Revised Extended Bibliography (late)

Revised Extended Bibliography Two (late)

Shell, Ellen Ruppel. "Kids Don't Need Equipment, They Need Opportunity." Smithsonian Magazine, July 1994. Reprinted by permission of the Smithsonian and Ellen Ruppel Shell. Web 6 February 2011. http://www.pps.org/articles/kids_smithsonian/

Ms. Shell addresses an important subject in child development: playtime and the environment that induces playtime: the playground. She contends that structured playground equipment and specially designed features are obsolete and ineffective. Unfortunately, since adults are in charge of building playgrounds, they design with prefabricated structures which are exactly what children do not need. She points out through her research that children need interactive environments, places where they can alter the terrain, get dirty and create their own world. This is where playtime truly becomes developmental for children. The current playground, with its rigid design and static edifices, reveals a place that isn't interesting to a child. The new playground design is more landscaping than construction, with bare patches of dirt, gardens, and natural features that engage a young mind.

This article seems to be advocating strongly for a revision of the design of playgrounds. Not only for creating a more effective and fun place for children's playtime, but an overall idea which requires community involvement and demands social interaction. She says that the current mentality of static and prefabricated features being more or less a one size fits all solution is wrong and a waste of valuable resources by both designers and administrators. As Roger Hart, Director of Children’s environment Research, says,

“Most people who care about child development know nothing about design, and most people who design know nothing about child development.”

A more modern design to a playground incorporates the things children actually find interesting or amusing, basic tools which they can combine themselves in unique ways. Things like sticks, stumps, sand, mud and rocks are the basic tools which comprise the new playground design. Some of the experts she interviewed showed how these components are far better for children to learn social skills and community interaction than premade designs such as swing sets and slides.

As a grown child myself I can still remember how boring some of the playgrounds were. I would not even play on some of the equipment in favor of a tall pine tree nearby, an open field, the sidewalk where I made a jump into the park, or just a simple sandbox with a bucket of water and my imagination. The idea that if we build structures in a certain way and arrange them just so, that children will automatically have fun without wanting to change the environment, is ludicrous. Anyone who has children knows that they have an innate desire to interact and alter their immediate environment, creating a new world or an imaginary one given the right arrangement. An effective design using prefabricated structures, known as "continuous play loops", utilizes this arrangement. The collective, and somewhat creative, organization of structures allows for imagination to take hold and for playtime to occur. Where I differ from their ideas is in the implementation. Requiring adult supervision is a good idea, however in our overprotective society I can only see this leading to a lot of adults censoring the playtime. What adults don't realize is that kids seek out risk as a part of fun, playtime is spontaneous and a little scary. These adults could probably use a little bit of fun themselves.

The following images demonstrate the difference between standard and adventure playgrounds. I challenge you to look at them and use your imagination. Think how you would have played in each of these environments and which of them you would have enjoyed the most.

Do colors make much difference in how enjoyable the playground is? How much fun would you have had in these parks as a kid? How would you react to your kids playing in each? Is there a trend?

The article is thorough and makes an excellent case for why playgrounds need to be designed in this way, however it does not touch on how this should be done. I would like to know if there is a plan to implement them, this article was written over 15 years ago and I have yet to see an adventure playground built. Where is the funding coming from: government, private or a combination? Is it entirely dependent upon the community? Is there a way to update current, ineffective playgrounds to reflect the newer approach? Where are good places for these playgrounds to be made? What are the criteria needed? Would it be possible to use this approach along with a new mentality about education curriculum to integrate playtime with the classroom?