Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Child-centered, play-based curriculum at a Hong Kong kindergarten and nursery: a gap analysis
(USC Thesis Other)
Child-centered, play-based curriculum at a Hong Kong kindergarten and nursery: a gap analysis
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
1
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM AT A HONG KONG
KINDERGARTEN AND NURSERY: A GAP ANALYSIS
by
Victor Koong
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
8 August 2016
Copyright 2016 Victor Koong
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
2
Acknowledgments
First I owe a tremendous amount of gratitude to my family, especially my wife, Purina.
Her support for me to pursue a doctoral degree has never wavered. I truly believe we tackled this
together, just as we have on many other obstacles. Most importantly she has always been there
to remind me of my capabilities when I felt discouraged. She is truly a source of joy and
inspiration in my life. I would also like to thank my three children, Kriscia, Hadyn and Annalise
for their encouragement and for their understanding of a father who seemed to be constantly
doing his homework. I hope one day they will understand that they can accomplish anything with
hard work and determination. I am also forever grateful to my mother, Christina, who taught me
the value of persistent and perseverance. She believed in me and encouraged me to reach my full
potential. She has and will always serve as a role model for me and my family. I am grateful for
the support of my sisters, Millie and Maggie, and for the trails they have blazed for me and for
their enduring support for me under any situation.
I would also like to express my deep appreciation to all the professors and the
administration team of the Global Executive Ed.D program for their support, guidance and
seemingly effortless logistical arrangement. I want to especially express my gratitude to my
dissertation committee, Dr. Larry Picus, Dr. Cathy Krop and Dr. Mark Robinson, for their advice
and especially my dissertation chair, Dr. Larry Picus, for his motivation and encouragement
throughout the dissertation process. I have benefitted tremendously from his insight and
guidance.
I would also like to thank all those who have help me in completing my dissertation
process including all my colleagues from Cohort 3, Pamela Chan and Karen Lai.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
3
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments 2
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 9
Chapter One: Introduction 10
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Performance Status 11
Related Literature 12
Importance of Narrowing the Gap 15
Organizational Performance Goal 15
Stakeholders and Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 15
Stakeholders for the Study and Stakeholder Performance Gap 16
Purpose of the Study and Questions 17
Methodological Framework 18
Definitions 18
Organization of the Study 19
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 20
Current State of Pre-School Education in Hong Kong 20
Kindergartens and Nurseries in Hong Kong 20
Education Bureau of Hong Kong (EDB) and Suggested Curriculum 21
The Definition of Play 22
Disposition or Characteristic of Play 22
State of Playfulness 23
Different Types of Play 25
The Benefits of Play 27
Strong Foundation in Cognitive Concepts 27
Strong Foundation in Social Concepts 28
Strong Foundation in Emotional Concepts 29
Approaches to Learning Through Play 30
Constructivist Theory of Learning 30
Integrating Play and Learning 31
Three Levels of Play 32
Mathematical Concepts Through Play 33
Literacy Through Play 34
Socioemotional Skills Through Play 35
Play-Based Curriculum 35
Play Recognized as Effective Pedagogy 35
Teaching Academics Too Early May Impact Learning 36
Assumed Causes from Literature Review 37
Pre-School Teacher’s Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Needs 37
Summary and Conclusion 40
Chapter Three: Methodology 41
Purpose of the Project and Guiding Questions 41
Methodological Framework 41
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
4
Assumed Causes of the Performance Gap 43
Preliminary Scanning Data 44
Learning and Motivation Theory 46
Participating Stakeholders 52
Data Collection 53
Surveys 53
Interviews 54
Observations 54
Validation of the Performance Issues 55
Validation of the Performance Issue: Knowledge 55
Validation of Performance Issue: Motivation 55
Validation of Performance Issue: Organization 56
Data Analysis 56
Trustworthiness of Data 56
Role of the Researcher 57
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 58
Participating Stakeholders 58
Results and Findings for Knowledge Assumed Causes 61
Survey Results 61
Summary of Survey Results for Knowledge Causes 80
Findings from Interviews 81
Findings from Classroom Observation 88
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge Assumed Causes 91
Results and Findings for Motivation Assumed Causes 94
Survey Results 95
Summary of Survey Results for Motivation Causes 107
Findings from Interviews 107
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Assumed Causes 111
Results and Findings for Organizational Assumed Causes 113
Survey Results 113
Summary of Survey Results for Organizational Causes 124
Findings from Interviews 124
Synthesis of Results and Findings of Organization Assumed Causes 128
Summary of Results and Findings 130
Chapter Five: Solutions, Implementation and Evaluation 133
Solutions for Knowledge and Skills Causes 135
Factual Knowledge Solutions 135
Conceptual Knowledge Solutions 137
Solutions for Motivation Causes 138
Attainment Value Solutions 138
Solutions for Organizational Causes 140
Cultural Settings: Administrative Work 140
Cultural Setting: Curriculum Expectations and Demands 141
Cultural Model: Parents’ Academic Focused Expectations 142
Implementation Plan 143
Stage One: Supplemental Guide and First Staff Development Day 143
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
5
Stage Two: Play Workshop Training 145
Stage Three: Parents and Teachers Breakfast Meetings 147
Implementation Plan Timeline 148
Evaluation Plan 150
Stage One: Supplemental Guide and First Staff Development Day 150
Stage Two: Play Workshop Training 152
Stage Three: Parent-Teacher Breakfast Meeting 153
Limitation and Delimitations 154
Future Research 155
Conclusion 156
References 159
Appendix A: Survey Instrument 168
Appendix B: Interview Questions 174
Appendix C: Classroom Observation Protocol 177
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
6
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Organizational Goal and Stakeholders’ Goals 16
Table 2: Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational
Issues 50
Table 3: Demographics of the Teachers Who Completed the Surveys 60
Table 4: Summary of Validated Knowledge Assumed Causes 93
Table 5: Question 22 (What are parents” general feelings regarding play and learning
through play in the classrooms? Responses categorized by grade levels) 101
Table 6: Question 22 (What are the parents’ general feelings regarding play and learning
through play in the classrooms? Responses categorized by language specialty) 102
Table 7: Summary of Validated Motivation Causes 112
Table 8: Summary of Validated Organizational Assumed Causes 129
Table 9: Summary of Validated Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Causes 131
Table 10: Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Validated Causes and
Solutions 134
Table 11: Implementation Plan Timeline 149
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
7
List of Figures
Figure 1. Responses to Question 1 About Recommendation of The EDB for Learning
Through Play Based On Teachers’ Language Specialty 63
Figure 2. Responses to Question 2 Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty 64
Figure 3. Responses to Question 3 by the Number of Correct Answers Identified Based on
Teachers’ Language Specialty 65
Figure 4. Responses to Question 4 Based on the Number of Correct Characteristics
Identified Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty 67
Figure 5. Responses to Question 4 Based on Common Characteristics and Frequencies of
Teachers’ Language Specialty 67
Figure 6. Responses to Question 5 Based on the Number of Correct Answers Identified by
Teachers 69
Figure 7. Responses to Question 6 About Knowledge of Types of Play 70
Figure 8. Responses to Survey Question 7 Where Play Emphasizes Children as Constructors
of Knowledge 71
Figure 9. Responses to Question 16 Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty and Categorized
by the Five Active Roles of Teachers 72
Figure 10. Responses to Questions 11, 12 and 13 About Mathematical, Literacy and Social
Competence Knowledge Skills 74
Figure 11. Responses to Question 8 About Knowing the Limitations of Teachers’
Intervention. 75
Figure 12. Responses to Question 9 About Evaluating Level of Play 76
Figure 13. Responses to Question 10 About Different Methods to Increase Play 77
Figure 14. Responses to Question 14 About Evaluating Strengths and Challenges in
Implementing Learning Through Play Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty 78
Figure 15. Responses to Question 15 about Frequency of Evaluating Strengths and
Challenges Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty 79
Figure 16. Responses to Question 17 About Children Learning Through Play 96
Figure 17. Responses to Question 19 About Children Learning Faster Through Play 96
Figure 18. Responses to Question 18 About Play to Fill-In Free Time Only 97
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
8
Figure 19. Responses for Question 20 About Teaching Through Play Activities
Compared to Traditional Methods 99
Figure 20. Responses for Question 21 About Confidence in Ability to Implement Learning
Through Play 99
Figure 21. Responses to Question 23 Based on Language Specialty About Parents’
Expectations 103
Figure 22. Responses to Question 23 Based on Grade Levels of Participants 104
Figure 23. Responses to Question 24 About the Frequency of Parents Asking About Their
Child’s Academic Readiness 24 Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty 105
Figure 24. Responses to Question 31 About Communication Channels 106
Figure 25. Responses to Question 25 About Enough Resources to Incorporate Play-Based
Learning 114
Figure 26. Responses to Question 26 About the Environment and Facilities for a
Child-Centered Pedagogy 115
Figure 27. Responses to Question 30 About too Much Administrative Work to Incorporate
More Play Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty 116
Figure 28. Response to Question 32 About Curriculum Demands and Incorporating Play
Based on Teacher’s Language Specialty 117
Figure 29. Responses to Question 27 About Resistance to Change 118
Figure 30. Responses to Question 28 About Faith in Learning Through Play as a Preferred
Learning Method 119
Figure 31. Responses to Question 29 by Number of Participants Ranking Each Asset 121
Figure 32. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Art Skills Based on
Teachers’ Grade Level 121
Figure 33. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Socialization Skills Based
on Teachers’ Grade Level 122
Figure 34. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Problem Solving Skills
Based on Teachers’ Grade Level 122
Figure 35. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Math Skills Based on
Teachers’ Grade Level 123
Figure 36. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the importance of Literacy Skills Based on
Teacher’s Grade Level 123
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
9
Abstract
The study examined child-centered, play-based curriculum at a pre-school educational
organization in Hong Kong. The focus was on assessing the relationship between the emphasis
on teaching academic skills and its effect on diminishing child-centered pedagogy such as play-
based learning. A gap analysis was used as the framework to investigate areas of improvement
through the lenses of knowledge, motivation and organization. Data collected through surveys,
interviews and classroom observations of teachers revealed that they had strong competence with
regard to knowledge, motivation and organizational issues relating to play-based learning.
Nevertheless, findings showed that teachers were not as familiar with certain factual knowledge
and conceptual knowledge regarding the definition of play, characteristics of play and how
principles of play can help promote mathematical and literacy skills. The study also confirmed a
number of organizational improvement areas, such as the considerable amount of administrative
work, curriculum expectations and demands, and an overwhelming culture of academic
readiness. Proposed solutions were devised based on the findings to provide strategies to achieve
the goal of spending more time in the curriculum on free-choice activities such as play as
recommended by the Education Bureau of Hong Kong. As part of the study, a three-stage
implementation plan and an evaluation plan were recommended.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
In Hong Kong and around the world, pre-school education faces the same pressure to
start teaching academic skills at a progressively younger age at the expense of incorporating
more child-centered practices. This pressure, caused by concerns about children not being ready
for school as well as concerns about children falling behind in their later academic learning, has
become a growing trend. In one study in the United States, research revealed that children in all-
day kindergartens generally spend four to six times as much time in literacy and math instruction
and taking or preparing for tests as in play or free-choice time (Miller & Almon, 2009). The lack
of opportunities to play is not beneficial for the children as decades of research and theory in
child development confirm the importance of play and how play can help foster in children a
strong foundation for cognitive, social and emotional concepts. Experts have also agreed that the
loss of this foundation, which can only be built through play, will undermine children’s success
in school and academic competence for years to come (Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003)
Organizational Context and Mission
This study was conducted based on an educational organization in Hong Kong which is
comprised of nine kindergartens and nurseries that provide quality pre-school education to
children aged two to six (collectively referred to as the “Kindergarten”). The mission has been
to provide all children a challenging learning environment where they can develop the necessary
social and personal skills needed to become caring, curious, multi-lingual learners. The
Kindergarten is a private kindergarten with no government funding or religious affiliation. There
are a total of 3789 students separated in four grade levels divided as pre-nursery, nursery, lower
class and upper class. Five of the nine kindergartens are approved by The International
Baccalaureate (the Swiss international educational foundation) to conduct the Primary Years
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
11
Programme. A combined staff of one chief principal, nine principals, 277 educators and 67
administrative staff handle the daily operation of the Kindergarten. A school board of directors
of six members dictates the strategic initiatives of the Kindergarten.
The Kindergarten was founded in the early sixties and has grown from two classrooms to
nine campuses across different districts in Hong Kong. Changes that occurred were not only seen
in the extension of more campuses, but also in the evolution of a more stimulating learning
environment, the presence of teachers with higher professional qualifications, the transformed
role of teachers from “teaching” to “facilitating” and the move towards a curriculum with a
strong emphasis on inquiry-based learning.
Organizational Performance Status
The organizational performance gap at the root of this study is that too much emphasis is
placed on teaching academic skills at the expense of engaging in more child-centered pedagogy
such as play-based learning. “Learning through play” has been recommended as the mode of
learning and teaching for young children in Hong Kong as documented in the local official
education report since 1982 (Fung & Cheng, 2011). As society becomes increasingly complex,
competitive and fast-paced, young children are being pushed to perform beyond their capacity
and pre-schools have responded with increasing structured time for academic instructions and
reduced time for free-choice activities like play.
In the Kindergarten, the amount of time allocated to play and creative instruction has
decreased by forty percent while the amount of time allocated to academic instructions has
increased by one hundred percent over the past three years since 2013. In close examination of
the teachers’ timetable for a half-day lower class, it was revealed that time allocated for free-
choice activities and small group activities decreased from 560 minutes per week to about 390
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
12
minutes (30% decrease) while language reading and writing time were increased from 180
minutes per week to about 280 minutes (55% increase).
Teachers are also encountering different challenges in implementing “play” in the
curriculum. Although the schedule of activities has allocated fixed timeslots for small group
activities time, teachers are responsible to plan the specific activity to be conducted during those
time slots. Instead of allowing more time for children to explore and be natural inquiry learners,
teachers tend to react to society’s pressure for academic achievements and often lead small group
activities in teacher-directed ways. This trend towards more academic instruction is creating an
increasing gap between the amount of time spent in child-centered pedagogy as recommended by
the Education Bureau of Hong Kong (“EDB”) (and by early childhood educators around the
world) and the actual amount of time spent on child-centered pedagogy engaged by teachers in
the curriculum at the Kindergarten. The researcher believes this gap directly affects the mission
of the Kindergarten to provide all children a challenging learning environment where they can
develop the necessary social and personal skills needed to become caring, curious, multi-lingual
learners.
Related Literature
Similar to the principles espoused by early childhood educators around the world,
documents published by the EDB have advocated child-developmentally appropriate pedagogy,
like play-based learning, as the core value of the pre-primary curriculum since 1982 (Fung &
Cheng, 2011). Decades of research in child development confirm that play is the primary vehicle
through which children build a strong foundation for cognitive, social and emotional concepts
(Moyles, 1994). Play has also been recognized as an effective form of pedagogy to promote
learning in the early years (Bruce, 1991; Cordova & Leong, 2001; Goncu, Mistry & Mosier,
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
13
2000; Moyles, 1994). Therefore, play serves a crucial part in the “child-centered” concept as a
key element of the learning and teaching strategies in early childhood education. Studies
conducted in 1980’s concluded that when children are playing, they are intrinsically motivated,
pleasurably involved and actively engaged; and these elements provide the most desirable and
optimal conditions for learning (Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983)
Nevertheless, a gap between the rhetoric and reality of implementation has repeatedly
been identified in the Hong Kong Government’s Quality Assurance Inspection (QAI) Annual
Reports (HKSAR Government Education Department 2003,2004,2005,2006b; HKSAR
Government Education Bureau 2007). In other words, the problem facing educators is not that
they do not believe in the benefits of learning through play, but in reality they face many
challenges to use play to promote learning. Perhaps part of the problem, as indicated by Wood
and Bennett (1997), is that play is spontaneous and different from traditional linear learning,
which has clear educational objectives and promotes conscious learning, it is not always easy to
articulate what “learning through play” is and to integrate it into a curriculum. Another important
aspect of realizing learning through play is that educators, as practitioners, have to be very
competent and skillful so as to perceive the “here and now” interests and needs of children in the
class and negotiate them with the “objects of learning” to support sustained shared thinking and
thus the metacognitive dialogue necessary for learning (Pramling-Samuelsson & Asplund-
Carlsson, 2008).
Also, in consideration are the views of parents and administrators who are not convinced
that learning through play is the best means to foster children’s holistic development and
academic skills. This is especially the case for Chinese parents in Hong Kong, perhaps under the
strong influence of a Confucian tradition, who are more likely than their Western counterparts to
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
14
focus on children’s academic skills (Coleman, 1987). It is common for parents in Hong Kong to
expect their children to learn social skills as well as academic skills in pre-school. As observed
by Dr. Opper of Hong Kong University (1994), parents expect young children to learn the skills
of formal literacy and numeracy and expect teachers to be responsible for teaching them such
skills. In turn, parents play a crucial role in advocating the focus on academic skills and building
more time for academic learning in pre-schools’ curriculum, which have been well documented
in the U.S and worldwide. In one survey of 254 New York and Los Angeles kindergartens,
researchers found that teachers devoted a preponderance of time to teaching literacy and
numeracy (Miller & Almon, 2009). In Hong Kong, researchers have also revealed that
kindergartens have increased students’ time for academic instructions and reduced time for true
child-centered activities like free play (Cheng, 1999). In one survey, kindergarten teachers
reported that there are only 5-10 minutes of free-choice activity time during a half-day program
(Cheng, 1999).
The lack of opportunities for play is a problem. Specifically, play promotes learning and
at the same time, it fosters social competence and confidence as well as self-regulation, and
children’s ability to manage their own behavior and emotions (Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2008).
Without enough play, children’s success in school and academic can be severely undermined
(Miller & Almon, 2009). In addition, the developmental appropriateness of a curriculum for
young learners focused on academic learning may not be beneficial or even detrimental. Some
researchers have indicated that perhaps early academic training is not superior to traditional
hands-on model of early education (Elkind, 2007). In some cases, early academic learning at the
wrong time for developing mental abilities may impact learning more complex skills for years to
come (Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003).
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
15
Importance of Narrowing the Gap
The problem of lack of balance between play and academic instruction is important to
solve for a variety of reasons. First, not implementing more child-centered practices, like play-
based learning, is affecting the quality of education for young children at the Kindergarten and in
Hong Kong in general. Second, children who should be developing at their own pace, are
adopting inappropriate learning strategies which potentially can affect their life long learning
attitude and discourage them from becoming curious learners. Third, an inappropriate focus on
academic learning at an early age is building severe pressure on students in Hong Kong and
hence other more serve self-destructive consequences may arise in the later stages of their lives.
It is only knowing what improvements can be made in promoting more play-based curriculum in
the classroom, that each child’s learning experience at the Kindergarten can be enriched in
developmental appropriate ways and achieve the mission for children to develop the necessary
personal and social skills needed to become caring, curious, multi-lingual learners.
Organizational Performance Goal
By December 2018, the Kindergarten is to comply 100% with the curriculum criteria and
standards recommended by the Curriculum Development Council of the EDB. Specifically,
teachers will increase the amount of time spent for child-centered pedagogy, such as learning
through play, so that it is 85% of the total class time. It is envisaged that the Kindergarten can
reach the goal to comply with the EDB recommendation in two years, by December 2018.
Stakeholders and Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
The focus of this study will examine the relationship between the emphasis on teaching
academic skills and its effect on diminishing child-centered pedagogy such as incorporating
more play-based learning in the classrooms, therefore, the key stakeholders are teachers,
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
16
administrators and parents. Although the student group is also a key stakeholder, for the purposes
of this study and due to the young age of the students, the study will not take their opinion into
consideration or include them in this study. The stakeholders’ goals in the context of play-based
learning are presented in Table 1.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Goal and Stakeholders’ Goals
___________________________________________________________________________
Organizational Mission
The Kindergarten provides all children a challenging learning environment where they can
develop the necessary social and personal skills needed to become caring, curious, multi-lingual
learners.
___________________________________________________________________________
Organizational Performance Goal
By December 2018, the Kindergarten will comply with 100% with the pre-school curriculum
criteria and standards recommended by the curriculum development council of the Hong Kong
Education
Bureau.
Teachers Administrators Parents
By December 2018, teachers
will provide more than 85%
of the total class time on
child-centered pedagogy and
spent less time on academic
instructions.
By December 2018,
administrators will build in
more than 85% of total class
time on child-centered
instructional time in the
curriculum and spend less
time on academic
instructions.
By December 2018, all
parents will adopt and
support the notion through
the parents and teachers
association that child-
centered pedagogy is
necessary for the
development of social and
personal skills.
Stakeholders for the Study and Stakeholder Performance Gap
While the joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall
compliance with the pre-school curriculum criteria and standards recommended by the EDB, it is
important to understand the challenges faced by the teachers in understanding and in
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
17
implementing “learning through play” in the curriculum. Currently, teachers report that they are
spending less than 45% of their class time a week on free-choice activities like play. The free-
choice activity time also does not take into the consideration what possibly teachers believe or
have conceptualized as play-based learning when in fact their practices do not match the child-
centered constructivist conception of play. As recommended by the Curriculum Development
Council of HKSAR Education Bureau, play should dominate a child’s early childhood
experience including the class time, encompassing about 85% of the students’ class time for the
schedule of a half-day kindergarten class, which means there is at least a 40% gap.
Purpose of the Study and Questions
The purpose of this study is to conduct a gap analysis to examine the possible issues that
are intervening and preventing the Kindergarten to meet the recommendation of the Educational
Bureau. The analysis focused on possible causes due to gaps in the areas of knowledge and skill,
motivation, and organizational issues. The analysis began by generating a list of possible or
assumed improvement area, also known as causes, and then by examining these systematically to
focus on actual or validated causes. While a complete gap analysis would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholders focused on in this analysis were the teaching
staff at the Kindergarten.
As such the questions that guided this study were the following:
1. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational causes that teachers face
in order to improve and reach the goal of providing child-centered, play-based pedagogy
for 85% of total class time as recommended by the Hong Kong Education Bureau.
2. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions necessary to
make these improvements?
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
18
Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis, a systematic and analytical method that helps to
clarify organizational goals and identify the gap between the actual performance level and the
preferred performance level within an organization, was utilized as a framework for this study.
Assumed causes for the performance gap were generated based on personal knowledge and
related literature. These causes were validated by using surveys, interviews and observations.
Research-based solutions were recommended and an evaluation plan was proposed to review the
implementation of the solution plan in a comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Child-centered pedagogy: early childhood education practices which centers on
recognizing high-level complex play as the age-appropriate teaching and learning pedagogy for
young children.
International Baccalaureate (“IB”): is an international educational foundation offering
four respectful programs of international education. Schools authorized by the IB organization
are permitted to offer any of their programs.
IB Primary Years Programmed (“IB PYP”): is the primary years program aims to
develop young children’s ability to search for understanding, the acquisition of essential
knowledge and skills, and to develop positive attitudes and actions. There are six
transdisciplinary themes which addresses issues at a personal, local, and global level. Each year
the teacher will prepare a “Programme of Inquiry” (POI) which will pick four (PN, K1, K2) or
six (K3) transdisciplinary themes for the children to learn. Under that theme a more specific
topic will be chosen and the direction of the inquiry will also be established by using the guiding
lines of inquiry.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
19
Free-choice activity time: the preferred term to describe the time for play as the word
“play” is too often misinterpreted as unconstructive time or an undisciplined lazy approach to
learning.
Guide to the Pre-primary Curriculum: the curriculum guide recommended by the Hong
Kong Education Bureau for use in pre-primary institutions. The guide is prepared by the
Curriculum Development Council of Hong Kong, which is an advisory body giving
recommendations to the Hong Kong Government on all matters relating to the curriculum
development for the school system form kindergartens to sixth form. Pre-primary institutions are
encouraged to adopt the recommendations set out in the curriculum guide.
Organization of the Study
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This Chapter One provides the reader with
the key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about child-centered
pedagogy and play-based learning. The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders as well as
the initial concepts of gap analysis are introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current
literature surrounding the scope of the study. The benefits of play-based learning pedagogy, the
current status and implementation issues faced by teachers, and child developmental appropriate
practices will be addressed. Chapter Three details the assumed causes for this study as well as
methodology when it comes to choice of participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter
Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on
data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps as well as recommendations for an
implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
20
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Play is not just a four-letter word. In an effort to give children a head start on academic
skills such as reading and mathematics, play has often been discouraged. This chapter presents
evidence that play and playful learning enhance academic, social and emotional development.
This chapter highlights some factors in the context of knowledge, motivation and organization,
which prevent a pre-school from implementing more play in the curriculum.
Current State of Pre-School Education in Hong Kong
Kindergartens and Nurseries in Hong Kong
Kindergarten education is offered to three-year to six-year old children in private
kindergartens, which are owned or operated by non-profit organizations or for-profit private
companies. Nurseries are offered to two-year to three-year old children. All kindergartens and
nurseries in Hong Kong are privately owned and are not included in the formal nine-year
compulsory educational system (Committee on Free Kindergarten Education, 2015). Therefore,
the Hong Kong Government has no direct authority to dictate formal curriculum, instead it acts
in an advisory role and provides a suggested curriculum (Cheng, 2006). In the 2014/2015 school
year, there were about 978 kindergartens and nurseries made up of 90% local stream and 10%
international stream (HKSAR Education Bureau, 2015). Kindergartens and nurseries operate on
a half-day basis, which normally lasts for three to three and one-half hours, while some
kindergartens offer whole-day classes of seven to seven and one-half hours with lunch services
(Committee on Free Kindergarten Education, 2015).
The Hong Kong Government and the EDB have consistently taken an active role in
promoting kindergarten teachers’ competencies. Since 2003, all kindergarten teachers are
required to be “qualified kindergarten teachers” registered with a minimum of five passing
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
21
grades in the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (college entrance exam) and are
required to complete a certificate in early childhood qualification or above (Committee on Free
Kindergarten Education, 2015).
Education Bureau of Hong Kong (EDB) and Suggested Curriculum
The government through the Education Bureau of Hong Kong (EDB) clearly advocates
play as an indispensable and important tool for facilitating children’s learning (Curriculum
Development Council, 2006). In fact, since the 1980’s, “Learning through play” has been
recommended by the EDB as the preferred pedagogy for early childhood education (Hong Kong
Government, 1986). To combat the tradition of a didactic teaching approach, the goal of the EDB
was to improve the quality of education in the early years by introducing “play” as being central
to the early childhood curriculum. In the 2006 “Guide to the Pre-primary Curriculum”, the
emphasis was on making a curriculum, which was more child-centered and play-based
(Curriculum Development Council, 2006). In the curriculum guide, the government gave specific
recommendations that teachers should organize activities in the six learning areas (physical
fitness and health, language, early mathematics, science and technology, self and society and
arts) around play, playful environment and inquiry-based experiments (Curriculum Development
Council, 2006). In regard to the schedule of activities, the government recommended that 85% of
the total class time for a half-day kindergarten program and 75% of the total class time for a
whole-day kindergarten program should be spent on free-choice activities, including play,
construction, creation, exploration, manipulation and social interaction (Curriculum
Development Council, 2006).
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
22
The Definition of Play
Play is often said to be the elixir of life. As a phenomenon, play has been studied and
examined from different theoretical and disciplinary perspectives. Yet, it is perhaps still very
difficult to clearly define “play” as it appears in various forms, at different times and places, and
with different meanings; some examples are using play areas as in the High Scope program
(Steinhart & Weimar, 1997) or exploring artistically or creatively as in the Reggio Emilia
approach (Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 1993). These programs claim that children are playing
and learning simultaneously. Researchers have founded that there are common factors which
have stood the test of time in formulating a definition of play: (1) children’s feelings or
motivation – the disposition/characteristics of play; (2) the types of behavior children partake
when they play – the state of playfulness; (3) the environment in which children play; and (4)
what children do when they play – the types of play in which children engage (Rubin et al.,
1983).
Disposition or Characteristic of Play
Prominent scholars have come up with six aspects that make up the disposition or
characteristic of play: (1) play is intrinsically motivated; (2) play is relatively free of externally
imposed rules; (3) play is carried out as if the activity were real; (4) play is focused on the
process rather than any product; (5) play is dominated by the players; (6) play requires the active
involvement of the players (Rubin et al., 1983). Scholars argue children are playful by nature,
hence they are intrinsically motivated to play as no one tells them what to do or how to do it
(Miller & Almon, 2009). Once an adult structures or intervenes inappropriately, children lose
interest and the activity ceases to be play anymore. Because play is intrinsically motivated
nature, it is a child’s way of controlling the environment (Rogers & Sawyers, 1998). When an
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
23
adult proposes a demand which conflicts with a child’s need for personal control, the child
usually reacts with frustration and discontinues the activity (Rogers & Sawyers, 1998). Whereas
if a child participates intrinsically, able to control their experience to match skills and challenges
according to their interests, they are more likely to feel a sense of accomplishment and hence are
more likely to want to repeat the activity (Rogers & Sawyers, 1998).
In play, it is important that participants are concerned with accomplishing the activities
rather than achieving any goal. It is not play if a child enters into play and says, “Hmm, I think I
will play now so that I can get some pre-reading skills.” Scholars specify that play is engaged
for its own sake and often play is “non-utilitarian” (Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003). Naturally,
play requires the active involvement of the players (children). In essence, children cannot be
passive recipients of play, they have to want to do it. Researchers have also highlighted that play
usually contains elements of make-believe, yet the participants feel they are actively engaged in
something real (Rogers & Sawyers, 1998). When a child pretends to pour liquid and then
pretends to drink what they poured is commonly seen as play.
Scholars have highlighted that the need for an adult, especially an early childhood
educator, to know these dispositions or characteristics of play because most of the time, adults
are unaware of the fact that they are actually preventing autonomous, self-directed play (Wong et
al., 2011).
State of Playfulness
Playfulness is a state of mind, whereas the word “play” is used in this study to describe
an activity. How can a teacher tell when a child is in a state of playfulness? Prominent
researcher Csikszentmihalyi (1993) has described playfulness as the “optimal experience” and
used the term “flow” to describe the state when a child’s concentration is so intense, they will not
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
24
pay attention to anything irrelevant. He described this state of flow as when self-consciousness
disappears and the sense of time becomes distorted and highlighted six qualities to indicate when
a child is in a state of playfulness: (1) clear goals (which are imposed by the player himself); (2)
focused attention; (3) loss of self-consciousness; (4) an altered sense of time; (5) intrinsic
motivation; and (6) belief that an experience is worthwhile for its own sake (Csikszentmihalyi,
1993). These features can help determine whether a child is actually playing.
Sometimes play has the general connotation of not being serious when in fact Professor
Csikszentmihalyi (1993) and other scholars indicated that to foster the condition of play, serious
engagement of the players and the absence of reality because of playfulness are required. Recent
researchers in Hong Kong and aboard studied how children view their state of playfulness. These
studies indicated that children usually view play as an activity with no preference and no specific
goals (Howards, 2010). Children also do not experience a formal classroom environment as a
play environment because it indicates the tendency for learning with teacher-directed activities as
found by a study of children in Hong Kong (Wong, Wang & Cheng, 2011). The study by Wong
et al. (2011) concluded that children differentiate play and non-play by looking at the nature or
function of the events, objects and places involved. In particular, kindergarten children found
that a classroom with any presence of a teacher as non-play even when the teacher was
conducting a game activity (Wong et al., 2011). They expressed that activities which require
deep concentration and seriousness, like playing piano, reading and writing as non-play.
Nevertheless, researchers concluded that within the same classroom environment, when the
activity was changed to a more self-directed and more open with less teacher instruction and
boundaries, from cues provided by the children as playful, children then experienced the tasks as
playful so that learning was enhanced (Howard, 2010). They discovered that playfulness as a
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
25
state of mind was the constant factor among different situations and generated different results
from the children (Howard, 2010).
Different Types of Play
Because play shifts and is difficult to categorize them, knowing and watching for the
broad types of play helps sensitize teachers to the shifting landscape that children create.
Various types of play occur beginning with the child’s first few months to twelve years and
beyond. There are physical play or locomotors play, object-play, symbolic play and pretend play
(Smith & Pellegrino, 2013).
Physical play or locomotor play is perhaps the earliest type of play to evolve and can be
observed in most mammals (Whitebread, 2012). Physical play, which includes exercise play
(running, climbing, jumping, dancing, skipping, etc.), involves large body activity and is
generally thought to support physical training of muscles, endurance and skill (Smith &
Pellegrini, 2013). Physical play also includes rough-and-tumble play and fine-motor practice
such as sewing, coloring, cutting, and manipulating action and construction toys) (Smith &
Pellegrini, 2013). Such play helps develop coordination, balance, and a sense of one’s body in
the space around it. Extensive research has been conducted on rough and tumble play and how
the interactions gained during this type of play can promote strong emotional bonds and
attachment which lead to social competence (Whitebread, 2012). Fine-motor play trains fine-
motor development and finger coordination skills, while at the same time, due to its mentally
absorbing nature, fine-motor play often helps children develop concentration and perseverance
(Whitebread, 2012).
Play with objects or object-play refers to the playful use of objects such as building
blocks, jigsaw puzzles, cars and dolls. Different age groups exhibit the manner in which play
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
26
with an object will manifest. At an infant stage, object-play is more sensory-motor play where
the child is exploring how objects and materials feel and behave (Whitebread, 2012). From
eighteen months to twenty months, toddlers begin to arrange objects, which gradually develop
into sorting and classifying activities. By the age of four, children are able to build, create and
construct. Play with objects allows children to try new combinations of actions, free of external
constraint, and help develop problem solving skills (Smith & Pellegrini, 2013). In a study by
Pellegrini and Gustafson (2005) of three-year to five-year old children revealed that the amount
of playful exploration, construction and tool use in which children were engaged predicted their
subsequent performance on physical problem-solving. Recently, constructional play has been
used as a kind of therapy for children with problems of self-regulation (Whitebread, 2012).
Symbolic play refers to the category of play that relates to the variety of symbolic
systems including spoken language, reading and writing, number, various visual media (painting
and drawing) and music (Whitebread, 2012). Spoken language play is when children develop
mastery by playing with actual or made up words, rhymes, verses and songs. Art play utilizes
different materials to create, mold and shape. Latest research revealed that children’s visual
literacy, their ability to understand pictures, photographs, diagrams, plans and maps, was
enhanced by their experiences of playing with a variety of visual media (Whitehead, 2012).
Music is another form of symbolic play where at every age level, children sing, dance and create
all sort of sounds. Music and dance provide opportunities to express feelings, learn about rhythm
and the difference in sounds, expand imagination and self-esteem. Recent research in the area of
music play concluded that it supports a range of children’s developing abilities, including those
related to social interaction, communication, emotion understanding, memory, self-regulation
and creativity (Pound, 2010).
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
27
Pretend play is important for children development and involves pretending an object or
an action is something other than what it actually is. A significant amount of research has been
invested in pretend play. High-quality pretend play has repeatedly been shown to be very closely
associated with the development of cognitive, social and academic abilities (Smith & Pellegrini,
2013). For example, during socio-dramatic play, children are obliged to follow the social rules
governing the character they are portraying. Children negotiate meanings and the role “You be
daddy, right” and argue about appropriate behavior “No, you don’t feed the baby like that.”
Scholars have also advocated that the pretend play advances many learning functions as it
develops pre-literacy skills and enhances emotional security (Miller & Almon, 2009)
The Benefits of Play
Play overlaps into all areas of children’s cognitive, social and emotional development.
As indicated above, scholars have found through research that different types of play can
facilitate all forms of healthy development in a child and provide the best context in which
children can grow and learn (Rogers & Sawyers, 1988).
Strong Foundation in Cognitive Concepts
Play contributes to cognitive development. Research showed that play contributed to
cognitive maturity and problem solving in a number of ways (Rogers & Sawyer, 1988).
First, play encourages problem solving. As children play, they retain their playful attitude
which is the critical quality that contributes to flexibility in problem solving. Their research
showed play and exploration are tenants to children’s problem solving (Roger & Sawyer, 1988).
One famous experiment had children completing different tasks by using a stick and joining
apparatus to reach inside the box for an object. Two sets of children were observed, one set was
given the opportunity to play with the sticks and apparatus before the experiment, meanwhile the
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
28
other set of children was given a demonstration by an adult to connect the sticks and apparatus.
Results from the studies consistently showed that children who were able to play with the sticks
and apparatus before the experiment performed better than the group that received the
demonstration (Rogers & Sawyers, 1988).
Research by Pelper and Ross (1981) demonstrated that play promotes creativity and
innovation in problem solving. Divergent problems require multiple solutions, the same as when
a child engages in object-play with blocks and build different structures from the blocks. One
researcher had children work with toys of a divergent nature (problems that require multiple
solutions) and with toys of a convergent nature (problems that require one solution). The study
revealed that the two groups reacted differently when they were asked to build a village with 45
pieces of play materials which is a challenging task for the age group (Pelper & Ross, 1981). The
divergent group build more structures and attempted more trial and error when they reached an
impasse. Whereas the convergent group was mired and attempted the same things over and over
again (Pepper & Ross, 1981). Other studies revealed conclusive evidence that play enhances
performance on divergent thinking tasks (Rogers & Sawyers, 1988).
Strong Foundation in Social Concepts
Many scholars have agreed that play enhances the development of social skills for
children. Cooperation, helping, sharing and successful social problem solving can all be
experienced through play. Pretend play especially has been highlighted by researchers to have
the greatest impact on a child’s social development. During pretend play, children engage in
various social interaction, group cooperation, social participation and impulse control (Hirsh-
Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003). Research as early as Piaget contended that through pretend play,
children who engage in resolution of conflicts make accommodations, step beyond their own
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
29
egocentricity and thereby manage the environment around them (Rogers & Sawyers, 1988). In
addition, studies developed the theory that a child’s frequency of social pretend play predicted
their social competence, popularity, and role-taking ability (Rogers & Sawyers, 1988). Children
create emotional comfort for themselves through play, such as when they have a favorite security
blanket or a teddy bear.
Another aspect of social development is the importance of pretend play and the
development of self-regulation. Many recent studies have examined the benefits of self-
regulation for children which is an essential skill for getting along with peers (Whitehead, 2010).
For example, a two-and-one-half year old Louis pretends to take on the role of a baby and cries
like a baby but then stops when James, acting as the role of “father”, comforts him. Louis knows
to stop crying when comforted which show his ability to regulate his own behavior (Bodrova &
Leong, 2001). In all the scenarios, play provided the context for role and rule conflicts with
peers, thus setting the stage for children to practice and consolidate their social skills (Rubin et
al., 1985).
Strong Foundation in Emotional Concepts
Play is often known to help children work through difficult emotional events. Hence, play
builds a strong foundation for emotional development. Researchers demonstrated that through
play children have the ability to maneuver the flux and flow of events as they wish in order to try
things out. Events that they experienced with adults are often too sophisticated to express or
handle in real-life (Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003). At the same time, through an activity like
pretend play, children can practice expressing their negative feelings or anxieties or positive
feelings associated with real-life events without consequences (Rogers & Sawyers, 1988).
Studies indicated that children were more empathetic and considerate of others’ feelings
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
30
providing more evidence that children can learn from play (Undiyaundeye, 2013). Although
cognitive, social and emotional development for children will occur without play, the research
highlighted above indicated that play can facilitate healthy development.
Approaches to Learning Through Play
Understanding that children are active constructors of knowledge and that development
and learning are the results of interactive manipulative experiences, it is easy to recognize how
guided play is supportive of all learning. Play provides a context for children to practice newly
acquired skills and to help them perform on the edge of their developing capacities in order to
take on new social roles, attempt novel or challenging tasks, and solve complex problems that
they would not otherwise do (Mallory & New, 1994b).
Constructivist Theory of Learning
Research suggested that children learn best when they take an active role, which is both a
physical and intellectual activity (Dewey, 1971). The constructivist theory emphasized that a
learner is no longer regarded as a passive receiver of knowledge (more teacher directed
orientation), but as an active constructor of meaning. The famous child development
psychologist Jean Piaget coined the constructivist theory meaning that the “knowledge is derived
from a child’s experimentation and playfulness with materials and reflection on his/her actions”
(as cited in Hedges, 2000). Built upon the constructivist theory, in education, the theory of
constructivism became well adopted by the teaching community.
Constructivism is important to understand as the theory that integrates play with learning
and describes how adults or teachers in the classroom can interfere to bring play to a higher-level
play which promotes learning. According to Vygotsky, who made significant progress in the
theory, social interaction, such as cooperative dialogues between children and a more
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
31
knowledgeable member, like an adult, is necessary for children to acquire new ways of thinking
(Bodrova & Leong, 2001). He introduced the theory of the zone of proximal development, which
suggests that a child’s actual developmental level can be stretched to attain a higher level of
competency with the assistance and guidance of an adult or capable peer. The theory explained
the phenomenon that children can perform expert tasks beyond their competence by experiencing
play interaction with adults. For example, in the Zinaconte Indians of South Mexico, the girls
become expert weavers of complex garments before the age of five as they receive informal
guidance from adult experts through games and dramatic play (Childs & Greenfield, 1982). The
theory suggested that children require activities that support past learning and that an adult can
encourage new learning on a slightly more-difficult level. In effect under the constructivism
theory, an educator plays an active role in guiding the construction of knowledge within the
classroom, but they also create opportunities for children to direct their own learning through
exploration and experimentation (Kotsiopoulos, Makosz, Zambrycka & McCarthy, 2015).
Integrating Play and Learning
According to Hedges (2000), play-based learning, the integration of play and learning
which was initially based on Vygotsky’s research that children can attain a higher level of
achievement with adult guidance, is facilitated by utilizing scaffolding, guided participation and
co-construction. The purpose of scaffolding is for teachers to determine the optimal time that the
children should move from one level of competence to another by careful observation and
interaction. Some common strategies used to facilitate and extend children’s learning, as
recommended by the National Association for the Education of the Youth, are questioning,
prompting, praising, confirming, giving feedback, expanding and repeating back (National
Association for the Education of the Youth, 2003).
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
32
Guided participation allows educators to direct children’s learning by utilizing
observation and participation with their peers in order to help them develop skills to identify
culturally defined problems and then construct new solutions. Co-construction refers to the
development and learning of children that occurs through complex and dynamic exchanges
between children and their actions to make sense of the world, and the social and cultural
pretense in everyday activities. Co-construction emphasizes the child’s input in learning
(Hedges, 2000). Teachers manipulate the learning environment so that each child is at the center
of their learning as part of the co-constructionist approach. Scholars have also suggested that
teachers should use different approaches to engage children in activities to help them to develop
a positive disposition towards learning (Kotsiopoulos et al., 2015).
Three Levels of Play
In line with the constructivist theory, leading play experts and scholars have classified
three qualities of play: chaotic or out of control play; simplistic and repetitive play; and
purposeful complex play that engages the children’s full attention (Gronlund, 2010). The third
level of purposeful complex play is the level of play recommended by play specialists as the
more mature play that brings children to high-levels of achievement and development (Miller &
Almon, 2009).
Chaotic or out of control play is characterized by children in loud and high-pitched
voices, high level of risk taking behaviors, and often with a great deal of disagreement. This kind
of play is discouraged and is often discontinued for the safety of the children. The second level
of play is simplistic and repetitive play. This level of play involves repetition and children are
not very involved. For example, a child may imitate what an adult will do, but does not go
beyond that imitation. In a dramatic play situation, two girls were playing in the kitchen corner
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
33
and brought Teacher Della cups and plates with plastic pieces of pizza. They told Teacher Della
“ This is orange juice and pizza”. When Teacher Della asked what else the children could offer,
the girls responded “pizza”, doing the same thing again and again. As an example of simplistic
play, the girls lacked variety in the pretend food and repeated the same actions. To encourage a
higher level of play, Teacher Della further interacted with the girls suggesting that they go to the
grocery store to get different items to cook. In addition, she raised the engagement by proposing
that they list their grocery items on a piece of paper while providing them a shopping cart and
grocery bag. By engaging the girls in various high-level tasks, Teacher Della was able to
intervene and brought the level of play to formal play. Therefore, high-level complex play often
is characterized by the state of playfulness where the children are fully immersed in the play
scenario and usually is accompanied by communication, negotiation, creativity and engagement
(Groulund, 2010).
Mathematical Concepts Through Play
Research supports that play and guided play indeed can help academic development like
improvements in mathematics. Researchers discussed an experiment by See and Ginsburg that
found 88% of four and five-year old children engage in spontaneous mathematical like tasks
every fifteen minutes of free play (as cited in Kotsiopoulos et al., 2015). Early mathematics
concepts are often introduced in play, such as when geometry is explained in block building or
when building toy railroad tracks, they learn that eight tracks are longer than three tracks.
Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff (2003) explained that unlike other forms of knowledge, mathematical
knowledge and concepts cannot be learned from just hearing about it, but should be learned by
experimentation and hands-on experience which are the essential qualities of play. Blocks are
play specialist toys of choice for building mathematical concepts. Children learn different sizes
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
34
and at the same time, with different sizes, shapes and colors of blocks, while sorting into logical
classifications or separating them by shapes and colors (Kotsiopoulos et al., 2015). When
children play with clay, separating them into small pieces, they are learning about the
fundamentals of quantity and number. One study by Ginsburg (2006) indicated that playful
mathematical instructions can be accomplished by providing memorable contexts in which the
environment is filled with opportunities for children to encounter math. Integrating mathematics
in real world activities like when children line up, an educator can discuss with the children
about the places in the line so they have a concept of ordinary number (Ginsburg, 2006).
Literacy Through Play
Research suggests that children use their most advanced language skills during play, and
that these language skills are related to emergent literacy (Christie & Enzi, 1992). From early
on, Vygotskian theory argues that literacy acquisition is a social constructive process that begins
in early childhood through every day experiences with adults, including bedtime storybook
reading and pretend play (Bodrova & Leong, 1996). Recent research reveals that some play
processes, such as the language, symbolic representation, and narratives used in play, are related
to early literacy skills (Christie & Roskos, 2013). Pellegrini and Gustafson (2005) found a
positive, significant relationship between three-year-old children’s symbolic play and their use of
meta-linguistic verbs (verbs that describe an activity such as talk, write, speak and read) that
suggests transfer of abstract socially defined language. Other researchers showed how play areas
and play environment can help build literacy such as when a play setting is rich with word
descriptions of objects and signs, and their data indicated that this type of manipulation of the
physical environment increases the range and amount of literacy behaviors during play (Christie
& Roskos, 2013). Evidence also indicated that a word rich play setting can provide young
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
35
children short-term gains in knowledge of writing, ability to recognize play-related print and use
of comprehension strategies (Christie & Roskos, 2013).
Socioemotional Skills Through Play
From decades of research, it is clear that guided play is important for fostering social
competence and confidence as well as for self-regulation, and children’s ability to manage their
own behavior and emotions (Barnett & Storm, 1981). In particular, recent research studies have
revealed the significant impact that guided play has on metacognitive and self-regulatory
processes in young children (Whitebread, 2010). Through the principles of emotional warmth
and security, feelings of control and cognitive challenge through problem-solving, Whitebread
(2010) suggested that play can be organized to support the development of self-regulatory skills.
He listed as an example where a three-year old boy was trying to put on a fireman’s jacket to be
just like his friend who was already wearing a police uniform. As the child struggled, he felt
frustrated and upset, and was looking over to his teacher searching for some assistance.
However, at no time did the teacher touch the jacket. Instead she did provide attention by talking
to him about the problem, giving emotional support (smiling throughout, expressing delight at
each successful move) and provided clear visual guidance by demonstrating “putting your arm in
like this.”. The boy eventually learned to control his emotion, while preserving and gaining more
self-efficacy (Whitebread, 2010).
Play-Based Curriculum
Play Recognized as Effective Pedagogy
Play serves as a crucial part in the “child-centered” concept as a key element of the
learning and teaching strategies in early childhood education. In the constructivist view, the
child is always seen as the agent of his own education and the task of educators is to encourage
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
36
children’s self-directed and autonomous engagement with the learning situation. Ultimately, the
play and learning pedagogy where educators identify children’s learning orientations and using
such knowledge to manipulate the learning environment and to promote children’s motivation to
engage with the environment is the best form of learning for children of the pre-school age
(Miller & Almon, 2009).
Teaching Academics Too Early May Impact Learning
Research conducted for over a long period of time has challenged the assumption that
starting earlier on the teaching of phonics and other academic skills leads to better results
(Darling-Hammond & Snyder, 1992). However, some advocates of a more skills oriented
teaching style have claimed positive effects on academic success of young children especially
those in the low socioeconomic status children (Engelmann, 1982). These views were debated by
studies that revealed early academic success is short-term and long-term effects on a child’s
learning development can be severe (Cheng, Reunamo, Cooper, Liu & Vong, 2015). In fact,
brain researchers have revealed that early forced learning may result in the use of lower brain
systems since the higher brain hemisphere which should do the type of work has not yet
developed. This habit of using inferior brain areas for higher-level tasks and of receiving
instruction rather than creating patterns of meaning can cause problems in later brain
development (Healy, 1989). In addition, research suggested that strong emphasis on a teacher-
directed academically oriented approach in early childhood education can negatively impact a
child’s intrinsic interest in the process of acquiring knowledge (Cheng et al., 2015). The
research study in Hong Kong by Cheng et al. (2015) suggested that a more academic focused
pre-school was not able to foster “agency skills” compared to a play-oriented pre-school and
revealed that students from the play-based pre-school exhibited more high-end agency skills.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
37
Agency skills involve the child’s motivation to explore, make choices and act on the
environment, along with an ability to exercise control over their own circumstances and destiny
(Cheng et al., 2015).
Longitudinal studies have also discussed the importance of the development of non-
cognitive abilities at an early age. Cognitive skills are often referred to achievement-oriented
tasks, such as problem solving and academic abilities that can be measured by achievement tests
(Jones, Greenberg, & Crowley, 2015). While non-cognitive process is referred to as behavior
characteristics, emotion regulation, attention, self-regulation and social skills, it is these non-
cognitive skills that have been found to be so important that development of these skills at a
young age has proven to add value to healthy personal development and eventually adult well-
being. In the landmark Perry Preschool program, researchers found that intentional intervention
to improve non-cognitive skills related to behavior and academic motivation were found to be
central to long-term effects on crime and employment (Heckman, Pinto, & Savelyev, 2013).
Another recent study has revealed how children with good early social competence at pre-school
has statistically significant association with enhanced young adult performances across multiple
domains of education, employment, criminal activity, substance use and mental health (Jones et
al., 2015). Overall, the importance and value of training the non-cognitive skills with more
child-centered pedagogy has scientific evidence to prove perhaps it is more important than
training cognitive skills.
Assumed Causes from Literature Review
Pre-School Teacher’s Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Needs
Based on the review of the literature, there are a number of reasons why play or a play-
based curriculum was not implemented as often as it should be. In addition, classroom contexts
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
38
such as time allocation for play, play arrangement, materials, as well as social and personal
factors can also be deterring implementation of play. These factors will be considered in light of
the knowledge, motivation and organization framework.
Factual knowledge. As revealed from the literature discussed above, as play appears in
various forms at different times and different places, teachers may not have thorough knowledge
of the definition of play in order to be able to identify what activities lead to play and whether
the children are in fact engaged in play (Fung & Cheng, 2012).
Procedural knowledge. Teachers could also lack the procedural knowledge to
implement learning through play in the classrooms. The quality assurance inspection reports
conducted by the Education Bureau from 2005-2007 identified that many Hong Kong preschools
continue to use a teacher-directed pedagogy focusing on academic transmission (Education
Bureau, 2007). A comparative study of Chinese preschool teachers and their American
counterparts suggests that the Chinese teachers tend to believe in teacher-directed or early
academic skills oriented instruction more than American teachers, who prefer less structured
child-initiated learning (Wang, Elicker, McMullen & Mao, 2008).
The problem facing educators is not that they do not have a strong belief in the benefits
of learning through play, but in reality they struggle with using play to promote learning in actual
classrooms (Wood & Bennett, 1997). Higher-level play is crucial in enhancing early childhood
learning. It is often difficult to sustain higher-level play as the process involves recognition of
the levels of play and knowledge of strategies that enhance its depth and richness (Gronlund,
2010). A number of studies in Hong Kong have also confirmed that a gap exists between the
preferred play-based pedagogical intention and the actual practice carried out by educators when
they tend to use play only to attract the attention of children while the children’s initiated flow of
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
39
playfulness is ignored (Cheng, 2000; Fung & Cheng, 2011; Lau & Cheng, 2010). Teachers in
one study claimed that teaching aids, such as a storybook or a picture of a panda, were symbols
of play (Cheng & Stimpson, 2004). Preschool teachers in Hong Kong were also found to be
unaware of learning opportunities embedded in free play and did not take up opportunities to
scaffold learning during play (Cheng & Stimpson, 2004).
Motivation. A number of factors revealed by this study’s literature review can have an
effect on teacher’s motivation to implement a play-based curriculum. There is tremendous
pressure on teachers to recognize that fostering academic skills is important. Education is valued
as a means to raise the socioeconomic status of the family, and children are brainwashed with the
importance of academic success from early on (Cheng, 2011). As parents in Hong Kong are
heavily academically focused, there is tremendous pressure from parents to ensure children are
taught academic subjects early, teachers do not feel appreciated if academic learning is not the
focus (Opper, 1994). In turn, the teachers’ idea of the proper role of a teacher and making a
difference in the lives of children, creates conflict with the lack of appreciation, and thus a lost
sense of attainment value. At the same time, teachers are suspected of lacking self-efficacy as
researchers have identified that “learning through play” as a play-based curriculum is difficult to
implement effectively and in an impactful manner. As highlighted by Wood and Bennett (1997),
teachers sometimes lack the experience and thus the opportunity to be proficient to see the needs
and interests of children in the class and negotiate them with the “objects of learning”.
Organization. In terms of organizational causes of the performance gap, the literature
revealed a strong consensus in emphasizing academic achievement in Hong Kong. Under the
strong influence of a Confucian tradition, parents’ preference is for greater focus on academic
skills along with the expectation that the school needs to teach academic skills early (Opper,
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
40
1994). Hence, part of the analysis will be to validate how the pressure from parents, as a cultural
practice, can influence the behavior of teachers.
Limited space and resources have also been found in Hong Kong to be barriers for
implementation of play and play-based learning in the classroom (Lau & Cheng, 2010). A
comparison between time allocated to play in pre-schools in Hong Kong and Germany revealed
that the average indoor playtime for Chinese classrooms was 27 minutes while the average from
German classrooms is 120 minutes (Wu & Rao, 2011).
Summary and Conclusion
The literature discussed how play serves as a foundation to many developmental
capabilities of young children, and if children are regarded as capable to lead their own
education, the task of the educator is not to instruct but to encourage children’s self-directed and
autonomous engagement with the learning situation. The true power of play is not that it can
teach children facts, but it can help them acquire important procedural knowledge which is
beneficial in acquiring more factual knowledge. By understanding the way more complex play
can create knowledge within a child-centered curriculum, the educator’s role is then only to
identify children’s learning orientation, use the knowledge to manipulate the learning
environment and stimulate children’s motivation to engage with the environment.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
41
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Guiding Questions
The purpose of this study was to conduct a gap analysis to examine how teachers can
improve to incorporate and implement more child-centered practices, like play-based learning, to
enrich children’s learning experience at the Kindergarten. The gap analysis focused on
examining the potential causes for this problem due to gaps in the areas of knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organization. A list of possible or assumed causes were first generated and then
examined systematically via surveys, interviews and observations to focus on actual or validated
causes. While a complete gap analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes
the teaching staff at the Kindergarten was the focus of this analysis.
As such the following questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational causes that teachers face
in order to improve and reach the goal of providing child-centered, play-based pedagogy
for 80% of the total class time as recommended by the Hong Kong Education Bureau?
2. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions necessary to
make these improvements?
Methodological Framework
The gap analysis framework was used in this study to understand and diagnose the
performance issues. Under this framework devised by Clark and Estes (2008), the analysis
began with dissecting complicated issues faced by organizations, which often involved the
dynamics of different stakeholders. A gap analysis was used to find specific target areas to
examine through the lenses of knowledge, motivation and organization and then solutions were
developed that focused on making improvements.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
42
A key initial stage of the Clark and Estes' (2008) model of gap analysis is setting goals.
Clark and Estes stated that many organizations are unsuccessful because they fail to set clear,
identifiable and measurable goals. They specified that without specific performance goals, team
members lose focus on the specific tasks for which they are responsible and hence ultimately
creates more disruptions than accomplishments and the organization does not reach its goals
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Another critical component of the performance gap analysis is identifying the three
general causes of the performance gap: knowledge and skills, motivation to achieve a goal and
the organizational barriers which are preventing people from reaching their goals (Clark & Estes,
2008). Regarding knowledge, it is critical to know the different types of knowledge: factual,
conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. Not all training and education can solve the different
knowledge problems (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Factual knowledge is often described as
knowledge of specific terminology, basic details and elements required to solve problems.
Conceptual knowledge is the knowledge of classifications, categories and knowing how to
organize these forms and the relationships between the different classifications and categories.
Procedural knowledge is the knowledge needed to accomplish, implement and execute a task.
Metacognitive knowledge is the knowledge needed to self-reflect, self-evaluate and self-assess
on particular tasks.
Motivation measures how much effort each person is willing to spend on work tasks
(Clark & Estes, 2008). It is a key ingredient for consideration when solving performance issues.
In relation to motivation, Schunk, Pintrich and Meece (2014) identified a motivational pyramid
which includes three common indicators: active choice, persistence and mental efforts.
According to the authors, active choice refers to when individuals choose or fail to choose to
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
43
actively pursue a work goal; persistence problems can result when individuals are distracted by
too many goals or by less important goals to complete a task; and effort or mental effort issues
can result when a goal is defined and the person is persistent to complete the goal, but then does
not invest the mental effort to achieve the goal (Schunk et al., 2014). Motivation perhaps is the
most difficult barrier or performance gap to address because changing motivational factors
involve changing individuals’ or team members’ mindset (Rueda, 2011).
The third critical cause is possible organizational barriers, which can be viewed as
cultural models or cultural settings (Clark & Estes, 2008). Cultural models are often perceived
as cultural practices such as an organization’s structures, values, policies and rules. Cultural
settings are the social context of the organization, and essentially, are the concrete manifestation
of cultural models.
Under this framework, different stakeholders can be analyzed through the different
causes of the performance gap, and solutions can be devised to concentrate on addressing
different causes for each stakeholder. Eventually, key areas of improvements are identified and
addressed, then the performance gap closes and the organization moves on to perform more
efficiently and better.
Assumed Causes of the Performance Gap
The gap analysis framework provided an evidence-based method to evaluate presumed
causes of a performance gap (Clark & Estes, 2008). This study evaluated the knowledge,
motivation and organizational causes that prevent teachers of the Kindergarten from
incorporating and implementing more child-centered pedagogy in the curriculum.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
44
Preliminary Scanning Data
Based on personal knowledge and informal conversations with staff of the Kindergarten,
the following knowledge and skill, motivation and organizational causes were identified as
hindering the incorporation and implementation of more child-friendly pedagogy in the
curriculum.
Knowledge and skills. It is critical to examine the scope of the knowledge each teacher
possesses before we examine whether there is an implementation issue. In each of the four types
of knowledge identified by Anderson and Krathworth (2001), it is important to address them in
light of the key stakeholder, the teachers. As for the factual knowledge, it is important to assess
if the teachers have a good understanding of the definition of play and the characteristics of play.
As play appears in different forms at different times and places, teachers need to have a thorough
knowledge of the definition of play and characteristics of play in order to be able to identify what
activities lead to play and whether the children are in fact engaged in play (Cheng, 1999).
Teachers also ought to know the criteria of the curriculum as prescribed by the EDB with regards
to learning through play and the amount of time suggested to be allocated to free-choice
activities and play.
Conceptual knowledge is important to assess whether the teachers know how principles
of play can help promote different academic skills, such as mathematical skills, literacy skills
and social competence. In relation to procedural knowledge, the knowledge of how to do
something, it is important to discern whether teachers have sufficient procedural knowledge to
implement play in the curriculum. For example, whether teachers have the specific knowledge
to implement play as a learning activity, to use play to achieve the learning objectives and to use
play as a tool for the transmission of teaching content.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
45
On a metacognitive level, teachers should evaluate their own strengths and challenges in
implementing learning through play consistently so as to make improvements. It has been found
that often teachers in Hong Kong do not develop self-learning habits to evaluate and solve
problems they face in the classrooms.
Motivation. In addition to knowledge, it is critical to understand the motivation for each
teacher. It is possible that they do not understand the effectiveness of learning through play in
the transfer of knowledge for children. Also, possibly from the perspective of the teachers,
fostering academic skills has become more important. As parents in Hong Kong are extremely
academically focused, teachers do not feel appreciated if academic learning is not the focus.
Persistence is also an important barrier for teachers. Once started, persistence is the measure to
describe how an individual continues to pursue a goal in the face of distractions. As with any
activity involving young learners, the transfer of knowledge and skills takes time and patience
and since the results or desired outcomes are often not immediately apparent, teachers may lack
persistence in conducting more learning through play. In relation to mental effort, overall it is
difficult for teachers to grasp the key aspects of realizing learning through play. Teachers
sometimes lack the experience and then miss the opportunity to be proficient in understanding
and recognizing the needs and interests of children in the class and negotiate them with the
“objects of learning” (Wood & Bennett, 1997). Hence, examining how teachers implement more
play-based learning, in addition to how much they know, and whether the teachers have the
appropriate mental effort to implement a play-based curriculum are important to understanding
the performance gap. Further validation through surveys, interviews and observations are needed
to ascertain whether these motivational gaps do exist in the teachers of this study.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
46
Organization. As for cultural models and cultural settings, it is the consensus in the
society that generally parents in Hong Kong, under the strong influence of a Confucian tradition,
are more academic skills focused and the expectation from society and parents is that the school
needs to teach academic skills early (Opper, 1994). Hence, part of the analysis was to determine
how much pressure is actually exerted by parents as a cultural practice and whether that has
influenced the behavior of the teachers. Also, as a cultural model in the case of the
Kindergarten, one suspected cause of the performance gap is the culture of resistance to change.
A high percentage of teachers have been employed for more than ten years and their openness to
accept change is perhaps not easy to earn. The cultural setting of the school was also examined
in this study to assess how it influenced teachers in their play-based learning understanding and
curriculum setting. For instance, it is possible that the heavy administrative workload to
complete a detailed portfolio assessment on each student to document their “act of learning”
increased teachers’ workload thereby delaying their efforts to implement more play-based
curriculum. In other instances, the curriculum expectations and time restrictions have made it
difficult to incorporate more play into the daily schedule.
Learning and Motivation Theory
The purpose of this study was to identify through the gap analysis whether all teachers, as
one of the key stakeholders, have the adequate knowledge, motivation and organizational support
to achieve their work goals. In order to understand why knowledge, motivation and
organizational factors are important in analyzing gaps, this study relied on major theories of
learning and motivation to explain how individuals and a team interact with knowledge and
motivation systems to gain successful goal achievement. A number of factors, in terms of
knowledge, motivation and organization, were identified which teachers may feel are preventing
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
47
them from reaching their goals. In the following paragraphs, these barriers are discussed within
a learning and motivation theory framework.
Knowledge and skills. Since knowledge and skills enhancement are critical for
improved job performance, this study has focused on Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001)
discussion of the four major types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural and
metacognitive in analyzing the key stakeholder group, the teachers. The factual knowledge
dimension refers to the knowledge of specific details and elements which includes the
knowledge of specific terminology and definitions (Clark & Estes, 2008). In the context of this
study, it is important to assess teachers’ knowledge concerning the definition of play and the
importance of play. It is also important to establish teacher’s factual knowledge concerning the
criteria of a “learn through play” curriculum as prescribed by the EDB.
The emphasis in conceptual knowledge is focused on whether the stakeholder realizes the
interrelationships among basic elements, for example, whether they have knowledge of how to
classify the basic elements and develop categories along with how to differentiate these elements
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). The Kindergarten teachers should be able to classify the
different developmental objectives of young children and examine how play meets those
objectives. Teachers should also know the principles of play and how they foster mathematical
concepts and literacy skills.
In relation to procedural knowledge, the knowledge of how to do something, the
stakeholder group in this case may face issue of practice in implementing a play-based
curriculum. In this manner, effective observation with immediate feedback and rehearsing
modeled behavior, then enacting it overly will help enhanced learning this knowledge (Rueda,
2011).
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
48
As for metacognitive knowledge, it is important for learners to evaluate and reflect on
one’s knowledge. As Pintrich (2003) explained, learners who know the strengths and
weaknesses in their abilities to complete a certain task will increase learning. In relation to the
Kindergarten, teachers could experience difficulties in implementing learning through play in the
curriculum, unable to evaluate their own strengths and weaknesses and thus unable to learn.
Because of these difficulties, they would lack the ability to contribute their opinion or inputs to
the curriculum. In addition, the issue for stakeholders could be that teachers have not developed
sufficient self-regulation to evaluate and solve problems that they experience in the classroom.
Motivation. In addition to inadequate knowledge, lack of motivation can be another
barrier for completing any task. Schunk et al. (2014) identified three key indicators of motivation
causes for a performance problem: active choice, persistence and mental efforts. Active choice
refers to how an individual’s intention to pursue a goal is replaced by actions. Value becomes a
measure for active choice as individual value is a reflection of his/her desire to engage in the
activity (Clark & Estes, 2008). Once started, persistence is the measure to describe how an
individual continue to pursue a goal in the face of distractions. At the same time, it is also a
measure of how an individual takes into consideration the attainment value of the activity in
terms of the needs, personal interests and personal values that an activity fulfills (Eccles &
Wigfield, 2002). Mental efforts describe when an individual which have chosen and are
persisting, are also spending the effort to complete the tasks to achieve a goal.
Often, motivation is measured in self-efficacy, which is the combination of individual
confidence and persistence in achieving a goal (Zimmerman, 2000). Promoting all three factors
or a combination thereof, will likely increase the performance of the individual to accomplish a
goal. At the Kindergarten, the relevant motivational issues are task value, self-efficacy and
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
49
attainment value. First, teachers may be reluctant to take steps to include more play in the
curriculum as they do not see the utility value of play. In addition, since scholars have stated that
realizing learning through play in a classroom is not easy, many teachers may not have the self-
efficacy to implement learning through play (Pramling-Samuelssson & Asplund-Carlsson, 2008).
Teachers also do not have high value in persisting in the activity when simply parents do not
appreciate play or play-based learning when they are academically focused.
Organization. The third barrier highlighted by Clark and Estes (2008) is the assumed
organizational causes, which exist to prevent a stakeholder from reaching its goals. Gallimore
and Goldenberg (2001) have distinguished these organizational causes into specific subsets of
cultural model and cultural setting. According to them, a cultural model describes the shared
“mental schema” or “normative understandings” of how things work such as core values, goals,
beliefs and processes learned over time. Whereas, cultural setting describes the activity settings
where the behaviors are enacted. Both aspects of culture affect a learner and behavior theories
believe influencing or changing certain a cultural model or setting will make learning more
meaningful. For example, appropriate teaching assists the performance of the learner
responsively in a learner’s zone of proximal development (Bodorva & Leong, 2001). In this
regard, teachers need to have the self-confidence that they are able to make changes and have
meaningful impact. In terms of the cultural settings for the Kindergarten, many teachers
expressed that the revised assessment reports and student portfolios have created a considerable
amount of the administrative work preventing them from devoting the necessary time to develop
and revise the curriculum and activity plan to include more play.
Summary. A summary of the sources of assumed issues and causes categorized as
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization is set out in the following Table 2.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
50
Table 2
Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Issues
Sources/Causes Knowledge* Motivation* Organizational*
Scanning interviews and
personal knowledge
(FK) Teachers do not
fully know the criteria of
learning through play as
prescribed by the
Educational Department
Bureau (EDB)
(M) Choice, Extrinsic
Value: Teachers do not
feel children are learning
through play thus they
resist to implement a
play-based curriculum in
class
(O) Cultural Model:
Teachers are
resistant to change
(implicit) as they
are experienced and
feel complacent in
their ways
(FK) Teachers do not
fully know the different
types of play
(CK) Teachers do not
fully know how play
emphasize children as
constructors of
knowledge and how the
interactive process
provide a context for
further learning
(M) Persistence,
Attainment Value:
Teachers do not feel
appreciated as a teacher
since parents are
unappreciated as they
value academic readiness
and academic learning
(O) Cultural
Setting: Curriculum
expectations and
demands have made
it difficult for
teachers to
incorporate more
play into the daily
schedule
(CK) Teachers do not
fully know how the
principles of play can
help promote
mathematical concepts
(CK) Teachers are not
familiar with how
principles of play can
build literacy skills
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
51
Table 2, continued
Sources/Causes Knowledge* Motivation* Organizational*
(CK) Teachers are not
familiar with how
principles of play fosters
social competence and
self-regulation skills
(PK) Teachers are not
familiar with how to use
play to achieve the
learning objectives of
each unit
(PK) Teachers are not
familiar with how to use
play as the means for
transmission of teaching
content
Learning and Motivation
Theories
(MK) Teachers are not
familiar with how to
evaluate their own
strengths and challenges
in implementing learning
through play in the
curriculum
(MK) Teachers did not
consistently develop self-
learning habits to
evaluate the problems
they face in
implementing learning
through play and
adjusting teaching
strategies
(M) Choice, Extrinsic
Value: Teachers do not
feel “play” or “learning
through play” can help
children gain literacy and
math skills
(O) Cultural
Settings: Many
teachers have
complained that the
revised assessment
reports have created
large amount of
administrative work
and hence delaying
other efforts like
incorporating more
play
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
52
Table 2, continued
* Indicate if the category is Factual Knowledge (FK), Conceptual Knowledge (CK), Procedural Knowledge (PK),
Metacognitive Knowledge (MK), Motivation (M), Organization (O)
Participating Stakeholders
This study examined the extent to which an emphasis on teaching academic skills is
suppressing child-friendly pedagogies such as play-based learning in a kindergarten classroom
with the key stakeholders as the teachers. Although the students are a key stakeholder, for the
purposes of this study and due to the young age of the students, they did not serve as participants
in this study.
While the joint effort of all stakeholders, including administrators and parents, ultimately
contribute to the achievement of the overall compliance with the pre-school curriculum criteria
and standards recommended by the HKSAR Education Bureau, the teachers of the Kindergarten
are the primary stakeholders for this study. The total population of the teachers was 277 with the
breakdown of 89 native-English-speaking teachers, 121 Cantonese-speaking teachers and 67
Putonghua-speaking teachers. The demographics of the entire population of teachers represented
were 32% English, 44% Cantonese and 24% Putonghua. The Kindergarten conducts bilingual
and trilingual classes where each bilingual class has two different language teachers in a
Sources/Causes Knowledge* Motivation* Organizational*
Background or Review of
the Literature
(FK) Teachers do not
fully have the knowledge
of the definition of play
(FK) Teachers do not
fully know the common
characteristics of play
(PK) Teacher are not
familiar with the skills
to/skills involved with
implementing a “learn
through play curriculum”
(M) Mental Effort, Self-
Efficacy: Teachers don’t
feel they have the skills
to implement “learning
through play” in the
classroom as research
has always shown it is
difficult to do effectively
and in an impactful
manner
(O) Cultural Model:
Parents of a
Confucian tradition
are heavily
academic focused
and that exerts
pressures or rewards
for more academic
skills based
curriculum rather
than a play-based
curriculum
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
53
classroom at all times and each trilingual class has three different language teachers in the
classroom. Hence, the same survey had the English and Chinese translation in one version and
was sent to teachers of all three languages.
Data Collection
After the approval of the Institutional Review Board of the University of Southern
California, data was collected via an online survey, in-person interviews and classroom
observations to validate the knowledge, motivation and organizational assumed causes when
implementing a play-based curriculum.
Surveys
A survey was used to assess the knowledge, motivation and organizational assumed
causes. A link to the online survey was sent via email to 277 teachers with 98 responses (35.3%)
collected. The online survey contained thirty-two items with sixteen items concerning
knowledge causes, nine items concerning motivation causes and seven items concerning
organizational causes. The survey utilized Likert scales, multiple choice, ranking responses and
fill-in responses to collect participant data. All participants read the information/fact sheet which
expressly set out their participation as voluntary. Respondents had the option to not participate in
the survey and to skip any question on the survey. Of the ninety-eight responses, two declined to
participate in the survey therefore there was a total of ninety-six respondents who explicitly
agreed to continue with the online survey and to be contacted potentially for in-person interviews
and classroom observations. A copy of the survey instrument is set out in Appendix A
Responses were collected and tabulated through Qualtrics. In addition, statistical
software was used to conduct regression analyses between the different categories of respondents
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
54
to indicate any statistically significant relationships. The participants’ identity remained
confidential at all times, as well as, all files kept on a password protected secured cloud service.
Interviews
Interviews were conducted after the conclusion of the survey to probe for in-depth
responses and investigate on some issues that were not covered in the survey. Eight teachers
were selected for individual-in-person interviews based on their responses on the survey, their
knowledge of play and play-based learning, their language specialty and their years of teaching
experience. The interviews were conducted by the researcher and a representative of the central
curriculum development section of the Kindergarten. All interviews were conducted in English
for English-speaking teachers, in Cantonese for Cantonese-speaking teachers and in Putonghua
for Putonghua-speaking teachers. All interviews began with a standard protocol reiterating the
information fact sheet and obtaining their permission to record the interview for later
transcription and coding. Each interview lasted for about 40-50 minutes. During the interviews,
notes were taken in English by the researcher and curriculum section representative. All
interviews were recorded and transcribed in English by the researcher. A copy of the guiding
questions for the interviews can be found in Appendix B.
Observations
Classroom observations were conducted to assess how teachers integrate play in the
curriculum. The observations were used as part of the methodology of the study to triangulate
their practice as it relates to the concepts and responses collected in the surveys and interviews.
Two teachers, one of nursery class and one of upper class, who participated in the interviews
were selected for in-class observation based on their responses, their years of experience and the
grade level they were teaching. Both observations were conducted by the researcher and
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
55
recorded for analysis purposes. The researcher observed the class for about 30-35 minutes. Each
observation session was conducted during the small group/inquiry learning time. A copy of the
observation protocol is set out in Appendix C
Validation of the Performance Issues
Validation of the Performance Issue: Knowledge
In order to assess knowledge performance causes, teachers were asked to complete an
online survey, participate in an interview and an observation. To assess participants’ factual
knowledge and conceptual knowledge, teachers were asked on the survey with Likert scale items
and multiple choice questions about the requirements of the EDB, the definition and
characteristics of play and learning through play. Interviews followed to reaffirm the survey
assessment. For some conceptual knowledge and procedural knowledge, in addition to surveys
and interviews, several teachers were selected for observation by the researcher on how they
implement a learning through play curriculum and use play to achieve a lesson’s learning
objective. In order to validate metacognitive knowledge causes, teachers were asked in the
survey with Likert scale items and multiple choice questions concerning their abilities to self-
evaluate their own strengths and weaknesses in teaching styles and as a professional self-learner.
Validation of Performance Issue: Motivation
Motivation is a key barrier for accomplishing any task. In the Kindergarten, the relevant
motivation issues were task value, self-efficacy and attainment value. Teachers were assessed via
the survey and interviews to determine whether they are motivated to implement a play-based
curriculum. Survey and interview questions were designed to discover the value teachers place
on play and their expectancies for learning through play and whether play will lead to better
learning. Questions also asked in relation to parents’ feelings regarding play and academic
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
56
readiness in the classroom and whether they felt conducting play in the classroom was
appreciated by parents.
Validation of Performance Issue: Organization
Assumed causes relating to cultural model and cultural setting were assessed through
survey and interviews. Organization culture and organization settings often affect teacher’s
motivation and restrain them from implementing a play-based curriculum. In order to validate
organizational causes, participants were asked in the survey using Likert scale, rank order scale
and fill-in response questions. Several participants were interviewed to assess which
organizational factors are contributing to the performance gap.
Data Analysis
Quantitative and qualitative assessments of the survey, interview and observation results
were conducted. In addition to mean and standard deviation to identify the average level of
responses, statistical analysis was conducted on all survey results by a statistical software to test
for regression relationships between different sub-groups of participants. Some open-ended
responses were coded and categorized for the ease of data analysis. The interview data were
transcribed and coded into themes that were related to knowledge and skills, motivation and
organization performance gaps.
Trustworthiness of Data
The triangulation of data was used in this study to enhance accuracy. In this connection,
the survey was used for the quantitative approach and in-person interviews were used for the
qualitative approach. Classroom observations were conducted as means to further balance
quantitative data.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
57
Role of the Researcher
As the researcher is a director of one of the organizations operating the Kindergarten and
having family members in upper management positions, there was a potential conflict of interest.
Because the researcher is not directly involved in the management of the school, his role as a
researcher was explained and in addition a representative of the central curriculum development
section explained that this study was also conducted in conjunction with regular curriculum
assessment. It was communicated to the teachers that this study was not part of a performance
evaluation or job advancement exercise. At the same time, the researcher emphasized that
participation in all survey and interviews was voluntary.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
58
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This study examined how a child-friendly pedagogy, like play-based learning can be
better incorporated in kindergarten classrooms in Hong Kong. In addition, the study examined
the relationship between the emphasis on teaching academic skills and its effect on diminishing
child-centered pedagogy such as play-based learning. The gap analysis was used as the
framework for this study (Clark & Estes, 2008). The guiding question for this study is: what are
the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational causes that teachers face in order to
improve and reach the goal of providing child-centered, play-based pedagogy for 85% of the
total class time recommended by the Hong Kong Education Bureau? Teachers of the
Kindergarten were the key stakeholders of this study.
The data collection methods used in this study were both quantitative and qualitative.
Surveys, interviews and classroom observations were used to triangulate data. A link to an
electronic online survey was distributed to teachers via email. Survey data was then analyzed in
sub-categories using data analysis software to test for relationship significance. Interviews with
teachers were conducted five to six days after the surveys closed for submission. Classroom
observations were conducted two weeks after the interviews. The findings from the surveys,
interviews and classroom observations are presented and synthesized under the categories of
knowledge, motivation and organization. This chapter sets out the results and findings of the data
collection process.
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholders for the survey were the teachers of all nine campuses of
the Kindergarten. The total population of the teachers is 277 with the breakdown of 89 native-
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
59
English-speaking teachers, 121 Cantonese-speaking teachers and 67 Putonghua-speaking
teachers.
277 surveys were distributed and 98 responses (35.3%) were received. Of the 98
respondents, two declined to participate in the survey, hence there were 96 effective respondents.
Out of 96 respondents, 25 were English-speaking teachers, 52 were Cantonese-speaking teachers
and 19 were Putonghua-speaking Teachers. This reflects the demographics of teachers in
general of the Kindergarten at 32% English teachers, 44% Cantonese teachers and 24%
Putonghua teachers. In terms of the years of teaching experience of the respondents, it varied
from 2 years to over 30 years. There were 29 teachers with 1-5 years of teaching experience, 21
teachers with 6-12 years of teaching experience, 25 teachers with 13-20 years of experience and
21 teachers with over 20 years experience. In terms of the grade level represented, there were 22
pre-nursery teachers, 18 nursery teachers, 26 lower class teachers and 30 upper class teachers.
This also approximately represents the demographics of the grade level of all nine campuses with
23% pre-nursery teachers, 27 % nursery teachers, 26% lower class teachers and 24% upper class
teachers. Some teachers teach two grade levels, hence only the lower level was chosen for the
purpose of calculating valid survey responses. Most respondents are teachers of half-day classes
and the number of whole-day classes account for only less than 10% of the total classes offered
at the Kindergarten. A summary of the demographic of teachers who completed the surveys is set
out in Table 3.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
60
Table 3
Demographics of the Teachers Who Completed the Surveys
Characteristic n %
Language Specialty:
English 25 26%
Cantonese 52 54%
Putonghua 19 20%
Grade Level Taught:
Pre-nursery 22 23%
Nursery 18 19%
Lower-class 26 27%
Upper-class 30 31%
Years of Experience
1-5 29 30%
6-12 21 22%
13-20 25 26%
>20 21 22%
Survey data was analyzed for relationship significance based on the demographic sub-
categories indicated above. Hence in some of the graphs below, data was visually displayed in
sub-categories of teachers where there were significant differences between sub-groups. Most
differences were found among different sub-groups of language specialty where there were
differences in responses among the breakdown of Cantonese-speaking teachers, English-
speaking teachers and Putonghua-speaking teachers. This could be due to the reason that
Cantonese-speaking teachers were trained locally and that being immersed in the culture, they
were used to the elements that were affecting their knowledge, motivation and organizational
behaviors.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
61
Results and Findings for Knowledge Assumed Causes
Knowledge entails the process by which people analyze information. It can be
categorized as factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).
A gap in knowledge and skills across any of the above four categories can hinder accomplishing
certain goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Hence, the four categories are used below as a structure to
identify any knowledge gaps which are then used to develop possible evidence-based solutions
to enhance performance.
Survey Results
The survey contained fifteen questions relating to validating knowledge assumed causes.
Among those fifteen questions, six questions concern factual knowledge, five questions concern
conceptual knowledge, three questions concern procedural knowledge and two questions concern
metacognitive knowledge. As respondents had the option to skip questions, not all survey items
were completed by all ninety-six (96) survey respondents. To analyze the survey results, in
addition to Qualitrics, the statistical software SPSS was used to generate frequencies, means and
standard deviations of the responses. In addition, in some items, regression analysis was
conducted between different categories of respondents to indicate any statistical significance
between different categories of teachers and their responses. The information was then compared
with interview and observation findings to find support to validate the knowledge assumed
causes.
Factual knowledge. Factual knowledge is the specific information on content and
elements, which are concrete and true. In its simplest form, factual information entails
terminology, significant facts and specific events, which have occurred. To assess factual
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
62
knowledge, there were six survey questions which focused on teacher’s general understanding of
the local recommendation, the definition of play and play-based learning in general.
The criteria of learning through play as prescribed by the EDB. The first assumed
cause was that teachers are not fully aware of the recommendation for learning through play as
prescribed by the EDB. Respondents were asked whether they knew if the EDB prescribed any
recommendation for “learning through play” in the pre-primary curriculum (Q.1) and were asked
specifically if they knew of the specific time allocation recommendation (Q.2).
79 out of 93 respondents (77%) knew about the recommendation. Nevertheless, 53 out of
88 respondents (60%) did not know about the exact time allocation recommendation by the
EDB. Out of 93 respondents, 79 responded that they knew of the recommendation prescribed by
the EDB. Cantonese teachers being 59% (n=43) of the respondents who knew of the
recommendation showed they knew about the recommendation more than the English teachers
and Putonghua teachers who accounted for 19% (n=18) and 12.90% (n=12) of the respondents
respectively. Figure 1 illustrates the responses to question 1 by breakdown of teacher’s language
specialty.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
63
Figure 1. Responses to Question 1 About Recommendation of The EDB for Learning Through
Play Based On Teachers’ Language Specialty
Nevertheless, with reference to knowing the specific time allocation as advised by the
EDB, only 35 out of 89 respondents (40%) for the second question knew of the 155 minutes
recommendation. It is interesting to note that Cantonese teachers knew of the specific time
allocation recommendation better than other language teachers. For those respondents who
choose the correct answer, twenty-two respondents were Cantonese teachers whereas only ten
were English teachers and three were Putonghua teachers. A chi-square test of independence
was conducted to examine the relation between the variable of language specialty and the
variable of time allocation chosen by the teachers. The relation between these variables was
significant, X
2
(2, N=89) =13.58, p=.035 confirming Cantonese teachers knew of the
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
64
recommended time allocation better. In sum, the assumed cause that teachers do not fully know
the criteria of learning through play as prescribed by the EDB was validated by survey results.
The number of respondents for each time allocation answer categorized by language specialty is
set out in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Responses to Question 2 Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty
The definition of play. As play appears in different forms at different times and places,
teachers need to have a thorough knowledge of the definition of play and characteristic of play in
order to identify what activities lead to play and whether the children are in fact engaged in play
(Cheng, 1999). Therefore, participants were asked to choose the common factors that they
believed defined an activity as play (Q.3). Researchers have identified four common factors of
the definition of play: (i) the child’s feelings or motivation, (ii) the type of behavior children
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
65
partake when they play; (iii) the environment in which children play; and (iv) the process and
procedures children take when they play (Rubin et al., 1983). In this question, participants were
asked to pick multiple answers among four correct choices.
Survey results validated that teachers were not fully aware of the common factors that
define an activity as play. All four factors were correct and only 23 out of 96 respondents (24%)
picked all four factors. Of the twenty-three respondents who picked all four factors, twelve were
Cantonese teachers, which accounted for 52% of this category, which was also more than the
seven English teachers (7.45%) and four Putonghua teachers (4.26%). Perhaps, this is an
indication that Cantonese teachers were more sensitive to the definition of play. Figure 3 shows
the number of participants along with the number of correct factors identified, being “one”
indicating one common factor identified by the teachers and “four” indicating a total of four
characteristics identified.
Figure 3. Responses to Question 3 by the Number of Correct Answers Identified Based on
Teachers’ Language Specialty
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
66
The common characteristics of play. Knowing the characteristic of play is important to
be able to identify that children are in fact playing or what needs to be done to motivate them to
be playing and when to regard play as self-directed. Prominent scholars have defined six
common dispositions or characteristics of play: (i) play is intrinsically motivated, (ii) play is
relatively free from rules, (iii) play is carried out as if the activity is real, (iv) play is focused on
the process rather than any product, (v) play is product of the players making their own choices,
and (vi) play requires the active involvement of the players (Rubin et al., 1983). A seventh
answer “play is always symbolic” was provided as a decoy response and to assess knowledge. In
the survey, teachers were asked if they knew of these characteristics of play (Q.4) and they were
able to choose multiple answers for this question.
Surveys results indicated only 7 out of 94 respondents (7.45%) chose all six correct
answers and all were Cantonese teachers. Based on the survey results, teachers were not fully
aware of the common characteristics of play. Results showed the decoy response “play is always
symbolic” had a relatively low response rate of 6.9% (n=26). Also, it was noted that the
characteristic “play is carried out as if the activity is real” had the least responses of 5.2% (n=18)
which indicated that perhaps role-play or pretend play are not viewed by teachers as a common
characteristic of play. Figure 4 indicates the number of correct characteristics picked by teachers
of different language specialty, being “one” indicating one characteristic identified by the
teachers and “six” indicating a total of six characteristics identified. No one picked all seven
characteristics. Figure 5 indicates the frequency of the each choice picked by each language
specialty.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
67
Figure 4. Responses to Question 4 Based on the Number of Correct Characteristics Identified
Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty
Figure 5. Responses to Question 4 Based on Common Characteristics and Frequencies of
Teachers’ Language Specialty
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
68
As part of identifying the characteristic of play, it was also important for teachers to
identify the state of playfulness for a child. Prominent play and learning expert Csikszentmihalyi
(1993) highlighted six qualities which indicate when a child has entered into a state of
playfulness when they have (i) clear goals; (ii) focused attention; (iii) loss of self-consciousness;
(iv) an altered sense of time; (v) intrinsic motivation; and (vi) belief that an experience is
worthwhile for its own sake. These features can identify when a child is playing, therefore,
teachers were asked if they could identify these qualities.
Survey results found that only 4 out of 94 respondents (4.25%) chose all six qualities. A
large percentage picked four criteria. Hence, survey results substantiated the assumed cause that
teachers are not fully aware of the common characteristic of play because they are not aware of
the common qualities that indicate when a child has entered into a state of playfulness. The
number of qualities identified by the number of teachers is set out in Figure 6, being “one”
indicating one common quality identified by the teachers and “six” indicating six common
qualities identified.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
69
Figure 6. Responses to Question 5 Based on the Number of Correct Answers Identified by
Teachers
The different types of play. Being familiar with the different types of play means
teachers are able to properly set up the environment and elevate the level of play. In the survey,
teachers were asked to agree or disagree whether they are knowledgeable about the different
types of play. Almost all respondents, 84 out of 93 teachers (90%) strongly agreed or agreed they
are knowledgeable about the different types of play (mean=2.97, SD=.40). Hence, the assumed
cause that teachers do not fully know the different types of play was not validated. The responses
to this survey question are set out in Figure 7
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
70
Figure 7. Responses to Question 6 About Knowledge of Types of Play
Conceptual knowledge. Conceptual knowledge is often referred to as the knowledge of
classifications, categories and knowing how to organize these forms and relationships between
the different classifications and categories (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). In other words, it is a
process of transferring and classifying factual knowledge to a deeper understanding or new
situation. The survey questions concerning the conceptual knowledge were designed to assess
teachers’ deeper understanding of play and its benefits.
Children as constructors of knowledge. The constructivist theory suggests that learners
are no longer regarded as passive receivers of knowledge, but as active constructors of meaning.
Psychologist Jean Piaget emphasizes that children learn knowledge from experimentation and
playfulness with material and reflection, which is different than the traditional approach where
children are viewed as passive learners taking instructions without creating meaning.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
71
In this connection, participants were asked whether they agreed or disagreed that play
emphasizes children as constructor of knowledge (Q.27). Almost all respondents (93%, n=87,
mean=3.26, SD=0.57)) strongly agreed or agreed that play emphasizes children as constructor of
knowledge. Please see Figure 8 for the responses to this question.
Figure 8. Responses to Survey Question 7 Where Play Emphasizes Children as Constructors of
Knowledge
In the open-ended question (Q.16) concerning the teacher’s view of their role in a
kindergarten classroom, most respondents agreed that their role in the classroom was not to
emphasize children as passive receivers of knowledge (an instructor or planner), but as an
observer facilitator and scaffolder (constructor of knowledge). Results for the open-ended
question were coded into five categories, in the order of a teacher’s active role as the knowledge
provider: (i) observer & play environment organizer; (ii) playmate and friend who will intervene
at appropriate time; (iii) facilitator, guidance provider and scaffolder; (iv) mentor and role model;
(v) instructor and planner. The order from 1 to 5 indicates the degree of involvement of teachers
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
72
in providing instructions. After coding, survey results indicated that a majority of the teachers
(87%, n=73) have identified their role as facilitator, guidance provider and scaffolder or those
with less teacher instruction or involvement. Figure 9 indicates the number of teachers who
picked each category based on teachers’ language specialty for the open-ended question 16.
Figure 9. Responses to Question 16 Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty and Categorized by
the Five Active Roles of Teachers
Of the detailed breakdown of the respondents, there were twenty-six Chinese teachers,
eleven English teachers and thirteen Putonghua teachers who indicated their role as facilitator,
provider of guidance and scaffolder. Overall, results from both survey questions indicated that
teachers skewed towards recognizing children as constructivist of knowledge versus being
instructor directed learning oriented. Also, it reflects the role that an interactive process is the
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
73
preferred process and pedagogy. Therefore, the assumed cause that teachers do not fully know
the way that play emphasizes children as constructors of knowledge and the interactive process
provides context for children was not validated.
Principles of play promote mathematical, literacy and socioemotional skills. Teachers
are familiar with how principles of play can help promote mathematical concepts, foster literacy
skills and build social competence and self-regulation skills. Research long supported that play
and guided play has helped to foster mathematical concepts, literacy skill and social competence
including self-regulation (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003; Barnett & Storm, 1981). Therefore,
teachers were asked in the survey to acknowledge whether they are knowledgeable about how to
help children to learn mathematical concepts (Q.11), foster literacy skills (Q.12) and build social
competence including self-regulation skills (Q.13) through play activities. Most respondents
have strongly agreed and agreed that they are knowledgeable about how to help children to learn,
foster and build mathematical, literacy and social competence skills through play-based
activities. In all three questions, responses had a mean of about 3, being 85 out of 93
respondents (91%, mean=2.99, SD=.45), 83 out of 93 respondents (89%, mean=2.99, SD=.45)
and 85 out of 93 respondents (91%, mean=3.04, SD=.46) responded “strongly agree” or “agree”
respectively. This represented a strong acceptance by the teachers and the assumed cause that
teachers do not know how the principles of play can help promote or foster mathematical
concepts, literacy skills and social competence skills and self-regulation skills could not be
validated. Hence, Figure 10 is a combination of the responses to survey questions 11, 12 and 13.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
74
Figure 10. Responses to Questions 11, 12 and 13 About Mathematical, Literacy and Social
Competence Knowledge Skills
Procedural knowledge. Procedural knowledge is referred to as the knowledge of how to
do something and includes knowledge in systematic processing, procedural, and criteria
assessment (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). It is important to assess because studies indicated
that, although educators believe deeply in the benefits of learning through play, in reality they
have difficulty in using play to promote learning in actual classrooms (Wood & Bennett, 1997).
Three survey questions were designed to assess teachers’ procedural knowledge.
Teachers were asked whether they are knowledgeable about the limitation of teacher intervention
during play (Q.8), whether they are knowledgeable in evaluating levels of play activities for
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
75
children (Q.9) and whether they are knowledgeable with using different methods and techniques
to increase level of play activities (Q.10).
The skills involved with implementation. One of assumed causes was that teachers are
not familiar with the skills involved with implementing a “learn through play” curriculum. One
of the learned skills is to know the appropriate time to intervene to support and enhance play so
the intervention benefits the children (Gronlund, 2010). When asked about the limitations for a
teacher’s intervention, most respondents stated that they are knowledgeable in this respect. 88
out of 92 respondents (95%), strongly agreed or agreed that they are knowledgeable about
teacher’s intervention skills (mean=3.07, SD=.387) Figure 11 shows the response rate for this
question.
Figure 11. Responses to Question 8 About Knowing the Limitations of Teachers’ Intervention.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
76
Teachers must understand how to provide support for their children while scaffolding
previous knowledge so that the children can reach higher levels of play progressing through the
three levels of play from the lowest, chaotic, to simplistic, and finally, the highest level,
purposeful play (Gronlund, 2010). Nevertheless, in evaluating the level of play activities (Q.9)
and knowing how to use different methods and techniques to increase the level of play activities
(Q.10), respondents were less confident as the “disagree” responses for the two questions
increased to 31% (n=29, mean=2.72 and SD=.52) and 15% (n=14, mean=2.91 and SD=0.46)
respectively. This indicated that teachers may not be that familiar with evaluating the level of
play and will require triangulation with interview and observation findings. Overall survey
results supported that teachers were familiar with the skills included with implementing a “learn
through play” curriculum, thus this assumed cause was not validated. Responses to the question
concerning procedural knowledge in evaluating level of play activities for children and with
using different methods of increasing the level of play are set out in Figures 12 and 13.
Figure 12. Responses to Question 9 About Evaluating Level of Play
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
77
Figure 13. Responses to Question 10 About Different Methods to Increase Play
Metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive knowledge includes knowing how to conduct
task assessment, evaluation and self-regulation (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). For
metacognitive knowledge, teachers were asked whether they set goals to evaluate their strengths
and challenges in implementing learning through play (Q.14) and how often they evaluate their
strengths and challenges in implementing learning through play (Q.15). Both questions were
multiple choices.
Self-learning habits and evaluation. One of the metacognitive knowledge assumed
causes of teachers not including more play-based activities was that teachers were not familiar
with how to evaluate their strengths and challenges on implementing more learning through play
in the curriculum. In the survey question relating to this assumed cause (Q.14), 72 out of 91
respondents (79%) strongly agreed or agreed that they set goals and conduct self-evaluation of
their strengths and challenges. Statistically, this proved that teachers are setting goals to evaluate
their strengths and challenges (n=72, mean 1.21, SD=.41). By language specialty, Cantonese-
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
78
speaking teachers with 52% of the responses for “no” (n=10) seem to have the largest percentage
of respondent who disagree they set goals to evaluate their strengths and weakness. This is
followed by English teachers of 42% (n=8). Please see Figure 14 for the number of responses
for “yes and no” answers to question 14 with their category breakdown by language specialty.
Figure 14. Responses to Question 14 About Evaluating Strengths and Challenges in
Implementing Learning Through Play Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty
Developing consistent self-learning habits. Another metacognitive knowledge assumed
cause that could prevent teachers from incorporating more play-based activities was that teachers
do not consistently develop self-learning habits to evaluate the problem they face in
implementing learning through play and adjusting the teaching strategies. In the survey question
relating to this knowledge cause, 74 out of 91 respondents (81%, mean=3.13, SD=0.70) chose
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
79
that they often or very often evaluate their own strengths and challenges in implementing
learning through play. This is reflected by the mean of 3.13. In fact, it is interesting to note that
Cantonese teachers (42 out of 74 teachers 56%) had a larger percentage of those who often
evaluate their strengths and challenges compared to teachers of English and Putonghua. In
general, survey results demonstrated that teachers often use self-evaluation so this assumed cause
is not validated. Responses to question 15 with the breakdown by language specialty are set out
in Figure 15.
Figure 15. Responses to Question 15 about Frequency of Evaluating Strengths and Challenges
Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
80
Summary of Survey Results for Knowledge Causes
The survey results indicated that teachers lacked certain knowledge in improving to
incorporate more play-based learning in the curriculum. Regarding factual knowledge, although
most respondents knew there was a recommendation for “learning through play” in the pre-
primary curriculum, they did not know the exact time allocation for play and free-choice
activities in a half-day curriculum. Results also indicated that Cantonese teachers knew the
recommendation better than teachers of other language groups. Perhaps, Cantonese teachers
being trained and educated in Hong Kong were more familiar with Hong Kong’s education
requirements and the recommendations of the EDB, whereas English-speaking and Putonghua-
speaking teachers are usually expatriate teachers who were educated and trained aboard. Survey
results also revealed that teachers did not fully know about the definition of play and the
common characteristics of play. In relation to conceptual knowledge, teachers indicated that they
are well aware that children are constructors of knowledge and the interactive process is good for
them to provide a context for further learning. A majority of the teachers indicated that the
preferred role for them as a teacher is to be a facilitator and scaffolder. This preference indicated
and reinforced their view that children are constructors of knowledge and that the teachers value
the interactive process. They also overwhelmingly indicated that they know how principles of
play can help children learn, in terms of fostering and building mathematical concepts, literacy
skills and social competence. For procedural knowledge, teachers indicated that they are
familiar with skills about limitations of a teacher’s intervention, the need to evaluate the level of
play and the skills needed to raise the level of play activities. In regard to metacognitive
knowledge, results found that teachers were familiar with evaluating their own strengths and
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
81
challenges on implementing learning through play and that many teachers developed self-
learning habits to evaluate their strengths and challenges.
Findings from Interviews
As discussed above, survey results highlighted that teachers were unfamiliar with certain
knowledge which could have affected their improvement in incorporating more play-based
learning in the curriculum. Interviews were conducted to triangulate the data with the survey
results. Eight teachers were selected to be interviewed based on their responses in the survey,
their teaching experience, their language specialty and their years of teaching experience. Three
Cantonese teachers, Three English teachers and Two Putonghua teachers were selected. Each
interview was recorded and transcribed. Each teacher agreed to be interviewed voluntary.
Some survey items were not triangulated with interview questions.
Factual knowledge. Survey results have already established that teachers were not fully
aware of EDB’s recommendation, and specifically the recommended time allocation of 155
minutes. Hence, the first question selected in the interview was in order to understand if teachers
were aware of the recommendation and were in fact doing what the EDB has prescribed.
Teachers were asked about the average amount of class time spent on free-choice or play-based
activities in the classroom per day, not including snack time and toilet time. The findings
indicated that none of the participants were spending the recommended 155 minutes on free-
choice/play-based activities per day. Responses ranged from forty minutes to ninety minutes for
a half-day curriculum of three hours per day. Although teachers’ schedule is fixed, majority of
the daily schedule is filled with small group activity times where activities are chosen and
planned by teachers. Hence, the interview results showed that teachers are not cognizant of the
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
82
recommendation of the EDB, supporting the survey results and validating the assumed cause that
teachers are not aware of EDB’s recommendation.
The survey results also indicated that teachers may not be fully aware of how to define
play and the characteristics of play to be able to identify whether a child is in fact playing.
Interview findings supported this assumed cause. In the interviews, teachers were asked “What
are the characteristics that you look for to define an activity as play?” and a usual follow-up
question was “Like how do you know when a child is really playing?” A number of
characteristics were highlighted by teachers but none of the teachers were able to identify all six
characteristics which researchers have indicated as the common characteristics of play. Three out
of eight teachers described how the type of communication and interaction between peers was an
indicator that the children are indeed playing. As explained by one English teacher, “When
children are interacting with each other, they are more engrossed in the activity and thus
demonstrate the necessary intrinsic engagement for true play.” In the interviews, it appeared that
English teachers were able to describe more of the characteristics than other language groups.
One English teacher explained, “Play is ‘you’ time. It is time for discovery and exploration, time
for children to enjoy, time for them to be free and independent, and time to connect with others.”
This was contrary to survey results where only Cantonese teachers appeared to be able to
identify all six characteristics. In general, through interviews, teachers were able to identify some
features or characteristics of play, although no one was able to identify all six. Hence the
assumed cause that teachers are not fully aware of the definition of play and the common
characteristics that identify play was validated by interview findings.
Conceptual knowledge. In reference to conceptual knowledge, teachers were asked if
they knew how play emphasized children as constructor of knowledge and how the interaction
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
83
process provided context for further learning. All eight teachers emphasized that as a constructor
of knowledge, children are capable of conducting the learning process themselves. One teacher
specified, “This is a process to test their limits, to let them find out about new things and to
explore on their own terms, these are all the process that emphasizes children as constructor of
knowledge.” Six of the eight teachers have emphasized their role as “observer, assistant and
facilitator.” When follow-up questions were asked concerning how the interactive process
provided context, one teacher explained, “I like to use higher-order questions like why and how
to bring out context. I also often encourage other children to participate in the play…there are
always one or two children in the class who naturally are good at interacting with other children
hence bring in much more dynamic play which provides the context.” In sum, many teachers
agreed that play certainly emphasizes children as constructor of knowledge and that the
interactive process provides context for further learning. The assumed cause that teachers lacked
this conceptual knowledge was thus not validated by the interview findings.
In relation to the conceptual knowledge of the principles of play in fostering certain
skills, teachers were asked in the interviews if they were familiar with how principles of play can
help foster, promote and build concepts, such as mathematics, literacy and social competence.
Almost all respondents in the survey indicated that they were familiar with how play and the
principles of play can help promote the skills, however interview findings revealed contrary
evidence that teachers were still referring to instructional didactic ways that emphasized children
as passive learners versus children as constructors of knowledge.
For example, in the question “In consideration of the principles of play, what are some
ways to use play or guided play to foster mathematical concepts? List any examples?” One
teacher responded, “We use various apparatus and equipment to help children understand
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
84
mathematical concepts, like blocks to count and toy clocks for getting them to move the hand to
the time I have written on the board.” Another teacher said, “They get to be familiar with
mathematical concepts with instruments like a measuring cylinder, and pouring water into the
cylinder and counting the liters.” These examples demonstrated that teachers were not fully
aware of the active learning concepts that foster children as constructor of knowledge. Using a
toy clock to demonstrate time does not involve any characteristic of play nor does it emphasize
children as constructor of knowledge because it is teacher directed and very different from the
notion where children are supposed to control their own agenda of activities. Two other teachers
have mentioned the use of counting flashcards as examples of play.
As for literacy, teachers were asked “in consideration of principles of play, what are some
ways to use play to foster literacy skills.” Two of the eight teachers made reference to “role
play” as the example where play fosters literacy skills. One mentioned the use of
“SMARTboard” to make Chinese characters and educational games in the classroom as play to
help promote literacy. But again, engaging children with an apparatus like the “SMARTboard”
does not perfectly fit the definition of play or elicit the characteristics of play. Two of the
teachers also mentioned songs and music as a “fun” way of elevating the level of literacy for
children.
In contrast, many interview participants identified play as helping to foster social
competence and four respondents explained how they use group games to promote the concepts
of taking turns, helping each other, problem solving and making decisions. The response of one
participant was, “In the unit of communities, I prepared some cardboard building blocks and
children were asked to build different buildings or structures of our communities using these
blocks (should we build a hospital, police station or fire station?). They [children] had to
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
85
negotiate, compromise and learn to be agreeable, all essential social competent and self-
regulation skills.”
In consideration of the above, teachers indicated that although they know the theoretical
background of principles of play. However, the application of how principles of play can help
foster mathematical and literacy skills was not as apparent. In particular for mathematical and
literacy skills, examples given were contrary to the concept of children as constructor of
knowledge and showed that part of teachers thinking was still routed in teacher-directed manner.
In this regard, interview findings supported that teachers were not as familiar with the concepts
of how play can foster mathematical and literacy skills. Hence, findings showed teachers had a
strong sense of understanding how principles of play can help foster social competency.
Procedural knowledge. Although there was no direct interview question concerning the
assumed cause that teachers are not familiar with the skills to/ skills involved with implementing
“learn through play” curriculum, many teachers have indicated their knowledge in this area
through their discussions and follow-up questions. In reference to whether teachers know about
limitation of their intervention during play, all teachers made some reference to their role as
facilitator while three teachers explained their role as an observer, and at the same time as a
participant with encouragement and support. One teacher described her role to intervene, “
…role of the teacher is to assist and participate in the form of encouragement and maybe
intervene only with appropriate questions to encourage more participation in play. Sometimes, I
also like to ask children to switch role where they will be the teacher and it always surprises me
that they often ask high-order thinking questions.” Teachers have also explained that they knew
about different levels of play and how to increase level of play activities. One English teacher
explained her position:
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
86
I usually let them ask the questions which often bring the levels of play up by
asking questions and I like getting other children to be involved. I found in
Hong Kong that children interact really well with adults (maybe because of all
the helpers) but I would try to stay away until I know I want to scaffold the
activity, for example doing the same activity again but for different reasons.
Like with my sand and soil box, the first week I hide the bugs and let them just
dig with different tools and make a mess. The next week, I would ask them to
do the same thing but with brushes and get them to see the seeds and roots
which I have planted in the box, while asking them what they find and show
them the seeds and roots and let them know this is where the bugs live and
students will learn these are the materials you will find under the earth and
hence we are playing with a purpose.
In order to validate their procedural knowledge, teachers were specifically asked in the
interview to give examples of when they use play to achieve a learning objective of a unit and an
example of how they use play for transmission of teaching content. All eight teachers gave
examples of how they would use group games and role-play to emphasize social learning. One
example was, “…similar to a duck duck goose game, we used a group game to teach cooperation
and self-control. Children sat in a circle and then a child chose to put a bean bag behind another
child’s back. The child who was chosen chases the first one around the circle before he/she sits
down in the spot in the circle. The game encourages patience, self-control and cooperation.” As
for transferring teaching content, one teacher mentioned, “Parents sometimes could be more
concerned whether the child learns about ABCs rather than the social skills they learn from play.
Teaching content somehow always has to relate back to literacy or language.” Nevertheless, five
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
87
teachers expressed that they are able to transfer content by their teaching methodology. Overall,
teachers felt they were confident with their procedural knowledge on implementing “learn
through play” in the curriculum.
Metacognitive knowledge. The assumed cause was that teachers are not familiar with
evaluating their own strengths and challenges in implementing learning through play in the
curriculum and that they do not do the evaluation consistently. In the interviews, teachers were
asked three questions to validate the assumed cause for metacognitive knowledge: “How do you
evaluate your performance in implementing learning through play and problems you have
encountered?”, “What are the steps you have taken to help you implement learning through play
successfully?” and “What are some challenges you face in implementing learning through play?”
Of the eight responses, two responded that they practice daily self-reflection and three
said they practice weekly reflection since one hour of collaboration planning each week is on the
schedule. One teacher said she thinks about the activities but does not do any formal evaluation.
Another teacher stated that she does reflection after every unit of inquiry which is about every
two months. The last teacher responded that “it is difficult to do evaluation for learning through
play when it is for literacy and math as they either learn it or they do not.” One teacher
explained her evaluation process, “We do lesson planning which is shared among teachers, hence
there is some evaluation with comments from teachers before and after. Then I do self-reflection
in terms of location, play environment and whether children were interested in the activities. I
also write down notes on the reflection column after every program of inquiry.” In terms of
successful practical steps, teachers shared how they work well with other teachers to implement
small group activities or “corner times” and how they are able to accomplish all the tasks in three
hours.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
88
As for challenges, teachers expressed that they experience constraints to implementing
more play because of the academic demands, such as writing and reading. Three of the eight
teachers mentioned the varying abilities of the children as a challenge to implementing play. The
interview findings of teachers have revealed that teachers do conduct self-evaluation in various
forms and that they see working with others as the primary strengths to implement play in the
curriculum. Their greatest challenges are addressing the different abilities of the children and the
academic demands of the school. Although there were three responses which indicated the
teachers practiced limited self-evaluation, the majority indicated they practice self-evaluation in
some manner consistently. Therefore, both metacognitive assumed causes were not validated by
the interview findings.
Findings from Classroom Observation
Two teachers were selected for in-class observations, one nursery class teacher with ten
years of teaching experience and one upper class teacher with over twenty years of teaching
experience. Each class observation was conducted during the small group activity time and
inquiry learning time (which accounted for almost 60% of the daily schedule). Mostly,
classroom observations were conducted to find support to validate the conceptual and procedural
knowledge findings.
In terms of the procedural knowledge, both teachers were observed to assess whether
they were able to guide the children towards accomplishing a task of the program of inquiry and
learning about the concepts of that unit of inquiry. IB curriculum dictates certain
transdisciplinary themes to be taught as units of inquiry. The methodology is for children to be
guided towards understanding the lines of inquiry which are statements that have been set out to
clarify the unit of study and define the scope of inquiry.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
89
In the classroom observation session, the researcher observed how one teacher conducted
an inquiry unit with the children. The trans disciplinary theme was “Sharing the planet” and the
central idea to convey was that “water is important to us” and “we can use it in different ways”.
The line of inquiry to be covered was the different ways that water can be used by examining its
function; water exists in different forms by examining how it changes and the different ways to
save water as children learn about shared responsibility. Teacher A started the lesson with some
pretend play where children were asked to pretend making a raining sound. Teacher A taught the
children a series of actions making a slushing sound with rubbing their hands together softly
(pretending to be the beginning of small rain drops), hitting their lap with their hands (rain is
picking up), stomping on the ground with their feet (to pretend violent rain), jumping up with a
big loud clap (thunderstorm) and finally sitting down again quietly with rubbing their hands
together softly (small droplets again). All throughout the actions, teacher A was explaining the
rain cycle, how it started with little droplets and turned into heavy rain. Children were then
asked to repeat the action with their eyes closed and follow the actions. Teacher A demonstrated
her ability to elevate the level of play from what was random sound to a consistent pattern with
soft and loud raining sounds in quick and slow tempo.
After that activity, Teacher A separated the class into four small groups with about eight
children in each group for small group activities. One corner of the room was set up with two
big buckets of water and plastic flowers held in Styrofoam and inside an inflatable water tub.
Children were encouraged to scoop the water from the buckets using plastic pails and irrigate the
flowers. They were learning the concept of different ways water can be used. In another corner,
there were eight glass jars which were covered with a paper towel and some cotton balls on top
of the paper towel. A jar of blue colored water was beside each of the covered jars. Children
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
90
were asked to use a squeeze pipette to suck the blue water up and release it on top of the cotton
balls after which the cotton balls turned blue. When enough water had accumulated, saturating
the paper towel and droplets of blue water can be seen dripping into in the empty glass jar.
Teacher A skillful asked the children questions during the activity, “Oh wow, look at the blue
cotton balls, What does it remind you of, Look at the sky outside what do you see?” One child
replied, “Like the fluffy marshmallows in the sky”. The teacher replied, “Yes like marshmallow
clouds in the sky, when it rains where does the rain come from?” One child replied, “Up in the
sky, in the clouds” and the teacher replied, “Oh look! Water is coming out, just like the clouds in
the sky”. In this short scenario, Teacher A did not intervene in the play episode except when
some of the children had problems getting the water into the pipettes, otherwise, she was there to
clean up a bit and ask more questions. In this short episode, it was observed that the children
learned about where rain comes from and that water exists in different forms.
The teacher demonstrated the ability to elevate the level of play with questions and
creating a play-based learning activity. The children were mesmerized with the water dripping
out of the cotton balls, had fun with pipetting the water out of the jars and dropping the water on
top of the cotton balls. Overall, in these two activities, the teacher facilitated the children to
participate in self-initiated play, where they were experimenting and taking charge of the play
process as constructors of knowledge. The teacher in the observation was able to elevate the
level of play to guided play with questions and minimal intervention. Ultimately, children were
able to understand the different ways water can be used and the learning objective of the
different form of water and how it changed. The learning objectives were successfully
transferred to the children using a planned “learn through play” activity. Hence, observation
findings did not support the assumed cause that teachers lacked the procedural knowledge
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
91
involved with inappropriate intervention, elevating the levels of play and implementing a “learn
through play” curriculum.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge Assumed Causes
Through the triangulation of survey results, interview findings and classroom
observations, the data indicated that teachers of the Kindergarten lacked certain factual,
conceptual and procedural knowledge.
Regarding factual knowledge, both of the survey results and interview findings revealed
that teachers were not familiar with the exact time allocation for play and free-choice activities
time as recommended by the EDB. Hence, the assumed cause was validated. Survey results
indicated that Cantonese teachers knew of the recommendation better than teachers of other
language groups perhaps because most Cantonese teachers were educated locally and received
their teaching qualification in Hong Kong which could explain their familiarity with the local
recommendation. The survey results and interviews confirmed that the teachers were not familiar
with the definition of play-based learning and lacked the ability to identify when the children
were playing by considering the characteristics of play, including the state of playfulness.
Although teachers did give detailed accounts of what they felt were the characteristics in terms
of the types of communication, internal motivation and engagement, none of the participants in
the interviews were able to identify all of the documented characteristics. Survey results
indicated that most teachers knew the different types of play. Teachers in the interviews
described the different types of play frequently, therefore, the assumed cause that teachers were
not familiar with the different types of play was not validated. Overall, among all the assumed
causes for factual knowledge, Cantonese teachers knew more about the time allocation
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
92
recommendation of the EDB but English teachers seemed to be much more familiar with the
definition of play and the characteristics of play.
Regarding conceptual knowledge, although teachers answered in the survey with
confidence that they understood how principles of play emphasize the child as constructor of
knowledge and that the benefits of play or guided play can help foster mathematical, literacy and
social competence skills, teachers in the interviews offered contrary evidence in their
understanding of the concepts in practice. This was especially true for mathematics and literacy
when there was a mismatch of teachers’ conception of playfulness using a play apparatus or
simply SMARTboards for building Chinese characters as play. Interview findings also revealed
that teachers are more didactic than they realized and what are intentions to promote play, may
not necessary fits the definition of play for children. Hence, the assumed cause that teachers were
not familiar with the concept of how principles of play help promote mathematical concepts and
build literacy was validated by the triangulation of data.
Procedurally, teachers indicated in the surveys and the interviews that they were familiar
with the skills to implement “learning through play”, including elevating the level of play to
meaningful focused learning. Teachers also demonstrated in the interviews and classroom
observations that they knew how to use play to emphasize active learning in order to achieve
learning objectives of their program of inquiry. This is perhaps the strength of the IB curriculum
where teachers are acquainted with encouraging student’s active inquiry and exploration that
helps them to find the answers and facilitate the children’s learning.
On the metacognitive level, no assumed cause was validated. Teachers in surveys and
interviews indicated that they knew how to evaluate their strengths and challenges and that most
teachers (80% in survey chose often and very often, 50% from the interview chose at least
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
93
weekly evaluation) consistently conducted self-evaluation to address problems and challenges in
implementing learning through play.
Table 4 summarizes how the knowledge assumed causes were supported or not supported
by survey results, interview findings and classroom observation records. The symbol Y indicates
the statement/assumed cause was supported by the data gathered, whereas the symbol N
indicates that the statement/assumed cause as not supported by the data gathered.
Table 4
Summary of Validated Knowledge Assumed Causes
Knowledge Assumed Causes*
Supported
by Survey
Results
Supported
by
Interview
Findings
Supported by
Observations
Validated
(Y/N)
(F) Teachers do not fully know the
criteria of learning through play as
prescribed by the Education Bureau
Y
Y
N/A
Y
(F) Teachers do not fully have the
knowledge of the definition of play
Y Y N/A Y
(F) Teachers do not fully know the
common characteristics of play
Y Y N/A Y
(F) Teachers do not fully know the
different types of play
N N N/A N
(C) Teachers do not fully know how
play emphasize children as
constructors of knowledge and how
the interactive process provide a
context for further learning
N N N/A N
(C) Teachers do not fully know how
the principles of play can help
promote mathematical concepts
N Y N/A Y
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
94
Table 4, continued
Knowledge Assumed Causes*
Supported
by Survey
Results
Supported
by
Interview
Findings
Supported by
Observations
Validated
(Y/N)
(C) Teachers are not familiar with
how principles of play can build
literacy skills
N Y N/A Y
(C) Teachers are not familiar with
how principles of play fosters social
competence and confidence
N N N/A N
(P) Teachers are not familiar with the
skills to/skills involved with
implementing a “learn through play
curriculum”
N N N N
(P) Teachers are not familiar with
how to use play to achieve the
learning objectives of each unit
N N N N
(P) Teachers are not familiar with
how to use play as the means for
transmission of teaching content
N N N N
(M) Teachers are not familiar with
how to evaluate their own strengths
and challenges on implementing
learning through play in the
curriculum
N N N/A N
* Indicate if the category is Factual Knowledge (F), Conceptual Knowledge (C), Procedural Knowledge (P),
Metacognitive Knowledge (M)
Results and Findings for Motivation Assumed Causes
In the gap analysis, motivation is a critical factor in affecting an organization to achieve
its goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Schunk et al. (2009) identified three common indicators of one’s
motivation: active choice, persistence and mental effort. Motivation assumed causes which
prevent teachers from reaching their goals were identified and assessed through surveys,
interviews and classroom observations.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
95
Survey Results
The survey contained nine items which were designed to investigate four motivation
assumed causes. The relevant motivation issues were task value, self-efficacy and attainment
value.
Active Choice. In examining how teachers can better incorporate more play-based
learning, it is critical to examine whether the teachers are motivated to do it. An important factor
is to gauge whether teachers experience a lack of extrinsic value before they choose to engage in
the activities. Six survey questions on the survey using four points on the Likert scale were
designed to assess teachers’ extrinsic values.
Children are learning through play. One of the assumed causes that prevent teachers
from engaging in more play-based learning is that teachers do not feel children are learning
through play. Three questions were used in this connection: “I believe children can learn through
play”(Q.17), “I believe play is just to fill-in time free time for children after they complete their
assignment”(Q.18) and “I believe children learn faster through play activities” (Q.19). The
responses were overwhelmingly that teachers believe that children can learn better through play.
Respondents strongly agreed or agreed that children can learn through play (100%, mean=3.79,
SD=. 40) and that children learn faster through play activities (95%, mean=3.46, SD=.62).
Figures 16 and 17 display the survey results for questions 17 and 19.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
96
Figure 16. Responses to Question 17 About Children Learning Through Play
Figure 17. Responses to Question 19 About Children Learning Faster Through Play
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
97
It was also very positive to note that teachers (93%) in general disagreed that play is just
to fill-in for free time only. Figure 18 sets out the survey results for question 18. Hence, the
assumed cause that teachers do not believe children are learning through play as a motivational
factor was not validated.
Figure 18. Responses to Question 18 About Play to Fill-In Free Time Only
Play or learn through play can help children gain literacy and math skills. Another
reason why teachers may be reluctant to engage in implementing more play-based learning in the
classroom is because they do not feel it is an effective pedagogy, especially for literacy and math
skills. Hence, teachers were asked in a four-point Likert scale question whether they are
knowledgeable in helping children to learn mathematical concepts and literacy skills through
play activities. Almost all teachers strongly agreed or agreed that they are knowledgeable in
helping children to learn mathematical concepts (91%) and literacy skills through play activities
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
98
(89%). Please see Figures 10 and 11 for results. In sum, results showed teachers felt play or
learning through play can help children gain literacy and math skills and hence, the assumed
cause was not validated.
Mental effort: self-efficacy. Once a task is started, motivation factors of mental effort
and persistence come into consideration. Teachers could lack mental effort to implement more
play or they might not feel confident lacking self-efficacy. As researchers have identified that a
play-based curriculum incorporating learning through play is difficult to implement effectively
and in an impactful manner (Wood & Bennett, 1997). Often teachers lack the experience and the
opportunity to be proficient in identifying the interests of the children in class and negotiate them
with the “object of learning”.
Hence, teachers were asked in the survey whether they think that they are more
knowledgeable about teaching through play activities compared to other traditional methods
(Q.20) and whether they are confident in their ability to implement “learning through play”
effectively and in an impactful manner in the classroom (Q.21). In both questions, most teachers
(94%, n= 86, mean=3.16, SD=0.50)) and (94%, n=86, mean=3.11, SD=.46) responded that they
strongly agreed or agreed with the statements. Therefore, the assumed causes that teachers don't
feel that they are knowledgeable in teaching through play activities compared with other
traditional teaching methods and that they do not have the skills to implement “learning through
play” in the classroom in an impactful and effective manner were not validated. Responses to
questions 20 and 21 are set out in Figures 19 and 20
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
99
Figure 19. Responses for Question 20 About Teaching Through Play Activities Compared to
Traditional Methods
Figure 20. Responses for Question 21 About Confidence in Ability to Implement Learning
Through Play
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
100
Persistence. The willingness of an individual to work hard and persist when tasks are
difficult or challenging is an important factor in motivation and goal achievement. Participants
were assessed on their attainment value and gauged whether they feel unappreciated when they
want to promote more “learning through play” because parents value academic readiness and
academic learning more than “play”. Teachers were asked open-ended questions on “what are
parent’s general feeling regarding play and learning through play in the classrooms?”(Q.22) and
“what are parent’s expectation in terms of academic readiness and academic learning in the
classroom?” (Q.23) Participants were assessed concerning the pressure parents assert from their
feeling towards learning through play and academic readiness. Two questions were asked to
assess the effect of the pressure from parents, “how often do parents directly ask you about their
child academic readiness” (Q.24) and “whether you feel there are sufficient communication
channels between teachers and parents to share learning objectives and recognition of the
school’s approach to children’s learning?” (Q.31) This latter question was designed to assess
whether teachers felt that there are sufficient open dialogue opportunities between parents and
teachers so that parents can understand the issues surrounding “learning through play”.
As for the open-ended question Q.22 most respondent’s (55%) stated parents do not
support play-based learning and do not understand play. Responses for this question were
categorized as: (i) play is a waste of time. Playtime is just for fun; (ii) parents expect knowledge
learning and results; (iii) parents have positive attitudes towards play but not necessarily a
component of their child’s learning or preparing them for primary school; (iv) parents support
play-based learning partially but do not really understand it; (v) parents are enthusiastic about the
concept of play-based learning and understand the benefits of play. From items (i) (play is a
waste of time) to (v) (enthusiastic about play concepts and play-based learning), the degree of
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
101
preference for academic learning decreases and generally favors play more. In respondents’
answers, 45 out of 81 teachers (55%) felt parents do not support and do not understand “learning
through play”. Survey results also indicated that teachers felt some parents may support play-
based learning but generally parents do not understand it. When evaluating the data by sub-
groups of grade level, it is interesting to note that the lower grade level teachers (pre-nursery and
nursery) responded that parents are generally more enthusiastic about play compare to teachers
of the older-age groups. 9 out of 17 pre-nursery teachers (52%) and 8 out of 14 nursery teachers
(58%) felt parents are enthusiastic about play-based learning compare to 8 out of 22 lower class
teachers (36%) and 11 out of 28 upper class teachers 9 (39%). Table 5 sets out the responses by
teachers of different grade levels. There was also a direct difference in correlation between
language teachers as 50% of English teachers felt parent’s general feelings regarding play and
learning through play is skewed towards knowledge learning and against play-based learning.
Table 6 sets out the responses by teachers’ language specialty.
Table 5
Question 22 (What are parents” general feelings regarding play and learning through play in
the classrooms? Responses categorized by grade levels)
Play is a
waste of
time.
Playtime is
just for fun
Parents
expects
knowledge
learning
and results
Positive
attitude
towards
play but not
a necessary
component
Support
partially
but do not
really
understand
it
Parents are
enthusiastic
about the
concept of
play-based
learning and
understand
the benefits
Total
Pre-
nursery
4 (24%) 2 (12%) 2 (12%) 9 (52%) 17
Nursery 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 8 (58%) 14
Lower
Class
3 (14%) 2 (9%) 4 (18%) 5 (23%) 8 (36%) 22
Upper
Class
4 (14%) 5 (18%)
3 (11%) 5 (18%) 11 (39%) 28
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
102
Table 6
Question 22 (What are the parents’ general feelings regarding play and learning through play in
the classrooms? Responses categorized by language specialty)
Play is a
waste of
time.
Playtime
is just
for fun
Parents
expects
knowledge
learning
and results
Positive
attitude
towards
play but
not a
necessary
component
Support
partially
but do not
really
understand
it
Parents are
enthusiastic
about the
concept of
play-based
learning
and
understand
the benefits
Total
English 4 (20%) 6 (30%) 6 (30%) 2 (10%) 2 (10%) 20
Cantonese 4 (9%) 6 (13%) 3 (7%) 9 (20%) 23 (51%) 45
Putonghua 1 (5%) 2 (11%) 3 (17%) 12 (67%) 18
In regard to question 23 concerning parent’s expectation in terms of academic readiness
and academic learning in the classrooms, teachers’ answers were coded and categorized as: (i)
happy learning environment and enjoy school. Children can learn through play; (ii) gain some
knowledge and be able to tell parents at home and possess the right learning attitude, well
rounded; (iii) gain some basic language and math skills at age-appropriate level - balance
curriculum; (iv) preparing children for academic learning and to enter into a desirable primary
school; (v) high expectation, lots of pressure on children’s academic to exceed beyond their age
group and often compare their child’s progress with others. The answers were arranged in the
order from less academic pressure for item (i) to most academic pressure for item (v). The
majority of the teachers (46 out of 80, 58%) actually felt that parents do expect academic
readiness or at least for their child to gain some basic language and math skills (mean=2.69,
SD=.1.36). Thus, survey results validated that there are significant demands from parents for
academic learning in the classrooms. Results also indicated English teachers felt the most
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
103
pressure from parents because eighteen out of nineteen English teachers (95%) responded that
parents have high expectations or that preparing the children to enter into a desirable primary
school was important. An analysis of variance showed that the effect of language specialty was
significant, F(2,77) = 23.56, p <.001. Post hoc analyses using Bonferroni corrections showed that
on the average English teachers experienced significantly higher parents’ expectations (M = 4.16,
SD = 1.07) when compared with Cantonese teachers (M = 2.32, SD = 1.16) and Putonghua
teachers (M = 2, SD = .87), p <.001. Figure 21 and Figure 22 display the responses to question
23 based on teachers’ language specialty and then based on grade level of respondents.
Figure 21. Responses to Question 23 Based on Language Specialty About Parents’ Expectations
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
104
Figure 22. Responses to Question 23 Based on Grade Levels of Participants
In relation to parent’s pressure on teachers for certain learning outcomes in the
classrooms, 70 out of 86 teachers (81%) specified that they were asked about academic readiness
at least once a week. Twenty-two respondents (25%) have replied that parents asked them two
to three times a week. Figure 23 indicates teacher’s responses to this question by language
specialty.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
105
Figure 23. Responses to Question 24 About the Frequency of Parents Asking About Their
Child’s Academic Readiness 24 Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty
In terms of sufficient communication channel, a majority 71 out of 90 teachers (78%)
indicated that there are sufficient or more than enough communication channels between
teachers and parents. Figure 24 indicates the results for question 31.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
106
Figure 24. Responses to Question 31 About Communication Channels
From the survey results, it can be inferred that teachers do not feel appreciated as parents
seem to only appreciate academic learning. From questions 23 and 24 data, it appears that
parents do not support play-based learning. In addition, parents’ expectations for their children’s
academic learning to be at a superior level along with the frequency that they ask about their
child’s academic readiness can create stress and ambivalence about play-based learning for the
teachers. Survey results validated the assumed cause that teachers do not feel appreciated as a
teacher since parents are critical because they value academic readiness and academic learning as
opposed to play-based learning. Results also indicated that English teachers felt the pressure the
most as a majority has expressed parents do not support play-based learning and that parents’
expectation on academic learning is high.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
107
Summary of Survey Results for Motivation Causes
In summary, only one motivation assumed cause was validated by survey results. The
other three assumed causes will need to triangulate with data from the interviews. In general, the
survey results validated that teachers do not feel appreciated when they want to promote more
learning through play because parents only value academic readiness and academic learning.
From the survey results, the assumed cause that teachers do not feel children are not learning
through play was not validated because a majority of the respondents agreed that children can
learn even faster through play and that play is not a waste of time. Survey results also revealed
that teachers did not feel play is an ineffective pedagogy for math and literacy skills. Survey
results also did not support that teachers lacked self-efficacy as they all felt confident in their
ability to implement “ learning through play” in the classroom effectively and in an impactful
manner.
Findings from Interviews
Interview findings were very similar to survey results in supporting only one assumed
cause. Interviewed participants were asked about motivational issues concerning the value in
participating in the “learning through play” activity, their confidence in their ability to implement
play-based learning and their attainment value for teachers to incorporate more play.
Active Choice: Children learning through play. To assess the assumed cause that
teachers do not feel children can learn through play, teachers were asked “Do you feel you are
making a difference in children’s lives by getting them to do more guided play in the
classroom?” Seven of the eight teachers concurred that they felt they are making a difference in
children’s lives by getting them to do more guided play. One commented, “We are making a
difference because children enjoy play and they are learning without them realizing it.” Another
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
108
one mentioned, “Learning through play equips children with inter-personnel relationships skills
and social learning that we know will carry them through for the rest of their lives.”
Teachers were also asked “How would you rank ‘learning through play’ versus other
teaching practices?” Seven out of the eight teachers replied that it was the preferred method as
“the IB curriculum conducted by the school recognizes ‘learning through play’ and it
complements well with making learning more hands-on and materialistic for the children.” The
only teacher who felt it was not the preferred teaching practice because, “play is the preferred
method except until the upper class when rote learning needs to take precedence to prepare them
[students] for primary school.” From the interview result, it can be inferred that teachers felt
children can learn through play and is the preferred teaching method. The assumed cause that
teachers believe children are not learning through play was not validated by the interview
findings.
Active Choice: Play can help children gain literacy and math skills. The second
assumed cause that teachers may not be as motivated because they do not feel that play can
really help literacy and math skills (whereas traditionally these skills are reserved for rote
learning) was assessed through the interview process. Overall, five out of eight teachers
disagreed with the assumed cause and stated that play can advance mathematical skills and
literacy. Of the five teachers who disagreed, four stated that play can advance literacy skills more
than math skills as one teacher commented, “Of course when they role-play it is easy to get when
they say the word of their action ‘I am jumping into the pool’ or vegetables they are preparing to
buy ‘onions, carrots, tomatoes’ but it is a lot harder to get them to count the number of cars.”
Also, grade-level also appears to make a difference as the two teachers who had doubt on
whether play is effective were upper class teachers who felt “perhaps primary school math has
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
109
been pushed earlier to upper class level, so some worksheet typed based activities for math and
literacy (especially Chinese literacy) may be what is necessary.” Teachers also gave examples of
how waiting in-line with bean bags can help promote mathematical concepts by learning about
patterns and colors. In summary, although the majority opinion from the interviews did not
support the assumed cause that teachers do not believe in play-based learning, when asked about
teachers’ beliefs in play as an effective teaching methodology for math and literacy skills,
teachers of the upper classes hesitated to give their full support.
Mental Effort: Self-efficacy. Teachers indicated in the survey that they are confident in
their ability to implement “learning through play” effectively and in an impactful manner. In the
interviews, teachers were asked “if you can give an example on how you can do it effectively?”
Three teachers indicated that they felt confident but also stated it may be difficult for upper class
teachers as they face more academic demands. The other five teachers expressed their confidence
by describing their ability to set up a play environment and to promote opportunities for students
to experience the learning process themselves. One teacher described “I may not be as confident
as when first coming from a primary school background, but seeing how other teachers use every
opportunity like waiting in line or lining up for dismissal in the playground to play games with
the children, it made me felt there was a mission for guided play even when we are out in the
hallways and when we rotate to different inquiry stations outside.” Another teacher mentioned,
“I play ‘Open Sesame’ with the children even on the slide to give them opportunities to learn
about waiting, taking turns, asking question and being polite, so it is impactful.” Teachers of all
grade levels and different language specialties expressed confidence in their ability to implement
“learning through play” effectively and in an impactful manner. Thus this assumed cause was not
supported by majority of the interview data as discussed above.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
110
Persistence: Teachers do not feel appreciated. The motivational assumed cause that
teachers do not feel appreciated as parents only value academic readiness was assessed by
interviews. Teachers were asked whether they felt there was pressure from the parents to conduct
more academic learning instead of play and whether they believed that parents understood the
benefits of play. Follow-up questions were asked if parents are overly concerned with academic
readiness that they do not appreciate a teacher spending too much time on play. Findings
showed that more teachers (five teachers) were experiencing pressure from parents than those
who felt little or no pressure. Interview findings also supported the survey results which
emphasized that English teachers tended to experience high academic expectations from parents
along with their not understanding nor appreciating the value of play in the curriculum. One
English teacher commented, “I was surprised the pressure is not as much as imagined but they do
have expectations and they don’t always understand play as a teaching style, so they ask for
worksheets after school.”
When asked whether parents do not understand play nor appreciate play, one English
teacher commented, “There is a conflict among them [parents] between process and end goal….
They want children to enjoy school but at the same time they want them to get into good
universities hence they ask you whether they know their ABCs and whether they can read in full
sentences.” Overall also it seems that pre-nursery teachers were found to be more sensitive to
pressure as they anticipate there are more pressure at upper grade levels. One stated, “I believe
there is less pressure in K1 but certainly more competition/comparison for K2 and K3.” Whereas
upper class teachers did experience less pressure from parents, “Parents seem to be in tune that
play is important in an inquiry-based school.” Nevertheless, when asked whether they feel
parents are overly concerned with academic readiness so that they do not appreciate teachers
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
111
spending too much time on play, five out of eight teachers have expressed parent’s lack of
appreciation for spending too much time on play, as one teacher commented, “Happy is a basic
requirement, but there are expectations for literacy, expectations for interview preparation,
expectations for fluency in two or three languages, where inevitably they appreciate more
worksheets to demonstrate their abilities.” In conclusion, interview findings supported that
teachers experienced a great deal of academic pressure from parents and that they do not feel
appreciated for using more play-based teaching methods. Similar to survey results, English
teachers seem to feel the pressure and lack of appreciation more than other language specialty
teachers. In addition, they assumed that parents do not understand the purpose of play more
frequently than other language groups.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Assumed Causes
Based on the synthesis of the survey results and interview findings, only one assumed
motivation cause was validated. Surveys and interviews found that teachers do not feel
appreciated as a teacher from the parents because they value academic readiness over play.
Teachers felt a great deal of pressure because parents do not appear to value play as part of the
curriculum. Results and findings showed that there is genuine pressure from parents to conduct
more academic based learning rather than play. English teachers were most vocal in expressing
their concerns. Pre-nursery teachers were sensitive to parents’ pressure as they assumed that
upper class teachers experience the most pressure from parents for academic achievement.
In reference to the assumed cause that teachers do not feel play or “learn through play”
can help children gain literacy and math skills, the survey indicated that teachers do not feel play
cannot help foster literacy and mathematical skills. However, in the interviews, two upper class
teachers had doubts about whether play can foster literacy and mathematical skills when
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
112
worksheets seem to be more effective and necessary. Of the five teachers who disagreed with the
statements, four indicated that play is not the preferred method to foster mathematical skill when
rote learning may need to take precedence. Hence, although the interview findings did not
support the assumed cause that play cannot help foster literacy and mathematical skills, there
were doubts and some contrary evidence indicating a waiver in teachers’ motivation to use play
to foster literacy and mathematical skills. The other two assumed causes were not validated.
These assumed causes include the participants’ extrinsic value where teachers do not feel
children are learning through play thus they resist implementing a play-based curriculum and
self-efficacy where teachers are not confident in the skills necessary to implement “learning
through play”. A summary of how each motivation assumed cause was supported by survey
results and interview findings are set out in Table 7.
Table 7
Summary of Validated Motivation Causes
Motivation causes
Supported
by
Survey
Results
Supported
by
Interview
Findings
Supported by
classroom
observations
Validated
(Y/N)
Choice, Extrinsic Value: Teachers do
not feel children are learning through
play thus they resist to implement a
play-based curriculum in class
N
N
N/A
N
Choice, Extrinsic Value: Teachers do
not feel “play” or “learning through
play” can help children gain literacy
and math skills
N N N/A N
Mental Effort, Self-Efficacy: Teachers
do not feel they have the skills to
implement “learning through play” in
the classroom as research has always
shown it is difficult to do effectively
and in an impactful manner
N N N/A N
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
113
Table 7, continued
Motivation causes
Supported
by
Survey
Results
Supported
by
Interview
Findings
Supported by
classroom
observations
Validated
(Y/N)
Persistence, Attainment Value:
Teachers do not feel appreciated as a
teacher since parents are
unappreciative as they value academic
readiness and academic learning
Y Y N/A Y
“Y” indicates the assumed cause was supported by the data. “N” indicates assumed cause was not supported by the
data.
Results and Findings for Organizational Assumed Causes
Achievement of a goal is often impeded because of organizational structures and settings.
According to Ballymore and Goldenberg (2001), organizational assumed causes of goal
achievement can be described by organizational cultural model and cultural setting. In the
following paragraphs, organizational factors for the achievement of organizational goals were
assessed by the survey and interview to determine which organizational barriers are preventing
more play-based learning implementation in the classrooms at the Kindergarten.
Survey Results
Nine survey questions were asked to assess the cultural setting and cultural model issues
including issues relating to resources to build a play-based curriculum, the amount of
administration work that is delaying efforts to incorporate more play, curriculum expectations
and demands that make it difficult to incorporate more play, teacher’s resistance to change
culture and the culture of parents of a Confucian tradition exerting pressure for a more academic
based curriculum.
Resources. Limited space and resources have always been found in Hong Kong to be
barriers for implementation of play and play-based learning in the classroom (Lau & Cheng,
2010). Building a play environment requires a large amount of resources. Teachers were asked
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
114
if they believe they have enough resources to conduct and build play-based learning atmosphere
(Q.25) and whether overall the school’s environment is conducive for child-centered pedagogy
(Q.26). Results showed that teachers (73 out of 93, 80%) agreed or strongly agreed that there are
enough resources with a mean of 2.90 and a standard deviation of .54. Figure 25 displays the
survey results for this question 25.
Figure 25. Responses to Question 25 About Enough Resources to Incorporate Play-Based
Learning
In addition, teachers (81 out of 91 teachers, 89%) also felt the environment was
conducive for child-centered pedagogy with a mean of 3.99 and standard deviation of .55. Figure
26 sets out the results for question 26. The results from both of these questions demonstrated that
teachers do not feel they lack the necessary resources to build a play-based environment
therefore the assumed cause was not validated.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
115
Figure 26. Responses to Question 26 About the Environment and Facilities for a Child-Centered
Pedagogy
Administration work and curriculum expectation. Two organizational issues that
could contribute to the organizational performance gap of incorporating more play in the
curriculum are the large amount of administration work required by the teachers and curriculum
expectations and demands from the institution. To assess the assumed causes, teachers were
asked in the survey, “ Do you feel there is too much administrative work (i.e. portfolio and
assessment report writing), that you believe hinders your planning and effect to implement and
make learning a better experience for the students, like incorporating more play?” (Q.30). A
majority of the teachers (80 out of 90 teachers, 89%) felt there was too much administrative
work which was hindering planning for more play. A mean of 3.21 with standard deviation of
.063 indicated that most teachers strongly agreed or agreed with the statement. Hence, survey
results validated the assumed cause that teachers felt there were too much administrative work
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
116
which hindered efforts to incorporate more play. Figure 27 sets out the responses to this
question 30.
Figure 27. Responses to Question 30 About too Much Administrative Work to Incorporate More
Play Based on Teachers’ Language Specialty
In relation to curriculum expectations and demands affecting successful implementation
of play-based learning, which a number of teachers had expressed this concern in scanning
interviews, teachers were asked if they felt whether curriculum expectations and demands affect
them to incorporate play into the curriculum (Q.32). Responses were coded and categorized by:
not affected, affected but able to manage demands and incorporate play into curriculum, and
much affected.
Almost all teachers (66 out of 71, 92%) felt and agreed that curriculum expectations and
demands affected their ability to incorporate more play (mean=2.51, DS=.63). Nevertheless,
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
117
35% of the respondents stated that curriculum expectations and demands affected them but they
were able to manage those demands and still incorporate play into the curriculum. Cantonese
teachers being eighteen out of the twenty-five teachers who replied that curriculum demands
affected them to incorporate more play but they were able to manage those demands. English
teachers were among the largest group of teachers who agreed that curriculum expectations and
demands affected their ability to incorporate more play. Figure 28 shows the survey results for
this question based on language specialty.
Figure 28. Response to Question 32 About Curriculum Demands and Incorporating Play Based
on Teacher’s Language Specialty
Resistant to change. One of the cultural setting assumed causes was that more
experienced teachers (defined as those with thirteen or more years of experience in teaching)
may be reluctant to change and tend to adhere to a more passive teacher-directed instructional
style. The demographics of experienced teachers account are about 40% at the Kindergarten and
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
118
48% of the respondents. Therefore, they were asked in the survey to rank using a four-point
Likert scale “I do not wish to try any new format with the curriculum such as ‘learning through
play’”(Q.27) and “I do not have faith in ‘learning through play’ as the preferred learning
method.”(Q.28). The respondents (94%, mean=1.62, SD=0.63) disagreed that they do not want
to try the new format. Results also showed that (86%, mean=3.21, SD=0.51) of the respondents
stated they have faith in “learning through play” as the preferred learning method. Therefore,
teachers indicated they are not resistant to change, even those who are more experienced agreed
that “learned through play” was the preferred learning method. The cultural setting assumed
cause was not validated. Figure 29 displays the responses to question 27 about the resistance to
change and Figure 30 displays the responses to question 28 concerning the faith in “learning
through play”.
Figure 29. Responses to Question 27 About Resistance to Change
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
119
Figure 30. Responses to Question 28 About Faith in Learning Through Play as a Preferred
Learning Method
Parents’ academic focused expectations. Under the strong influence of the Confucian
tradition, parents in Hong Kong expect that schools will teach academic skills early (Opper,
1994). An assumed cause relating to the organizational cultural model that could prevent
teachers from incorporating more play is the pressure exerted by parents for more time spent in
academic skill based learning. Three survey questions were asked to gauge teacher’s pressure
from parents: “What are the parent’s expectation in terms of academic readiness and academic
learning in the classroom” (Q.23); “How often do parents directly ask you about their child’s
academic readiness?” (Q.24) and “How would your rank which assets are most valued by
parents?”(Q.29).
In relation to the first two questions, we have discussed the results in the motivation
section and found that there are significant demands from parents for academic learning in the
classrooms. In regard to parent’s expectations for academic readiness and academic learning in
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
120
the classroom, a majority of the teachers (58%) agreed that parents do expect academic readiness
or at least for their child to gain some basic language and math skills. The parents’ pressure on
teachers was verified by the findings as 70 out of 86 participants (81%) specified that they are
asked about academic readiness at least once a week. Twenty-two respondents (26%, n=86) have
replied that parents asked them two to three times a week.
In relation to the question which assets are most valued by parents, survey results
indicated that academic skills of math and literacy were ranked in the first two choices with a
significant difference from art and socialization skills. Figure 31 shows the distribution of
rankings among each skill. Art skills was ranked by most respondents (59 out of 92, 64%) as the
least valued. While 55 out of 92 teachers (60%) ranked math skills as the first two most valued
assets for parents and 65 out of 92 teachers (71%) ranked literacy skills as the first two most
valued assets for parents. When comparing the results by grade levels, it showed that teachers of
lower and upper class tended to rate math and literacy skills higher as first or second choice more
than Pre-nursery and Nursery class teachers. Please see Figures 33, 34, 35 and 36 for the results
of the rankings by grade level.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
121
Figure 31. Responses to Question 29 by Number of Participants Ranking Each Asset
Figure 32. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Art Skills Based on Teachers’
Grade Level
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
122
Figure 33. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Socialization Skills Based on
Teachers’ Grade Level
Figure 34. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Problem Solving Skills Based
on Teachers’ Grade Level
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
123
Figure 35. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the Importance of Math Skills Based on Teachers’
Grade Level
Figure 36. Responses to Question 29 Ranking the importance of Literacy Skills Based on
Teacher’s Grade Level
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
124
The survey data indicated that teachers felt parents requested or desired more academic
learning than child-centered play. In sum, strong data supported the feeling of an overwhelming
parents expectations on academic readiness, the pressure from the frequency on parents’
demands on their children’s academic readiness and the clear indication that math and literacy
skills were most valued by parents. Hence, the cultural model assumed cause was validated as
there is a strong indication that Confucian traditions are driving academically focused parents to
exert pressure on teachers for a more academic skills based curriculum and even reward teachers
to have this type of curriculum compared to child-centered play-based learning.
Summary of Survey Results for Organizational Causes
Of the five organizational assumed causes, three were supported by the survey results and
two were not. For the two not supported by survey results, teachers indicated that there were
enough resources to build a play-based learning atmosphere. A large majority felt that the
schools’ environment and facilities were conducive for child-centered pedagogy. Survey results
also showed that there was no resistant to change culture as “learn through play” was indicated
as the preferred learning method. Nevertheless, the survey results revealed that many teachers
felt there was too much administrative work hence hindering efforts to implement more play.
Also, the assumed cause that formal curriculum expectation and demands made it difficult for
teachers to incorporate more play into the daily schedule was validated. In addition, survey
results validated the explicit cultural model that parents’ pressure for academic focused
curriculum limit teachers from implementing a more play-based curriculum.
Findings from the Interviews
To understand in detail about organizational assumed causes, four questions were asked
during the interviews with teachers as a follow-up to survey questions.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
125
Curriculum expectations and demands. Although there was not a direct interview
question assessing the assumed cause that curriculum expectations and demands made it difficult
for teachers to incorporate more play into the daily schedule, many teachers have mentioned this
point when asked, “What is the single most important reason you feel that is preventing you from
incorporating more play in the classroom?” Six out of eight teachers referred to curriculum
demands and time constraint to do all that is required by the curriculum as the single most
important reason. One teacher commented that “there is just not enough time to implement all
play-based activities, where inevitably language and literacy learning time, which is primarily
academic or rote learning driven, will eat into the schedule and take up a portion of the children’s
time at school.” One common theme of teachers’ comments was “conducting an extra session on
reading and writing is only made possible by reducing the time on exploration.” Also, it
appeared that other activities of the curriculum have affected play-based learning as explained by
one teacher, “Time constraints mean that we are unable to focus on the play aspect of learning.
Once a month we spend time making birthday party crafts and there is a lot of time spent on
portfolio pieces, work to showcase to the parents and assessment that it leaves little time for
playing in a three-hour day.” As for curriculum demands, reading and writing academic training
have been expressed by teachers as one concern, “literacy especially in two different languages
is set in such a structural program that it leaves little room for children to learn through hands on
play.” Hence, interview findings supported the assumed cause that teachers felt curriculum
expectations and demands affected incorporating play into the curriculum.
Resistant to change culture. In regard to teachers’ culture to change, all eight teachers
agreed in the interviews that “ learning through play” is the preferred teaching method and they
readily accept it as part of the curriculum. One teacher stated, “Because the school’s emphasis is
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
126
on inquiry learning, teachers had to change to strike a balance between rote learning and play
learning.” Another teacher commented that “The whole school agrees that inquiry-based
learning curriculum seems to draw the attention of the children better, thus promote much better
motivated learning.” Nevertheless, one teacher specified that “learning through play is the
preferred teaching method, however it may vary with the upper class where they will inevitably
do more rote learning for more academic preparation.” Overall, the findings do not support the
assumed cause that there is a resistant to change culture among teachers.
Parents’ academic focused expectations. The survey results indicated that there was
significant support for the assumed cause that parents from a Confucian tradition are heavily
academic focused which exerts pressure for more academic skills based learning rather than a
play-based learning model even at the pre-school level. In addition, strong academic expectations
from parents who value academic skills more than art and socialization skills were evident from
the survey results. In order to triangulate these findings and interviews were used. Participants
were asked whether they thought that parents understand the benefits of play and whether the
school is providing enough guidance to parents about “learning through play.” In addition, it
was proposed that if the school were to provide opportunities for the parents about the benefits of
a play-based curriculum, would this serve as a solution to the pressure from parents about
academic skills education?
As a motivation concern, it was established that parents are overly concerned with
academic readiness that they do not appreciate a teacher spending too much time on play. As an
organization issue, academic pressure turns into a cultural conflict with the “learning through
play” culture, which the EDB and the Kindergarten are trying to promote. Therefore, when
teachers were asked whether they believe parents understand play lays a good foundation for
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
127
future learning, six out of eight teachers replied that parents probably do not understand this
concept. Even the two teachers who mentioned that parents appeared to understand the
philosophy, also said that probably academic expectation at higher grade level will demand
otherwise. Another teacher mentioned that “[parents] understand but with the looming pressure
of entering primary school, some upper class parents may have certain academic expectations
and will demand academically related activities.” Of the teachers who thought that parents do
not understand, they generally commented that “parents don’t really understand the importance,
they have an emphasis on outcomes and academic performance.” One teacher made a point that
“Parents are focused on reading techniques rather than allowing children to stay for exploration.
They don’t understand that play is where children learn and build their relationships.” In the
extreme, one teacher responded, “Parents only ask about what words or numbers that their
children learn in school.”
When teachers were asked about whether they believe the school was providing sufficient
guidance to parents about “learning through play”, five out of eight teachers stated that the
school was not providing sufficient guidance. They mentioned that there is a need to teach
parents more about how play makes relationship and to encourage play. One mentioned the
school “can guide parents along the way with teaching them that even copybook exercise can be
used in a way to be more interactive and playful.” While those who believed the school was
providing enough guidance reported that the “expanded unit reports is good way to communicate
with parents and it helps them to further understand the benefits of play-based/inquiry-based
activities happening in the classroom.” Overall, interview findings supported and validated the
assumed cause that the culture of academic readiness exerts pressure on teachers to provide
academic skills based learning rather than incorporating more play.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
128
Synthesis of Results and Findings of Organization Assumed Causes
Of the five organizational assumed causes, three were validated by the survey results and
interview findings.
In relation to the assumed causes of cultural settings, teachers indicated that the
assessment reports required by the Kindergarten created large amount of administrative work
which limited teachers’ efforts to incorporate more play. In the survey, teachers demonstrated
overwhelmingly that the administrative work leaves minimal time for planning for more play.
This assumed cause was also supported by interview findings where teachers mentioned that the
assessment report is comprehensive but takes too much preparation time. In relation to
curriculum expectation and demands, survey and interview data supported that they have made it
difficult for teachers to incorporate more play in the daily schedule. Several comments from the
interview detailed how time spent on the demands of reading and writing was only possible by
reducing the time on exploration through play.
The main concern which was overwhelmingly supported by survey results and interview
findings was the culture of pressure from parents for more academic skills based learning rather
than play-based exploration. Participants in both survey and interviews indicated that parents
consistently regard literacy and math skills and academic readiness as top priorities. The survey
and interview results also showed that pressure from parents are extreme in that a majority of the
teachers (81%) are being asked about their child’s academic readiness at least once a week. In
terms of whether this culture is in conflict with the play culture, six out of eight (75%) teachers
in the interviews believed that parents do not fully understand play and how it lays a good
foundation for future learning. A majority of the teachers thought more communication from the
school to the parents about “learning through play” would help improve the pressure from
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
129
parents to incorporate academic skills learning which creates a cultural conflict with play-based
learning. The assumed cause was validated by survey and interviews. A summary of how each
organizational assumed cause was supported by survey results and interview findings are set out
in Table 8.
Table 8
Summary of Validated Organizational Assumed Causes
Organizational Assumed Causes
Supported
by
Survey
Results
Supported
by
Interview
Findings
Supported by
classroom
observations
Validated
(Y/N)
Cultural Setting: There are not
enough resources to build a play-
based environment
N
N
N/A
N
Cultural Setting: Many teachers
have complained that the revised
assessment reports have created
large amount of administrative
work and hence delaying other
efforts like incorporating more play
Y Y N/A Y
Cultural Setting: Curriculum
expectations and demands have
made it difficult for teachers to
incorporate more play into the daily
schedule
Y Y N/A Y
Cultural Model: Teachers are
resistant to change (implicit) as they
are experienced and feel
complacent in their ways
N N N/A N
Cultural Model: Parents of a
Confucian tradition are heavily
academic focused and that exerts
pressures or rewards for more
academic skills based curriculum
rather than a play-based curriculum
Y Y N/A Y
“Y” indicates the assumed cause was supported by the data. “N” indicates assumed cause was not supported by the
data.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
130
Summary of Results and Findings
Survey results, interview findings and observation findings for each category of
knowledge, motivation and organization were assessed for validation through triangulation of the
data. Among the twenty-one assumed causes, nine were validated and twelve were not validated.
Regarding the category of knowledge and skills, five of the twelve assumed causes were
validated. Factually, survey results and findings validated that teachers were not familiar with
the exact time allocation for play and free-choices activities as recommended by the EDB.
Survey results and interviews findings also confirmed that teachers did not fully know the
definition of play and the characteristics of play, including the state of playfulness. Overall,
among all the assumed causes for factual knowledge, Cantonese teachers knew more about the
time allocation recommendation of the EDB but English teachers seemed to be more familiar
with the definition of play and the characteristics of play. Regarding conceptual knowledge,
interview findings found that teachers were not familiar with how principles of play help
promote mathematical concepts and build literacy as interview evidence revealed that teachers’
intention to promote play do not necessary fits the definition of play.
Of the four assumed motivation causes, only one was validated. Surveys and interview
findings confirmed that teachers did not feel appreciated as a teacher from parents because they
value academic readiness over play. Essentially, teachers felt a great deal of pressure because
parents do not appear to value play as part of the curriculum. All the other three assumed
motivation causes were not validated.
In regard to the category of organization, out of five assumed organizational causes three
were validated by survey results and interview findings. For cultural settings, survey and
interview findings revealed that large amount of administrative work, such as assessment reports
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
131
and portfolio preparation required by the Kindergarten, limited teachers’ efforts to incorporate
play in the curriculum. At the same time, data supported that curriculum expectations and
demands made it difficult for teachers to incorporate play in the daily schedule. Both surveys and
interview findings revealed that Cantonese teachers were especially confident that curriculum
demands can be managed and yet play can still be incorporated. Regarding cultural model,
findings overwhelmingly supported there was a culture of pressure from parents for more
academic skills based learning rather than play-based exploration. That culture exerted pressure
on teachers for more academic skills based learning and even rewarded teachers to implement
more academic learning compared to child-centered play-based learning. A summary of all
validated knowledge, motivation and organizational causes are set out in the following Table 9.
Table 9
Summary of Validated Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Causes
Category Validated Causes
Knowledge
(Factual)
Teachers do not fully know the criteria of learning through play
as prescribed by the Education Bureau
Knowledge
(Factual)
Teachers do not fully have the knowledge of the definition of
play
Knowledge
(Factual)
Teachers do not fully know the common characteristics of play
Knowledge
(Conceptual)
Teachers do not fully know how the principles of play can help
promote mathematical concepts
Knowledge
(Conceptual)
Teachers are not familiar with how principles of play can build
literacy skills
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
132
Table 9, continued
Category Validated Causes
Motivation
(Persistence)
Teachers do not feel appreciated as a teacher since parents are
unappreciative as they value academic readiness and academic
learning
Organization
(Cultural
Setting)
Many teachers have complained that the revised assessment
reports have created large amount of administrative work and
hence delaying other efforts like incorporating more play
Organization
(Cultural
Setting)
Curriculum expectations and demands have made it difficult for
teachers to incorporate more play into the daily schedule
Organization
(Cultural
Model)
Parents of a Confucian tradition are heavily academic focused
and that exerts pressures or rewards for more academic skills
based curriculum rather than a play-based curriculum
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
133
CHAPTER FIVE: SOLUTIONS, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
After the identification of the validated knowledge, motivation and organizational causes
in Chapter Four, the next step of the gap analysis is to present the evidence-based solutions to
address the validated causes and narrow the performance gap. In particular, Chapter Five
presents solutions for the Kindergarten and will address the second research question, “What are
the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational solutions necessary to make
improvements in providing more child-centered, play-based pedagogy?” Discussion on the
solutions will be based on applied research theories in order to demonstrate the relevance,
applicability, and effectiveness of the solutions in closing the gap. In the latter part of the
chapter, an integrated implementation plan is proposed to address the knowledge, motivation and
organizational barriers. At the end, an evaluation plan is presented, which provides guidance for
implementing the proposed solutions and assessments in order to achieve the expected outcomes.
As discussed in Chapter Four, the study found nine validated causes. Solutions are
provided for all nine validated causes and categorized in themes of knowledge, motivation and
organization. A synthesized solution is presented in the implementation plan which integrates all
solutions for a significant impact to achieving organizational goals. A summary of the
knowledge, motivation and organizational validated causes and solutions are set out in the
following Table 10.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
134
Table 10
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Validated Causes and Solutions
Validated Causes Solution Principles Implementation
Knowledge (Factual):
Do not fully know the
recommendation of the
Hong Kong Education
Bureau, the common
factors which define play
and the characteristics of
play
Reconnect with prior
knowledge; Segmenting
complex materials with
schema; For those who
completed training but
need reminders – job aids
First Staff Development Day &
Suppmental Guide
-Supplemental guide to explain
recommendation, common factors
which define play and characteristic
of play
-Explanation session on
recommendation especially for
English and Putonghua teachers
-Supplemental guide with worked
examples of assesement reports and
portfolios
-Voice-over presentation with tips for
efficiency for assement reports and
portfolios
-Peer coaching w/Cantonese teachers
handling curriculum expectations
- Senior administrators clearly
communicating curriculum
expectaions and changes
Organization (Cultural
Setting): Large amount of
administrative work
(assessment reports and
portfolios) and curriculum
expectations hindering
efforts to incorporate play
Segmenting and pre-
training; Offloading
cognitive load to other
senses; Peer coaching to
promote culture of
collaboration; Constant
& Candid
communication to align
culture with
organizational goals
Knowledge (Conceptual):
Do not fully know how the
principles of play can help
promote mathematical and
literacy skills
Learning conceptual
knowledge needs to
involve all cognitive
processes not only
retention (understanding,
applying, evaluating,
creating)
Play workshop
-where teachers get to experience
being constructors of knowledge
themselves by playing with open
materials and by participating in
group play with emphasis on math
and literacy skills
-self-reflection session and group
sharing session to build identity with
play
Motivation (Persistance):
Lack of attainment value
as teachers do not feel
appreciated for spending
time on play
Addressing human needs
for competence,
relatedness and
autonomy
Organization (Cultural
Model): Culture of heavily
academically focused
parents
Constant & candid
communication to align
culture with
organizational goals
Casual Breakfast Meeting
– opportunity to share and relate the
benefits of “learning through play”
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
135
Solutions for Knowledge and Skills Causes
There were five validated causes relating to the gaps of knowledge and skills. As
highlighted by Andersen and Krathwohl’s (2001) knowledge framework, there are four types of
knowledge including factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive along with six
dimensions of cognitive domains consisting of remembering, understanding, applying,
analyzing, evaluating and creating. Two types of the knowledge, factual and conceptual, and six
dimensions of cognitive domains will provide guidance for developing solutions to the validated
causes.
Factual Knowledge Solutions
Survey, interview, and observation findings confirmed that teachers were not familiar
with the specific recommendation of the EDB for the amount of time allocated for play and free-
choice activities. Teachers also demonstrated that they were not familiar with the definition and
the characteristics of play, which are important concepts for the teachers to identify and
understand in order to apply play in practice. The six dimensions of cognitive processes are
hierarchical in that each dimension is a prerequisite for the next (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).
Thus, in order for teachers to apply their knowledge on the definition of play and the
characteristics, it is important for them to remember and understand them first. Therefore, in
order for teachers to incorporate more play, they have to first be able to readily identify if the
children are indeed playing and hence increasing their factual knowledge.
In order to address these factual knowledge gaps, teachers will need to gain concrete
knowledge of the recommendation from the EDB as well as the definition and characteristics of
play. There are a number of ways to handle complex materials so that the amount of essential
processing can be managed efficiently. Mayer (2011) suggests three evidence-based approaches,
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
136
(i) segmenting complex material into meaningful parts, (ii) providing learner with relevant prior
knowledge (pre-training) for the intrinsic load to be managed and (iii) offloading some of the
visual material to the auditory channel or modality. In situations where teachers are not familiar
with the definition and characteristics of play, providing a schema and organizing the
information in another format may assist teachers in remembering all the information. As Mayer
(2011) has described, meaningful learning occurs when learners engage in cognitive process of
organizing where by techniques are used for providing a signaling effect, such as outline,
headings and pointer words, etc. According to the author, meaningful understanding occurs with
connection to prior knowledge, allowing an individual to create a cognitive system to learn and
understand additional information (Mayer, 2011). In a situation where experts who have
completed training and need reminders about how to implement what they have learned, Clark
and Estes (2002) have suggest job aids.
One of the recommended solutions would be to distribute a supplemental guide to the
curriculum guide as a job aid during “Staff Development Day” hosted at the beginning of the
year. The supplemental guide would incorporate the recommendation of the EDB, the definition
of play, the six characteristics of play and the qualities of the state of playfulness of a child. It is
believed that teachers, especially Cantonese teachers who are trained locally and have studied
this kind of factual knowledge as part of their qualified kindergarten teacher degree, would be
able to use the supplemental guide to connect with their prior knowledge. Since English teachers
were not as familiar with the specific recommendation of the EDB, a dedicated section in
English should set out the salient features of the recommendation and the “Guide to the Pre-
primary Curriculum”.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
137
Conceptual Knowledge Solutions
Teachers in the survey indicated that they were very familiar with how the principles of
play, which emphasize children as constructor of knowledge and how the interactive process
provides context for further learning. Nevertheless, during the interviews, when asked about the
principles of play and how play can help foster mathematical and literacy skills, participants
gave examples that did not express the concept of children as constructors of knowledge learning
from who learn from interactive experiences. Doubts were expressed by the teachers about
whether the principles of play can achieve mathematical and literacy skills. Conceptual
knowledge cannot just be learned by simply explaining the concepts. To close this knowledge
gap, it is suggested that teachers become “constructors of knowledge” similar to the way children
learn through experiencing hands-on play as a solution.
Researchers indicated that conceptual knowledge, knowledge of relationships and
understanding, cannot be learned by rote. It must be learned by thoughtful, reflective mental
activity (Mayer, 2002). As elaborated by Mayer (2002), meaningful learning can only be viewed
as learning in which learners seek to make sense of their experience. In meaningful learning,
learners are engaged in active cognitive processes, such as paying attention to relevant incoming
information, mentally organizing incoming information into a coherent representation and
mentally integrating incoming information with existing knowledge (Mayer, 2002). The relevant
cognitive processes involved should be those that go beyond retention or remembering but by
transferring such as understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating and creating. These processes
are ways learners can actively engage in the process of constructing meaning.
Therefore, the solutions necessary for teachers to gain better conceptual knowledge is to
learn first-hand the principles of play by constructing knowledge from participating in a teacher
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
138
only “play workshop”. Self-active play workshops were found by researchers and practitioners
as an effective learning strategy as they apply constructivist principles to create a learning
community in which adults build their own knowledge through hands-on play, reflect on their
play experience, and collaborate with peers (Nell & Drew, 2013).
The goal of the workshops will be for teachers to reinforce the concept of play with
emphasis on children as constructors of knowledge and to experience the benefits of the
interactive hands-on learning process whereby they can better transfer knowledge to children in
the classrooms. During the workshops, teachers will be asked to participate in solo play and
group cooperative play where they can explore how open-ended materials can be used to
promote math and literacy skills and concepts. The workshop objectives are for participants to:
(i) engage in quality hands-on play experience using open-ended materials; (ii) construct,
implement and evaluate approaches to teaching; (iii) deepen their understanding of the role as
constructor of knowledge and materialize those concepts in the classrooms to foster math and
literacy skills; and (iv) strengthen teachers’ vision of themselves as play advocates.
Solutions for Motivation Causes
The only validated motivation assumed cause was that teachers did not feel appreciated
when they provided more learning through play in their classrooms, meanwhile parents appeared
to value only academic readiness and academic learning, which resulted in a lack of motivation
for the teachers. The teachers became caught in the issues of “attainment value” and persistence.
Attainment Value Solutions
An important motivational principle is that the more an individual values an activity, the
more likely they will chose, persist and engage in it (Rueda, 2011). It is important for people to
be considered as valuable contributors to their social groups and institutions. Researchers have
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
139
conceptualized “attainment value” in terms of the needs, personal interests, and personal values
that an activity fulfills (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). The attainment value an individual attaches to
an activity and the desire to perform the task reflect that person’s self-image while being central
to their self-definition. If teachers do not understand the value in incorporating more play, they
will not persist in the activity. Autonomy or being able to feel responsible for an individual’s
behavior and their goals support building attainment value (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002).
In this connection, studies suggest addressing the human needs for competence, relatedness
and autonomy as the best solutions to influence attainment value (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). In
the case of the teachers at the Kindergarten, the issues of teachers’ belongingness and teachers’
autonomy are of special concern. One strategy to solve these issues is to provide tasks, materials,
and activities that are relevant and useful to teachers, allowing for some personal identification
with the organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). Cooperative and collaborative groups allow
opportunities for attaining both professional and social goals along with helping teachers to
identify with play-based pedagogy. Hence, teachers participating in an all teacher play workshop
can enhance this identity of the organization by sharing with peers the motivation behind play
and the content of their experience. At the same time, cooperative play can be viewed as an
opportunity to accomplish a task where teachers experience what the children experience in their
classrooms, such as discussion, negotiation, and compromise. In large-group discussion sharing
sessions, teachers can share the relevance of the workshop to their work with children in the
classroom, again ensuring that the participants understand the importance of play in the
classroom. Finally, teachers will experience during the workshop their own behavior in solo play
where they will experience being the constructors of knowledge themselves and being
empowered with the feeling responsible for one’s behavior.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
140
Solutions for Organizational Causes
Three organizational causes were validated by survey results and interview findings. In
relation to cultural settings, participants demonstrated that the assessment reports and portfolio
reports created a large amount of administrative work which that hindered their efforts to
incorporate more play. Also, in relation to cultural settings, curriculum expectations and
demands were found to have made it difficult for teachers to incorporate more play in the daily
schedule. In relation to cultural models, data validated the assumed cause that parents of a
Confucian tradition are heavily academically focused and that exerts pressures or rewards to
create a culture model for more academic skills based curriculum rather than a play-based
curriculum. Organizational solutions are drawn from solution principles of knowledge and
motivational issues. Strategies of cognitive processes are also discussed.
Cultural Settings: Administrative Work
Regarding teachers finding too much administrative work in assessment reports and
portfolio reports, strategies from cognitive load theory are relevant to encourage learners to
optimize intellectual performance, such as decreasing extraneous cognitive load by providing a
worked example or reducing redundancy (Kirschner, 2002). The organization can encourage
these strategies to help teachers with too much administrative work in assessment and portfolio
reports. In addition, off loading some visual materials to auditory channel (modality) will also
help to decrease cognitive load (Mayer, 2011). In the case of the Kindergarten, administration
can reduce teachers’ cognitive load by reducing the time to fill out the assessment report with
worked examples. Also, teachers can be encouraged to manage assessment and portfolio work
daily in order to segment complex materials into manageable parts. A voiceover presentation
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
141
addressing common problems with efficiency suggestions from head teachers can help to change
to the modality mode taking advantage of the auditory channel recommended by the experts.
Cultural Setting: Curriculum Expectations and Demands
In relation to curriculum expectation and demands hindering efforts for planning more
play, the relevant solution strategy is for the organization to align organizational culture to
organizational goals. Social cognitive theory emphasizes goal setting importance as it identifies
desired outcomes so that individuals can plan accordingly to achieve those outcomes. Having
clear communication of an organization’s performance goals and plans helps to align
organizational culture with organizational policies and goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Communicating constantly and candidly to those involved about goals, plans and progress is also
an effective measure to enhance performance. Clark and Estes (2008) found that good
communication promotes trust, helping individuals to adjust their performance to accomplish
goals. Ultimately, senior management at the Kindergarten will need to make a commitment to
organizational changes. Studies of effective organizational changes have shown the need for the
vision and commitment of upper management to be communicated to everyone with visible
management involvement in the process (Clark & Estes, 2002). Peer coaching is also relevant as
a solution where it fosters a culture of collaboration along with the necessary social support
(Swafford, 1998).
In view of the above, curriculum goals should be introduced to teachers using clear and
concise communication concerning the organization’s goals for academic skills learning to be
balanced with more guided play during the small group activity times. Also, findings indicated
that some upper class teachers felt academic demands were higher for the upper class
curriculum. Therefore, curriculum goals clarification can be organized into grade levels where
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
142
specific guidance for upper class teachers would demonstrate how to incorporate guided play to
meet academic expectations. Since Cantonese teachers were especially confident that curriculum
demands can be managed and yet play can still be incorporated, Cantonese teachers can peer
coach other language teachers to adapt curriculum demands and incorporate more play. There is
also a need for a strong commitment on the part of senior administrators of the Kindergarten to
clearly communicate expectations of the curriculum, perhaps by grade level. This would be
beneficial at the beginning of the year when teachers meet for the new schedule. The meeting
would be an opportunity for the organization to communicate changes, such as goals for grade
level curriculum, balancing parents’ expectations, and developing appropriate pedagogy.
Cultural Model: Parents’ Academic Focused Expectations
In order to mitigate the strong academic focus of parents that create much pressure and
stress for the teachers, the organizational strategy to solve this issue could be to treat the issues as
knowledge gaps and use similar solutions as discussed in the above knowledge section. At the
same time, constant and candid communication of goals relevant to the stakeholders to align
culture with organizational goals as discussed above are important.
One of the solutions would be to engage parents in a casual meeting to further discover
the benefits of the play-based curriculum and how play can be integrated into the curriculum to
foster mathematical and literacy skills. Findings indicated that a majority of the teachers thought
more communication from the school to parents about “learning through play” would help
improve the pressure from parents to incorporate academic skills. Research indicated that parent-
teacher communication has a positive effect on parents’ perspective of their children and their
involvement, which in turn has a positive effect on their children’s interest in learning (Ames,
1993). Some studies suggested that parent-teacher conferences are not an effective form of
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
143
communication because often the perception of a teacher holding “official evidence” of a
student’s achievement hinders a parent’s active participation (Graham-Clay, 2005). Hence, it is
suggested that communication be more informal where teachers and parents can communicate in
a less teacher-directed format with sharing opinions from both sides. A parent-teacher breakfast
meeting is suggested where teachers can participate in group meetings to share their experience
in implementing various teaching and learning strategies, like play-based learning. The objective
is to provide an informal channel to build parental confidence through partnership. Meetings
could involve teachers conducting an informal presentation with perhaps videos of students in
class playing and learning in order to help parents to visualize the principles of play and how
play-based learning can promote mathematical and literacy skills. Head teachers could share
their experience as parents would be invited to raise questions at any time and share their
expectations.
Implementation Plan
As discussed above, various solutions are offered to address the gaps created by validated
causes in themes of knowledge, motivation and organization. Many of the solutions can be
combined and implemented together in practice. The following describes the integrated
implementation plan which will be conducted in three stages: (i) Supplemental Guide and First
Staff Development Day; (ii) Play Workshop Training; and (iii) Parent-teacher Breakfast
Meetings.
Stage One: Supplemental Guide and First Staff Development Day
At the start of each academic year, the Kindergarten will host a “Staff Development Day”
for the whole organization where the yearly curriculum handbook will be distributed. Usually the
principals at the school address the staff concerning new programs, the general calendar of
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
144
events, and any new administrative measures. The first stage of the implementation plan is to use
this opportunity to provide a supplemental guide for teachers with detailed information of the
EDB’s recommendations, in addition to the details of the definition and the characteristics of
play. Salient features of the recommendations can be highlighted in a separate explanation
session with English and Putonghua teachers since most of the English and Putonghua teachers
indicated in the survey that they did not have as much prior knowledge as the Cantonese
teachers.
At the same time, the supplemental guide should also contain worked examples of
assessment reports and portfolio reports with a link to a brief voice-over presentation or
demonstration on how the reports should be filled-in and assembled efficiently. Head teachers
can provide some guidance on user-friendly tips and methods to segment the preparation work
on a daily basis so the work is not left until the last minute. Senior administrators should also
make an announcement at the Staff Development Day in relation to the Kindergarten’s
commitment to a play-based learning curriculum. If there are changes to the curriculum, it should
be explained that emphasis on math and literacy skills can still be conducted through play
activities and inquiry-based activities. Special attention should be placed on addressing
curriculum expectations and how they can be included in the curriculum. Since survey results
indicated that Cantonese teachers were especially confident that curriculum demands can be
adapted so that more play can be incorporated, an experienced Cantonese teachers could conduct
a peer coaching session to share their views with the English teachers on how best to manage
specific curriculum demands.
Key implementation action steps. In order to implement the initiatives at the start of
academic year meeting, a few preparation tasks need to be taken. A supplemental guide should
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
145
be prepared with head teachers and curriculum administrators reviewing the guide first, taking
into account its applicability and comprehensiveness. The guide should include explaining the
EDB’s recommendation, the definition and characteristics of play, and a detailed description of
how to identify a child in a state of playfulness along with the benefits of play. Head teachers
along with more experienced teachers can help prepare some examples and a video link or voice-
over presentation of the worked examples to help with completing the assessment reports and
students’ portfolios efficiently. Curriculum expectations will need to be reviewed to find the
balance between the emphasis on reading and writing proficiencies in the children and emphasis
on play and guided play during small group activities. Experienced Cantonese teachers who
were especially confident that play can be incorporated in the curriculum would need to be
identified for sharing their ideas on how best to manage curriculum demands.
Stage Two: Play Workshop Training
In the second stage of the implementation plan, teachers would be asked to participate in
a three-hour play workshop to enhance their conceptual knowledge of play. Another goal of the
workshop would be to help promote relatedness to build attainment value. The workshop would
be conducted in two segments, a solitary play segment and a cooperative play segment. In the
solitary play segment, a play workshop coach would guide participants to conduct solo play with
open-ended materials, then engage participants to reflect on their experiences through personal
journal reflections, partner sharing and group debriefing. Open-ended materials, which are
usually non-representative and manipulative reusable resources, allow players to express and
elaborate physical patterns and ideas in order to help participants foster connections between
materials and participants’ ideas (Nell, Drew, & Bush, 2013). The purpose would be to let
participants experience all the cognitive processes such as problem solving, analyzing,
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
146
synthesizing and evaluating their understanding of principles of play and its emphasis on
constructors of knowledge. The emphasis should also be for participants to experience their
individual control and to be responsible for their behavior.
In the second segment of cooperative play, participants would be encouraged to form
small groups (preferably in teachers respective language groups) to work together to build a
common structure using with different materials. In particular, teachers could work together
through collaboration to develop ways that math and literacy concepts can be represented or
emphasized during play. Afterwards, participants in each group would be asked to reflect on
their experience and how it relates to the classroom. The emphasis would be to have teachers
identify with play, to discover the importance of play and the benefits of play-based learning. At
the same time, an essential part of the second segment is to share in large-group discussion and
compare viewpoints among teachers of different language groups (and if possible among
teachers of different grade levels). Since findings revealed that English teachers were most
susceptible to parent’s academic pressure, they are encouraged to share their experience and
build identity with other English teachers. In the large-group discussion, English teachers could
also share their experience with teachers of other language group who felt less pressured. Key
topics of discussion should also expand on the personal direct play experience of teachers and
any discussion on implications and strategies for applying what teachers have learned to their
practice in the classrooms.
Key implementation action steps. The first preparation task for this initiative would be
to locate a qualified “play” coach who is well versed in conducting this type of workshop for
teachers. The Institute for Self-Active Education might be a possible organization to contact
because it has been conducting play workshops called, “Hands, Heart and Mind”, for early
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
147
childhood educators since 1989. At the same time, a big open venue would be required to ensure
participants can spread out with their creation and their imagination. Gathering open-ended
materials and making sure there is an abundance of them would be important. Not many human
resources need to be deployed for the implementation of this task. Nevertheless, conducting this
play workshop and obtaining sufficient budget will require the approval of principals and senior
administrators.
Stage Three: Parents and Teachers Breakfast Meetings
In the third stage of the implementation plan, it is suggested that each campus of the
Kindergarten should host a parent-teacher breakfast meeting. A significant number of teachers in
the interviews mentioned that perhaps more communication from the school about play-based
curriculum would be beneficial. The breakfast meetings would be casual rather than formal, such
as a parent-teacher conference. The teachers would be asked to participate in group meetings
with parents to share their experience in implementing various teaching and learning strategies,
like play-based learning as the first topic. They would share with parents the objectives of play-
based learning and help parents to understand what the teachers are doing in the classrooms to
reach their learning objectives. The initial proposal from this study is to have at least two
meetings per year, one every 6 months. The meeting would be hosted at one of the campuses
first, and then evaluate the implementation and location, before expanding implementation to
other campuses. The format would be under the direction of the senior administrators and
teachers. Possibly each meeting could begin with an informal presentation on designated topics,
such as relating to learning through play. The meeting should also include imagery or video of
different children playing and engage in the learning process. Head teachers and senior
curriculum administrators could speak about specific topics sharing their experiences. After the
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
148
short presentation, parents should be allowed to contribute by making comments and asking
questions. They could also share their views or discuss their expectations in general. Parents
should be invited to submit questions before the meetings to assist with topic selection.
Key implementation action steps. Some of the key implementation tasks would be to
seek senior administrators and teachers’ opinion and inputs on the format and substance of the
meetings. It is suggested to form a selected panel of head teachers and teachers to share views
and discuss about format, budget, logistics, venue and presentation style of the breakfast
meetings. Most importantly, preparation work needs to be conducted to highlight the effective
strategies to support parent motivation. It is important to collect relevant imageries and videos of
children playing in class which can provide context for the interactive learning process and help
parents better understand play-based learning. Essential to address in the presentation would be
how concepts of play and play can help promote mastery of mathematics and literacy concepts.
The importance of social competence and self-regulation skills should also be emphasized and
demonstrated through play-based activities. Select members of the Parent-Teacher Association
should also be consulted for ideas for the presentations, format of the meeting and expectation
management. In the final stages of the preparation, an invitation outlining the general topic of the
meeting, purpose and intention should be sent to parents, so that they come to the meeting with
certain expectations.
Implementation Plan Timeline
It is envisage that the implementation plan will take two years to complete all three stages
starting August 2016. Table 11 describes a breakdown of the cascading implementation plan for
the years 2016, 2017 and 2018.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
149
Table 11
Implementation Plan Timeline
Stage One: Supplemental
Guide and First Staff
Development Day
Stage Two: Play workshop Stage Three: Parent-Teacher
Breakfast Meeting
Aug 2016 -preparation of supplemental
guide
-preparation of worked
example of assessment
report/portfolio
-preparation of voice-over
presentation
- curriculum review
Sep
2016
-staff Development Day:
distribution of supplemental
guide
-senior administrator
announcement of commitment
-begin to search for a play
workshop coach
Oct-Dec
2016
-Cantonese teachers to share
their views on how to manage
curriculum expectations in
regular meetings
-begin to look for a suitable
venue
-consider the open-ended
materials
-seek teachers’ inputs for
hosting the meeting
-consult senior administrator
Feb
2017
-gathered open-ended
materials
-start advertising for the
event and recruit
-consult selected PTA
members
-form selected teachers &
head teachers panel
Jun
2017
-host the 1
st
workshop
-revaluate before hosting 2
nd
workshop
-host 1
st
meeting of selected
panel
-determine format, topic and
preliminary logistics
Sep
2017
-look for venue
-seek senior administrators’
approval
-gather image and video for
presentation
Dec
2017
-host meeting to finalize
details
-prepare presentation
-finalize invitation and
logistics
Jan 2018 -August
2018
-issue invitations
-host meeting in October
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
150
Evaluation Plan
The final stage of the gap analysis is to evaluate and measure the success of the
implementation plan in closing the identified performance gaps. The Kirkpatrick Model
(Kirkpatrick, 2006) will be used to assess the impact of the various aspects of the implementation
plan on teachers’ performance. The framework is based on four levels that measure of the
effectiveness of the training program: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. The first level of
“reaction” is to assess participants’ general attitude, perception and reaction towards a training
program or initiative. The second level is evaluating “learning” by assessing the extent that a
participant has acquired the skills, knowledge, attitudes and commitments after a training
program/initiative. It also measures what has been understood and absorbed pre and post
training, providing immediate feedback to improve the training programs. The third level of
evaluating “behavior” entails measuring whether the participants’ behaviors have changed as a
result of learning the knowledge and skills during the training initiatives. This level also intends
to measure how participants may apply the knowledge learned from the training context to the
workplace. In the fourth level of evaluation, results of the training are to be assessed. Level four
evaluation should consider whether the training has achieved the intended impact hence results
that have contributed to the organization’s performance and to closing any performance gap.
For the purposes of this study, the four levels of evaluation should be used to assess each
stage of the implementation plan.
Stage One: Supplemental Guide and First Staff Development Day
Level 1 Evaluation, Reaction. In order to evaluate the reaction level, a general survey
could be distributed to measure teachers’ perception of the information contained in the
supplemental guide relating to play-based learning. It would be helpful to include in the survey
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
151
items relating to the explanation session on the recommendation of the EDB, the worked
examples of assessment reports and portfolio reports and the tips offered by head teachers in the
short voiceover presentation. A post training survey could cover senior management’s
announcement of their commitment to the play-based learning curriculum and any specific
change which might be made that year.
Level 2 Evaluation, Learning. Substantive questions concerning concrete examples of
the common factors in the definition and characteristics of play, along with the qualities of the
state of playfulness could be included in the post training survey. Informally, the teachers’
understanding of the process for efficient completion of assessment report and portfolios after
studying the worked examples and the demonstration by the more experienced teachers can be
assessed during regular meetings. In the follow-up with assessment report and portfolio report
demonstration, teachers could be asked to complete a sample report during regular meetings to
assess their efficiency in completing the required assessment and portfolio reports.
Level 3 Evaluation, Behavior. In order to evaluate behavioral change or knowledge
transfer, teachers should be assessed via classroom observations to measure if they have applied
the concepts of recognizing the characteristics of play and state of playfulness in their practice.
Also, changes could be assessed in terms of the way teachers lead the children when they play
and how teachers set up the play environment to reinforce the characteristics of play. The
amount of time that teachers need to submit the assessment and portfolio reports could be used to
evaluate the effectiveness of the worked example and voice-over presentation. In addition,
whether they can submit the reports before the due date could indicate their efficiency before and
after the supplemental guide training. It would be a comparison of the number of days that a
specific teacher needs to submit the reports before the designated deadline before the Staff
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
152
Development Day and after. Having an improved timing due to efficient report writing could
provide an indication of how effective the training was and whether more training needs to be
incorporated.
Level 4 Evaluation, Results. Results or impact can be seen or measured from the
changes that have occurred in the activities planned by teachers in the curriculum. Impact can
also be measured by the amount of time teachers are spending on average in play-based activities
each day and each week. Efficiency in completing the reports can be assessed by the outputs of
the teachers before the submission deadline. Impact from senior administrators’ demonstration of
their commitment to a play-based curriculum can be seen via teacher enthusiasm for play-based
curriculum and perhaps, potentially on the turnover rate of teachers employment. Ultimately
results are measured by parents’ satisfaction with the play-based learning and the number of
times parents complained.
Stage Two: Play Workshop Training
Level 1 Evaluation, Reaction. A post workshop survey could be conducted to assess
teachers’ reaction to the workshop, in particular how their experience enhances their
understanding of the principles of play and how the interactive process provides context. In
particular, an assessment of their experience or explanation on whether the cooperative play
interaction enhanced their understanding of constructing knowledge and how that experience
helped them to provide ways to foster and promote mathematic and literacy concepts. The survey
could also assess whether the sharing session build identity for the teachers and their reaction to
the shared experience of other teachers experience in their practice of incorporating play in the
classrooms.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
153
Level 2 Evaluation, Learning. The teachers’ conceptual knowledge could be tested
three months after the workshop to assess if their conceptual knowledge on how principles of
play can strengthen mathematic and literacy skills. They could also be asked questions in their
regular meetings a few weeks after participating in the workshop about whether they think that
the workshop helped to reinforce their belief in play and how parents’ expectations can be
managed.
Level 3 Evaluation, Behavior. The transfer of knowledge can be assessed through
observing how teachers are implementing play activities that foster mathematics and literacy
concepts in the classrooms. In addition, an evaluation could be conducted through informal
conversations concerning the workshop effects and teachers’ attitude and values.
Level 4 Evaluation, Results. The effectiveness of the workshop can be measured via
classroom observations on whether implementation of more play-based activities to promote
math and literacy, especially in the upper class classrooms. Also, increase in motivation factor
of value can be assessed by informal conversation and by exploring during annual review
whether those who attended the workshop experienced increased job satisfaction compared with
those who did not come to the workshop.
Stage Three: Parent-Teacher Breakfast Meeting
Level 1 Evaluation, Reaction. In respect to the breakfast meetings, teachers are
requested to complete a reaction assessment survey after the breakfast meeting. Topics of the
survey would include the format of the meeting to the general attitude of the parents concerning
the topics covered in the meetings such as play-based learning. In particular, it is important to
assess whether teachers think parents appreciated the opportunity for this meeting.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
154
Level 2 Evaluation, Learning. Measuring attitude changes would be an important
assessment to the breakfast meeting. Perhaps, teachers could be asked three months after the
survey whether they believe parents’ attitude has changed after the meeting and whether they are
asked about academic learning as often as before the meeting.
Level 3 Evaluation, Behavior. Evaluation for the level 3 behavioral changes can be
assessed through observations of any signs of increased value in teachers’ perception in
promoting play manifested in the increased amount of time for play in their classroom. In
addition, informal feedback from the teachers and head teachers could reflect whether there are
changes in behavior after the meeting, such as increased implementation of play-based
curriculum in the planning of small group activities.
Level 4 Evaluation, Results. At this level, evaluation will concentrate on measuring
teachers’ expectation from parents and whether the increased understating of play-based learning
by parents helped the communication between teachers and parents and help manage parents’
expectations about play-based learning in their classroom.
Limitation and Delimitations
Limitations. There are a number of limitations which may affect the accuracy of this
study. First, the study is limited by the bias of the responses created by the perception of the
teachers that participation in this study was a work-based performance review, which is true for
both interviews and surveys. Second, the study is limited by the accuracy of the translation of the
questions and various responses from Chinese to English; and hence, participants may not
understand or interpret the survey items and interview questions in the manner intended. Third,
participants answered survey questions on a voluntary basis and were allowed to skip questions
so not all survey questions were answered, which may affect the accuracy of the survey results.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
155
Fourth, various key stakeholders, like administrators and parents, were excluded to limit the
scope of this study. Therefore, their specific views examined through the lenses of knowledge,
motivation, and the organization would make this gap analysis more comprehensive and
complete. Fifth, statistical analysis was based on a correlational, not a causal relationship.
Delimitations. The literature and evidence reviewed was mostly pertaining to the
younger age group of the kindergarten and nurseries ages 2-4, as play is most appropriate for that
age group. In relation to the recommendations of the Guide to the Pre-primary Curriculum,
references to the recommendations were made pertaining to half-day programs only. The
Kindergarten has whole-day classes for some upper class students in the kindergarten (age 5-6).
Future Research
On an organizational level, it would be interesting to study the integration of teachers
from different cultural backgrounds in a bilingual or trilingual classroom setting. In a bilingual
setting, one is bound to have teachers of different cultural backgrounds who are required to work
together in the same classroom. Many management studies emphasized the integration of
employees from different backgrounds, for example, several studies discussed the difference
between the hierarchical society like the Asian culture and the egalitarian society of the Western
culture. One issue is the distance between managers and employees in a hierarchical society is
much greater than in an egalitarian society. In a hierarchical society, there is a perception that
managers just need to instruct their employees what to do where in an egalitarian society,
employees respond better to more freedom. It would be interesting to examine these differences
in an education setting and how to bridge the gaps between teachers of different cultural
backgrounds.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
156
How to use play to foster resiliency in children would be an interesting topic for future
research. Some of the latest longitudinal studies and research indicated the importance of
resiliency and executive functions like self-regulation and their effects from children to
adulthood. The research showed that the earlier children are equipped with such skills such as
resiliency and self-regulation, the more successful children and adolescents will be in their social
competence, academic demands and workplace tensions. Hence, it is a belief of the researcher
that children at a very young age can be trained in resilience and self-regulation and there is no
better way to do this than through play at a very young age.
Conclusion
This dissertation studied how the Kindergarten can improve their curriculum by
incorporating more play-based learning to enrich students’ learning experiences. A gap analysis
was used to identify areas of improvement in teachers’ knowledge, motivation and
organizational resources.
Key survey results, interview findings and observation findings revealed overall that
teachers had strong competence with regards to knowledge, motivation and organizational issues
relating to play-based learning. Nevertheless, in the area of knowledge and skills, teachers
indicated that they were not familiar with the exact time allocation recommendation of the EDB
for play and free-choice activities. In addition, the research findings from this study supported
the performance gap that teachers were unclear about the common factors that define play and
the characteristics of play, as well as, the qualities that indicate a state of playfulness. Teachers
were found to be unfamiliar with some aspects of conceptual knowledge such as, how the
principles of play can foster mathematical concepts and literacy skills. It was revealed that
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
157
participants’ intention to promote play sometimes did not fit the definition of play for children,
such as using a “SMARTboard” or toy clock was considered play by some respondents.
The findings also indicated that teachers were motivated to incorporate more play-based
learning; however, the challenges of not feeling appreciated by the parents, who seem to value
academic readiness over play, affected their persistence to incorporate play in the curriculum.
As an organization, teachers had issues with the large amount of administrative work
such as assessment reports and students’ portfolios, which hindered their efforts to incorporate
more play. Teachers also revealed that the curriculum expectations made it difficult for them to
incorporate more play, because of the expectation of parents for academic learning to take
precedence over play. The overwhelming concern of teachers was how the culture in Hong Kong
creates pressure from parents for more academic skill based learning. Over 81% of the teachers
were asked by parents about their child’s academic readiness at least once per week; and, over
60% of the teachers in the survey ranked mathematical and literacy skills as the top two assets
valued most by parents.
A comprehensive three-stage implementation plan was devised to help the Kindergarten
to close the performance gaps for achieving its goals in two years. The plan included the
preparation of a supplemental guide to help teachers refresh their understanding of the
recommendations from EDB and the definition of play. The plan also proposed providing a play
workshop for teachers to gain a better understanding of their identity with play and, at the same
time, to give them a hands-on experience about how principles of play can help to foster
mathematical and literacy skills. Finally, a parent-teacher breakfast meeting was proposed as an
informal opportunity to share with parents in order to raise their awareness about play and play-
based learning.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
158
Although the study is focused on one kindergarten organization in Hong Kong, it is the
hope of the researcher to encourage this continued debate on the most appropriate learning
strategies for children and kindergartens around the world. Play is undervalued in education. Its
importance must be realized today to help future generations to grow and develop the necessary
skills needed to cope with an increasingly complex society.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
159
References
Ambrose, S.A., Bridges, M.W., DiPietro, M., Lovet, M.C., & Norman, M.K. (2010). How
learning works. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ames, C. (1993). Parent involvement: The relationship between school-to-home communication
and parents' perceptions and beliefs (Report no. 15). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins
University Publications.
Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D.R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:
A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Barnett, L. A., & Storm, B. (1981). Play, pleasure, and pain: The reduction of anxiety through
play. Leisure Sciences, 4(2), 161-175.
Bodrova, E., & Leong, D.J. (2001). The tools of the mind project: A case study of implementing
the Vygotskian approach in American early childhood and primary classrooms. Geneva,
Switzerland: International Bureau of Education, UNESCO.
Brooker, L. (2010). Learning in play in a cultural context. In P. J. Broadhead, J. Howard, & E.
Wood (Eds.), Play and learning in the early years (pp. 27-42). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Bruce, T. (1991). Time to play in early childhood education. London, UK: Hodder & Stoughton.
Cheng, D. P. (1999). Difficulties of Hong Kong teachers’ understanding and implementation of
‘play’ in the curriculum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 857-869.
Cheng, D. P. (2006). The translation of western teaching approaches in Hong Kong early
childhood curriculum: A promise for effective teaching? Contemporary Issues in Early
Childhood, 7(3), 228-237.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
160
Cheng, D. P., Reunamo, J., Cooper P., Liu, K., & Vong, K. P. (2015). Children’s agentive
orientations in play-based and academically focused pre-schools in Hong Kong. Early
Child Development and Care, 185, 1828-1844.
Christie, J. F. & Roskos, K. A. (2013). Gaining ground in understanding the play-literacy
relationship. American Journal of Play, 6(1), 82.
Curriculum Development Council (2006). Guide to the pre-primary curriculum. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong Special Administrative Government Printer.
Clark, R. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1993). The evolving self: A psychology for the third millennium. New
York, NY: Harper Collins.
Curriculum Development Council. (2006). Guide to the pre-primary curriculum. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong Special Administrative Government Printer
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (1992). Reframing accountability: Creating learner-centered
schools. The changing contexts of teaching, 11-36.
Dembo, M. & Seli, H. (2013). Motivation and learning strategies for college success. New York,
NY: Taylor & Francis.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of
Psychology, 53(1), 109-132.
Elkind, D. (2007). The power of play: Learning what comes naturally. Cambridge, MA: Da
Capo Press.
Engleman, S., & Carine, D. (1982). Theory of instruction: Principle and applications. New
York, NY: Irvington Publication.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
161
Fung, K.H., & Cheng, D. P. (2012). Consensus or dissensus? Stakeholders’ views on the role of
play in learning. Early Years: An International Research Journal, 32(1), 17-33.
Ginsburg, H. P. (2006). Mathematical play and playful mathematics: A guide for early education.
Play= Learning: How play motivates and enhances children’s cognitive and social-
emotional growth, 145-165.
Goncu, A., Mistry, J., & Mosier, C. (2000). Cultural variations in the play of toddlers.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24(3), 321-329.
Graham-Clay, S. (2005). Communicating with parents: Strategies for teachers. School
Community Journal, 15(1), 117.
Gronlund, G. (2010). Developmentally appropriate play: Guiding young children to a higher
level. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
Healy, J. M. (1989). Your child's growing mind: A guide to learning and brain development from
birth to adolescence. Main Street Books.
Heckman, J., Pinto, R., & Savelyev, P. (2013). Understanding the mechanisms through which an
influential early childhood program boosted adult outcomes. American Economic Review,
103(6), 2052-2086.
Hedges, H. (2000). Teaching in early childhood: Time to merge constructivist views so learning
through play equals teaching through play. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 25, 16-
21.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2003). Einstein never used flash cards: How our children
really learn – and why they need to play more and memorize less. Emmaus, PA: Rodale
Press.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
162
Hirsh-Pasek, K. & Golinkoff, R. M. (2008). Why play = learning. In R. E. Tremblay, R. G. Barr,
& R. DeV. Peters (Eds.), Encyclopedia on early childhood development. Retrieved from
http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/play/according-experts/why-play-learning
Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2009). A mandate for playful learning in preschool: Applying the scientific
evidence. Oxford University Press.
Hong Kong Education Bureau. (2015). Kindergarten education statistics [Data file]. Retrieved
from www.edb.gov.hk/en/about-edb/publications-stat/figures/kg.html
HKSAR Government Education and Manpower Bureau. (2003). Quality assurance inspection
(QAI) annual report 2003. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Special Administrative Government
Printer.
HKSAR Government Education and Manpower Bureau. (2004). Quality assurance inspection
(QAI) annual report 2004. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Special Administrative Government
Printer.
HKSAR Government Education and Manpower Bureau. (2005). Quality assurance inspection
(QAI) annual report 2005. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Special Administrative Government
Printer.
HKSAR Government Education and Manpower Bureau. (2006). Quality assurance inspection
(QAI) annual report 2006. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Special Administrative Government
Printer.
Hong Kong Government. (1986). Education commission report no. 2. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
Government Printer.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
163
Howard, J. (2010). Making the most of play in the early years: The importance of children’s
perceptions. In P. J. Broadhead, J. Howard, & E. Wood (Eds.), Play and learning in the
early years (pp. 145-160). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.
Jones, D., Greenberg, M., & Crowley, M. (2015). Early social-emotional functioning and public
health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and future wellness.
American Journal of Public Health, 105(11), 2283-2290.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation. Performance
Improvements, 45(7).
Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the
design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 1-10.
Kotsopoulos, D., Makosz, S., Zambrzycka, J., & McCarthy, K. (2015). The effects of different
pedagogical approaches on the learning of length measurement in kindergarten. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 43(6), 531-539.
Lau, G., & Cheng, D. P. (2010). Learning through play in the early childhood classroom: Myth
or Reality? Hong Kong Journal of Early Childhood, 9(2), 27-43.
Mallory, B. L., & New, R. S. (1994). Social constructivist theory and principles of inclusion:
Challenges for early childhood special education. The Journal of Special Education, 28(3),
322-337.
Mayer, R. (1999). The promise of educational psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Mayer, R. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 226-232.
Mayer, R. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Ally & Bacon.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
164
Miller, E. & Almon J. (2009). Crisis in the kindergarten: Why children need to play in school.
Retrieved from
http://www.allianceforchildhood.org/sites/allianceforchildhood.org/files/file/kindergarten_r
eport.pdf
Moyles, J. (Ed.). (2010). The excellence of play (3
rd
ed.). New York, NY: Open University Press.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2015). 12 Principles of child
development and learning that inform practice. Retrieved from
http://www.naeyc.org/dap/12-principles-of-child-development
Nell, M., & Drew, W. (2013). From play to practice: Connecting teachers’ play to children’s
learning. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Pellegrini, A. D. (2005). Recess: its role in education and development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Associates.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Gustafson, K. (2005). Boy’s and girl’s uses of objects for exploration, play,
and tools in early childhood. In A. D. Pellegrini & P. K. Smith (Eds.), The nature of play:
Great apes and humans (pp. 113-135). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Pelper, D.J., & Ross, H.S. (1981). The effects of play on convergent and divergent problem-
solving. Child Development, 52, 1202-1210.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Pong, W. P., & Chow. J. C. S. (2002). On the pedagogy of examinations in Hong Kong.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(2), 139-149.
Pound, L. (2010). Playing music. In J. Moyles (Ed.), The excellence of play (3
rd
ed.) (pp. 139-
153). New York, NY: Open University Press.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
165
Pramling-Samuelsson, I., & Carlsson, M. A. (2008). The playing learning child: Towards a
pedagogy of early childhood. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52, 623-641.
Pramling-Samuelsson, I., & Fleer, M. (2009). Play and learning in early childhood setting:
International perspectives. New York, NY: Springer.
Rogers, C. S., & Sawyers, J. K. (1988). Play in the lives of children. Washington D.C: National
Association for Education of Young Children.
Rubin, K. H., Fein, G. G., & Vandenberg, B. (1983). Play. In P. H. Mussed (Ed.), Handbook of
child psychology, 4, (pp. 693-774). New York, NY: Wiley.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teacher College Press.
Schraw, G. (1998, March). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science,
26(1), 113-125.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. (2014). Motivation defined. Retrieved from
http:/www.education.com/reference/article/motivation/
Smith, P. K., & Pellegrini, A. (2013). Learning through play. Retrieved from http://www.child-
encyclopedia.com/Pages/PDF/Smith-PellegriniANGxp2.pdf
Swafford, J. (1998). Teachers supporting teachers through peer coaching. Support for Learning,
13 (2), 54-58.
Undiyaundeye, F. A. (2013). How children learn through play. Journal of Emerging Trends in
Educational Research and Policy Studies, 4(3), 514.
Upper, S. (1994). Audit views on learning and development in Hong Kong preschool children.
Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 44-51.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
166
Van Lent, M., & Laird, J. E. (2001, October). Learning procedural knowledge through
observation. Proceedings from K-CAP’2001 First Knowledge Capture Conference.
Victoria, B.C., Canada.
Wang, J., Elicker, J., McMullen, M., & Mao, S. (2008). Chinese and American preschool
teachers’ beliefs about early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Development and
Care, 178, 227-249.
Whitebread, D. (2010). Play, metacognition and self-regulation. In P. J. Broadhead, J. Howard,
& E. Wood (Eds.), Play and learning in the early years (pp. 161-176). Los Angeles, CA:
Sage Publishing.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., Davis-Kean, P. (2006). The
development of achievement motivation. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology (6
th
ed., Vol. 3). New York, NY: Wiley.
Wong, S. M., Wang, Z., & Cheng, D. P. (2011). A play-based curriculum: Hong Kong children’s
perception of play and non-play. The International Journal of Learning, 17(10), 165-180.
Wood, L., & Bennett, N. (1997). The rhetoric and reality of play: Teachers’ thinking and
classroom practice. Early Years, 13(2), 22-27.
Wood, E. (2010). Developing integrated pedagogical approaches to play and learning. In P. J.
Broadhead, J. Howard, & E. Wood (Eds.), Play and learning in the early years (pp. 9-26).
Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.
Wu, S. C., & Rao, N. (2011). Chinese and German teachers' conceptions of play and learning
and children's play behaviour. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal,
19(4), 469-481.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
167
Zigler, E. F., & Bishop-Josef, S. J. (2006). The cognitive child versus the whole child: Lessons
from forty years of head start. In D. G. Singer, R. M. Golinkoff, & K.A. Hirsh-Pasek
(Eds.), Play = learning: How play motivates and enhances cognitive and social-emotional
growth (pp. 15-35). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
168
Appendix A
Survey Instrument
問卷調查
Teacher’s name 老師姓名:
Language specialty (please circle): English, Chinese (Cantonese) or Chinese (Putonghua)
專諸語言(請圈): 英文 / 中文(廣東話) / 中文( 普通話)
Years of Experience 年資:
Grade level currently teaching: Pre-nursery, Nursery, Lower Class, Upper Class
現時教授級別: 小組 / 幼兒班 / 低班 / 高班
1. Do you know if the EDB prescribe requirements for “learn through play” in the pre-primary
curriculum?
你知否教育局對學前教育課程有關「從遊戲中學習」的規定要求?
1. Yes 知道
2. No 不知道
2. Do you know what is the appropriate time allocation for free choice activities and music and
art in half-day curriculum as advised by the EDB?
你知否教育局對半日制課程中,有關自由選擇活動、音樂及美藝建議的適當時間?
1. 165 minutes 分鐘
2. 155 minutes 分鐘
3. 85 minutes 分鐘
4. 55 minutes 分鐘
3. What are the common factors you feel will define an activity as play? (may choose multiple
answers)
你認為有什麼因素令你把活動定性為遊戲? (可選多項)
1. Children’s feelings or motivation
幼童的感覺或積極性
2. The types of behavior children partake when they play
當幼童玩耍時,他們參與時表現出來的行為
3. The environment in which children play
幼童玩耍時的環境
4. The process and procedures children take when they play
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
169
幼童玩耍時的過程及程序
4. What do you feel are the common characteristics of play? (may choose multiple answers)
你認為遊戲應有什麼特質是最合適的﹖(可選多項)
1. Play is intrinsically motivated
遊戲是源自內在動機
2. Play is relatively free from rules
遊戲是比較沒有規則的
3. Play is carried out as if the activity is real
進行遊戲時要使活動像真的一樣
4. Play is focused on the process rather than any product
遊戲著重過程多於結果
5. Play is a product of the players making their own choices
遊戲是幼童自己作出自由選擇的結果
6. Play requires the active involvement of the players
遊戲需要幼童主動參與
5. How do you know when a child enters a state of playfulness? (may choose multiple answers)
你從何得知幼童已進入嬉戲的狀態﹖(可選多項)
1. Child seems to have clear goal
幼童似乎有清晰的目標
2. Have focused attention
專注力強
3. Seem to be immerse in the activity
幼童似乎融入遊戲中
4. Have an altered sense of time
幼童有時間概念
5. Seem intrinsically motivated
幼童的內在動機
6. Believe the activity is worthwhile
幼童相信活動是值得的
6. I am knowledgeable about the types of plays.
我很了解不同種類的遊戲 。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
7. Play emphasizes children as constructor of knowledge.
遊戲強調幼童是知識的建構者。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
8. I am knowledgeable about the limitations of teacher intervention during play.
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
170
我很清楚在遊戲時 老師介入的限制 。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
9. I am knowledgeable of evaluating level of play activities for children.
我對評估不同程度的遊戲活動有着深入了解 。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
10. I am knowledgeable with using different methods and techniques to increase level of play
activities.
我對以不同的方法及技巧去提升遊戲程度有着深入的認識。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
11. I am knowledgeable in helping children to learn mathematical concepts through play
activities.
我擁有豐富知識去幫助幼童從遊戲中學習數理概念。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
12. I am knowledgeable in helping children to learn literacy skills through play activities.
我擁有豐富知識去幫助幼童從遊戲中學習讀寫技能﹖
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
13. I am knowledgeable in helping children to learn social competence and self-regulation skills
through play activities.
我擁有豐富知識去幫助幼童從遊戲中學習社交及自律的 能力。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
14. Have you set goals to evaluate your strengths and challenges you face on implementing
learning through play?
在實踐 從遊戲中學習時,你有沒有訂下目標去評估自己的長處及挑戰?
1. Yes 有
2. No 沒有
15. How often do you evaluate your strengths and challenges when you implement learning
through play?
當實踐從遊戲中學習時,你會多久去評估一次自己的長處及挑戰?
1. Very often 經常
2. Often 有時
3. Seldom 很少
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
171
4. Never 從不
16. What is the role of a teacher in the kindergarten classroom?
老師在幼稚園課室扮演着什麼角色?
17. I believe children can learn through play.
我相信幼童能從遊戲中學習。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
18. I believe play is just to fill in free time for children after they complete their assignments.
我認為遊戲只是讓幼童完成他們的功課後填滿自由時間的一種選擇。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
19. I believe children learn faster through play activities.
我相信從遊戲中學習,幼童學習會較快。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
20. I am more knowledgeable in teaching through play activities compared with traditional
teaching method.
相比傳統的教學方法,我對從遊戲中學習的教學方式較為了解。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
21. I am confident in my ability to implement “learning through play” effectively and in an
impactful manner in the classroom.
我有信心我能夠以一個有影響力的方式在課室內有效地實踐「寓遊戲於學習」。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
22. What are parents’ general feeling regarding play and learning through play in the
classrooms?
家長對於玩遊戲以及在課堂上通過遊戲學習一般抱以什麼看法﹖
23. What are the parent’s expectations in terms of academic readiness and academic learning in
classroom?
家長對於課堂上的學術準備和學習有什麼期望﹖
24. How often do parents directly ask you about their child’s academic readiness?
家長大概多久會詢問你關於小朋友的學術準備 ﹖
1. Two to three times a week 一周 2-3 次
2. Once a week 一周 1 次
3. Two to three times a month 一個月 2-3 次
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
172
4. Infrequently 幾乎不問
25. I agree that I have enough resources to conduct and build a play-based learning atmosphere.
我同意我有足夠的資源去構建一個以遊戲為基礎的學習氛圍。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
26. I agree the environment and facilities of the school is conducive for centered pedagogy.
我認為學校的環境和基礎設施有助於中心教學法。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
27. I do not wish to try any new format with the curriculum such as “learning through play”.
我不想嘗試任何新形式的課程設計,如:在遊戲中學習。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
28. I do have faith in “learning through play” as the preferred learning method.
我有信心「寓遊戲於學習」能成為首選的學習方式。
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
29. How would you rank which are the assets most valued by parents? (rank them with 1 being
the most valued and 5 being the least valued)
你會如何排列以下在家長心中認為最有價值的技能? (1-5,1 為最有價值,5 為最少價
值)
Math skills 數理技能 _____
Literacy skills 讀寫技能 _____
Art skills 美藝技能 _____
Socialization skills 社交技能 _____
Problem solving skills 解困技能 _____
30. Do you feel there is too much administrative work i.e. portfolio writing, that you believe
hinders your planning and effort to implement and make learning a better experience for the
students, like incorporating more play?
你是否認為過多的行政工作,如評估寫作等,會使你缺乏時間和精力去為學生規劃更
好的學習經歷,如融合遊戲於學習當中?
1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree
非常同意 同意 不同意 非常不同意
31. Do you feel there are sufficient communication channels between teachers and parents to
share learning objectives and recognition of the school’s approach to children’s learning?
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
173
你認為老師與家長之間有足夠的溝通渠道去互相交流學習目的及其認可的學習方式嗎
?
1. More than enough 2. Sufficient 3. Not sufficient 4. Minimal
非常足夠 足夠 不足夠 非常不足夠
32. Do you feel existing curriculum expectations and demands affect you to incorporate play
into the curriculum? Please explain?
你認為現時對課程的期望及要求如何影響你將遊戲融合於學習課程中?
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
174
Appendix B
Interview Questions
Teacher:
Years of Experience:
Grade level currently teaching:
Knowledge
1. What is the average amount of time your class spends on free choice/play-based activities in
the classroom per day or per week?
你每日或每星期平均花多少時間在課室進行自由選擇活動/ 以遊戲為基礎的活動?
2. What are the characteristics you look for to define an activity as play?
活動要有什麼特質會使你把它們定性為遊戲?
3. Do you know how play emphasizes children as constructors of knowledge? How can this
interactive process provide context for further learning? How do you get them to do higher
level of play?
你知道遊戲如何強調幼童是知識的建構者嗎? 如何令這個互動過程提供進一步的學習
環境?
4. In consideration of the principles of play, what are some ways to use guided play to foster
mathematical concepts? Any example
鑒於遊戲的原則, 有什麼方法利用遊戲/ 指導遊戲去培養數學概念﹖請舉例。
5. In consideration of the principles of play, what are some ways to use guided play to enhance
literacy skills? Any example
鑒於遊戲的原則, 有什麼方法利用遊戲/ 指導遊戲去加強語文能力? 請舉例。
6. In consideration of the principles of play, in what ways do you believe guided play can help
foster/enhance social competence and self-regulation in the classroom? Any example?
鑒於遊戲的原則, 在那一方面,你相信指導遊戲能培養/ 加強幼童的社交及自律能力?
請舉例
7. How would you use play to achieve the learning objectives of each unit? Any example
你如何以利用遊戲達到每一項學習目標﹖請舉例。
8. How would you use play as means for transmission of teaching content? Any example
你如何以遊戲作為一個渠道傳達學習的內容﹖請舉例。
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
175
9. How do you evaluate your performance in implementing learning through play and the
problems you have encountered?
你如何評估自己在實踐從遊戲中學習的表現及遇到的問題﹖
10. What are some of the steps you have taken to help you implement learning through play
successfully?
你用了什麼方法去幫助你成功實踐從遊戲中學習﹖
11. What are some of the challenges you face in implementing learning through play?
在實踐從遊戲中學習時,你遇到什麼挑戰﹖
Motivation
12. Do you feel you are making a difference in children’s lives by getting them to do guided
play in the classroom?
你覺得你在課室跟幼童進行指導遊戲時,你是為幼童帶來正面的影響﹖
13. How would you rank “learning through play” versus other teaching practices?
你如何評價「從遊戲中學習」及其他教學方法﹖
14. Do you feel children can effectively learn literacy and math skills through play-based
activity?
你覺得幼童能從遊戲中有效地學習語文及數學嗎﹖
15. Do you do you feel confident in your ability to implement “learning through play”
effectively and in an impactful manner in the classroom? May be give an example how do
you do it effectively?
你有多信心你能在課室有效地及有影響力地實踐「從遊戲中學習」﹖或試舉例子說明
你如何有效地做到﹖
16. Do you feel there are lots of pressure from parents to conduct more academic learning
instead of play?
你會否感到很多來自父母的壓力去進行更多學術學習而不是遊戲﹖
17. Do you feel that perhaps parents don’t understand the benefits of play hence they do not
appreciate play?
你會否覺得或許父母不明白遊戲帶來的益處,因此他們不懂得欣賞遊戲﹖
18. Do you feel that parent’s are overly concerned with academic readiness they do not
appreciate a teacher spending too much time on play?
你會否覺得父母過多於關心學術準備,並不欣賞老師放太多時間在遊戲上?
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
176
Organization
19. Overall, do you feel teachers are agreeable to use “learning through play” as the preferred
teaching method?
整體上,你認為老師會同意利用「從遊戲中學習」作為優先的教學方法嗎﹖
20. Do you believe parents understand that play lays a good foundation for future learning?
你相信父母會明白遊戲是為將來奠定學習的好基礎嗎?
21. Do you believe the school is providing enough guidance to parents about “learning through
play”?
你相信學校向父母提供足夠有關「從遊戲中學習」的指引嗎﹖
22. What is the single most important reason you feel that is limiting you from incorporating
more play in the classroom?
什麼是你最重要原因阻礙你在課室融入多些遊戲於課堂﹖
CHILD-CENTERED, PLAY-BASED CURRICULUM
177
Appendix C
Classroom Observation Protocol
Teacher:
Grade level currently teaching:
Observation items
Observe teachers implementation of the curriculum or his/her usual teaching style
Observe teachers implementation of a lesson on the program of inquiry
-are the children playing?
-are the children being constructor of knowledge?
-how to elevate the level of play?
-level of intervention from the teacher?
-able to bring forth the central idea, concepts and line of inquiry?
Observe behaviors to assess teacher’s level of engagement in learning through play
Observe teacher’s behavior to assess his/her confidence level in carrying out him/herself in a
classroom when using learning through play
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The study examined child-centered, play-based curriculum at a pre-school educational organization in Hong Kong. The focus was on assessing the relationship between the emphasis on teaching academic skills and its effect on diminishing child-centered pedagogy such as play-based learning. A gap analysis was used as the framework to investigate areas of improvement through the lenses of knowledge, motivation and organization. Data collected through surveys, interviews and classroom observations of teachers revealed that they had strong competence with regard to knowledge, motivation and organizational issues relating to play-based learning. Nevertheless, findings showed that teachers were not as familiar with certain factual knowledge and conceptual knowledge regarding the definition of play, characteristics of play and how principles of play can help promote mathematical and literacy skills. The study also confirmed a number of organizational improvement areas, such as the considerable amount of administrative work, curriculum expectations and demands, and an overwhelming culture of academic readiness. Proposed solutions were devised based on the findings to provide strategies to achieve the goal of spending more time in the curriculum on free-choice activities such as play as recommended by the Education Bureau of Hong Kong. As part of the study, a three-stage implementation plan and an evaluation plan were recommended.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A gap analysis on improving teacher retention in kindergarten: a case of a private kindergarten in Hong Kong
PDF
Improving educational attainment at a bridge program in Saudi Arabia: a gap analysis
PDF
The importance of being a global citizen: creating and implementing a global curriculum for the Cutting Edge Youth Summit
PDF
Increasing English performance in Chinese schools: a gap analysis
PDF
Building 21st century skills for school-age children in Colombia: lessons from a promising practice
PDF
Developing standards-based Chinese curricula in international schools: a gap analysis for Eagle American School
PDF
Teachers assumptions on the importance of executive function: a gap analysis evaluation study
PDF
Supporting online English language teachers’ ability to implement advanced technical teaching proficiency: a gap analysis case study
PDF
Imagining an equitable child care system
PDF
High attrition rate of preschool teachers in Hong Kong: an evaluation study
PDF
Preparing students for the 21st century labor market through liberal arts education at a Chinese joint venture university
PDF
The role of U.S. historic sites and museums in supporting social studies instruction in K-12 classrooms
PDF
An examination of teachers' proficiency in incorporating soft skills into instructions to culinary students at Kai Ping Culinary School: a gap analysis
PDF
Examining regular high school teachers’ roles in enhancing students academic performance: a gap analysis
PDF
Learner-centered teaching in Uganda: an analysis of continuing educational needs
PDF
Creating "excellent" learning experiences: a gap analysis of a university extension program
PDF
An evaluation of project based learning implementation in STEM
PDF
Creating a comprehensive professional development program for MBA students: a needs analysis
PDF
Effective course design for improving student learning: a case study in application
PDF
Linking shared governance and strategic planning processes: an innovation study
Asset Metadata
Creator
Koong, Victor
(author)
Core Title
Child-centered, play-based curriculum at a Hong Kong kindergarten and nursery: a gap analysis
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Global Executive
Publication Date
08/12/2016
Defense Date
08/08/2016
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
child-centered curriculum,OAI-PMH Harvest,Play,play-based curriculum,play-based learning
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Picus, Lawrence (
committee chair
), Krop, Cathy (
committee member
), Robison, Mark (
committee member
)
Creator Email
koong@usc.edu,victorkoong@me.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-302116
Unique identifier
UC11279555
Identifier
etd-KoongVicto-4774.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-302116 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-KoongVicto-4774.pdf
Dmrecord
302116
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Koong, Victor
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
child-centered curriculum
play-based curriculum
play-based learning