Risky play research, while an emerging area in early childhood education, rarely addresses risky play with infants and toddlers. This study adds to the research base by examining provision for 1- to 3-year-olds' risky play in three contrasting early childhood programs -- referred to in this study as Center 1, Center 2 and Nature center.
The Nature center (where children spend most of the day outdoors in a natural environment) was selected because previous research indicates that natural environments promote vigorous physical activity and risky play. Center 1 and Center 2 were selected based on high and low Infant-Toddler Environment Rating Scale (ITERS-R) scores (with Center 1 having a high score and Center 2 a low score). ITERS-R is a standardized evaluation instrument measuring the quality of infant and toddler programs, including aspects focusing on health and safety. The theoretical concept of affordance framed the qualitative assessment of the early childhood environments. An affordance is generally defined as a quality of an object or an environment allowing – or inviting -- an individual to interact with it in certain ways.
The researcher conducted three full days of observations in each of the three centers, using pre-determined criteria for objective risk (environmental characteristics of the situation, such as height, speed, and unstable surfaces) and subjective risk (individual characteristics such as children's expressions of fear, hesitancy or exhilaration). A tentative risk category was assigned to each unit of risky play, with categories consisting of (1) Play with great heights, (2) Play with high speed, (3) Play with harmful tools, (4) Play near dangerous elements, (5) Rough‐and‐tumble play, and 6) Play where the children can 'disappear'/get lost.
The 1- to 3-year-olds engaged in play in all risk categories. The largest category was playing with risky elements (i.e., as they appeared risky for the children). The total number of risky play instances in each center was roughly equivalent. There were, however, some differences: Center 1 and the Nature center had instances of risky play in each category; Center 2 had no instances in two categories (height and playing with harmful tools). Children in the centers with environments affording more risk categories showed more varied play. One-year old children engaged in more risky play indoors and 2- and 3-year old children engaged in more risky play outdoors.
The two affordance assessment approaches (i.e., the qualitative observations and the ITERS-R) coincided substantially. There were, however, some discrepancies which the researcher discusses in the article. The researcher also notes that a holistic assessment of quality in early childhood programs could beneficially include provision for exploration, risky play, and bodily learning.
This study indicates that centers with more appropriate affordance – while perhaps not having more risky play -- have more varied risky play. A mix of natural environments and traditional play equipment appears to offer sufficient variation and diversity to promote risky play in young children.
Research Partner