To think playtime should be better managed?

[TheHouseOnBellSt]

Fully prepared to be told if I am BU.

I've often heard people say that school is just as important "for social reasons" as it is for academic. It's often trotted out when someone thinks about home education...."But what about her social development??"

And so forth. But...I think that for many children, the reality is that socialising in school is not all it's cracked up to be.

You have some kids who are excellent socially...you could possibly say that they are a minority...I have one DD who is excellent socially and one who'se had to learn.

Anyway...my friend's son has ASD and is in infants but starting to struggle...she's at a loss because he has no one to one at playtime...she's seen him alone...wandering.

He's maybe the extreme end of things but many kids have periods when they need guidance at playtime.

I'm aware that my friend's son has little support from the midday assistants as of course they're trying to "police" a whole playground...

Here's my point....shouldn't there be more support for all the kids at playtime? Some trained staff.....not necessarily teachers...but people who know something about play and learning...who could be more hands on and helpful when it comes to children learning to get on together?

I know there are kids in year 6 who struggle at my own DDs school...kids in other years who do...kids who can't share...kids who bully...kids who have issues understanding the fine nuances of conversation...the list goes on...and yet they're all thrown out together at breaks and expected to sort themselves out!

AIBU?

Where does the money come from?

It's a nice idea but school budgets are massively stretched as it is.

We also have a team of 'peer mediators,' who are carefully selected pupils who are trained in helping to sort out minor fallouts and squabbles. They can usually help particularly the younger kids with the low-level stuff, and know when to pass an issue on to an adult.

Interestingly, this week, due to the hot weather, football has been suspended at lunchtime on the field to discourage them from running about too much in the heat (some hope!). When I told my class, there was a cheer - from most of the boys! They said that it was quite a relief actually, as it had become so dominating out there, and it meant their footie-loving mates would be freed up to play other things.

camsie Who was that to? If to me, then the Sports Apprentices are on some kind of subsidised scheme, I think. The Behaviour TA was already on the staff, and seconded from class as a necessary 'sacrifice.' The amount of disruption a few children were causing meant something had to be done in a more positive way than simply punishing and suspending.

Tinkly I agree! It's like saying "Here I am! I'm left out!" what child wants that??

Rufus I agree....but play leaders would have some responsibility towards say picking up a child who has fallen...it's common sense...why would that be a problem? They could then hand the child over to a playtime assistant who could take them for first aid. It's no different to the relationship between teachers and teaching assistants....both are trained but in different things.

So, has it always been this way, and we have generations of scarred adults who loathed and detested playtimes? Or do children today just find it harder to get along with each other? And if so, why? Are we perpetuating the problem by micro-managing kids all the time, or should we let them sort it out for themselves?

Clam I would say it's always been this way. The education model hasn't changed much has it...not in terms of playtime anyway.

I wouldn't say this is micro managing....the way we teach children in schools is highly questionable anyway...it can't possibly suit ALL children....having them sit in one place for hours...in one room..then dumping them out to fend for themselves...they need not join in with the arranged games anyway. It wouldn't be compulsory.

thehouse

Not always a problem, but if the child wants you...then they want you

I just think it would be just as good having lots of staff who can do all the jobs

So if I'm in the middle of a game someone can take over the game while I deal with the child, rather than an already upset child being passed to someone else

I just prefer the idea of people being able to move from one position to another

Dining room staff off sick, play leader can help, playleader off sick, dining room staff can take over

I think you have to find a careful balance between making sure kids aren't too micro-managed and that they aren't being made miserable by breaks.

Playtime is an excellent time for the children to develop important skills - playing/making their own games (something a lot of children struggle to do) and in conflict resolution. I'm not suggesting we ignore kids battering lumps out of each other, but they do need to learn how to deal with each other.

When I was in P6 and 7 I was an infant monitor. 8 of us spent breaktimes and lunchtimes with the infants (P1-3). We supervised the playground, played games with the kids who had no-one to play with, dealt with any arguments, picked the fallers up and passed things on to the janitor if it was urgent or the teachers at the end of break. We were carefully selected, none of us minded 'missing' breaks because we actually really enjoyed it. Of the 8 of us I know that at least 5 ended up working in childcare or education. It really worked.

The last school I worked in had to scrap their scheme because there were very few older children who could reliably do it and when it did work several of the infant parents complained very loudly because they wanted their children 'properly supervised' (which was amusing in many ways because they went from being supervised by 2 adults and 5 older children to just the 2 adults!).

Sorry thehouse

Basing it on my job rather then your idea if you see what I mean

So our set up is that there is a dedicated first aider (everyone takes it in turns) in effect your example has me taking the child from the play leader and walking it 100 yards to the first aider

In our school that would make no sense, but obviously it's in your ideal school playground scenario so my way makes no sense

I know quite a few kids who are at breakfast club in the morning with scheduled activities. Then it's time for school. After school they do organised activities or are at after school club. By the time they get home, it's homework, food and bed.

They don't need their playtimes micro managed as well. They need a chance to be kids. That's how they learn about relationships with their peers - not by some adults telling them what to do all the time.

This is one of the reasons we're planning to HE our DC. DS1 is as pre-school & will just wander aimlessly unless an adult directs him towards an activity. I have to get him settled reading a book when I drop him off but I've got no idea how much he really joins in during the day. I have noticed that when it's just him & one or 2 other children then he can play a little with them but once there's 3+ others then he gets a bit overwhelmed & won't engage with them.

The other day we were at a friend's house & he went from doing his own thing to bouncing happily on the trampoline with 2 other children. The only thing that changed was 2 children went home. I want to laugh when people suggest to me that HE will be detrimental to his social development - he'd have no social life & just wander around feeling lonely if he was thrust into a playground with hundreds of other children. He's like me in that respect. At least with HE I can be organising playdates where he'll feel able to actually interact with other children!

Meant to say... You, I don't micromanage his playtime by any stretch of the imagination but he does need to be in a situation where he feels confident enough to interact with others. That situation isn't being left entirely to his own devices in a playground full of other children. Not all children will learn appropriate social interaction by the sink-or-swim method currently practised in most schools. I'm 28 & still learning how to have friends. It's taken me until the last couple of years to figure out how to start friendships, I'm still working on how to develop them much beyond the small-talk phase.

It's quite normal for children of that age and a bit older to need a bit of help regarding making friends and playing. I'm not saying don't intervene ever. We certainly look out for the reception children when they start, especially through the first term and help them to think of games to play. And we'll look out for any older children if we think they are struggling.

But everything doesn't need to be a planned activity.

Rufus I am certain that children who've fallen can walk 100 yards and regularly do so!

You no...as I said in my OP not all the children would need to or want to join in with the play leaders but they would be there for those who do want to.

I think having an extra body who organises some playground games for dc who want to join in would be good - and it could be parents - I work 5mins away from ds's school that he starts in September and would happily do one or two lunchtimes a month for free to free up a ta or teacher to do this.

I worked at one school where I was asked to run special clubs at playtime, I'd have about 12 children from each year group, who often struggled with normal playtimes, and would have them doing team games in a separate space. It worked really well, and other children would often ask if they could join. I'd include a few kids who were good mixers to model co-operative behaviour.

But it was a smallish school ( 2 form entry), with lots of playground space and everyone on the same timetable, so not staggered playtimes/lunchtimes.It wouldn't be feasible everywhere, and I did it for 2 year groups, twice a week each. The other playtimes they were left to get on with it, and there was no other provision for other year groups.

Lots of schools struggle to fit in the legally required playtimes and PE sessions as it is, when space is at a premium.

But any kind of organised activity is good, it just needs a few adults to initiate things like skippping, and encourage the shy ones to join in, and to make sure the equipment is always available.

But everything doesn't need to be a planned activity.

They also don't need to be out with the whole of the rest of the school.

They don't need to be left largely unsupervised for long periods.

They don't need a free rein to bully or be bullied.

They don't need their activities to be limited by being on an overpopulated square of tarmac.

They don't need to be in an overwhelming sensory environment that lots of children find intimidating and exhausting.

Many children do need to be supervised by the skilled professionals who are employed to oversee their activities during the rest of the day but those needs are not being met.

Plenty of reception teachers are managing these times of the day better now. Some of them are getting grief from other teachers because supervising their own class properly every break time means they are not available to do the regular playground duty once a week. Clearly that's more important than the 4 and 5 year olds feeling safe

If reception class staff can get it right, other staff can too. It just takes a willingness to change, although I can see, just on this thread, that the resistance to reflection on and review of these practices will probably be a long time coming.

The Big Buddy system used in many schools in Australia, is one way to help young children who find themselves feeling lost and on their own during breaks. The older children gain leadership skills, friendships and the positive results of being in a small way responsible for a younger child. Many schools allocate one lesson a week where the Big Buddies (most schools have their own name not particularly Big Buddy) sit in class with their Little Buddies and do activities together.

In many schools the children start as Big Buddies in Grade four or five so they are with same younger child for at least two years until they themselves leave that school.

The Big Buddy system used in many schools in Australia, is one way to help young children who find themselves feeling lost and on their own during breaks.

It sounds like a good system in so far as buddy systems go but the children shouldn't be in an environment where it is necessary to organise this. There are benefits to building relationships between year groups but the main one shouldn't be helping children who are floundering in busy playgrounds without sufficient support from qualified adults.

Haven't RTwholeFT, sorry, but one of the posts near the beginning jumped out at me as similar to the primary my youngest goes to:

The year 5 & 6 children have lots of different responsibility options that they sign up for at the start of each term - one of these is a 'play leader' style role, where they go to the infants playground and 'help them play'.
What they actually do is get the younger kids playing tig / various ball games & beanbag games / skipping etc etc. They make sure that no-one is left on the buddy bench and that no-one looks left out.

One of the huge strengths of the school is their inclusivity, and how quickly kids become part of the school socially (it is about 70% military kids so they have a lot of experience within the school of managing integration of new children and children who may have lost their previous friendship groups through postings).

I'm sure that sort of thing has been mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but I just wanted to suggest to the OP that she could suggest a similar thing for her school.

thehouse

I don't really understand the problem with my posts

I've said repeatedly that your idea is excellent, I have apologised for using the example of my school when obviously we are supposed to be discussing your ideas

At no point have I said that all children would need walking to the first aider, but a fair few do. Most will walk with their friends and you can't see a mark on them. Some are very distressed and literally need their hand holding

In my school it wouldn't work but in a school with the extra staff and different set up obviously it would

I do agree up to a point. There could be some organised games of the more old fashioned type and children needn't joint in if they didn't want to. But it would solve the problem of one child lurking around with nobody to play with because they'd join in the game. And it could be run by volunteers.

Rufus I never said there was any problem with your posts. You seem to throw up many ideas about why this idea would cause issues...I simply give answers as to how those issues could be fixed.