THE BENEFITS OF SOCIODRAMATIC PLAY:
A RESOURCE BOOK FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS AND PARENTS
A Project
Presented to the faculty of the Department of Child Development
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
Child Development
(Theory and Research)
by
Megan E. Matteoni
SUMMER
2013
© 2013
Megan E. Matteoni
ii
THE BENEFITS OF SOCIODRAMATIC PLAY:
A RESOURCE BOOK FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS AND PARENTS
A Project
by
Megan E. Matteoni
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair
Dr. Juliana Raskauskas
__________________________________, Second Reader
Dr. Lisa J. Jorgensen-Easterla
____________________________
Date
iii
Student: Megan E. Matteoni
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format
manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for
the project.
__________________________, Chair
Dr. Sue Heredia
___________________
Date
Department of Graduate and Professional Studies in Education
iv
Abstract
of
THE BENEFITS OF SOCIODRAMATIC PLAY:
A RESOURCE BOOK FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS AND PARENTS
by
Megan E. Matteoni
Statement of the Problem
The act of play is essential to children’s development. Through play, empathy,
communication, symbolic thinking as well as collaboration and problem-solving skills
are learned and practiced. The current project addresses sociodramatic play as a creative
projection of children’s cognitive development and aid in developing their prosocial
interactions. The active cooperative interactions between participants during
sociodramatic play, requires the participants to take on complementary roles that
correspond with the same focus or direction of the play scenario. Sociodramatic play is
the fusion of fantasy and social play, where imaginations collaborate to create play
scenarios that are physically and mentally portrayed. It requires the separation of
thoughts from actions, which is referred to as symbolic representation. The skills
associated with symbolic representation are not only precursors to developing literacy
skills, but also develop the individual’s emotional security and ability to self-regulate.
v
Sources of Data
Through extensive research, a resource book was created to support early
childhood educators and parents of young children in comprehending the cognitive and
emotional advantages of sociodramatic play as well as ways to promote this form of play
within the classroom and at home. The resource book was presented to evaluators,
ranging from educators to parents of preschool children. The evaluators read and
completed a one-page questionnaire based on the book’s usefulness to their field.
Overall, the resource book was viewed as a valuable piece of research to the field.
Nine of 11 (82%) of evaluators strongly agreed with the statement that the book was well
written and its objectives were met, while 18% of evaluators agreed, and no one
disagreed or strongly disagreed. The evaluators enjoyed reading the personal experiences
shared and appreciated how personal stories were tied to theory exploration and
discussions of current research throughout the book. Eight of 9 (72%) of evaluators,
working within the education field, stated they would recommend the resource book to
their colleagues, and 10 of 11 (90%) of all evaluators stated they would recommend the
book to parents.
_______________________, Committee Chair
Dr. Juliana Raskauskas
_______________________
Date
vi
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this project to my son, Gustavo. I love you. You are my life and
bring me so much joy. I love to play with you.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project is the accumulation of perseverance, optimism, long sleepless nights,
too much coffee, and the support of my family, professors, and fellow graduate students.
Thank you to my professors in the Child Development department for amazing lectures
and insight into the field. Thank you to Dr. Juliana Raskauskas for being my advisor and
keeping me on track with this project. Thank you to Dr. Lisa Jorgensen-Easterla for being
my second reader and for sharing your interests in the act of play with me.
I would specifically like to acknowledge Charlotte Matteoni and Dave Stengel for
the support they have provided Gustavo and I over the last three years. Their help has
given Tavo a magical childhood and me the opportunity to pursue and achieve my
academic dream. I could not have done this without the two of them. Thank you to Gary
Matteoni for the opportunity to travel and grow up overseas. These culturally rich
experiences helped mold me into who I am today. I would like to also thank the teachers
who have inspired me over the years, specifically Jeanne Soule Zeuch who opened her
classroom to me years ago and mentored me as an early childhood educator. Thank you
for inspiring me to apply to graduate school. I would like to acknowledge Belann
Giaretto and the staff at Pacific Primary School. Their passion for promoting emergent
curriculum through play still motivates me.
viii
And thank you to Mestre Urubu Malandro for introducing me to the art of
capoeira which not only trained me in determination to combat obstacles and achieve my
goals, but gave me the opportunity to work with children and reconnect to my passion for
child development.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication .............................................................................................................................. vii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ viii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ...................... ……………………………………………………….. 1
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................. 1
Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................... 5
Significance of the Project ............................................................................................ 5
Methods ....................................................................................................................... 7
Population of Interest ................................................................................................... 8
Definition of Terms ..................................................................................................... 9
Limitations ................................................................................................................... 9
Organization of the Project ........................................................................................ 10
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .................................................................................. 11
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11
Sociodramatic Play ......................................................................................................... 12
Theoretical Framework of Play....................................................................................... 16
Piagetian Cognitive Stage Theory ................................................................ 16
Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory ................................................................. 18
Justification of the Scope of the Project ....................................................... 20
Sociodramatic Play, Culture, & Intersubjectivity ......................................... 21
Intersubjectivity and the Relational Habitus within Sociodramatic Play ..... 24
x
Cultural Influences within Sociodramatic Play ............................................ 25
Play as a Cultural Practice ............................................................................ 27
The Influence of Attachment on Social Interactions and Neural Development ........ 32
Sociodramatic Play & Neural Development .............................................................. 33
Sociodramatic Play & Language Development ......................................................... 36
Sociodramatic Play & Social Emotional Competence ................................................ 39
3. METHODOLGY .............................................................................................................. 43
Project Design ............................................................................................................ 43
Role of the Researcher ............................................................................................... 43
Procedures.................................................................................................................. 45
Resource Book Scenarios Chapter Outline ................................................... 46
Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 48
4. DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS ................................. 50
Discussion .................................................................................................................. 50
Suggestions for Improvement and Implementation ................................................... 51
Limitations ................................................................................................................. 53
Recommendations and Conclusions .......................................................................... 54
Appendix A. Outline of Chapters ........................................................................................ 56
Appendix B. Evaluation Form .............................................................................................. 58
Appendix C. Evaluation Results ........................................................................................... 59
Appendix D. Scenarios: Resource Book ................................................................................. 60
References .............................................................................................................................. 126
xi
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
Play is an integral part of a child’s development. The National Association for the
Education of Young Children (1992) stated that play is an essential aspect of a child’s
development and constitutes an integral role in forming a foundation for further
education. Yet, in the standards based learning environment, preschools seem to be losing
sight of what is developmentally appropriate for young children and are emphasizing
more academic curricula (Stipek, 2006). The absence of play opportunities may inhibit
development of preschool children’s ability to cognitively comprehend many of the
abstract reading and math skills required for school readiness. The self-regulation skills
to sit still and focus attention for long periods of instruction may also be difficult for
children in the absence of play. In 1998, the Department of Education declared play as an
important part of the learning process. They also pointed out that play and joyful
learning can stimulate cognitive interactions, such as empathy, communication, symbolic
thinking as well as collaboration and problem-solving skills (as cited in Samuelsson and
Johansson, 2006). Imagine a group of preschool children reenacting a doctor visit where
the patient is being cared for by various nurses and doctors who discuss and debate the
best course of action. This play scenario exemplifies how the cognitive interactions listed
above can be executed within play. Through play, young children have a great chance of
2
learning these skills in a way that is developmentally appropriate and engaging. Children
often reenact family culture and real life scenarios through their play (Gmitrova,
Podhajeckå & Gmitrova, 2009; Riojas-Cortez, 2001; Whitington & Floyd, 2009), and by
doing so, they can also be learning important lessons depending how educators utilize
these play episodes (James, Bearne, & Alexander, 2004).
Educators portray a key role in supporting children’s development by providing
classroom environments, materials and learning activities that encourage play (Kemple,
1996; Smith & Pelligrini, 2008). Still, some preschool educators may not be fully aware
of the benefits of play to development and learning. Other educations may not have the
knowledge of how to maximize benefits by successfully by incorporating different forms
of play into the curriculum (Goldstein & Cisar, 1992; Kemple, 1996; Rushton, 2011). For
example, gross motor counting activities that incorporate skills like jumping, rolling, or
spinning afford children the utilization of their bodies to understand math concepts.
Children explore and draw their own conclusions of the environment through play (Lloyd
& Howe, 2003). As children mature and their worlds expand through experiences and
relationships, so does their play, particularly in terms of symbolic representation (Ortega,
1991).
Sociodramatic play, for example, involves active cooperative interactions between
two or more participants and requires the participants to take on complementary roles that
correspond with the same focus or direction of the play scenario. This type of play
constitutes approximately 66.7% of all pretend play in preschool (Hughes, 2010). This
type of play typically begins around the age of 3 years (Lillard, 2002; Smith & Pellegrini,
3
2008). By participating in sociodramatic play, children develop symbolic representation,
the ability to separate their thoughts from their actions (Hanline, Milton, & Phelps, 2008;
Johnson & Ershler, 1981; Vygotsky, 1978). Symbolic representation skills are not only
precursors to developing literacy skills, but also develop the individual’s emotional
security and ability to self-regulate (Elias & Berk, 2001; Hanline et al., 2008; Smith &
Pellegrini, 2008).
For example, the following play episode involved three friends ranging in ages 4
to 6 who were incorporating the concept of fire and water into their superhero scenario.
“Jen” is 4 years old girl and lives with “Jack.” They are not siblings, but more like
roommates. They share a house with their parents. “Jack” is 6 years old boy and “Gus” is
4 years old boy who periodically sees his two friends when their parents get together.
Jen: fire! Super Fi!
Jen runs into sandbox and passes in front of Gus
Gus: Super Fi! Acknowledges the invitation to play, opens arms and pretends to
capture Jen.
Jen: Fire! Runs a few steps with arms in the air and looks behind her
Gus: follows girl and tries to tag her back from behind. Super Fi!
Jack is standing off to side observing the interaction
Jen: If you touch me, I Fire.
Gus: But I have water in me.
Jen: I know, but don’t make me melt…looking at Jack
I Fire
Gus: lifts arms toward girl and makes a spraying sound.
I made you melt.
Jack: water beats fire, Jen.
Jen: I know. She melts into sand.
Jack: And I am, I’m all elements so I get the Golden Idol hold up a yellow plastic
sand toy castle mold.
4
The three friends exhibit various social emotional skills within this short play
scenario. They play well together and the respect for each other is apparent through their
verbal and physical actions. Above Jen asserts her desire to be strong as well as her
knowledge about fire by telling Gus, “if you touch me, I fire.” The two share their
knowledge of how fire and water counteract with one another and negotiate a conclusion
to the opposing elements. Jack, being the oldest, is looked to as the mediator. Jen looks to
him for confirmation when she is insisting Gus should not melt her. By the way she
looked at Jack, it is obvious she has a close relationship with him. Jack observes and
listens to the conversation between Jen and Gus and then offers the solution to the fire
and water superhero encounter. He does not choose a side, but rather offers a logical
explanation. The two younger children offer him their attention and value his opinion.
The three children are practicing valuable social and communicative skills through their
play scenario. Sociodramatic play incorporates the use of group planning, negotiation,
problem-solving skills, as well as the initiation and attainment of goals. Acquisition of
these cognitive strategies are often accompanied by increases in development of language
and symbolic representation of objects and actions (Gmitrova et al., 2009).
Allowing children to participate in sociodramatic play allows educators to observe
and learn how to support the child’s emotional and social predispositions (Dunn &
Hughes, 2001; James et al., 2004). In addition, parents, as well as educators are key
contributors to the emotional competence in young children (Denham, Basset, & Zinsser,
2012). While sociodramatic play promotes the development of cognition, language skills,
5
and social emotional learning in young children, educators and parents who recognize,
observe, and support this form of play acknowledge its saliency (James et al., 2004;
Kemple, 1996; Michael, Meese, Keith & Mathews, 1999; Smilansky, 1990).
Purpose of the Study
The proposed project was to create a book for early childhood educators and
parents about the benefits of sociodramatic play and the importance of play-based
experiences to preschoolers’ development. The book will center on the benefits of
sociodramatic play and how to support such play inside the classroom and at home. The
book includes chapters on the theoretical understandings of play, types and benefits of
sociodramatic play, the role of play in children’s development and strategies for
promoting sociodramatic play in classroom and home environments. The book was
written for the audience of early childhood educators and parents of preschool aged
children. A complete draft of the book chapters was sent to early childhood educators and
parents for feedback. Feedback and potential changes resulting is discussed in the
discussion chapter. Following the completion of this project the author intends to
incorporate feedback into the final product to be submitted to Redleaf Press or Turn The
Page Press. The intent is to publish this project as a research-based, developmentally
appropriate, reference on sociodramatic play for early childhood educators and parents.
Significance of the Project
The significance of this project is to increase awareness of the benefits of play and
6
how to maximize them. Play functions as a representation of serious behaviors or actions
with more emphasis on the actual process versus final product (Pellegrini, Dupuis &
Smith, 2007). The young child incorporates sociodramatic play as a way to create
understanding of their contextual environment through action (Piaget, 1969). The child
may have an innate need to embody impressions and fantasies through images and
actions (Bredikyte, 2000). The individual child participating in sociodramatic play
develops social skills through social interactions and fosters the ability to imagine
scenarios and socially engage in conceptualizing solutions for arising problems (Elias &
Berk, 2001; Gupta, 2009; Hanline et al., 2008; Thorp et al., 1995; Vygotsky, 1978).
Therefore, play provides a safe environment for the child to reflect and find meaning in
personal experience, which may allow for greater cognitive development to occur.
Sociodramatic play is a tangible tool for children to portray emotions and
develop an understanding of emotions (Denham, Zoller, Couchoud, 1994; Seja & Russ,
1999). Many young children have difficulties understanding and expressing their
emotions (Racine, Carpendale, & Turnbull, 2007). Reacting to emotionally charged
events and acknowledging or deciphering the meaning of those emotions are complex
developmental skills that require patience, practice, and effort (Denham et al., 2011).
Sociodramatic play can act as a medium for young children to model and actively control
the outcome of a proposed real life event that may overwhelm the child when originally
faced with the situation (Seja & Russ, 1999). During this type of play experience,
children begin to evaluate emotions and make connections between internal feelings and
7
acting out a behavior based on the emotion. The table below summarizes the cognitive
and social emotional benefits of sociodramatic play.
Table 1
Benefits of Sociodramatic Play
Cognitive
linguistic skills
intrinsic motivation
classification ability
divergent thinking skills
representational thinking
Social Emotional
cooperative skills
conflict resolution
perspective taking
self-regulation skills
expression of empathy
Therefore, raising awareness about play and how to maximize its benefits among parents
and educators has the potential to ultimately benefit the cognitive and social-emotional
development of children.
Methods
The project consists of a resource book for early childhood educators and parents, based
on the development and benefits sociodramatic play offers young children. It would
features these chapters:
1. The Art of Play

Historical look at play

Forms of play
2. Sociodramatic Play

What is it? Definition of SDP
8

How SDP develops in the young child

Examples of SDP: mini analysis
3. Psychological Perspectives on Sociodramatic Play

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory

Piaget’s preoperational stage, symbolic representation, and schemas
4. Emotional Competence Through Sociodramatic Play
5. Sociodramatic Play & Cognitive Development
6. Sociodramatic Play Inside Preschool Curriculum

Observations inside the classroom

Encouraging elaboration on play
7. Sociodramatic Play at Home
Population of Interest
The project was created as a resource guide for early childhood educators and
parents, as well as preschool administrative staff to educate them about the cognitive
complexity, language development, and prosocial development involved in sociodramatic
play. The book will also give educators and parents strategies for how to implement
sociodramatic play inside the classroom and home, as well as ways to observe and
document the children’s work within the sociodramatic play’s context.
9
Definition of Terms
Agency: A transaction between individuals or an individual and the context in which the
individual exists.
Intersubjectivity: The negotiation and creation of a shared meaning through
communicative methods.
Social Emotional Competence: The balance of emotional, social cognitive, and
behavioral development.
Sociodramatic Play (SDP): A complex form of fantasy or make believe play which
involves two or more participants.
Theory of Mind (ToM): The individual’s internal belief system and emotional
understanding as they influence behavior and reasoning.
Limitations
The primary limitation to this project is the limited scope. Play is a large topic
encompassing many different forms, in fact sociodramatic play itself is also broader than
can be captured by this project. Therefore, this project is only able to touch upon the
most salient topics related to sociodramatic play and child development. Exploration of
the full scope of benefits of play on child development would require a more in depth
look at all forms of play as well as future research gathered from longitudinal studies
looking at the cognitive and emotional development of children after school entry and
beyond.
10
Another limitation to the project is the concept of sociodramatic play’s saliency to
personal expression. Vygotsky (1978) viewed play as an affordance for children to create
their own meaning, but their meaning is based on what they perceive in reality. So
although play is abstract and affords children the flexibility to create an unreality, their
reality constrains them from straying too far from what their culture and experiences rely
on.
Organization of the Project
This chapter has introduced the significance of a project to write a resource book
for early childhood educators and parents on the benefits of sociodramatic play. While
this first chapter presented an overview of the project, chapter 2 provides an extensive
academic review on what sociodramatic play is and how it benefits young children
socially, emotionally, and cognitively. It sets the theoretical foundation on the importance
of sociodramatic play and builds an argument addressing these important facts. All
information presented in chapter 2 is based on previous research studies.
Chapter 3 outlines the details of the resource book including the design of the
project, the role of the researcher, and procedures taken to complete the project. Chapter
4 discusses the feedback gathered about the book chapters from members of the target
audience and future recommendations for the resource book. Succeeding chapter 4, the
appendices are provided including a copy of the evaluation used by colleagues and parent
readers as a critique of the resource book.
11
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
Learning occurs when the child is passionate about the subject and can actively
participate in the experience (Miller, 2009; Rushton, 2011). Through play, children create
internal working models to conceptualize or make sense of their world (Piaget, 1951).
Play is a creative form of personal expression. Children immerse themselves in various
styles of play rendering it tangible in all aspects. When individuals play together and
contribute to each other’s form of personal expressions proximal development occurs,
and the act of play is contextualized to the specific environment and emotional state of
the group (Gupta, 2009; Vygotsky, 1978). Pellegrini, Dupuis, and Smith (2007) state that
“playful behaviors resemble serious behaviors but participants are typically more
concerned with the behaviors themselves (i.e., “means”) rather than the function (i.e.,
“ends”) of the behavior” ( p. 264). For example, the concept of “playing house”
resembles the daily chores that occur within the children’s homes, like making dinner,
but the playful outcomes do not produce the same outcomes as the realistic chores.
Children actively model real life scenarios that they have witnessed or personally
experience through their play (Piaget & Inhelder, 1969). Burghardt (2005) suggests that
the act of play needs to be voluntary and conducted while in a relaxed or non-stressful
state of mind rather than imposed. Play should be intrinsically motivating to the
participants, chosen by participants rather than predetermined, enjoyable to participants,
12
involve participants physically and mentally, and entail an element of make believe or
challenge reality (Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983).
Keeping sight of these characteristics, play can be represented in the context of
locomotion, fantasy, object-directed, and social engagements (Graham, 2011; Pellegrini,
2009). Children engage in these types of actions and interactions daily. Locomotion play
suggests gross motor movement. Fantasy play constitutes any sort of imaginary or
pretend play; it is commonly a collaborative activity between two or more children but
can also be practiced as a solitary activity. Object-directed activity can be constructive
play or play using manipulatives. Social play involves groups of children working
together and sharing ideas and resources (Graham, 2011; Pellegrini, 2009). These types
of skills can aid the child throughout his or her life and can lay the foundation for
academic and overall life success (Howes, 2011; Howes & Phillipsen, 1998).
Sociodramatic play, which involves imaginary play and two or more children, is a
fusion of fantasy and social play. This chapter provides an overview of what
sociodramatic play entails, a theoretical framework outlining the importance of this form
of play, and the developmental advantages engaging in sociodramatic play provides
young children.
Sociodramatic Play
Sociodramatic play is a complex form of fantasy or make believe play which
involves two or more participants (Smilansky, 1990; Thorp, Stahmer, & Schreibman,
1995). Imagination manifests inside reality to create an altered contextual state of
13
interaction (Whitington & Floyd, 2008). Children rely on symbolic play to share
thoughts, ideas, goals, and negotiate outcomes. Through this social interaction, children
decide upon a play scenario and utilize their surrounding environment to development the
play scenario further. Rather than the environment and objects within it, being the
stimulus for play, the social interactions occurring within the play scenario acts as the
stimulus (Goncu, 2009; Vygotsky, 1978; Whitington & Floyd, 2008). Children
contemplate how their actions will affect the play scenario and communicate with one
another to establish an itinerary to proceed with the scenario. Sociodramatic play ensures
cognitive, social, and emotional development (Dansky, 1980; Elias & Berk, 2001; Gupta,
2009; Hanline, Milton & Phelps, 2008; Thorp et al., 1995; Vygotsky,1930–1935/1978).
Sociodramatic play positively affects the level of imagination and creativity a child
exhibits, as well as memory recall, vocabulary, verbal interaction, and the quality and
organizational skills of verbal comprehension (Dansky, 1980; Thorp et al., 1995).
Young children utilize role-playing as a way to create understanding of their
contextual environment through action. Children have the innate need to embody
impressions and fantasies through images and actions (Bredikyte, 2000). Their dialogue,
gestures, and interactions during play are deliberate and become manifest within the
character or role each child emulates (such as the Fire and Water scenario between Jen,
Gus, and Jack in Chapter 1). The child evolves into the character and accepts the other
characters around him (Holland & Lachicotte, 2007). The play scenarios are created and
complimentary additions to advance the play are formed (Hughes, 2010). The ability to
accept these social interactions and execute mental and physical responses is unique for
14
each child participating (Rushton, 2011). Through their play scenarios, children socially
and individually co-construct an understanding of prosocial behavior. Sociodramatic play
affords children the ability to share their imaginative manifestations based on their
culture and experiences with peers and socially engage in conceptualizing solutions
within their play (Gupta, 2009; Lillard & Sobel, 2000).
Realistic behaviors are introduced into play by the participants using “pretense”
(Vygotsky, 1978; Winther-Lindqvist, 2010). Pretense, or the act of pretending, is the
intersection of symbolic thought and subjunctive thought (Lillard & Sobel, 2000;
Winther-Lindqvist, 2010). Symbolic thought is the ability to detach and associate
different meanings or identities onto a new meaning or object (Piaget, 1951). Whereas,
subjunctive thought constitutes the hypothetical meaning placed on objects (Bretherton,
1989; Winther-Lindqvist, 2010). For instance, a group of children pretending they are
astronauts exploring outer space while on a moon expedition is an example of
subjunctive thought. The same group pretending a cardboard box is the spaceship in
which the space exploration occurs is symbolic thought. The two thought processes can
occur simultaneously.
Sociodramatic play is a multilayered process of social interactions. It entails the
concept of make believe, the realistic environment, and art of organizing, planning and
negotiating (Winther-Lindqvist, 2010). Ivy Schousboe (1993, as cited in WintherLindqvist, 2010) referred to these concepts as being interdependent on one another. The
diagram below depicts how the concepts support and influence one another. As the
imagination of the participants evolves through the performance of make believe actions,
15
it is relevant to the organization and negotiation of the play scenario which is the concept
of staging. The reality of the play scenario is comprised of the participants, physical
environment, props, and laws of nature that effect how the play is conducted. Each of
these concepts can exist alone, but for an accurate depiction of sociodramatic play each
must be present.
imagination
SDP
staging
reality
Diagram 1
Spheres of Reality
Sociodramatic play allows children to separate object from meaning as well as
action from meaning (Vygotsky, 1978). Play allows children to perceive reality through a
creative imaginative lens. Sociodramatic play affords children the ability to regulate their
behaviors through the play scenario. They begin to symbolically represent objects or
ideas and accept one another’s representations to fulfill the needs of the scenario. These
scenarios are dynamic as they move in and out of reality. The participants act as the
16
conductors leading the orchestration of imagination through a maze of twists and turns
until the concerto is finished.
Theoretical Framework of Play
Piagetian Cognitive Stage Theory
Piaget’s psychobiological view of the environment plays a pivotal role in the
child’s cognitive development. The child’s environment dictates the child’s cognitive
development through the quality of activities. The child graduates to the next stage of
cognitive development through the experience of more complex interactions. Piaget
referred to this as the process of assimilation and accommodation to achieve
equilibration. The child imitates to tangibly comprehend a new situation (Piaget, 1951;
Sutton-Smith, 1966).
Piaget’s preoperational stage of development occurs between the ages of 2 and 7,
embodying the preschool years and beginning of socialization amongst peers. During this
stage of development, the child’s language and symbolic representation in play increase
(Piaget, 1951). Piaget viewed this form of representational thinking as a derivative of the
interactions between the child and environment (Matusov & Hayes, 2000; Sutton-Smith,
1965). Piaget believed it is human nature to want to make sense of the world (Miller,
2011; Piaget, 1952). During the preoperational stage, the child’s level of thinking and
processing is egocentric, but socially constrained. The environment forms the child’s way
of thinking, and is made apparent through play. However, the advancement of symbolic
play for the young child’s development is dependent on the cooperation from the child’s
17
peers (Matusov & Hayes, 2000). Through sociodramatic play, the child utilizes the
environment and peers to comprehend scenarios they experience within their lives.
Equilibration occurs with the combining of previous and new knowledge, to
understand new experiences, and the acceptance of these new ideas and experiences to
expand on preexisting concepts to make better sense of the present (Piaget, 1952;
Silverman & Geiringer, 1973). Piaget believed there is an innate need to have a balance
between the environment and the person’s cognitive reality (Nichols, 2002).
Sociodramatic play allows the child to assimilate to a new experience to accommodate
personal needs (Piaget, 1951). The child reenacts the experience at a pace that is
accommodating to the child’s level of comprehension. Reality is transformed to
accommodate the child’s level of cognition (Bjorklund, 1995; Piaget, 1951).
An example of a child utilizing sociodramatic play to establish equilibrium is
presented in the following scenario. A three-year-old boy, who will be referred to as
Matt, experienced relational aggression from the older boys in his preschool class. The
group of boys would exclude Matt in play and incorporate his name in condescending
rhyming verses. Matt is faced with two disparate truths: (1) these are my friends and (2)
they are being mean to me. Matt, who was the youngest child in the class, had never
experienced this type of social interaction before and was unsure of how to acknowledge
and adapt to it. He worked out his feelings of powerlessness and conflict through
sociodramatic play. Matt began taking on the role of superheroes and created
sociodramatic play scenarios with family members to combat his emotions. When Matt
18
wore his Spiderman mask, he became a powerful superhero. He would ask his mother to
pretend to be one of the classroom boys.
Matt: You pretend to be Joshua*
Mother: Ok.
Matt: (puts on Spiderman mask) Oh, hi Joshua.
Mother: (gasps) Who are you?
Matt: I’m Spiderman. Look, I’m a spider. I have more power than you.
You know that Joshua?
*Name changed to protect identity of child.
The powerful superhero scenario provided Matt with a firm perception of the
emotions he was experiencing and the ability to overcome it emotionally (Meece & Mize,
2009). According to Piaget, Matt’s ability to verbalize his ideas afforded him the tools
necessary to build on the role taking. However, Matt’s preoperational stage of
development constrained him by only considering his perspective of the scenario. In the
end he was able to get the boys to stop teasing him and rejoin their play activities.
Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory
Another viable theory pertaining to the theoretical framework of play is the
Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky, 1978). This theory recognizes the central role social
relationships and culture perform in the organization of human thinking and learning
(Daniels, 2008; Gupta, 2009). Learning is a transformation of social practices where
participation and practice precedes mastery. Children learn through their play.
Sociodramatic play provides a window into the temperament and emotional states of
children as it is reflective of the physical and mental environment in which children
function on a daily basis (Lindsay & Colwell, 2003;Seja & Russ, 1999). Consistent with
Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory, active participation in sociodramatic play allows
19
children to internalize their external culture and become socialized to their environment,
as well as, develop a concept of rules pertaining to the play scenario (Elias & Berk, 2001;
Gupta, 2009;Vygotsky, 1978). Studies confirm that sociodramatic play promotes
cognitive, social, and emotional development (Elias & Berk, 2001; Hanline et al., 2008;
Gupta, 2009; Thorp et al, 1995; Vygotsky, 1978).
Children utilize role-playing as a way to create understanding of their contextual
environment through action. For instance, a 2-year-old boy who watches his mother
apply makeup in the mirror finds a tube of lipstick and smears it around his mouth and
chin. Sociodramatic play is often used to practice social roles and specifically gender
roles. Children utilize actions to represent impressions and fantasies (Bredikyte, 2000;
Connery, John-Steiner, & Marjanovic-Shane, 2010; Vygotsky, 1978). According to
Vygotsky (1930), children’s imaginations develop through their cultural-historical
makeup and within the social interactions they experience (Connery, et al., 2010). In the
quote below, Vygotsky states the social dynamics governing the development of
imagination allows the individual to expand on their experiences.
Imagination operates not freely, but directed by someone else’s experience, as if
according to someone else’s instruction..[Imagination] becomes the means by
which a person’s experience is broadened, because he can imagine what he has
not seen, can conceptualize something from another person’s narration and
description of what he himself has never directly experienced (Vygotsky,
1930/2004, p.17).
The child’s dialogue, gestures, and interactions during play are deliberately chosen and
become manifested within the character or role the child emulates and is acknowledged
and accepted by his or her peers (Friedman & Leslie, 2007; Holland & Lachicotte, 2007
Howe, Petrakos, Rinaldi & LeFebvre, 2005).
20
In sociodramatic play children can substitute objects or tools, needed to complete
the symbolic task, with imaginary objects (Vygotsky, 1978). This is a form of abstract
thinking. Children build abstract thinking skills through symbolic play, which increases
their capability of separating meanings from objects. Vygotsky (1976) stated practice and
achievement of abstract thinking skills during play is a precursor for comprehending
written language. As concepts are recognized and shared amongst the players, symbolic
play becomes a form of communication within a social interaction (Striano, Tomasello, &
Rochat, 2001). The ability to engage in abstract thinking and symbolic representation
during the preschool years has been positively correlated with the development of literacy
and math skills (Hanline et al., 2009; Vedler, 1997). The use of imagination in play is a
powerful tool that creates independent meanings onto objects. To impose a new meaning
onto an already established object is a system of second-order symbolism (Vygotsky,
1978). Similar to a child using a stick as a sword within a play scenario and then
imagining the same stick is a horse. The stick serves two purposes within the same play
scenario.
Justification of the Scope of the Project
Sociodramatic play involves the whole child. The child’s culture, previous
experiences, and thoughts transform into symbolic actions and language, which are
directed towards goals and aspirations (Vygotsky, 1978). Sociodramatic play is a tool for
the child to symbolically express emotional needs and gain cognitive understanding of
social situations (Piaget, 1951; Striano, Tomasello, & Rochat, 2001).
21
Children learn through social interactions and developing personal beliefs based
on these encounters (Gupta, 2009; Miller, 2011). Observing the child as an individual
with personal interests and needs by encouraging the engagement of free play and
developmentally appropriate activities promotes brain development (Aguilar, 2010;
Graham, 2011; Lloyd & Howe, 2003; Mehta, Golembo, Nosarti, Colvert, Mota,
Williams, Rutter, & Sonuga-Barke, 2009; Smolucha, 1992). Children have an innate need
to acquire knowledge and justify experiences through their play. Children utilize play to
decipher and better comprehend situations and concepts, cognitively enriching their
perspectives (Samuelsson and Johansson, 2006). This demonstrates the saliency of play
as a tool for learning.
Through this project, the readers will gain an understanding of how sociodramatic
play scenarios evolve and the benefits sociodramatic play has on child development.
Early childhood educators and parents will read empirical evidence supporting
sociodramatic play’s saliency on brain development, language development, and social
emotional skills through the cultural practices, relationships, and shared meaning of
young children.
Sociodramatic Play, Culture, & Intersubjectivity
Sociodramatic play allows for shared meaning between players, but also a shared
shift or redefinition of meaning as the players negotiate scenarios (Vygotsky, 1978).
According to Vygotsky, the individual’s level of mental functioning occurs twice during
the course of the individual’s development. First, it occurs within the social interactions
that the individual experiences, and once the knowledge is introduced, the individual
22
internalizes it and accepts the information as his or her own (Tudge & Rogoff, 1999;
Wertch & Tulviste, 1992). Sociodramatic play is dependent on communication, both
verbal and nonverbal, between its players. To be successful at sociodramatic play, the
players must have the ability to separate meaning from the action or play scenario that is
occurring (Goncu, 1993; Whitington & Floyd, 2009).
Intersubjectivity is the negotiation and creation of a shared meaning through
communicative methods (Goncu, 1993; Stone, Underwood, & Hotchkiss, 2012;
Whitington & Floyd, 2009). When individuals with different perspectives are able to fuse
their knowledge and experiences together to negotiate a mutually acceptable meaning,
intersubjectivity exists. Sociodramatic play allows for intersubjectivity as the players
negotiate scenarios (Ortega, 1991; Vygotsky, 1978). This creates an ecosocial system,
natural occurring social interactions within the microcosm world of play that involve
children and adults (Lemke, 2000). Children create shared meanings through
sociodramatic play by establishing the three elements of intersubjectivity; a joint focus,
metacommunication, and communication (Goncu, 1993; Ortega, 1991; Whitington &
Floyd, 2009).
First, a joint focus of attention must exist between the players. The players must
share an interest or goal in the scenario in order for their interactions to transpire (Goncu,
1993; Ortega, 1991; Whitington & Floyd, 2009). For example, if two children decide to
play superheroes, the agreement on the scenario’s premise displays their joint focus.
Second, the metacommunication between players allocates the pretend play scenario to
be interpreted and accepted as an action of play. The players accept one another’s actions
23
as part of the scenario and the pretense of play. If a child announces she has been
poisoned, the child is inviting the other players to accept this as part of the play and the
other players acknowledge it is a pretend pretense and not reality. The third element of
intersubjectivity within sociodramatic play is communication. Both verbal and nonverbal
forms of communication enable the development of sociodramatic play through
intersubjectivity. If a child pretending to be a superhero begins to fight an imaginary “bad
guy” the other players will acknowledge the nonverbal actions as a form of
communication and proceed to develop the scenario. In the same scenario, if the child
verbally announces the arrival of a “bad guy,” the other players follow along.
The intersubjectivity related to sociodramatic play affords community within the
group of players (Goncu, 1993; Ortega, 1991; Whitington & Floyd, 2009). Experiences
and language are shared and intertwined to create a culture established by pretense and
social interactions. This process provides the players with the communicative means to
define their social-emotional, cognitive, and cultural identities through collaboration and
negotiation (Oretega, 1991; Smolucha, 1992; Valsiner, 2001; Vygotsky, 1978).
Various levels of responsibility among individuals affect the levels of
intersubjectivity (Goncu, 1993; Vygotsky, 1978). For instance, if a teacher constrains
students from verbally interacting amongst themselves within the classroom environment,
the students will have different learning strategies and intellectual outcomes than students
whose teachers afford them the opportunity to verbally share ideas and understandings of
their experiences. The opportunity to co-construct knowledge within a group by sharing
language, social practices, and experiences creates competent members within designated
24
learning environments. Intersubjectivity exists within the zone of proximal development
(Tudge & Rogoff, 1999; Vygotsky, 1978). Through sociodramatic play, the
communication and social skills of the more experienced players can influence novice
players (Smolucha, 1992; Whitington & Floyd, 2009). Experiencing different stages of
intersubjectivity can exist influencing the level of agency and competence obtained by
the players (Stone, et al., 2012; Valsiner, 2001).
Intersubjectivity and the Relational Habitus within Sociodramatic Play
Agency, as it pertains to the construct of play, is defined as a transaction between
individuals or an individual and the context in which the individual exists (Stone, et al.,
2012; Wertsch, Tulviste, & Hagstorm, 1993; Vygotsky, 1987). According to Wertsch et
al. (1993), agency is founded within the social realm of small group interactions, like
those occurring within sociodramatic play, and then within the use of tools and artifacts.
It exists at an intermental as well as intramental level of functioning where Sociocultural
Theory is based (Vygotsky, 1987). Wertsch, et al. state, agency is synonymous with
moral reasoning. Agential action is related to the individual’s culture and historical
background where the individual’s level of morality is founded. Through agency,
individuals create their knowledge seeking social worlds by utilizing various tools and
artifacts, like language, perspective taking and problem solving within the group dynamic
(Stone, et al., 2012; Valsiner, 2001). Stone et al. (2012) referred to this process as the
relational habitus, and occurs within sociodramatic play.
The relational habitus is established through the dynamic use of individuals, their
choice of tools, and the application of these tools to complete the designated task (Stone,
25
et al., 2012). The relationship between individuals, tools, and tasks is salient to the
learning processes (Valsiner, 2001; Vygotsky, 1978). These three elements of the
relational habitus become intramentally dependent on one another, as well as, specific to
the context they are chosen for. It is the relationship between each of these three
elements that supports the Sociocultural Theory of agency within sociodramatic play.
Depending on how these elements are represented and the specific context they are used,
the relational habitus will vary (Maynard, 2012; Stone, et al., 2012).
Agency, intersubjectivity, and the relational habituses dissect the organic
definition of Sociocultural Theory (Stone, et al., 2012; Tudge & Rogoff, 1999; Valsiner,
2001; Wertsch et al.,1993). Intersubjectivity and the relational habitus are intertwined
through the social systems and the individuals who construct those systems (Maynard,
2012; Stone, et al., 2012). “Individuality is an abstraction, since no viable human
individual lives or can live outside the bounds of relatedness” (Stone, et al., 2012, p.66).
Social systems cannot exist without intersubjectivity and the sociocultural affordance of
the social system produces the individuals. The peer relationships and experiences that
are built and solidified through these social interactions allow the individual child to
establish their identity (Stone et al., 2012).
Cultural Influences within Sociodramatic Play
Culture is created through direct and indirect experiences and interactions of
individuals who make up a group (Miller & Goodnow,1995; Super & Harkness, 2009). It
evolves to reflect the individuals involved. It is integrated into the way a group thinks,
speaks, works, and plays (Gosso, de Lima Salum e Morais, & Otta, 2007). Culture is
26
dynamic. What occurs in the present is relative to the past. Decisions are based on
accrued knowledge, but the present context in which it exists is just as influential. The
past and present create the future.
Children develop within the culture they are born into; absorbing and accepting its
traditions and practices without even realizing the influence their culture will have on
their lives (Gosso, de Lima Salum e Morais, & Otta, 2007; Rogoff, Morelli, & Chavajay,
2010; Super & Harkness, 2009). Children learn to be a part of their culture through daily
experiences and interactions with their community. The impression culture instills in
children is reflective during their play (Gosso, de Lima Salum e Morais, & Otta, 2007).
Play patterns are a fusion of the individual’s psychology, environment, and experiences
supporting the influence of culture to children’s social interactions during sociodramatic
play. As stated by Bornstein and Lamb (2011):
If we want to understand a behavior being manifested in any particular cultural
context, we need to know the way that this context fits into the pattern of life
experiences of the individuals being studied, as well into the past history of
interactions between and within cultures that have shaped the contexts where we
make our observations (p.60).
Sociodramatic play allows children to explore their social identities and identify with
cultural practices by engaging in them with peers (Winther-Lindqvist, 2010).
Sociodramatic play involves the exploration of physical and social experiences.
Developing a sense of responsibility through play relative to daily life gives children a
purpose or place within their culture and develops morality. What constitutes play for
27
children is salient to their environment and the context for which they are required to
adapt to it. Super and Harkness (2009) refer to the physical and social experiences of
children as an opportunity for proximal development. Children’s social development and
integration into society is dependent on their cultural context. Similar to Rogoff, Morelli,
and Chavajay’s (2010) argument, the child, context, and community are interrelated; they
are multidirectional. Depicting how society functions on a daily basis through play,
allows children to embrace their culture, conceptualize the value of work, and encourages
them to engage in these tangible life practices.
Social actions, culture, historical contexts are as influential to the makeup of the
individual as the individual is to their existence. The child is an ensemble of social
relations. Competence is gained through the social context and social negotiation of
sociodramatic play that promotes intellectual development (Lightfoot & Cox, 1997;
Smolucha, 1992; Vygotsky, 1930/1990). The child is born into a culture as an active
participant who builds on meaning through historical and social interactions (Lightfoot &
Cox, 1997), and may perceive a specific context based on their social interactions, culture
and historical past. Through this type of dynamic relationship, knowledge, meaning, and
competence emerge and are integrated into cultural practices and historical contexts.
Play as a Cultural Practice
Cultural practices are influential actions that people value (Miller & Goodnow,
1995). Cultural practices possess familiar values that are recognized and respected by the
majority within a culture. Cultural practices are actions that a culture routinely
participates in within a specific context. For instance, within the preschool culture it is
28
customary to have a designated time of the day and area for group meetings or “circle
time”. This marks a time of the day when the class comes together as a community. It
can serve as a salient representation of the group’s identity. The children and teachers
recognize the same rules and routines and abide by these rules. The classroom’s group
time culture provides a sense of rhythm and stability to the participants’ day. In the
reading, Miller and Goodnow (1995), adapt five propositions to define how cultural
practices contextualize child development.
Proposition 1
The first proposition views the relationship between culture and the individual as
bidirectional. An individual is born into an already existing culture, but influences the
preexisting culture by existing. It transforms to fit the context of which the individual is
experiencing. For example, research conducted on the levels of pretend play of Brazilian
preschool children studied the quality the sociodramatic play exhibited by five different
cultural groups (Gosso, De Lima Salum E Morais, & Otta, 2007). One of the groups,
referred to as the mixed SES urban group, was made up of children from diverse
socioeconomical and cultural levels who attended a public university preschool. The
children’s parents ranged from professors, university students, and lab technicians, to
janitorial staff. The dynamic that existed between these children is unique and creates a
culture of their own through their play and interactions though their familial experiences
were vastly different.
29
Proposition 2
Cultural practices depict what is valued and what is viewed as efficient or useful
to the group. In Parmar, Harkness, and Super’s (2004) research on the ethnotheories of
Asian and Euro-American parents of play and academics during the preschool years,
results should a salient difference between the two cultures. While, Asian parents tend to
view play as being important for physical development, they emphasized more
importance on preparing their children academically for school. Euro-American parents
viewed play as developmentally important for cognitive and social skills, and emphasized
the importance of their children having a strong sense of self in order to be successful in
school. Both viewpoints are valid for the cultural practices of each group.
Proposition 3
Participation varies within a culture and each individual. Cultural practices
represent a model for which a child, with few experiences, can draw upon. Once the child
has digested the practice, the child has the ability to adopt and transform the practice to
fit his or her individualistic ideals. A young child who attends a multiple age preschool
will experience the learning benefits of having older peer mentors. The novice or
inexperienced child will experience the zone of proximal development, gaining skills and
knowledge above their current status, but below the more experienced child (Griffin &
Cole, 1984). Depending on the younger child’s abilities and interests, some skills may be
mimicked and others inspire a new direction on an already existing project.
30
Proposition 4
Cultural practices are socially integrated into history and are influential to one
another. Cultural practices have a bidirectional relationship, but can also compete for
more recognition through the individuals who believe and perform them. Chinese culture
upholds a collectivist viewpoint which is apparent in all aspects of their society, including
preschool (Tobin, Hsueh, Karasawa, 2009). Preschool is a micro-culture of the culture in
which its students practice in preparation of being young members of. Preschool is a
reflection of a culture’s expectations of its members. The Chinese children at Sinan Road
Kindergarten participate in daily literacy activity referred to as “Story King.” They are
encouraged to critique the oral storytelling skills of the child who is chosen to stand in
front of the class and tell the story for that day (Che, Hayashi, & Tobin, 2007). The
National Association for the Education of Young Children defines this as an
inappropriate developmental practice on the teacher’s behalf. The American
individualistic culture encourages children to express themselves and supports the
individual. Whereas, the collectivistic culture believes the group supports its members as
a whole not on an individual basis.
Proposition 5
Every action has reaction and the individual is continually learning and being
redefined. In Rushton’s (2011) editorial on neuroscience and the development of play,
the researcher recalls an incident where a preschool child accidently knocked over
another child’s glass thermos. The thermos shattered into pieces. The owner of the
thermos was less concerned with the action and more fascinated with the way his thermos
31
had transformed. On the other hand, the child responsible for the accident became
engulfed with emotion and immediately ran over to the easel and began painting a picture
of black lines from one corner of the paper to the other until it was saturated in black
paint. Consequently, the child was an avid painter of colorful pictures and rainbows. Her
reaction to the accident was emotionally charged which she chose to reflect on through an
extension of her artistic interests. The child used an appealing playful activity to release
anxiety she felt from accidentally breaking her classmate’s thermos.
The five propositions provide a theoretical framework for understanding the
relationship cultural practices have on child development. Practices are routinely
repeated meaningful actions. A child builds schemas through observations, language, and
social relationships to cognitively develop an understanding of the society or culture that
he or she is a part of. The child’s developed schemas then serve as a reference point for
new cultural practices to develop. Sociodramatic play scenarios are centered around the
cultural practices of the players. Each player contributes knowledge to the scenario and
the negotiation of the play’s actions and meanings, the intersubjectivity, is established.
The players adopt new meanings into their cognition while becoming competent
members within the social play scenario.
Positive participation in social interactions gives a child the ability to build selfcompetency and affords the tools needed to co-construct a social community amongst
peers that promotes learning (Stone, Thompson, Hart, Hotchkiss, & Nasir, 2012). The
development of competency within the individual is context dependent and is related to
32
the amount of time a child spends building relationships (Stone, et al., 2012). This
confidence allows the child to interact with peers and relate to their ideas.
The Influence of Attachment on Social Interactions and Neural Development
The overall mental health of a child is determined by their experiences during
significant periods of brain growth (Schore, 2001). Early forms of positive social
interaction, such as play, can stimulate neural activity in the brain, and the positive
feelings associated with the feeling of secure attachment affords the development an
Internal Working Model (IWM) associating positive emotions with human relationships.
The IWM is salient to social development and the ability to foster future relationships
(Schore, 2000). For sociodramatic play to occur, participants must be willing to explore
social interactions with one another. This includes collaboration of ideas, problem
solving, and perspective taking. Children learn to interact with peers through play and the
quality of these social interactions has a direct effect on the brain’s development, linking
emotionality and cognition (Hansen & Saxe, 2009).
The brain is central to all levels of development, which include physical, mental,
psychological properties. When an event or situation occurs, it has no emotional
significance until the individual involved interprets the event to reflect his or her current
emotional state (Alexander & O’Hara, 2009). The ability to emotionally decipher an
event is reflective of past experiences which are encoded and stored in the brain. Schore’s
psychoneurobiological (2001) model interrelates attachment, brain development and
33
emotional experiences as being salient to development. Sociodramatic play fosters brain
development through social interactions.
Sociodramatic Play & Neural Development
The areas of the brain mature similarly to the succession in which they evolve
within the womb (Eliot, 1999; Perry, 2006). The four main areas or regions of the brain
are the brainstem, midbrain, limbic system, and cortical (Eliot, 1999; Perry, 2006; Siegel,
2012). The lower brain structures consist of the brainstem, cerebellum, and midbrain. The
brainstem matures within the womb and is responsible for regulating basic physiological
needs like body temperature and heart rate. The cerebellum is responsible for movement.
It controls motor functions and aids in cognitive performance. The cerebellum is most
active when a task is unfamiliar and a high level of concentration is exhibited to complete
The midbrain is responsible for regulating the appetite, sleep, and stress levels. The
central structure of the brain is the limbic system and consists of the hippocampus and
amygdala. The limbic system is responsible for emotion, memory, and motivation. It is
also responsible for levels of attachment within mammals (Alexander & O’Hara, 2009;
Siegel, 2012). The cortical region of the brain includes the neocortex and prefrontal
cortex and is responsible for abstract thought, perception, and reasoning. The neocortex,
only found in mammals, is the area of the brain linked to sensory and cognition. Whereas,
the prefrontal cortex, existing only in primates, allows for higher cognitive development,
planning, and social learning. Executive functions, which are the brain’s processes that
34
control conscious thought, emotion, and action, are salient to the development of the
prefrontal cortex (Diamond, 2000; Graham, 2011; Qu, 2010).
Mind Your Brain Inc., 2012
Neurobiological studies on play have identified several brain structures salient to
social play behavior; including the cerebellum, neocortex and prefrontal cortex, and
limbic system (Diamond, 2000; Graham, 2011; Qu, 2010). Graham’s findings (2011)
suggest that social play exhibits both motor and cognitive skills. This form of play is
multifaceted and supports neural development (Aguilar, 2010; Graham, 2011; Lloyd &
Howe, 2003). Sociodramatic play affords the development of the brain’s various regions
while players are engaged and practicing social, language, motor, and cognitive skills.
Through sociodramatic play, risk taking, motor development and cognitive thinking
develop the brain and body.
35
When analyzing brain, the most neural activity during play occurred in the limbic
system, the area of the brain containing the amygdala and hippocampus (Siviy &
Pankseep, 2011). The limbic system, which regulates emotion and memory, connect the
lower and higher functioning sections of the brain and allows for the mental processing of
social signs and interactions (Eliot, 1999; Siegel, 2012). The amygdala is linked with
processing emotional memories (Alexander & O’Hara, 2009). Social play is also
associated with the size of the amygdala (Mehta et al., 2009). Possession of a larger
amygdala suggests more engagement in social play as well as positive social interactions
(Siviy & Pankseep, 2011).
The correlation of neural development and the stages of play coincide with
specific sections of the brain and the complexity of play (Siviy & Pankseep, 2011). When
damage occurred within the limbic system, play declined. Damage to the cortex appeared
to involve various alterations in the style of play. Prefrontal cortex damaged rats
exhibited less complex play tactics, Orbitofrontal damaged rats did not acknowledge
specific partner and show adjustment in play to accommodate partner, and motor cortex
damage resulted in lack of play maturity in rats. These findings are relative to the process
of brain development within a child.
The occurrences of social interactions within play are innate behaviors. Siviy and
Pankseep’s (2011) neurological investigations discovered if rats were housed in isolation,
they showed increased levels of social play as opposed to rats housed within a group
environment. The increased levels of dopamine when socially deprived rats were allowed
to interact with other rats signify a link between the social and emotional aspects of
36
behavior. Levels of play also increased when rats engaged in play with familiar rats
versus unfamiliar rats over a course of 7 days. Stimulating neural activity through play
during childhood is salient to developing high levels of cognition as an adult (Gale,
O’Callaghan, Godfrey, Law, & Martyn, 2004).
During the first 3 years of life the hippocampus, amygdala, and corpus callosum
grow rapidly. These areas of the brain are associated with emotion, memory, and
cognitive growth (Mehta et al., 2009). All of which are embedded within play and its
level of social interactions which is why sociodramatic play is referred to as a complex
form of play. It involves all functionality of the brain. Players acknowledge one another
as coagents in the creation of the scenario and the specific role each player proposes.
Players plan, reason, and improvise situations with one another. They exhibit levels of
empathy and self-control in order to accommodate peers to ensure the play scenario’s
continuity.
Sociodramatic Play & Language Development
Language is a personal and social human process (Vygotsky, 1978). Through
language, the needs of the individual can be expressed and interpreted by others.
Language and dialogical interactions foster learning through social practices. Children
utilize speech to afford themselves the freedom to manipulate their environment
(Vygotsky, 1978).
The onset of language affords toddlers the ability to develop representational
thinking establishing the foundation of symbolic play (Piaget, 1962). Children begin to
37
combine verbs and nouns in grammatically constructed sentences around the age of three
(Eliot, 1999). With the onset of conversational skills, it is around this age, sociodramatic
play begins to develop (Hughes, 2010). The social interactions, like the ones occurring
during sociodramatic play, exemplify how language promotes socialization among
humans (Schieffelin & Ochs, 1996). Children with language deficiencies or impairments
are less likely to engage in complex sociodramatic play scenarios (Hughes, 2010;
Stahmer, 1995)
The linguistic interactions occurring within sociodramatic play are improvised
and collectively involve each player’s culture (Sawyer, 1997). It is a combination of
individualistic ideas and collectivistic negotiations. Sociodramatic play’s dialogical
interactions are not scripted, but guided and negotiated by each player’s cultural beliefs.
The improvisational conversations occurring within sociodramatic play are salient to
cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978). Children will engage in more literate language
and use more descriptive words when interacting with peers during sociodramatic play
versus other forms of play (Vedler, 1997). The engagement of sociodramatic play among
children begins to decline around the age of six as children begin to socially interact in
non play relationships (Sawyer, 1997; Vedler, 1997).
The verbal interactions between children that occur during sociodramatic play use
language through social interactions to learn about each others experiences and cultures,
build on their critical thinking skills and have an opinion on what it means to be
productive and goal oriented. The act of sociodramatic play accomplishes meaning with
words. Children’s cognitive development is mediated by historical, cultural, and practical
38
centered activities and the perception of these actions (Vygotsky, 1978). Perception
exists bidirectionally with the specified activity. During sociodramatic play the players
are sharing culture through language, which guides the child to discover and gravitate
towards various themes and experiences. The same play scenario can have varied
meaning for the players because both have diverse backgrounds and interpret the
language occurring within the play differently (Valsiner, 2001). Language becomes a
tool. Once an action or symbol affords a meaningful outcome, may be adopted as a new
practice, fusing culture and cognition (Vygotsky, 1978; Gutierrez & Stone, 2000).
By observing and learning from various players, Sociodramatic play can aid
children in realizing their capabilities, goals, and interests (Vygotsky, 1978). The play
scenario acts as a social interaction utilizing language to produce self-competency in the
participants and establishes identity. “Identities are collaboratively constructed through
human activities in real time” (Stone, Thompson, Hart, Hotchkiss & Nasir, 2012, p. 8).
The play scenario works as a coagent, bringing thoughts together to generate new ideas
(Stone et al., 2012; Wertch, Tulviste & Hagstorm, 1993) Through communicating and
negotiating shared meaning each child becomes a competent member of the community
(Stone, et al., 2012).
While engaged in sociodramatic play, the individual participants interpret the
language used by their peers and construct meaning from it based on their previous
knowledge and cultural influences (called Semiotic regulation) (Valsiner, 2001). Asking
clarification questions during sociodramatic play can prompt participants to expand on
opinions of the play scenario. “The intrapsychological self-assurance about one’s
39
capability here preemptively regulates and directs the action. Semiotic regulation is thus
of crucial relevance for intrinsic motivation” (Valsiner, 2001, p.87). The child’s
interpretation of the play scenario is a glimpse into what the child believes is important to
recognize. The ability to decipher between what is valued and what is an affluent choice
in following the play experience builds on future choices.
Sociodramatic Play & Social Emotional Competence
The preschool period is developmentally salient to the child’s ability to learn to
self-regulate emotions, but not much research has documented young children’s ability to
comprehend and control emotions (Dennis & Keleman, 2010; Webster-Stratton & Reid,
2002). Reacting to emotionally charged events and then acknowledging and deciphering
the meaning of those emotions are complex developmental skills that require patience,
practice and effortful control (Denham et al., 2011). Social emotional competence exists
within the balance of emotional, social cognitive, and behavioral development (Hembree,
2010; Herman, Paukner, & Suomi, 2011). It is the ability to maintain successful peer
relationships and exhibit prosocial behavior (Cillessen & Bellmore, 2011). Possessing
social emotional competence is having the ability to find a balance between social and
individual needs.
There are three elements involved with obtaining social emotional competence;
experiencing, expressing, and understanding (Denham, Waren, Von Salisch, Benga,
Chin, & Geangu, 2011) Young children learn social emotional competence through social
play. The complexity of these peer interactions within play correlate to the individual
40
child’s ability to gain social competence (Cillessen & Bellmore, 2011; Elias & Berk,
2008; Webster-Stratton & Reid, 2002). In sociodramatic play, interacting with one
another allows the participants to physically and cognitively experience, express, and
comprehend the emotions involved with the scenario. Developmental social emotional
skills like perspective taking, problem solving, self-regulation, and assertiveness can be
derived and refined by participating in sociodramatic play (Gupta, 2009; Michael, Meese,
Keith, & Mathews, 2009; Webster-Stratton & Reid, 2002).
Sociodramatic play is a tangible tool for children to portray emotions and develop
an understanding of emotions (Seja & Russ, 1999). Many young children have
difficulties understanding and expressing their emotions (Racine, Carpendale, &
Turnbull, 2007). Sociodramatic play can act as a medium for a young child to model and
actively control the outcome of a proposed real life event that may overwhelm the child
when originally faced with the situation (Seja & Russ, 1999). Children begin to evaluate
emotions and make connections between internal feelings and acting out a behavior based
on the emotion. Play scenarios, or scripts, are developed through cultural experiences and
provide a link between specific emotions and certain behaviors (Dennis & Keleman,
2009). Through these role-playing scripts reactions are established and if repeated
becomes behaviors to assist the physiological outcome of the emotion. Sociodramatic
play and role playing “real life” situations allows children to cognitively understand
emotions associated with specific behaviors and gives children a reference scenario to
understand how to regulate those emotions.
41
Utilizing developmentally appropriate play scenarios to discuss emotions, young
children are capable of expressing their emotions and implementing self-regulating
strategies. Sociodramatic play is a window into children’s temperament and emotional
states as it is reflective of the physical and mental environment in which they endure on a
daily basis (Seja & Russ, 1999). Children comprehend emotions through experiencing
them socially rather than introspectively (Carpendale & Lewis, 2004; Racine,
Carpendale, & Turnbull, 2007). As children mature, their emotions are heavily
interdependent on social competence, but to be emotionally competent the child must
recognize the emotion exists and is being experienced.
Pretend play and acting out real life situations helps children to regulate emotions
by putting a situation or emotion into a context they can identify with. The role-playing
and deciphering how a character might react to a situation within a sociodramatic context
develops a child’s Theory of mind (Racine, Carpendale, & Turnbull, 2007). Theory of
mind (ToM) consists of the individual’s internal belief system and emotional
understanding as they influence behavior and reasoning. To possess ToM the child must
understand his or her emotions, as well as those of others, in addition to understanding
internal state of mind and false belief understanding (Racine et al., 2007). The young
child’s thoughts and actions are influenced by an egocentric way of thinking (Bjorkland,
1995; Piaget, 1952). However sociodramatic play allows the child to share roles and
negotiate play scenarios with others. Through play, the child’s egocentrism is
compromised for the game to continue.
42
Sociodramatic play supports ToM through its social interactions. These social
interactions also aid in the development of perspective taking (Denham, Basset, Mincic,
Kalb, Way, Wyatt, & Segal, 2012). By expressing emotions and initiating problemsolving tactics during negotiated play scenarios, the child is gaining emotional knowledge
and experience dealing with peer interactions. The role-playing experienced within the
social group provides a foundational behavior pattern and confirms behavioral
expectations for specific actions (Winther-Lindqvist, 2010). Sociodramatic play aids in
the development and understanding of appropriate social interactions.
There has been extensive research conducted on understanding of emotions
separately from the development of understanding false beliefs. However, Racine et al.
(2007) state both concepts are relevant in analyzing the degree to which a child
comprehends their social world. Emotions are relative to the social context in which they
develop. When young children do not have the verbal and cognitive demands from an
adult, they are able to portray better understanding of emotional understanding and
strategies on how to control emotions (Dennis & Keleman, 2009). It may be easier for
child to conceptualize emotions that are acted out in front of them versus having to
cognitively assess them. Young children are capable of regulating their social-emotional
with proper tools and guidance.
43
Chapter 3
METHODLOGY
Project Design
The purpose of this project was to inform early childhood educators and parents
on the benefits of sociodramatic play by creating a resource book based on the cognitive
and social emotional benefits sociodramatic play offers young children. In order to do so,
I reviewed the existing literature about sociodramatic play. This literature review
consisted of research on the act of role-playing among young children, but also symbolic
play, intersubjectivity, play therapy, brain development, and different cultural views of
the importance of play. An outline of the major benefits of sociodramatic play was then
drafted and the development of chapter topics created to coincide with these findings (see
Appendix A). The outline was used to develop the organization of Chapter 2 Literature
Review and then expanded into the organization of the resource book. The final process
was to have the completed book evaluated by members of the target audience, who
consisted of early childhood educators and parents of young children, for usefulness and
completeness.
Role of the Researcher
The concept for the resource book was conceptualized by my interactions and
observations of children in play experiences, particularly of sociodramatic play in
44
preschool children. As a licensed preschool teacher of 6 years, as well as a mother to a
four-year-old boy, I was able to use my informed observations to identify the benefits of
sociodramatic play and the need for more information on the subject for parents and
educators. Within the classroom I witnessed various forms of play and participated in
child led pretend play activities. I have always been fascinated by sociodramatic play
due to the participants’ ability to cognitively move in and out of scenarios. This form of
play affords glimpses into the dynamic evolution of imagination that young children
possess.
My role was to develop an argument on the importance of sociodramatic play
during the preschool years. In order to accomplish this task, I conducted a thorough
analysis of research on the topic. I utilized empirical articles as well as textbooks
centered on sociodramatic play’s effects on neural, cognitive, and social emotional
development. I also videotaped several sociodramatic scenarios involving my son,
transcribed the videos, and analyzed them based on the empirical literature and theories I
have been studying. Utilizing conversational analysis techniques I learned in CHDV 211,
with Dr. Stone, I was able to transcribe the videos in Transana software and repeatedly
watch the sociodramatic play interactions between my son and others. Over the course of
my graduate studies, I witnessed his sociodramatic play develop and become more
interactive as he matured. His scenarios have become more complex and his ability to
interact with others during play has improved.
Once enough evidence was collected to prove sociodramatic play’s saliency in
young children’s overall development, I began writing my literature review. Upon
45
completion of the literature review, I began to write the chapters of the resource book
based on the arguments I addressed in the academically centered literature review.
Procedures
In order to create the resource book, I researched extensively the topics listed in
the chapter guide. The chapter guide functioned as a research funnel, narrowing down my
topic of interest from a general look at play to more specific form of play and its benefits.
This research included empirical articles, textbooks focusing on play, its influence on
development, and literature on successful preschool programs that promote sociodramatic
play.. I did extensive article searches within the PsychINFO and ERIC databases. I
searched the terms “sociodramatic play,” “symbolic play,” “pretend play,” and “roleplaying.” Depending on the source, these various terms were interchangeably used to
describe the same form of play. I also researched the benefits of sociodramatic play
through a Vygotsky and Piaget theoretical lens. Utilizing several books by these two
psychologists, I dissected their theories and how they could be applied to sociodramatic
play. Once I felt like I had a substantial amount of information, I began to outline my
chapters for the resource book. Again, I funneled the information I had gathered starting
with a broad look at play and became more specific, focusing solely on sociodramatic
play. Below is the resource book’s chapter guide. I also used this guide to outline my
literature review.
46
Resource Book Scenarios Chapter Outline
1. The Art of Play

Historical value of play

The culture of play

Forms of play
2. Sociodramatic Play

What is it? Definition of SDP

How SDP develops in the young child

Example of SDP: mini analysis
3. Psychological Perspectives on Sociodramatic Play

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory

Piaget’s preoperational stage, symbolic representation, and schemas
4. Emotional Competence Through Sociodramatic Play

Social emotional learning- self regulation, self-awareness, prosocial behavior

Mini analysis
5. Sociodramatic Play & Cognitive Development

Brain development

Language and Literacy
6. Supporting Sociodramatic Play in Preschool Curriculum

The art of observation

A look at emergent curriculum

Natural environment
47

Examples of SDP and how to observe and promote
o Puppets
o Capes and costumes
o Classroom environment
o Boxes
7. Sociodramatic Play at Home

Attachment’s influence on relationships

Ways to incorporate SDP at home
o Reenactment
o Character
o Stuffed animals
o Literacy
Based on the evidence gathered from my resources, I connected theory with
applied settings to build my argument. Each subtopic related to the benefits of
sociodramatic play was carefully outlined and referenced by empirical and academic
sources to give weight to the evidence base for my argument.
I first began writing my literature review, dividing it into sections based on the
chapter guide I had created. While writing each section of the literature review, I would
send drafts to my project sponsor to obtain feedback on content. Once each section of the
literature review was approved, I combined them into one document. This process
required some editing and reorganization in order to make the separate sections flow into
48
one continuous read. In order to do so, I outlined the entire literature review. This process
assisted me in reading the document, restructuring its content making it a more efficient
argument. Once I was satisfied with the literature review, I returned the revised document
to my project sponsor for approval.
Upon receiving my project sponsor’s approval on the literature review, I began to
write the resource book. It was a challenge to transform academic writing into a piece
with more of a personable lens that would captivate the general audience I was targeting
for the resource book. The first draft of the resource book was factual and dry. It
contained substantial information pertaining to sociodramatic play, but it did not tell a
story. In order to modify my style of writing, I reminisced on my own childhood and how
I played. Sharing personal stories and experiences throughout the resource book while
incorporating research and theory created an informative and entertaining read that the
target audience could relate to. My second reader added to additional ideas to the
literature review from her field of recreation and also encouraged the use of examples
throughout the resource book to help bring the ideas to life for parents and educators.
Evaluation
Once the resource book was completed, I presented a copy to 17 people who
either work in the education field or are parents of preschool aged children. Out of the 17
evaluations, I received 11 back (65%). Of the 11 evaluators, 2 were fathers of preschool
aged children, 2 were mothers of preschool children, and 3 were mothers, of preschool
aged children, and are currently working within the Education or Child Development
fields. In addition, there were 2 women, with over 10 years of working experience within
49
preschools, and who had children between the ages of 14 and 35. Another evaluator was
a woman with 24 years of experience within early childhood education and mother of
three children between the ages of 25-28, and one woman had 24 years of experience
working as a preschool teacher. The group was asked to read the resource book and
complete a survey to evaluate the structure and contents of the book and offer suggestions
for improvement (see Appendix B for copy of survey). The evaluation consisted of 7
statements ranging in the format of the book, its usefulness and relativeness to reader, and
its level of enjoyment and information provided. The evaluation asked readers to rank
their opinion of the book on a 4 point Likert scale. Each statement was followed by a set
of numbers; 1 representing “ I strongly disagree with statement,” 2 representing “ I
disagree with statement,” 3 representing “ I agree with statement,” and 4 representing “ I
strongly agree with statement.”
Overall, the readers found the resource book to be well written, entertaining, and
applicable to early childhood education. The findings from the evaluation will be
discussed in Chapter 4 along with the overall usefulness of the resource book.
50
Chapter 4
DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS
Discussion
The purpose of this project was to produce a resource book on the benefits of
sociodramatic play. The book is a resource guide for early childhood educators and
parents, as well as preschool administrative staff to educate them about the neural
development, cognitive complexity, language development, and prosocial development
involved in sociodramatic play. The resource book begins with a chapter on play and its
historical and cultural value. It then describes the various forms of play before focusing
specifically on sociodramatic play. The resource book provides educators and parents
strategies for how to implement sociodramatic play inside the classroom and home, as
well as ways to observe and document the children’s work within the sociodramatic
play’s context.
Sociodramatic play is utilized by young children to learn how to achieve goals
and practice social interactions (Elias & Berk, 2001; Gupta, 2009; Hanline et al., 2008;
Thorp et al., 1995; Vygotsky, 1978). By developing social skills, children enhance their
ability to emotionally control and understand how their actions affect others (Denham,
Zoller, Couchoud, 1994; Seja & Russ, 1999). Children develop better language skills
through communicating their ideas and opinions through sociodramatic play, and begin
utilizing critical thinking skills as they compromise scenarios within their play (Elias &
51
Berk, 2001; Hanline et al., 2008; Smith & Pellegrini, 2008). A resource book clarifying
these positive outcomes of sociodramatic play through research and theoretical concepts
will aid in the celebration of children’s play and solidify its importance to child
development.
Suggestions for Improvement and Implementation
After reading the book, evaluators completed a review of the usefulness of this
resource book. Nine of 11 (82%) of evaluators strongly agreed with the statement that the
book was well written and its objectives were met, a further 2 (18%) marked agree and
no one disagreed or strongly disagreed. The evaluators discussed in write in items how
much they enjoyed reading the personal experiences shared and how much they
appreciated that examples and personal stories were tied to theory exploration and
discussions of current research throughout the book. 72% (8 of 9) of evaluators, working
within the education field, stated they would recommend the resource book to their
colleagues, and 90% (10 of 11) of all evaluators stated they would recommend the book
to parents.
Evaluators provided additional thoughts and suggestions for improvement for
content and design. The evaluators’ suggestions were beneficial and thoughtful. The
feedback received provided me with insight as to how the general reader population
would receive the resource book. Several evaluators stated they would like to see the
photos represent a broader range of ethnicities and gender. Due to copyright laws, I
utilized my own photos within the pages of the book. My photos represented my son and
52
his friends engaged in different playful activities. I would like to incorporate more photos
representing culturally diverse children engaged in sociodramatic play.
Incorporating more photos into the book would aid in visualization of the text,
linking the provided research and personal experiences to the reader. In particular,
chapter 6 “Supporting Sociodramatic Play in Preschool Curriculum” would benefit from
having photos of children inside the classroom as well as examples of cardboard
structures, more photos of puppets, and patterns to create simple costumes and puppets. A
suggestion was made to include interviews with preschool teachers and their classroom
experiences with sociodramatic play. Incorporating more examples from other teachers’
perspectives would aid in promoting the benefits of this form of play and make the
resource book relative to more professionals in the field and less from the personal lens
of the author.
One evaluator mentioned the premise of the resource book correlated well with
Michelle Obama’s initiative for “Get Moving” and the campaign for 60 minutes of play
per day. Perhaps dedicating a few paragraphs to the initiative in the chapter on play or in
an introduction or forward would denote the timeliness of the resource book and aid in
drawing attention to its objectives. By associating the resource book with a nationwide
movement, recognition on the importance of different forms of play, like sociodramatic
play, could receive more prominence.
Overall the resource book was well received and evaluators made important
suggestions for how to make it more relevant to wider audiences, the classroom setting,
and the national stage. Based on their recommendations I also made minor revisions to
53
the resource book by clarifying sentences and adding an additional list of potential
natural resources to utilize inside classrooms. Upon presenting the resource book to
potential publishers, I will further refine its content based on the evaluators’ suggestions.
Limitations
Although the resource book received positive feedback from evaluators, there
were limitations to the evaluation that should be considered. A major limitation of this
project was the small pool of evaluators who were willing to participate in critiquing the
resource book. A larger diverse population of randomly chosen evaluators would have
increased the saliency of the evaluations and ensured the resource book’s significance to
the population it has been written for.
Another limitation was the fact that evaluators’ behavior was not followed up
after they read the resource book. The current evaluation was formative asking about the
usefulness of the information provided in the guide. It is not known whether or not the
suggestions to enhance sociodramatic play were implemented by the evaluators, which
threatens the ultimate validity of this tool. Suggestions included in each chapter are
based on research evidence and best practices but there still needs to be a test of their
direct relationship to social-emotional well-being and cognitive performance. Therefore
in the future a summative evaluation is needed. Although evaluators found the resource
book to be a valuable source to the topic of play, specifically the importance of
sociodramatic play, its impact on their professional and personal lives still needs to be
documented.
54
There were limitations to the project in its entirety. By focusing on only one form
of play, I limited myself to providing a complete argument to the general benefits of play.
My focus on sociodramatic play viewed play through a contextual lens, which was more
age specific than the various forms of play. Because sociodramatic play is more common
during early childhood, the resource book is more relative to professionals and parents
who are involved with younger children. More specifically to the individual chapters,
researching the affects play has on brain development was limited to experiments
conducted on animals rather than children. Though the results found are relative, it is not
as accurate as if the brains of actual children were studied. Also, the act of sociodramatic
play is referred to by various names; role-playing, pretend playing, symbolic playing,
depending on the area I was researching and the academic journal. There is a chance I did
not uncover valuable research to compliment my argument. Perhaps having more
professionals who have expertise in this form of play evaluate the resource book would
serve as a better critique than just the general public.
Recommendations and Conclusions
This resource book was specifically designed to afford early childhood
educators and parents of young children’s perspectives on the importance of play and
social interactions; specifically through sociodramatic play but it is only one medium.
Supplementing the book with other media like providing a resource website or
incorporating a workshop either through video or in person could help get this
information to more parents and aid in promoting its saliency to the field. A workshop
55
utilizing participants in tangible examples of sociodramatic play and other hands on
experiences could solidify the points addressed within the pages of the resource book.
Creativity and play is not constrained to childhood, but is salient to all ages
(Brown, 2009). By participating in playful learning experiences, adults have the
opportunity to release their imaginations and explore their levels of creativity while
developing social bonds (Brown, 2009; Palagi, 2011). A workshop centered on this
concept would provide participants with a personal connection to the resource book and
aid in the comprehension and interpretation of its importance. Overall, the evaluation
results support the need for this resource and I will pursue publication once my Master’s
program is complete.
56
APPENDIX A
Outline of Chapters
Scenarios: Chapter Outline
1. The Art of Play

Historical value of play

The culture of play

Forms of play
2. Sociodramatic Play

What is it? Definition of SDP

How SDP develops in the young child

Example of SDP: mini analysis
3. Psychological Perspectives on Sociodramatic Play

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory

Piaget’s preoperational stage, symbolic representation, and schemas
4. Emotional Competence Through Sociodramatic Play

Social emotional learning- self regulation, self-awareness, prosocial behavior

Mini analysis
5. Sociodramatic Play & Cognitive Development

Brain development

Language and Literacy
57
6. Supporting Sociodramatic Play in Preschool Curriculum

The art of observation

A look at emergent curriculum

Natural environment

Examples of SDP and how to observe and promote
o Puppets
o Capes and costumes
o Classroom environment
o Boxes
7. Sociodramatic Play at Home

Attachment’s influence on relationships

Ways to incorporate SDP at home
o Reenactment
o Character
o Stuffed animals
o Literacy
58
APPENDIX B
Evaluation Form
SCENARIOS: The Benefits of Sociodramatic Play Resource Book Evaluation
Occupation:
Educators: Years in Field:
Parents: Age of Child(ren):
Please answer the following statements by circling the appropriate number.
Strongly
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
The book was well written & objectives met
1
2
3
4
The information presented was relevant and useful
1
2
3
4
The book increased my knowledge of SDP
1
2
3
4
The book is valuable resource to my current
1
2
3
4
I enjoyed reading this book
1
2
3
4
I would recommend this book to colleagues
1
2
3
4
I would recommend this book to parents
1
2
3
4
profession
Suggestions for improving the resource book:
________________________________________________________________________
59
APPENDIX C
Evaluation Results
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
N/A
The book was well written & objectives
met
0
0
18
82
0
The information presented was relevant
and useful
0
0
45
55
0
The book increased my knowledge of SDP
0
9
36
55
0
The book is valuable resource to my
current profession
0
27
0
19
54
I enjoyed reading this book
0
0
27
73
0
I would recommend this book to
colleagues
0
10
27
36
27
I would recommend this book to parents
0
9
27
64
0
Evaluation Question:
*results reflected in percentages
60
APPENDIX D
Scenarios: Resource Book