisely why free play has an important role in developmentally appropriate practice. To maximize learning, teachers also provide guided play experiences.

Guided Play

While free play has great value for children, empirical evidence suggests that it is not always sufficient  when there is a pedagogical goal at stake  (Smith & Pellegrini 2008; Alfieri et al. 2011; Fisher et al. 2013; Lillard 2013; Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2013; Toub et al. 2018). This is where guided play comes in.

Guided play allows teachers to focus children’s play around specific learning goals (e.g., standards-based goals), which can be applied to a variety of topics, from learning place value in math to identifying rhyming words in literacy activities. Note, however, that the teacher does not take over the play activity or even direct it. Instead, she asks probing questions that guide the next level of child-directed exploration. This is a perfect example of how a teacher can initiate a context for learning while still leaving the child in charge. In the previous kindergarten vignette, the teacher guided the children in developing their literacy skills as she embedded writing activities within the free play at the centers.

Facilitating Guided Play

Skilled teachers set up environments and facilitate development and learning throughout the early childhood years, such as in the following:

• Ms. Taglieri notices what 4-month-old Anthony looks at and shows interest in. Following his interest and attention, she plays Peekaboo, adjusting her actions (where she places the blanket and peeks out at him) to maintain engagement.
• Ms. Eberhard notices that 22-month-old Abe knows the color yellow. She prepares her environment based on this observation, placing a few yellow objects along with a few red ones on a small table. Abe immediately goes to the table, picking up each yellow item and verbally labeling them (“Lellow!”).
• Mr. Gorga creates intrigue and participation by inviting his preschool class to “be shape detectives” and to “discover the secret of shapes.” As the children explore the shapes, Mr. Gorga offers questions and prompts to guide children to answer the question “What makes them the same kind of shapes?”

An analogy for facilitating guided play is bumper bowling. If bumpers are in place, most children are more likely than not to knock down some pins when they throw the ball down the lane. That is different than teaching children exactly how to throw it (although some children, such as those who have disabilities or who become frustrated if they feel a challenge is too great, may require that level of support or instruction). Guided play is not a one-size-fits-all prescriptive pedagogical technique. Instead, teachers match the level of support they give in guided play to the children in front of them.

Critically, many teachers already implement these kinds of playful activities. When the children are excited by the birds they have seen outside of their window for the past couple of days, the teachers may capitalize on this interest and provide children with materials for a set of playful activities about bird names, diets, habitats, and songs. Asking children to use their hands to mimic an elephant’s trunk when learning vocabulary can promote learning through playful instruction that involves movement. Similarly, embedding vocabulary in stories that are culturally relevant promotes language and early literacy development (García-Alvarado, Arreguín, & Ruiz-Escalante 2020). For example, a teacher who has several children in his class with Mexican heritage decides to read aloud  Too Many Tamales  (by Gary Soto, illus. Ed Martinez) and have the children reenact scenes from it, learning about different literary themes and concepts through play. The children learn more vocabulary, have a better comprehension of the text, and see themselves and their experiences reflected. The teacher also adds some of the ingredients and props for making tamales into the sociodramatic play center (Salinas-González, Arreguín-Anderson, & Alanís 2018) and invites families to share stories about family  tamaladas  (tamale-making parties).

Evidence Supporting Guided Play as a Powerful Pedagogical Tool

Evidence from the science of learning suggests that discovery-based guided play actually results in increased learning for all children relative to both free play and direct instruction (see Alferi et al. 2011). These effects hold across content areas including spatial learning (Fisher et al. 2013), literacy (Han et al. 2010; Nicolopoulou et al. 2015; Hassinger-Das et al. 2016; Cavanaugh et al. 2017; Toub et al. 2018; Moedt & Holmes 2020), and mathematics (Zosh et al. 2016).

There are several possible reasons for guided play’s effectiveness. First, it harnesses the joy that is critical to creativity and learning (e.g., Isen, Daubman, & Nowicki 1987; Resnick 2007). Second, during guided play, the adults help “set the stage for thought and action” by essentially limiting the number of possible outcomes for the children so that the learning goal is discoverable, but children still direct the activity (Weisberg et al. 2014, 276). Teachers work to provide high-quality materials, eliminate distractions, and prepare the space, but then, critically, they let the child play the active role of construction. Third, in guided play, the teacher points the way toward a positive outcome and hence lessens the ambiguity (the degrees of freedom) without directing children to an answer or limiting children to a single discovery (e.g., Bonawitz et al. 2011). And finally, guided play provides the opportunity for new information to be integrated with existing knowledge and updated as children explore.

Reinforcing Numeracy with a Game

The children in Mr. Cohen’s preschool class are at varying levels of understanding in early numeracy skills (e.g., cardinality, one-to-one correspondence, order irrelevance). He knows that his children need some practice with these skills but wants to make the experience joyful while also building these foundational skills. One day, he brings out a new game for them to play—The Great Race. Carla and Michael look up expectantly, and their faces light up when they realize they will be playing a game instead of completing a worksheet. The two quickly pull out the box, setting up the board and choosing their game pieces. Michael begins by flicking the spinner with his finger, landing on 2. “Nice!” Carla exclaims, as Michael moves his game piece, counting “One, two.” Carla takes a turn next, spinning a 1 and promptly counting “one” as she moves her piece one space ahead. “My turn!” Michael says, eager to win the race. As he spins a 2, he pauses. “One . . . two,” he says, hesitating, as he moves his piece to space 4 on the board. Carla corrects him, “I think you mean ‘three, four,’ right? You have to count up from where you are on the board.” Michael nods, remembering the rules Mr. Cohen taught him earlier that day. “Right,” he says, “three, four.”

Similar to guided play, games can be designed in ways that help support learning goals (Hassinger-Das et al. 2017). In this case, instead of adults playing the role of curating the activity, the games themselves provide this type of external scaffolding. The example with Michael and Carla shows how children can learn through games, which is supported by research. In one well-known study, playing a board game (i.e., The Great Race) in which children navigated through a linear, numerical-based game board (i.e., the game board had equally spaced game spaces that go from left to right) resulted in increased numerical development as compared to playing the same game where the numbers were replaced by colors (Siegler & Ramani 2008) or with numbers organized in a circular fashion (Siegler & Ramani 2009). Structuring experiences so that the learning goal is intertwined naturally with children’s play supports their learning. A critical point with both guided play and games is that children are provided with support but still lead their own learning.

Digital educational games have become enormously popular, with tens of thousands of apps marketed as “educational,” although there is no independent review of these apps. Apps and digital games may have educational value when they inspire active, engaged, meaningful, and socially interactive experiences (Hirsh-Pasek et al. 2015), but recent research suggests that many of the most downloaded educational apps do not actually align with these characteristics that lead to learning (Meyer et al. 2021). Teachers should exercise caution and evaluate any activity—digital or not—to see how well it harnesses the power of playful learning.

Next Steps for Educators

Educators are uniquely positioned to prepare today’s children for achievement today and success tomorrow. Further, the evidence is mounting that playful pedagogies appear to be an accessible, powerful tool that harnesses the pillars of learning. This approach can be used across ages and is effective in learning across domains.

By leveraging children’s own interests and mindfully creating activities that let children play their way to new understanding and skills, educators can start using this powerful approach today. By harnessing the children’s interests at different ages and engaging them in playful learning activities, educators can help children learn while having fun. And, importantly, educators will have more fun too when they see children happy and engaged.

As the tide begins to change in individual classrooms, educators need to acknowledge that vast inequalities (e.g., socioeconomic achievement gaps) continue to exist (Kearney & Levine 2016). The larger challenge remains in propelling a cultural shift so that administrators, families, and policymakers understand the way in which educators can support the success of all children through high-quality, playful learning experiences.

Consider the following reflection questions as you reflect how to support equitable playful learning experiences for each and every child:

• One of the best places to start is by thinking about your teaching strengths. Perhaps you are great at sparking joy and engagement. Or maybe you are able to frequently leverage children’s home lives in your lessons. How can you expand practices you already use as an educator or are learning about in your courses to incorporate the playful learning described in this article?
• How can you share the information in this chapter with families, administrators, and other educators? How can you help them understand how play can engage children in deep, joyful learning?

This piece is excerpted from NAEYC’s recently published book  Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth Through Age 8,  Fourth Edition. For more information about the book, visit  NAEYC.org/resources/pubs/books/dap-fourth-edition .

Teaching Play Skills

Pamela Brillante

While many young children with autism spectrum disorder enjoy playing, they can have difficulty engaging in traditional play activities. They may engage in activities that do not look like ordinary play, including playing with only a few specific toys or playing in a specific, repetitive way.

Even though most children learn play skills naturally, sometimes families and teachers have to teach children how to play. Learning how to play will help develop many other skills young children need for the future, including

• social skills:  taking turns, sharing, and working cooperatively
• cognitive skills:  problem-solving skills, early academic skills
• communication skills:  responding to others, asking questions
• physical skills:  body awareness, fine and gross motor coordination

Several evidence-based therapeutic approaches to teaching young children with autism focus on teaching play skills, including

• The Play Project:  https://playproject.org
• The Greenspan Floortime approach: https://stanleygreenspan.com
• Integrated Play Group (IPG) Model: www.wolfberg.com

While many children with autism have professionals and therapists working with them, teachers and families should work collaboratively and provide multiple opportunities for children to practice new skills and engage in play at their own level. For example, focus on simple activities that promote engagement between the adult and the child as well as the child and their peers without disabilities, including playing with things such as bubbles, cause-and-effect toys, and interactive books. You can also use the child’s preferred toy in the play, like having the Spider-Man figure be the one popping the bubbles.

Pamela Brillante , EdD, has spent 30 years working as a special education teacher, administrator, consultant, and professor. In addition to her full-time faculty position in the Department of Special Education, Professional Counseling and Disability Studies at William Paterson University of New Jersey, Dr. Brillante continues to consult with school districts and present to teachers and families on the topic of high-quality, inclusive early childhood practices.  

Photographs: © Getty Images Copyright © 2022 by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. See Permissions and Reprints online at  NAEYC.org/resources/permissions .

Alfieri, L., P.J. Brooks, N.J. Aldrich, & H.R. Tenenbaum. 2011. “Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning?” Journal of Educational Psychology 103 (1): 1–18.  

Bassok, D., S. Latham, & A. Rorem. 2016. “Is Kindergarten the New First Grade?” AERA Open 2 (1): 1–31. doi.10.1177/2332858415616358. 

Bergen, D., ed. 1988. Play as a Medium for Learning and Development: A Handbook of Theory and Practice . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. 

Bonawitz, E.B., P. Shafto, H. Gweon, N.D. Goodman, E.S. Spelke, & L. Schulz. 2011. “The Double-Edged Sword of Pedagogy: Instruction Limits Spontaneous Exploration and Discovery.” Cognition 120 (3): 322–30. 

Cavanaugh, D.M., K.J. Clemence, M.M. Teale, A.C. Rule, & S.E. Montgomery. 2017. “Kindergarten Scores, Storytelling, Executive Function, and Motivation Improved Through Literacy-Rich Guided Play.” Journal of Early Childhood Education 45 (6): 1–13. 

Christakis, E. 2016. The Importance of Being Little: What Preschoolers Really Need from Grownups . New York: Penguin Books.  

Duncan, G. J., A. Claessens, A.C. Huston, L.S. Pagani, M. Engel, H. Sexton, C.J. Dowsett, K. Magnuson, P. Klebanov, L. Feinstein, J. Brooks-Gunn, K. Duckworth, & C. Japel. 2007. “School Readiness and Later Achievement.” Developmental Psychology 43 (6): 1428–46. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428 .  

Fisher, K.R., K. Hirsh-Pasek, N. Newcombe, & R.M. Golinkoff. 2013. “Taking Shape: Supporting Preschoolers’ Acquisition of Geometric Knowledge Through Guided Play.” Child Development 84 (6): 1872–78. 

García-Alvarado, S., M.G. Arreguín, & J.A. Ruiz-Escalante. 2020. “Mexican-American Preschoolers as Co-Creators of Zones of Proximal Development During Retellings of Culturally Relevant Stories: A Participatory Study.” Journal of Early Childhood Literacy : 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1468798420930339 . 

Gray, P. 2013. Free to Learn: Why Unleashing the Instinct to Play Will Make Our Children Happier, More Self-Reliant, and Better Students for Life . New York: Basic Books.  

Han, M., N. Moore, C. Vukelich, & M. Buell. 2010. “Does Play Make a Difference? How Play Intervention Affects the Vocabulary Learning of At-Risk Preschoolers.” American Journal of Play 3 (1): 82–105. 

Hannaway, J., & L. Hamilton. 2008. Accountability Policies: Implications for School and Classroom Practices . Washington, DC: Urban Institute. http://webarchive.urban.org/publications/411779.html . 

Hassinger-Das, B., K. Ridge, A. Parker, R.M. Golinkoff, K. Hirsh-Pasek, & D.K. Dickinson. 2016. “Building Vocabulary Knowledge in Preschoolers Through Shared Book Reading and Gameplay.” Mind, Brain, and Education 10 (2): 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12103 . 

Hassinger-Das, B., T.S. Toub, J.M. Zosh, J. Michnick, R. Golinkoff, & K. Hirsh-Pasek. 2017. “More Than Just Fun: A Place for Games in Playful Learning.” Infancia y aprendizaje: Journal for the Study of Education and Development 40 (2): 191–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2017.1292684 . 

Hirsh-Pasek, K., & R.M. Golinkoff. 2008. “Why Play = Learning.” In Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development [online], eds. R.E. Tremblay, M. Boivin, & R.D. Peters, topic ed. P.K. Smith, 1–6. Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development and Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development. www.child-encyclopedia.com/play/according-experts/why-play-learning . 

Hirsh-Pasek, K., H. S. Hadani, E. Blinkoff, & R. M. Golinkoff. 2020. A new path to education reform: Playful learning promotes 21st-century skills in schools and beyond . The Brookings Institution: Big Ideas Policy Report. www.brookings.edu/policy2020/bigideas/a-new-path-to-education-reform-playful-learning-promotes-21st-century-skills-in-schools-and-beyond . 

Hirsh-Pasek, K., J.M. Zosh, R.M. Golinkoff, J.H. Gray, M.B. Robb, & J. Kaufman. 2015. “Putting Education in ‘Educational’ Apps: Lessons from the Science of Learning.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 16 (1): 3–34. 

Isen, A.M., K.A. Daubman, & G.P. Nowicki. 1987. “Positive Affect Facilitates Creative Problem Solving.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (6): 1122–31. 

Kearney, M.S., & P.B. Levine. (2016, Spring). Income, Inequality, Social Mobility, and the Decision to Drop Out of High School . Washington, DC: Brookings. www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/income-inequality-social-mobility-and-the-decision-to-drop-out-of-high-school . 

King, A. 1993. “From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side.” College Teaching 41 (1): 30–35.  

Lillard, A.S. 2013. “Playful Learning and Montessori Education.” American Journal of Play 5 (2): 157–86. 

Meyer, M., J.M. Zosh, C. McLaren, M. Robb, R.M. Golinkoff, K. Hirsh-Pasek, & J. Radesky. 2021. “How Educational Are ‘Educational’ Apps for Young Children? App Store Content Analysis Using the Four Pillars of Learning Framework.” Journal of Children and Media . Published online February 23. 

Miller, E., & J. Almon. 2009. Crisis in the Kindergarten: Why Children Need to Play in School . College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood. https:// files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504839.pdf . 

Moedt, K., & R.M. Holmes. 2020. “The Effects of Purposeful Play After Shared Storybook Readings on Kindergarten Children’s Reading Comprehension, Creativity, and Language Skills and Abilities.” Early Child Development and Care 190 (6): 839–54. 

NAEYC. 2020. “Developmentally Appropriate Practice.” Position statement. Washington, DC: NAEYC. www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/dap .  

Neuman, S.B., & K. Roskos. 1992. “Literacy Objects as Cultural Tools: Effects on Children’s Literacy Behaviors in Play.” Reading Research Quarterly 27 (3): 202–25.  

Nicolopoulou, A., K.S. Cortina, H. Ilgaz, C.B. Cates, & A.B. de Sá. 2015. “Using a Narrative- and Play-Based Activity to Promote Low-Income Preschoolers’ Oral Language, Emergent Literacy, and Social Competence.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 31 (2): 147–62. 

Pagani, L.S., C. Fitzpatrick, I. Archambault, & M. Janosz. 2010. “School Readiness and Later Achievement: A French Canadian Replication and Extension.” Developmental Psychology 46 (5): 984–94.  

Pedulla, J.J., L.M. Abrams, G.F. Madaus, M.K. Russell, M.A. Ramos, & J. Miao. 2003. “Perceived Effect of State-Mandated Testing Programs on Teaching and Learning: Findings from a National Survey of Teachers” (ED481836). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED481836 . 

Ravitch, D. 2010. “Why Public Schools Need Democratic Governance.” Phi Delta Kappan 91 (6): 24–27. 

Resnick, M. 2007. “All I Really Need to Know (About Creative Thinking) I Learned (by Studying How Children Learn) in Kindergarten.” In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity & Cognition , 1–6. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. 

Romano, E., L. Babchishin, L.S. Pagani, & D. Kohen. 2010. “School Readiness and Later Achievement: Replication and Extension Using a Nationwide Canadian Survey.” Developmental Psychology 46 (5): 995–1007.  

Salinas-González, I., M.G. Arreguín-Anderson, & I. Alanís. 2018. “Supporting Language: Culturally Rich Dramatic Play.” Teaching Young Children 11 (2): 4–6. 

Siegler, R.S., & G.B. Ramani. 2008. “Playing Linear Numerical Board Games Promotes Low-Income Children’s Numerical Development.” Developmental Science 11 (5): 655–61. 

Siegler, R.S., & G.B. Ramani. 2009. “Playing Linear Number Board Games—but Not Circular Ones—Improves Low-Income Preschoolers’ Numerical Understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology 101 (3): 545–60. 

Sim, Z., & F. Xu. 2015. “Toddlers Learn from Facilitated Play, Not Free Play.” In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , Berkeley, CA. https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/past-conferences . 

Singer, D.G., & J.L. Singer. 1990. The House of Make-Believe: Children’s Play and the Developing Imagination . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  

Smith, K. 1993. “Becoming the ‘Guide on the Side.’” Educational Leadership 51 (2): 35–37.  

Smith P.K., & A. Pellegrini. 2008. “Learning Through Play.” In Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development [online], eds. R.E. Tremblay, M. Boivin, & R.D. Peters, 1–6. Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development and Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development. https://www.child-encyclopedia.com/pdf/expert/play/according-experts/learning-through-play . 

Souto-Manning, M. 2017. “Is Play a Privilege or a Right? And What’s Our Responsibility? On the Role of Play for Equity in Early Childhood Education.” Foreword. Early Child Development and Care 187 (5–6): 785–87. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03004430.2016.1266588 . 

Toub, T.S., B. Hassinger-Das, K.T. Nesbitt, H. Ilgaz, D.S. Weisberg, K. Hirsh-Pasek, R.M. Golinkoff, A. Nicolopoulou, & D.K. Dickinson. 2018. “The Language of Play: Developing Preschool Vocabulary Through Play Following Shared Book-Reading.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 45 (4): 1–17.  

Weisberg, D.S., K. Hirsh-Pasek, & R.M. Golinkoff. 2013. “Guided Play: Where Curricular Goals Meet a Playful Pedagogy.” Mind, Brain, and Education 7 (2): 104–12. 

Weisberg, D.S., K. Hirsh-Pasek, R.M. Golinkoff, & B.D. McCandliss. 2014. “Mise en place: Setting the Stage for Thought and Action.” Trends in Cognitive Science 18 (6): 276–78. 

Zosh, J.M., B. Hassinger-Das, T.S. Toub, K. Hirsh-Pasek, & R. Golinkoff. 2016. “Playing with Mathematics: How Play Supports Learning and the Common Core State Standards.” Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College 7 (1): 45–49. https://doi.org/10.7916/jmetc.v7i1.787 . 

Zosh, J.M., K. Hirsh-Pasek, E.J. Hopkins, H. Jensen, C. Liu, D. Neale, S.L. Solis, & D. Whitebread. 2018. “Accessing the Inaccessible: Redefining Play as a Spectrum.” Frontiers in Psychology 9: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01124 . 

Jennifer M. Zosh, PhD, is professor of human development and family studies at Penn State Brandywine. Most recently, her work has focused on technology and its impact on children as well as playful learning as a powerful pedagogy. She publishes journal articles, book chapters, blogs, and white papers and focuses on the dissemination of developmental research.

Caroline Gaudreau, PhD, is a research professional at the TMW Center for Early Learning + Public Health at the University of Chicago. She received her PhD from the University of Delaware, where she studied how children learn to ask questions and interact with screen media. She is passionate about disseminating research and interventions to families across the country.

Roberta Michnick Golinkoff, PhD, conducts research on language development, the benefits of play, spatial learning, and the effects of media on children. A member of the National Academy of Education, she is a cofounder of Playful Learning Landscapes, Learning Science Exchange, and the Ultimate Playbook for Reimagining Education. Her last book, Becoming Brilliant: What Science Tells Us About Raising Successful Children (American Psychological Association, 2016), reached the New York Times bestseller list.

Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, PhD, is the Lefkowitz Faculty Fellow in the Psychology and Neuroscience department at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  She is also a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Her research examines the development of early language and literacy, the role of play in learning, and learning and technology. [email protected]

Vol. 77, No. 2

Print this article

Early childhood education : Journals

• Childhood education "The purpose of Childhood Education, an official journal of the Association for Childhood Education International, is to capture and disseminate information about exciting and innovative models, programs, funding approaches, practices, policies, research, and other areas that are being explored and implemented to improve the education of children around the world."
• Contemporary issues in early childhood "Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood is a peer-reviewed international research journal. The journal provides a forum for researchers and professionals who are exploring new and alternative perspectives in their work with young children (from birth to eight years of age) and their families. CIEC aims to present opportunities for scholars to highlight the ways in which the boundaries of early childhood studies and practice are expanding, and for readers to participate in the discussion of emerging issues, contradictions and possibilities."
• Early childhood education journal "The Early Childhood Education Journal analyzes issues, trends, policies, and practices for early childhood education from birth through age eight. In addition, the journal offers well documented points of view and practical recommendations."
• Early childhood research quarterly "Early Childhood Research Quarterly (ECRQ) publishes research on early childhood education and development from birth through 8 years of age. ECRQ publishes predominantly empirical research (quantitative or qualitative methods) on issues of interest to early childhood development, theory, and educational practice."
• Early education and development "Early Education and Development (EE&D) is a multi-disciplinary professional journal that publishes primarily empirical research on the links between early childhood education and children's development from birth to age 8. It is international in scope and designed to emphasize the implications of research and solid scientific information for practice and policy. EE&D is designed for researchers and practitioners involved in preschool and education services for children and their families."
• Journal of early childhood teacher education "The Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education is the official journal of the National Association of Early Childhood Teacher Educators. Its purpose is to provide a forum for consideration of issues and for exchange of information and ideas about research and practice in early childhood teacher education."
• Journal of research in childhood education : JRCE "The Journal of Research in Childhood Education, a publication of the Association for Childhood Education International, features articles that advance knowledge and theory of the education of children, infancy through early adolescence."
• YC young children "Young Children is a peer-reviewed professional journal published by the National Association for the Education of Young Children."
• << Previous: Recent print books
• Next: Databases >>
• Background information
• Recent e-books
• Recent print books
• Connect to Stanford e-resources
• Related guides
• Last Updated: Sep 6, 2024 9:59 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.stanford.edu/early_childhood_ed

• EPBJ Awards

The Case for Early Childhood Education as Health and Economic Policy

Families across the United States are facing significant challenges due to the limited availability and affordability of high-quality early childhood care options for children under the age of 6. Child care access is especially challenging for those seeking to reenter the workforce. Rethinking child care, especially early childhood education, as health care is essential for achieving a better future and economic security for children, families, and caregivers across the U.S.

Early Childhood Education: Health and Economic Challenges

Children and their families experience more hardships throughout their lifetimes because the U.S. lacks quality early childhood education for children whose parents want to join the workforce during their children’s infancy and toddler years. Families with young children lose the opportunity for better health and increased wealth over their lifetimes when child care, including early childhood education, is unavailable to them.

What Is the Magnitude of Child Care in the U.S.?

Per data from the U.S. Census Survey,  over 17 million households had young children under the age of 6 in 2022, and nearly 19 million children under the age of 5 in the U.S. as of 2023, according to UNICEF. In 2022, the U.S. Census Survey noted over one in three parents with children under the age of 6 reported that they did not work because they did not have any type of child care arrangement. A conservative estimate from a recent U.S. Department of Labor’s Women Bureau report reports that “more than $775 billion in additional economic activity per year” is lost because of the lack of labor force participation. The lack of accessible high-quality child care in general and particularly early childhood education, not only affects families, depriving them of opportunities for improved health and wealth, but also has a significant impact on the economic health of the country.

What Is the Effect on the Well-Being of Children?

Children’s brain development is fundamentally shaped by the quality of their early interactions and experiences, producing either robust or lacking foundations for their ability to learn, overall health, and behavior as they mature throughout their lives. During a child’s first few years, the brain forms over one million neural connections every second, “ a pace never repeated again .” A recent U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) report from the Administration for Children and Families echoes that children benefit from high-quality early childhood education by learning important “foundational skills for math, reading, self-control, and positive relationships.” There are short-term effects on child cognitive development, executive functioning, and social skills at the kindergarten level and similar intermediate effects through primary and secondary school. There are also estimated long-term effects , including “higher educational attainment, better adult health,” and, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “higher earnings throughout employment years.”

What Is the Effect on the Well-Being of Families?

Without high-quality early child care available, unpaid caregivers suffer the loss of the opportunity to achieve better health, wealth, and well-being through workforce participation. The long-term consequences include lower wages, missed promotions, lost job tenure, loss of skills, and less contribution to retirement plans, when they become employed or reemployed. The average lifetime cost of unpaid caregiving is $420,000 in lost earnings and retirement income for college-educated mothers, and $295,000 for all mothers in the U.S. This is economically significant for many families.

Further, the recent COVID-19 pandemic provided important insights into the support structure of early childhood care necessary for families with young children to thrive. During the pandemic, the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report found that one out of four unpaid caregivers of children reported that their mental health had worsened. Resenting the caregiving role was associated with higher odds of an adverse mental health symptom while having support was associated with lower odds. The availability of high-quality early childhood education could mitigate the negative mental health effects that unsupported caregivers experience. It is time to rethink child care as essential health care for families , both children and caregivers.

Why Is High-Quality Early Childhood Care and Education Out of Reach?

Simply put, the market for early childhood education does not work well. There is an excess in demand and not enough child care slots offered. Multiple causes for this include:

• Workforce challenges including lack of competitive pay and high turnover.
• High costs associated with providing quality care.
• Fragile business models vulnerable to economic shocks.

Child Tax Credit

In comparison to other countries, the U.S. invests very little in family benefits at slightly more than half a percent of GDP compared to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average of 2.1% of GDP in 2019.

The Child Tax Credit is a tax break for families raising children. For 2021, the American Rescue Plan expanded the Child Tax Credit to $3,600 for a child under the age of 6 for families that qualify. In 2022 and 2023, the Child Tax Credit is again limited to $2,000, with $1,600 being refundable, for children under the age of 6.

Figure 1 — Child Care Employment, Total Employment (Thousands)

The Child Care Stabilization Act was a part of the American Rescue Plan Act, which was enacted to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. Through this program, the federal government provided $24 billion in subsidies to child care providers and indeed did stabilize the market for child care according to a working paper by the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) cited by the White House (Figure 1). The program supported “ over 225,000 care providers serving as many as 10 million children ”; eight out of ten licensed care providers in the U.S. received assistance. According to the same CEA report , funds from the Child Care Stabilization Act both increased the number of child care workers and increased the wages for those workers. Since the program’s expiration in November 2023, some individual state legislative and executive branches have been moving to address the child care crisis through various programs. However, child care providers feel the sting of losing federal support.

Policy Recommendations

A multipronged policy approach could provide affordable, high-quality early childhood education for any family who would like to access it by offering both demand and supply-side solutions to the problem. Stabilization efforts through the American Rescue Plan brought the industry back to baseline in terms of child care employment, but continued efforts are needed to address the crisis and improve the availability and affordability of child care in years to come:

• Expand the Child Tax Credit for families with young children aged 5 and under to $3,600 with full refundability, making the high cost of child care more affordable for working families.
• Continue the Child Care Stabilization Act through the next five years to expand the availability and affordability of early childhood care by fortifying existing care centers and investing in new ones.

The resulting policy effect would be an increase both in supply and demand to the benefit of children, their parents, and society. 

To treat child care as health care is to recognize the short- and long-term effects on the well-being of families both in health and wealth. The existing child care market is failing families by not providing the early child care education that is needed and wanted. To address both the supply and demand for child care, tax credits, and child care subsidies provide opportunities that benefit children, their parents, and society. Indeed, investing in children is investing in the future.

This material may be quoted or reproduced without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given to the author and Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The views expressed herein are those of the individual author(s), and do not necessarily represent the views of Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election results
• Google trends
• AP & Elections
• College football
• Auto Racing
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Jill Biden and Lloyd Austin visit an Alabama base to tout expanded military benefits

First lady Jill Biden, center, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, left, watch four and five-year-olds build with blocks at a military early childhood education program at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, Friday, Sept. 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Tara Copp)

First lady Jill Biden and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin watch four and five-year-olds build with blocks at a military early childhood education program at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, Friday, Sept. 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Tara Copp)

First lady Jill Biden is greeted by Charlene Austin as she arrives at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, as Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and others look on, Friday, Sept. 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Tara Copp)

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his wife Charlene, arrive at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, Friday, Sept. 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Tara Copp)

FILE - First lady Jill Biden walks on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, July 7, 2024. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

• Copy Link copied

WASHINGTON (AP) — First lady Jill Biden and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin traveled Friday to Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama to highlight programs that the Pentagon and White House are rolling out to improve service members’ quality of life as well as early childhood education in the military.

Biden and Austin visited a pre-kindergarten program the first lady has championed that funds universal preschool for children aged 3 and 4. The administration plans to expand it beyond military facilities and into education systems nationwide.

She said the program at Maxwell Elementary School — which provides full-day pre-kindergarten care for military children —“is part of the blueprint for making high-quality preschool available to every 3- and 4-year-old in America.”

In the on-base classroom, children identified letters, and once they did, got to feed a green paper dinosaur that Austin and Biden took turns holding. The kids also sang a song about frogs.

Austin said the Pentagon is looking at new ways to give service members more support to address higher prices for goods and housing. He has made improving troop quality of life a goal during his time as defense secretary.

To that end, the Pentagon is increasing the number of days that military families can stay in paid temporary housing when they move from base to base in response to concerns that it’s been difficult to find off-base housing in competitive real estate markets. Austin also is looking at increasing the amount of money troops receive to cover uniform costs.

“We heard loud and clear that the families juggling work and raising kids need affordable child care and quality early childhood education,” Austin said.

His aim is to retain service members and show prospective recruits that the programs the Pentagon offers to support a military career, including more housing help, career assistance for spouses and pay raises.

Earlier this year, the Army, Marine Corps and Air Force reported they expect to meet recruitment goals for this budget year, but the Navy said it may fall short.

It has become more difficult for the military to recruit young people to serve. Fewer families have a direct connection to the military and more young people fall short of the fitness requirements to qualify.

Volume 52, Issue 7

Special Issue on Picturebooks and Young Children: Potential, Power, and Practices

• Patricia A. Crawford,
• Sherron Killingsworth Roberts,

Picturebooks and Young Children: Potential, Power, and Practices

• Patricia A. Crawford
• Sherron Killingsworth Roberts

Kindergarten Children’s Talk About Illustration Techniques in an Almost Wordless Picturebook

• Sylvia Pantaleo

Picturebooks in the Primary Grades: Representation and the Stories Shared About Who Belongs in STEM

• Victoria Cardullo
• Megan Burton

Exploring Books for Beginning Readers: Comparing Leveled Readers and Geisel Award Books

• Samuel DeJulio
• Miriam Martinez
• María Leija

Mathematics Content in Early Childhood Classroom Libraries: Alignment with Common Core Mathematics Standards

• Kathryn Lake MacKay
• Brandon G. McMillan
• Emma K. Tolman

Children’s Olfactory Picturebooks: Charting New Trends in Early Childhood Education

• Natalia Ingebretsen Kucirkova
• Selim Tosun

Concept, Ritual, and Narrative: What Are Toddler Books?

The power of picturebooks to support early elementary teachers’ racial literacy in communities of practice: an example from the 3rs (reading, racial equity, relationships).

• Caitlin F. Spear
• Jennifer O. Briggs
• Jennifer Ponce-Cori

Bilingual Students’ Meaning-Making Strategies When Exploring Wordless Picturebooks in Interactive Shared Reading

• Chaehyun Lee

Reading, Writing, and (Anti-)Racist Picturebooks: Reframing Literacy Engagements

• Annemarie Kaczmarczyk
• Karyn Allee

Dreamcatchers, Water Protectors, and the Question of Authenticity: Supporting Teachers in Choosing and Using Indigenous Children's Literature

• April Mattix Foster
• Courtney Hayes

Supporting Children Through Grief: A Content Analysis of Picturebooks About Death

• Katie Danielson
• Hailey Colman

Picturebooks About Disasters: Incorporating Interactive Read-Alouds to Support Young Children’s Social-Emotional Learning

• Natalie Conrad Barnyak
• Jacqueline M. Myers

A Snapshot of Early Childhood Teachers’ Read-Aloud Selections

• Leslie La Croix
• Allison Ward Parsons

Positive Body Image-Related Strategies in Children’s Picturebooks

• Tingting Xu
• Sarah Savoy

Oopses on the Page: A Content Analysis of Children’s Picturebooks Featuring Mistakes

• Maleka Donaldson
• Selma Benmoussa

The Effect of Interactive Picturebook Reading on Problem-Solving Skills in Preschool: A Quasi-Experiment

• Joris Van Elsen
• Leen Catrysse
• Sven De Maeyer

The Role of Picturebooks in Supporting the Mathematical Knowledge of Preschool Teacher Candidates

• Dilşad Güven Akdeniz

Building Classroom Community Through Daily Mantras Inspired by Children’s Picturebooks

Making Waves: Early Childhood Teachers’ Experiences with Multicultural Picturebooks to Promote Equitable Classrooms

• Grace Francis

What’s the Story with Storytime?: An Examination of Preschool Teachers’ Drama-Based and Shared Reading Practices During Picturebook Read-Aloud

• Annette C. Schmidt
• Melissa Pierce-Rivera
• M. Adelaida Restrepo

Facilitating Critical Discussion of Picturebooks Through Socratic Seminars in a Kindergarten Classroom

• Katie Schrodt
• Lydia Smith

Depictions of Refugees in Children’s Picturebooks in Turkey

• Menşure Alkış Küçükaydın
• Ömer Gökhan Ulum

Story-Driven Embodied Play: Empowering Young Children’s Agency in Science Learning

• Kyungjin Cho

Content Analysis of Portrayals of Climate Change in Turkish Picturebooks

• Burcu Sarı Uğurlu
• Sezen Apaydın

The Reading Builds Empathy Pilot Survey: Picturebooks for Empathy Development

• Valerie Lorene Williams-Sanchez
• Kyle DeMeo Cook

“Reading is Social”: Dialogic Responses to Interactive Read-Alouds with Nonfiction Picturebooks

• Courtney Shimek

The Portrayal of Characters with Learning Disabilities in Children’s Picturebooks

• Leah K. Tiisler
• Kenya E. Wolff

A Comparative Analysis of Chinese and Korean Picturebooks for Early Childhood Climate Change Education

• So Hyun Jang
• Tong Tong Kang

When the Sun is Out of the Picture: Exploring a Variation Theory Key to Children’s Imagination in a Picturebook Reading Activity

• Anna Backman

Authenticity, Accuracy, and Respect in Picturebooks About Africa: Implications for Pedagogy in the United States

• Jacqueline Ariri Onchwari
• Meghan Hesterman

Developing Young Children’s Physical Literacy Through Picturebooks

• Athanasia Chatzipanteli
• Georgios S. Gorozidis

Developing Emotional Intelligence in Children Through Dialogic Reading, Self-made Books, and Visible Thinking Routines

Shared Picturebook Reading in a Preschool Class: Promoting Narrative Comprehension Through Inferential Talk and Text Difficulty

• Ageliki Nicolopoulou
• Elizabeth Hale
• Gina Maurer

The Relationship Between Shared Picturebook Reading and Language Development in Young Children

• Sheila Combs
• Kristina N. Higgins

Who Gets to Decide? A Case Study Exploring Tennessee’s Early Childhood Literacy Initiatives

• Bethany Parker
• Amy Wilson-Ratliff
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research