Running head: OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS

The Role of Open-Ended Materials in Early Childhood Classrooms

Hannah Marie Smith

South Dakota State University

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 2

Abstract

The purpose of the literature review is to investigate ways in which the implementation

and use of open-ended materials and loose items within the early childhood education setting can

supplement traditional classroom routines and play-based activities. While play cannot be

singularly defined or confined to a specific context, the universal act of play offers opportunities

for essential social, cognitive, physical, and emotional development. This study aims to research

how open-ended materials can further support these developmental opportunities through the

exploration of three critical research questions: 1.) How might open-ended materials support play

in the early childhood environment? 2.) How do these open-ended objects change the levels of

engagement that children have in that specific area? 3.) How might open-ended materials

encourage emerging engineering behaviors? Through extensive literary research and a critical

appraisal of four relevant studies, each of these critical research questions is addressed in order to

gain a better understanding of the potential uses and benefits of incorporating open-ended

materials and loose items in the early childhood education setting.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 3

Introduction

The innate curiosity and natural propensity for play is a unifying characteristic of

childhood across all cultures, nationalities, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Children’s play and

interactions within the learning environment serve a critical purpose in the early childhood

classroom, ranging from child development in a variety of developmental domains to informing

the curriculum that is taught in these play-based environments. Despite ongoing research and

investigations of the multidimensional act of play, it is generally accepted throughout the field of

education that a singular definition of play is not necessary nor sufficient (Pellegrini & Smith,

1998). In other words, the significance and purpose of play is entirely dependent on the child or

children involved in the act of play and the background each play participant or observer applies

to the context.

While specific definitions and functions of this universal activity vary from context to

context, the concept of play as a vehicle for learning and development during childhood remains

a constant focus in early childhood education settings because of its systematic relationship to a

variety of developmental domains including social, cognitive, and language domains (Lifter,

Foster-Sanda, Arzamarski, Briesch, & McClure, 2011). Psychologist Lev Vygotsky stated in his

1978 publication that play “contains all developmental tendencies in a condensed form and is

itself a major source of development” (p. 102). Additionally, the act of play allows children the

contextual flexibility necessary to explore real-life situations, problems, and solutions through

pretend or make-believe play (Ramani, 2012). This exploration is often extended through the use

of materials present in the play setting as children transform objects into another in order to carry

out the play scenario. For example, a simple block is imaginarily transformed into a telephone or

remote in order to act out and explore a familiar scenario. Children learn and gain the most
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 4

understanding of their environment when they are actively manipulating objects and interacting

with others, such as peers, teachers, parents, etc. (Biddle, Garcia-Nevarez, Roundtree Henderson,

& Valero-Kerrick, 2013). Psychologist Jean Piaget proposed the idea that children construct their

understanding and knowledge of the world around them through their playful interactions with

these materials and described the act of play as a “happy display of known actions” (Piaget,

1962, p. 93). Play, according to this specific definition, is enjoyable and serves as an opportunity

for children to display and build upon prior experiences or familiar scenarios.

It is important to define specific play functions and behaviors as they will be referred to

in studies used in the literature review. With more comprehensive and thorough explanations and

investigations, clearer insights can be gleaned from the material gathered and researched

throughout the study. Although play can be seen as a general term and may be applied to many

different applications of childhood behavior, play functions must be further described and

understood in order to make conclusions based on which types of play have more success than

others when using the scope of beneficial learning and development. While this aspect of play is

a complex system and cannot be simplified into a singular definition, there are behaviors and

signifiers which are specific to certain types of play. For example, Sara Smilansky proposed a

model of five basic forms of play. This model includes:

 Functional play, which is a type of play in which children learn about the nature

of their surroundings. Examples of this type of play include filling, stacking,

playing with water, dumping, and more.

 Constructive play, where children work to make something and/or to solve a

problem. An example of this type of play includes combining pieces or materials,

such as blocks.
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 5

 Dramatic play, which entails the act of pretending. Children might pretend to be

someone or something else, although this type of play does not require social

interaction with their peers or other children.

 Sociodramatic play, which is a form of dramatic play. More than one child is

involved in this type of play, and children enact real-life, familiar scenarios

surrounding a specific theme.

 Games with rules, which involves cooperative play and often features winners and

losers. These games typically entail child-controlled rules and become more

evident when children move from early childhood to middle childhood (Biddle et

al., 2013).

Furthermore, empirical research and various developmental theories have confirmed that

children’s use of and interactions with materials within the learning environment “constitute a

universal part of development and learning” as children devote a significant amount of their

attention to the process and product(s) of these interactions (Brophy & Evangelou, 2007). These

experiences can be supported through the use of open-ended materials (also referred to as “loose

parts”), which are materials without a specific set or directions or “correct” use. Open-ended

materials can be used singularly or in combination with other materials, and they allow children

to make specific choices regarding their expression, creativity, and independence in the context

of their play (Shrier, 2016). With the introduction of choice, children can begin to understand the

importance and presence of interactive play with other children, how specific materials can be

combined in a myriad of different ways, and the overall benefits of being the sometimes-sole

contributor to a play environment or the outcomes of such. Most importantly, open-ended

materials and their usage are completely determined by the child rather than the manufacturer or
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 6

other adults, meaning that it is the child’s prerogative as to how the materials are moved,

combined, structured, redesigned, deconstructed, or put back together (Neill, 2013). Drew and

Rankin (2004) provided seven guiding principles for utilizing loose parts in early childhood

settings: 1.) Children’s spontaneous, creative self-expression increases their sense of competence

and well-being in childhood and adulthood. 2.) Children extend and deepen their understandings

through multiple, hands-on experiences with diverse materials. 3.) Children’s play with peers

supports learning and a growing sense of competence. 4.) Children can learn literacy, science,

and mathematics joyfully through active play with diverse, open-ended materials. 5.) Children

learn best in open-ended explorations when teachers help them make connections. 6.) Teachers

are nourished by observing children’s joy and learning. 7.) Ongoing self-reflection among

teachers in community is needed to support these practices. However, despite the greater levels

of creativity and inventiveness expressed by students when using these loose parts (Neill, 2013),

the field of education has experienced a lack of research related to the implementation and use of

loose parts in early childhood classrooms (Maxwell, Mitchell, & Evans, 2008). In order to fully

understand how to encourage and support play in early childhood settings, it is essential to

consider how the use of these materials build upon and impact the play environment. While

materials are an ever-present aspect of the play environment, the interchangeability and the

control held by the child while playing with the materials allows for an environment completely

dependent upon the decision of the child as opposed to an environment with fixed items.

My personal background in the field of Early Childhood Education (ECE) began in 2012

as a classroom teaching assistant in a local preschool program. Since then, I have served in a

variety of classroom teaching and pre-service teaching roles in schools and early childhood care

centers. The students, families, and faculty I have interacted with hail from diverse racial, ethnic,
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 7

linguistic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. The presence of these diverse backgrounds allows a

deeper and more comprehensive understanding of how an upbringing can affect and influence

various aspects of learning and development. My undergraduate educational background is in

Early Childhood Education with certification to serve as a classroom teacher for ages birth-8th

grade. South Dakota State University has provided me with an exceptional education rooted in

experiential learning, relationships, active learning, and constructivism, and it is from this

perspective that I approach my research and role as a future educator.

I have completed practicum hours in a variety of settings, including the Fishback Center

for Early Childhood Education located on the university campus. During this time in the

Fishback Center, I served as a teaching assistant in a toddler classroom for a semester and later as

a full-time student teacher in a 4- and 5-year-old classroom for a semester. I also participated in a

South Dakota State University course taught by the Director of the Fishback Center, Dr. Kay

Cutler. In ECE 360: Play & Inquiry, my peers and I investigated the benefits of using inquiry-

based learning strategies in the early childhood classroom, the relationship between play and

learning during childhood, and the use of open-ended materials through Materials Workshops.

Additionally, we engaged in critical reflection as to how these open-ended materials support

developmental theory and how a child’s experience using a specific material might be affected in

relation to future learning opportunities and learning development. Prior to the course, I was

familiar with various biological, psychological, and emotional child development milestones and

various theories of development and learning in early childhood. However, the concept of play

and the learning environment as an integral piece of the early childhood classroom and how it

can greatly affect a child’s future ability to learn and development educationally was both new

and exciting to explore throughout my further studies and courses.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 8

The study of open-ended materials and the learning environment appealed to me during

this course and throughout my student teaching experience in a Reggio Emilia-inspired setting as

I began to see firsthand how the students learned through play and interactions with their peers

and objects in the learning environment. A significant assignment I completed during Dr. Cutler’s

course was a child descriptive review focused on a specific early childhood student at the

Fishback Center. I observed a 32-month-old child whom I will refer to as “Jon” over the course

of 4 weeks in order to study how the child interacted with his peers and the classroom

environment and how these interactions were influenced by the child’s physical, emotional, and

cognitive characteristics. Through the use of observation, anecdotal records, work samples, and

descriptive narratives, I studied Jon’s physical presence, gestures, disposition, temperament,

connections with other people, interests, preferences, as well as modes of thinking and learning. I

was intrigued by how the physical environment and the materials present impacted Jon’s

behaviors and interactions. For example, Jon would become visibly upset when his mother

would leave the classroom at drop-off in the morning. After a few drop-off scenarios, Jon’s

teachers quickly realized that Jon was soothed and intrigued by a ramp and set of colorful

wooden balls. In order to reduce Jon’s feelings of anxiety, sadness, frustration, etc., his teachers

used open-ended materials such as the ramp, balls, wooden beads, and magnetic connectors to

support Jon’s engagement and feelings of calmness in the classroom. This scenario and similar

experiences throughout my semester of student-teaching guided me to continue to ask questions

regarding open-ended materials in play-based environments. How do open-ended parts support

students’ play? How do these open-ended materials create changes in the play environment? Do

loose parts support or encourage specific behaviors such as engineering behaviors?

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 9

Critical Research Question.

The purpose of this literature review is to further investigate the role of open-ended

materials in the early childhood setting and their influence on students’ behaviors and

interactions. For the purpose of this review, open-ended materials or loose parts are defined as

materials without a specific set of directions or correct use, materials in which usage is

completely determined by the child, and materials which can be used singularly or in

combination with other materials (Shrier, 2016 and Neill, 2013). The guiding questions of this

literature review are: 1.) How might open-ended materials support play in the early childhood

environment? 2.) How do these open-ended objects change the levels of engagement that

children have in that specific environment? 3.) How might open-ended materials encourage

emerging engineering behaviors?

Review of Related Literature

Martinez.

The researcher presented two main objectives for this study: to explore which types of

play children engaged in when interacting with open-ended materials and to further investigate

the strategies teachers use in order to support classroom play with open-ended materials. A

systematic review of related literature was completed by the researcher, guided by the previously

mentioned research questions. 45 studies and related sources were selected, with no limitations

on date of publication, using specific keywords and topics, including: “defining play, the play

scale, imaginative play and learning, early educator approaches to play, the cognitive preschool

and the playful preschool, [and] quality in early childhood education” (Martinez, 2016).

The qualitative action research study investigated by the researcher involved 23 children

enrolled in a full-day preschool classroom in a medium-sized public K-12 school district in

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 10

Northern California. Of the 23 students, ranging in age from three years to five years old, 21 of

the children qualified for free or reduced meals. Classroom staff involved in the research study

comprised of two fully-certified Child Development Teachers (including the researcher), two

Child Development Assistants, as well as a Substitute Child Development Assistant. Four (2

boys and 2 girls) of the 23 children enrolled in the classroom were selected for a convenience

sample based on contracted hours allowing for attendance in both the morning free-play period

and the afternoon free-play period. In-class observations alternated between morning and

afternoon free-play periods over an 8-week timespan where students had free choice in which all

classroom “interest areas” were available for children to choose from. These areas included play

environments specifically dedicated to manipulatives, music and movement, dramatic play, block

play, computer activity, library and reading activities, art, science activities, sand and water, a

quiet area, and a house-like setting called “Kimochis House.” Materials were deliberately

selected and placed in appropriate areas. These materials ranged from puzzles, magnetic building

tiles, and lacing beads to child-sized instruments, dancing scarves, and baby dolls. Overall, the

researcher listed 60 different types of materials available for students to use in the various open-

ended play areas. Staff members were interviewed before the start of the study in order to

identify current and potential strategies to support play in the preschool classroom. While each

staff member presented varying definitions of play, a list regarding the roles of play in preschool

classrooms was generated. This list included socio-emotional skills, social interaction,

imagination, learning, verbal communication, and discrete skills (Martinez, 2016).

Observations recorded during the study concluded that children’s play with open-ended

materials in the classroom yielded three categories of play: solitary/constructive play,

associative/constructive play, and associative/dramatic play. Sociologist Mildred Parten, as cited

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 11

in Rubin (1977), defined six sequential categories of social participation exhibited by children

during play which Martinez (2016) used to classify children’s play with open-ended materials.

Solitary play refers to play behaviors in which the student(s) observes their peers participating in

an activity but does not participate themselves, whereas associative play refers to play in which

the student(s) engages in play with their peers and shares materials (Rubin 1977). Similarly,

cooperative play is an additional type of social play in which children play in groups similar to

associate play, but they also demonstrate a division of labor within a group project or group-

attained goal. However, this type of play typically begins to take place around 4.5 years of age,

which may have influenced its lack of presence in this study’s results (Biddle et al., 2013).

Martinez also utilizes play categorizations such as “constructive play,” which is the manipulation

of objects or tools to construct something, and “dramatic play,” which refers to “the substitution

of an imaginary situation” in order to fulfill the personal wishes or play needs of the child(ren)

involved in the play scenario (Rubin, 1997). According to Martinez (2016), the children’s play

often transitioned from associative/constructive play to associative/dramatic play with

encouragement from teacher communication, specifically interrogative questioning. During free-

play interactions, students communicated with one another, shared ideas, and negotiated the

meaning of materials. Study results found that most staff members in the study-specific

classroom did not use communication between staff and students as a supportive strategy, and the

most frequently observed supportive strategy was visual monitoring by classroom staff from

either a standing or sitting position. The most significant finding of the study concluded that

male students were most frequently observed playing with the open-ended materials at both the

activity tables and the open-space block area, while female students were observed primarily

utilizing the open-ended materials at activity tables.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 12

Brophy & Evangelou

Through a series of naturalistic observations, researchers aimed to explore the

relationship between the free play activity of children and engineering thinking. The study

specifically targeted young children’s learning progression of engineering thinking, strategies

and methods to expand this thinking, and to foster children’s interest in engineering. Researchers

were motivated to conduct research in the area of informal play, learning, and development

through these foundational research questions: 1.) Why do children desire to construct with

blocks and what do they build? 2.) How do students’ natural powers of observation and kinetics

help to build their intuitions of physical properties which govern the world? 3.) What is the

process behind the methods in which children construct with blocks? In addition, researchers

posed a separate research question pertaining to the research methods used in the field—how can

engineering thinking be made visible to researchers and teachers in appropriate ways?

In order to accurately investigate the precursors to engineering thinking in early

childhood, researchers established the relationship between play and engineering thinking. Using

previous research on children’s free play, researchers defined play through four categorizations

of successive stages of play and activity: functional play, constructive play, dramatic play, and

games with rules. Functional play refers to play in which children exhibit “simple, repetitive

muscle movements with or without objects,” whereas games with rules refers to play in which

participants accept prearranged rules and adjust to the rules in order to successfully participate in

the play scenario (Rubin, Watson, & Jambor, 1978). Researchers conjectured that each of these

stages exists in relation to specific activities related to engineering thinking, and that complex

engineering tasks require combinations of each of these tasks. In addition, researchers

established a definition of play as it pertains to child development and engineering thinking,

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 13

stating that play, as a developmental process which naturally occurs, “is ‘used’ to scaffold a

learning space through which developmentally, culturally, and personally appropriate curricula

can be negotiated” (Brophy & Evangelou, 2007).

Using a variety of open-ended, semi-structured, and structured materials, researchers

planned to explore a broader image of engineering thinking in order to align specific activities

and theories of learning to this thinking. Among these materials were blocks, puzzles, Lego™

blocks, water tables, and snap circuits. Researchers then began the on-going, naturalistic study in

a child care facility serving students ranging from 2 to 5 years of age on a full-day basis. Each

classroom consisted of a maximum of 20 students, a Head Teacher, an Assistant Teacher, a

morning Teacher’s Aid, and an afternoon Teacher’s Aid. Research methods included naturalistic

observations, field notes, and video recordings of students, and took place on a daily basis within

a 2-hour time block in the morning and in the afternoon.

In the study results, researchers shared specific conversations between students,

behaviors exhibited by individual and groups of students, as well as images of structures built by

the students. Using these pieces of evidence, researchers highlighted where students showcased

engineering behaviors such as strong internal models of structural concepts, understanding of the

usefulness of structures (such as homes), and “the ability to construct beyond a simple visual

representation of an imaginary world to an actual structure” (Brophy et al., 2017). The students’

employment of various physical properties and details from their own worlds allowed for the

invention of models and structures of an increasingly complex and interesting design.

Researchers also discussed the developmental precursors which make these behaviors possible,

stating that children develop their own understanding of material properties and the laws of

physics which govern their world through their experiences. This ability to notice these
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 14

properties and the associated possibilities and constraints was related back to discoveries in child

development by Jean Piaget, who found that infants can distinguish between the physical

“possible” and “impossible” as early as 4 ½ months of age. This is used by researchers to

conclude that preschool-aged children are continuing to expand the developmental and

experiential precursors necessary to notice events in their own world that they can later use when

creating imaginary and concrete worlds of their own (Brophy et al., 2017)

Gold

This study aimed to explore existing gender differences in the social behaviors, physical

behaviors, and “engineering thinking play” behaviors of preschoolers in a variety of play

environments. While “engineering thinking play” is a relatively new construct within the field of

early childhood education, the researcher utilized a checklist created by Bairaktarova of

engineering thinking behaviors which are frequently observed during preschoolers’ play:

communicating goals, generating design ideas, construction, problem-solving and replication,

expressing creative or innovative ideas, solution-testing and evaluating design, explaining how

things are built or work, following patterns and prototypes, and using logical and mathematical

thinking and technical vocabulary (Gold, 2014, p. 8). The researcher conducted the study across

three different play environments that preschool students typically interact with on a regular

basis. These environments included the traditional playground, the dramatic play area, and, most

significant to this literature review, an environment in which children played with “large,

manipulable, loose parts” (Gold, 2014). The researcher first performed a review of topic-relevant

literature, covering background topics such as the importance of play, theories of differences in

play behaviors, engineering play, loose parts and their relation to block play, gender differences
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 15

in preschool play, and more. Gold’s (2014) study was guided by the following research

questions:

Question 1. Are there mean differences in boys’ and girls’ rates of physical, social, and

engineering thinking play behaviors per hour?

Question 2. Are there mean differences in preschoolers’ rates of physical, social, and

engineering thinking play behaviors per hour within the three play settings: the

traditional playground, the dramatic play area, and in settings with large, manipulable,

loose parts?

Question 3. Are there any interactions between preschoolers’ gender and play

environment in their rates of physical, social, and engineering play behaviors per hour?

Using these guiding research questions, the research team began collecting observational

data from participants. The study spanned 3 ½ months and included sixty-eight preschool

students (ages ranging from 3 to 5 years of age) from two classrooms in a local Head Start center

as well as from two classrooms in the Miller Child Development Laboratory School at Purdue

University. The student sample was comprised of children of Caucasian, African-American,

Asian and Latino ethnicities, as well as a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds. Each preschool

classroom was visited on a regular, weekly basis by two researchers who focused their attention

on one child at a time in a single play setting. By the end of the observational period, each

student had been observed in each of the three play settings. Research methods included 20-

second observation intervals, field notes, and the completion of a checklist (included in

Appendix A.) including 9 early engineering thinking play behaviors, 21 social behaviors, and 30

physical behaviors. These observation intervals were repeated by researchers for as long as the

child was engaged in play in a specific play setting, and the target number of minutes of
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 16

observation in order for the student to be included in the sample was 15 minutes. Each child

received a summary score for each observed social behavior, physical behavior, and early

engineering thinking behavior, which were then calculated to conclude an average number of

behaviors that occurred each hour.

The researcher specifically used the observations and measurements of

engineering thinking play as “an index of the types of behaviors in which preschoolers are

engaging that parallel thought-processes and behaviors associated with the engineering process

(Gold, 2014). The study results did not indicate any gender differences in the frequency of early

engineering thinking play occurrences. The study result which most significantly pertains to this

literature review is the finding that children’s play with large, loose parts that children can

manipulate was associated with a frequency of engineering thinking play that was three times

greater than in the traditional outdoor playground setting. Observed play with these large loose

parts were associated with higher levels of gross motor and fine motor physical activity as well

as greater occurrences of positive social play behaviors. The researcher utilized Gallahue and

Ozmun’s descriptions of fine and gross motor activities in young children in order to categorize

each of these activities and behaviors. For example, of the 30 potential gross and fine motor

movements, researchers observed gross motor behaviors such as running, jumping, walking, and

kicking. Fine motor behaviors included manipulating small objects, drawing, painting, and

writing. Researchers also categorized social play behaviors into two main categories: positive

and negative play. The positive social play category included 11 positive behaviors such as

taking turns, cooperating, and sharing, while the negative social play category included 10

negative behaviors including hitting, shoving, knocking over, throwing objects, or displaying

interpersonal aggression. Using these observations, the researcher concluded that this play with
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 17

loose parts and other materials which students could manipulate could potentially benefit

children’s physical, social, and cognitive development in multiple domains.

Maxwell, Mitchell, & Evans

In this study, researchers aimed to investigate two objectives. In order to do so,

the study was divided into two separate stages based on these research questions: 1.) In which

ways does playground equipment contribute to preschool students’ dramatic and constructive

play behaviors? 2.) In which ways does the addition of loose parts to a playground contribute to

preschool students’ dramatic and constructive play behaviors? This literature review will

specifically focus on Study II conducted by the researchers. Preliminary research of relevant

studies and background information regarding types of play and play settings, behavior

descriptions of play and social interaction, as well as play materials and equipment was

conducted by the researchers. From this preliminary literary research, researchers concluded that

previous studies on loose parts in preschool environments had been limited to indoor

environments and that no significant work had been conducted in an outdoor preschool

environment.

Results from Study I identified several specific features of outdoor playground

equipment which are “consistently associated with higher order play behaviors” (Maxwell,

Mitchell, & Evans, 2008). Areas which were enclosed, could fit two to three children, and had

multiple points of entry and exit were associated with higher amounts of dramatic play. Dramatic

play was also highly associated with these areas when props and equipment (such as loose parts)

were present for students to utilize. Study II, using these results, focused on the types of play

present in relation to these outdoor play environment attributes, specifically the installation of

loose parts. Researchers wanted to study whether providing these loose parts for children to use
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 18

will encourage the students to create their own spaces and enclosures in order to support

dramatic play. Examples of spaces which were associated with higher rates of dramatic play in

Study I included “house-type places,” “places with specific boundaries” or spaces such as “nodes

or platforms” (Maxwell et al., 2008). The study sample consisted of 32 children (16 children

from two classrooms in the university-based laboratory day care program at Cornell University)

between the ages of 48 months and 60 months (M=54 months). The classrooms involved in the

study contained an equal number of boys and girls. Researchers used a repeated measures design

to observe the students on the playground during outdoor free play in three phases over a period

of seven weeks from March to May: a pre-treatment phase, treatment phase, and post-treatment

phase. The seven-week time frame was chosen so as to minimize any effects of maturation and to

ensure that changes observed by researchers could be accredited to the installation of the loose

parts. The playground at the location of the study was divided into four areas based on the

physical attributes and amount of use of the spaces (included in Appendix B). After consideration

of the visibility, scale, and amount of use by students of the four areas, researchers identified the

east and west areas of the playground as suitable for use in the study as these areas were

proportionately less-used by the children. Researchers added the following loose parts to the

intervention areas:

 15 large Styrofoam blocks (24” x 12” x 8”)

 3 pieces of fabric (5’ x 8’)

 5 tires

 5 tree stumps

 PVC pipes

 50 Little Tykes© plastic blocks (12” x 4” x 3”)

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 19

Students were observed in a random order for a period of three minutes, and each child was

observed approximately 36 times per week. Researchers gathered qualitative and quantitative

data as they studied the type of play behavior, type of social interaction, location, and students’

use of props on the playground. Researchers conducted observations in pairs in each space for 15

minutes at a distance of ten feet away from the play space. Conversations, photographs, and

sketches were recorded in field notes and quickly transferred to a computer documentation

system that same day.

Researchers concluded the study after 7-week period with findings which were supportive of

their first hypothesis: “More constructive play will occur when children are provided with

supportive loose parts” (Maxwell et al., 2008). Students engaged in higher rates of constructive

play in areas where loose materials were provided than in the spaces where these materials were

not present. The loose part props were used for space-making in the eastern and western

intervention areas at a rate of 51% as play increased in these areas. The students spent 7.1% of

their outdoor free play time in the east and west intervention areas during the treatment phase

compared to 1.5% in the pre-treatment phase and 0.8% in the post-treatment phase. Constructive

play occurred in the western space as students used the loose materials to construct spaces for

dramatic play including houses, a table, a kitchen, beds, cars, and a living room. In the eastern

space, the children participated in constructive play by building structures such as a space ship, a

boat, a train, and a tower. After analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data, researchers

were able to conclude that “dramatic and constructive play occurred simultaneously” in Study II.

“Children constructed spaces such as ‘houses’ and ‘forts’ with the loose parts and then carried

out various play themes in these constructed spaces” (Maxwell et al., 2008). Overall, researchers

confirmed that constructive behavior increased in areas where loose materials were added to the
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 20

traditional playground setting, and that children used these materials to construct spaces for

dramatic play activities. The construction of these spaces “not only encouraged dramatic play but

also communication and negotiation skills” (Maxwell et al., 2008).

Discussion

Defining Play in Relation to Open-Ended Materials

Each of the four studies analyzed for this literature review utilized specific definitions of

various types of play in order to categorize the behaviors and interactions of the students with

their peers and the learning environment. For example, researchers used classifications such as

constructive play, associative play, solitary play, functional play, and dramatic play. For the

purpose of utilizing a common framework on which to base the concept of play, this

investigation’s definition of play is based on the five essentials of meaningful play as defined by

the National Association for the Education of Young Children. Using these five essential

components of play, we can begin to categorize the various behaviors associated with each type

of play and their relation to developmental and play theories. According to Nell and Drew (n.d.),

essential elements of play include:

 Children make their own decisions

 Children are intrinsically motivated

 Children become immersed in the moment

 Play is spontaneous, not scripted

 Play is enjoyable

Psychologist Jean Piaget has significantly contributed to and changed the study of early

childhood education as the first psychologist to challenge the previously held belief that children

are simply less competent thinkers in comparison to adults. Piaget introduced the theory of
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 21

cognitive development and demonstrated that young children think in significantly different

ways than do adults (McLeod, 2018). This theory involved concepts new to the field of early

childhood education, including the concepts of schemas, the adaptation processes, and the stages

of cognitive development. Each of these concepts further supported the belief that children

naturally construct their own knowledge through their active experiences and interactions with

their environment (Piaget, 1999). For example, the adaptation processes within Piaget’s theory of

cognitive development involved the concepts of assimilation and accommodation. According to

Piaget, assimilation occurs when new information from a child’s experiences is processed and

organized based on that child’s existing understanding of their world. In contrast,

accommodation occurs when new information cannot be processed and/or organized using the

child’s existing understanding of the world, so the child’s understanding must be adjusted or

changed in order to deal with new information (such as a new object, situation, etc.) (Piaget,

1999). This theory of cognitive development has significantly influenced modern research of

play behaviors and the design of play environments. Researchers and educators alike widely

accept that play supports the development of new skills throughout children’s exploration of the

world around them. Piaget’s study of cognitive development can be better applied and

understood by investigating his conclusions as they related to open-ended play. Open-ended play

fosters and allows for an environment in which children can more accurately and precisely hone

their development in both cognitive and behavior aspects.

Similar to Piaget’s research findings which concluded that children create mental models

of the world around them through biological maturation and interaction with their environment

(McLeod, 2018), open-ended play is a type of play in which children explore various interaction

and play opportunities while simultaneously developing important cognitive skills (De Valk,
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 22

Bekker, & Eggen, 2015 and Shrier, 2016). The rapid brain development which children

experience during early childhood impacts emotional, cognitive, social, and physical

performances for the rest of the child’s life, and open-ended play supports this development by

allowing children to make choices, express their creativity, and supporting independence (Shrier,

2016). Children are intrinsically motivated to play, and open-ended play seeks to further support

this motivation by designing environments and experiences in which children have control over

the rules, goals, and interpretations of the play. This allows children to utilize their imagination

in a variety of ways, which makes play more satisfying for a longer period of time as children

explore different opportunities to interact, come up with new rules or goals, and invite other

children to join in the play experience (De Valk, Bekker, & Eggen, 2015). This relates to Piaget’s

suggestion that children develop in four stages of cognitive development: a sensorimotor stage

(birth through 18-24 months of age), a preoperational stage (18-24 months through 7 years of

age), a concrete operational stage (7 through 12 years of age), and a formal operational stage

(adolescence through adulthood) (Shroff, 2017). While each stage is significant in the intellectual

development of children from infancy to adulthood, the preoperational stage is especially

significant in regard to open-ended play. During this preoperational stage, young children are

beginning to be develop the skill of thinking about objects and experiences symbolically as they

develop imagination, memory, and the ability to engage in make-believe play (Shroff, 2017). For

example, a child might use a broom as a pretend horse during a make-believe play scenario with

peers or during solitary play in order to act out familiar experiences such as riding a horse or

being on a farm. This was showcased in the study conducted by Martinez as students practiced

symbolic thinking by “communicating together, sharing ideas, and negotiating meaning of

materials” (2016). Open-ended play and the freedom of choice and expression it provides acts as
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 23

an invaluable tool in the field of early childhood education as children continue to develop and

grow in these essential skills. Very clearly, when a choice is presented to children as opposed to

one material, cognitive and creative thinking can much more easily be facilitated and observed.

With multiple materials to choose from and a loosely-defined purpose for each material, children

can create their play environment and the scenarios included with a very real sense of inspiration

and intuition.

While it has been established that play cannot be singularly defined or confined to a

specific definition due to its complexity and ambiguity (Pellegrini & Smith, 1998 and Eberle,

2014), it is necessary to define specific types of play and developmental theories in order to

analyze the first critical research question of the literature review: How might open-ended

materials support play in the early childhood environment? In Martinez (2016), open-ended

materials, specifically in the manipulatives area, supported students as they freely transitioned

between solitary play and associative play. The loose items and open-ended materials provided in

the manipulative area encouraged symbolic thinking, which in turn allowed students to transition

from constructive play, where students worked together to create something or to solve an

existing problem, to dramatic play in which students pretended to be someone or something else.

In Brophy & Evangelou (2007), the open-ended materials specifically supported students’

constructive and dramatic play, as well as students’ associative and cooperative play worked

together to create increasingly advanced structures and imaginary places such as “Nick’s Domino

House” or “Annie’s Hotel” With the use of open-ended materials, specifically wooden blocks,

students continued to develop and showcase the developmental precursors necessary to not only

create complex and interesting models and structures, but to also recognize the physical

properties and associated possibilities or constraints. In addition, the study conducted by Gold
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 24

(2014) showcased various ways in which the implementation of open-ended materials in an early

childhood setting supported multiple play behaviors—engineering thinking play, gross and fine

motor play, and positive social play behaviors. The researcher specifically reported that students’

play with open-ended materials resulted in a frequency of engineering thinking play behaviors

which was three times greater than that of the traditional outdoor playground.

Role of the Environment

A critical component of these four studies and child play interactions in general is the role

of the environment. Teachers have significant responsibilities in regard to the regulation of the

teaching-learning environment (Mirzeoglu, 2015). On average, school-aged children spend

significantly more time in the classroom environment than in a home environment (Rushton,

Juola-Rushton, & Larkin, 2009). As a result of the amount of time spent in a classroom

environment as opposed to a home environment, further understanding the implications certain

types of play can have related to childhood development must be considered. Furthermore, the

way in which children develop and learn in the classroom environment can have a much greater

effect on future outcomes as opposed to play in the home environment, due to both access to

more specialized materials in the classroom, as well as a greater focus on play, learning, and

childhood development when in the classroom setting. The environment and associated contexts

are made up of any objects, materials, tools, or physical structures with which children interact

with in order to create interpretations (Martinez, 2016 Various characteristics of each play space

and physical environment affect the play behaviors students demonstrate throughout their

interactions with the environment and their peers, both indoors and outdoors (Martinez, 2016).

Because such a large aspect of play and its many characteristics depends so greatly on the

environment and the many interchangeable items within it, there is no shortage of options for
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 25

educators when considering the specific needs of each child. With a variable and ever-changing

system of items which children can interact with, coupled with environments that can also be

tailored to each child, the use of open-ended materials can greatly increase learning and

development opportunities.

Italian educator and developer of the Reggio Emilia learning approach, Loris Malaguzzi,

emphasized the magnitude of the environment in regard to meaningful learning. In addition to

the belief that children are capable of and desire to construct their own knowledge, Malaguzzi

defined the environment as the “third teacher” after students’ parents and the classroom teacher

(Biermeir, 2015). While educators are undoubtedly important and crucial in the role of learning,

the environment in which education takes place should also be perceived as an equally vital

aspect of a child’s ability to learn and cognitively develop. Children utilize the environment for a

variety of play-based needs and interactions. For example, students develop more “complex

hierarchical system[s] of short-term and long-term goals, wherein immediate goals can be

forgone occasionally to reach long-term goals” (Bodrova & Leong, 2015, p. 379). The

development of these systems allows for children to begin understanding the importance of

placing certain items higher or lower in terms of priority, which is yet another indication that

open-ended play fosters a broader understanding of goal development and definition, which can

only serve to improve and expand upon these subjects later in life. The meaning which children

attach to various design aspects (i.e. interaction opportunities and physical properties of the

environmental design) allow students to construct games in the given context (De Valk, Bekker,

& Eggen, 2015). By attaching different meaning to various items within the play environment,

children can more adeptly participate in dramatic play by forming an understanding of the

agreed-upon roles of the items within the play context.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 26

Rushton, Juola-Rushton, and Larkin (2009) outline four key principles for creating an

active learning environment: 1.) The physical arrangement of classroom components such as

chairs, tables, library, lighting, etc. attract students’ interest. 2.) Specific space is designated for

individual work as well as small and large group meetings. 3.) Manipulative materials and spaces

to explore these materials are accompanied by large blocks of time to intrigue students’ curiosity

and encourage role play and experimentation. 4.) Classroom educators demonstrate a love for

learning and model compassionate, positive interactions and behaviors. Active learning

environments are further supported through deliberate and purposeful creation of open-ended

play opportunities as defined in the previous section. Each of the four studies utilized an open-

ended play approach as described by De Valk, Bekker, and Eggen (2015): open-ended materials

were used to support creativity and imagination and children involved in each study were

considered to be active participants with freedom to create their own play activities (p. 107). This

is a critical step before addressing this literature review’s second critical research question: How

do these open-ended materials change the levels of engagement that children have in that specific

environment? De Valk et al. (2015) propose a Stages of Play model which encourages learning

environment designers to think about children’s interactions with materials within this

environment as a dynamic process. These Stages of Play include an “invitation stage” where

students are attracted towards a specific environmental design, an “exploration stage” in which

students begin to intentionally interact with the environmental design, and an “immersion stage”

when children are genuinely involved in a play experience within that environment (p. 107).

In Martinez (2016), students are engaged in each of these stages of play during the three

classroom time periods designated for free choice. Students were invited to explore and engage

with specific areas and open-ended materials (manipulatives, music and movement, dramatic
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 27

play, quiet area, art, etc.). Once a student or students were attracted towards a specific area of the

environment, they moved between the exploration and immersion stages at their own pace.

Students explored how the various loose items could be utilized, and could attach meaning to

these materials, in order to engage in immersive play scenarios with peers or solitarily. Similarly,

the students in the study conducted by Brophy and Evangelou (2007) were invited to participate

in free-play throughout the daily classroom schedule in open, semi-structured, and structured

environments. Researchers specifically observed and analyzed students’ interactions during the

exploration and immersion stages with open-ended materials in the block area. Students explored

potential construction possibilities with the various sizes and shapes of wooden blocks before

engaging in the immersion stage where the students typically worked cooperatively with other

children to build familiar structures such as houses, a hotel, and a pool (p. 7). While Gold

conducted observations in three free-play environments (Imagination Playground™, traditional

playground, and dramatic play area), the Imagination Playground™ environment allowed

researchers to specifically study students’ usage of loose parts involving “large, light-weight,

moveable objects and attachable pieces” (2014). Students were invited to explore and use any of

these three play environments. In the Imagination Playground™ environment specifically,

students were invited to explore loose parts such as large and small blocks, blocks with holes in

which tube-like structures could be inserted, as well as wheel-shaped and cylindrical pieces.

Similar to other studies analyzed throughout this literary research, students explored potential

combinations and uses for these loose items as well as materials in other play environments

before engaging in immersive play. During the immersive play stage, researchers observed

students express innovative ideas, communicate goals, generate design ideas, and engage in both

solitary and cooperative play (p. 37). Finally, these three stages of play were also visible in the
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 28

study conducted by Maxwell, Michell, & Evans (2008). Researchers purposefully arranged the

loose parts and open-ended materials into structures such as walls to invite students into the play

environment. Students then entered the exploration phase of the Stages of Play by entering and

exploring materials within a specific play environment, followed by the immersion stage in

which researchers recorded specific conversations of students as they discussed and created

unique play experiences. For example, students’ play experiences ranged from dramatic play

involving make-believe flowers and houses to pretend scenarios involving space ships and boats

(p. 55). With multiple stages of play and play environments introduced to children within one

setting, allowing the children to roam and choose the most interesting environment and stage to

them personally, children are able to make definitive choices in the type of play that participate

in. The presence of free will within a play environment may seem arbitrary given that choice is

available with any open-ended materials in a play environment, but when multiple stages are

presented at once in addition to open-ended materials, the play scenario created by any one child

can vary greatly from another. This ability to control and mold the play scenario continuously

only further allows for the development of imaginative and cognitive thinking.

Emerging Engineering Behaviors

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education has become a

major focus for school districts and academic curriculum standards across the nation. When

given the opportunity to engage in in-depth projects and investigations of the world around them,

students are likely to gain cognitive benefits in regard to STEM-related learning goals, such as

their knowledge and understanding, skills, dispositions, and feelings towards STEM (Katz,

2010). Although research has proven that logico-mathematical and abstract thinking are not

possible in young children during engineering thinking play or otherwise, researchers have
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 29

suggested that play with engaging materials in the early childhood setting stimulates young

children’s cognition which may ultimately encourage the manifestation of abstract thinking

capabilities later in life (Gold, 2014). However, these types of in-depth investigations and play

with engaging materials can present a challenge when students enter early grades (K-2nd grade)

as less than 10% of classroom instructional time is dedicated to teaching science and engineering

topics (Pantoya, Aguirre-Munoz, & Hunt, 2015). The use of open-ended materials or loose items

can further supplement the curriculum design of early childhood education classrooms in regard

to STEM education as educators begin to investigate and plan activities in which children can

develop their engineering thinking skills through play. By engaging in the design and

construction processes associated with open-ended materials, children learn about the structural

differences within these processes which could support the eventual development of logico-

mathematical and abstract thinking capabilities (Gold, 2014). For example, preschoolers develop

these necessary skills and experiences through “building, constructing, tearing down, talking

about building, changing things, using previous knowledge, and observing each other” (Gold,

2014, p. 13). Constructive play is a significant play type in relation to engineering thinking play

behaviors. In constructive play, children display behaviors similar to the engineering thinking

behaviors previously listed in the study of Gold (2011). While students participating in

constructive play work to create something and/or to solve a common problem, students who

exhibit engineering thinking behaviors generate design ideas, construct, explain how things are

built or how they work, etc. As the study conducted by Brophy & Evangelou (2007) showcased,

young children are interested in and capable of understanding engineering ideas and processes

such as building with blocks.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 30

Each of the studies analyzed within this literary review lend support to the idea that loose

parts and open-ended materials can potentially promote early engineering thinking/play

behaviors; by default, constructive play behaviors become an ever-present source of inspiration

and creation within the early childhood education environment. It is observed in Maxwell et al.

(2008) that constructive play and various engineering play behaviors occur in significantly

higher amounts when students are provided with loose parts as participants utilized open-ended

materials to construct pretend spaces such as houses, cars, etc., which not only encouraged a

transition to dramatic play but also the usage of communication and negotiation skills. In Brophy

and Evangelou’s study of the relationship between play and engineering thinking, researchers

highlighted various engineering behaviors and development of structural concepts which

students exhibited when utilizing open-ended materials. These observed behaviors included an

understanding of the usefulness of specific structures and the ability to build actual structures

rather than visual representations (i.e. using multiple blocks to create a house structure versus

referring to a single block or location as a “house”). In every facet of early-childhood education

and cognitive behavior, the importance and crucial presence of play cannot be understated.

Further, open-ended materials clearly have the ability to further allow for comprehensive

learning, engineering thinking, and a continuous desire to use the play environment. The open-

ended materials used in the play environments listed throughout this study only prove that this

aspect of play can more easily and smoothly allow for the future development of the precursors

for abstract thinking, cognitive development, and collaboration.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 31

Conclusion

In summary, this literature review was designed to investigate three critical research

questions focusing on open-ended materials and their influence on environment, engagement,

and emerging engineering behaviors in the field early childhood education. Data was primarily

collected from an extensive review of relevant literature and studies which correlated to at least

one or more of the three critical research questions. While the use and study of loose items and

open-ended materials in the early childhood education setting is relatively new, sufficient

research exists to study the relationship between these materials and their correlation to exhibited

behaviors and engagement. Literary research and conclusions drawn from this literature review

were rooted in the fundamental knowledge that the act of play serves a critical purpose in the

cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development in early childhood. Furthermore,

empirical research which has confirmed the universal necessity for the use of open-ended

materials in play during early childhood also served as a foundation for this literature review.

Specific play behaviors observed in each of the four studies analyzed in this review were

supported by developmental and play theories, specifically Piaget’s theory of cognitive

development and definitions of play behaviors as outlined by the National Association for the

Education of Young Children. Results and conclusions discussed within the studies themselves

and the critical appraisal of each individual study concluded that access to and interaction with

open-ended materials and loose parts encourage natural early childhood play behaviors, most

significantly dramatic play and constructive play. The environments in which these materials are

implemented encourage further development and provide students with the experiential

precursors necessary to later develop engineering-related skills such as abstract thinking.

Overall, the use of open-ended and loose materials is associated with higher frequencies of
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 32

engineering thinking behaviors, and current research suggests that play with open-ended

materials may benefit children’s development in multiple domains.

Evidence Table

Sample Size
Article in Citation and
Order of (in APA Research Population Data Collection
Appearance format) Design Description Methods Results of Study
1 Martinez, N. Action 23 children Staff member Across all play
(2016). What Research enrolled in a interviews, in- areas, children
will it be? An and full-day class observation engaged in four
investigation Naturalistic preschool of children’s playkey types of play
of play with Observatio classroom, 2 and strategies when utilizing
open-ended ns Child used by staff to open-ended
materials in a Development support play, materials. Male
preschool Teachers, 2 review of the students used
classroom. Child Early Childhood these materials
Sonoma Development Environment in the block area
State Assistants, 1 Rating Scale— and at activity
University. 1- Substitute Revised, search tables, while
55. Child and review of female students
Development related literatureused these
Assistant and research materials mostly
at activity tables.
2 Brophy, S., Action 20 students in Search and Students
& Research a childcare review of related exhibited various
Evangelou, and facility literature and engineering
D. (2007). Naturalistic (ranging in research, in-class behaviors during
Precursors to Observatio age from 2 to observation of their building
Engineering ns 5 years), 1 children’s play processes, such
Thinking. Head and building as having strong
American Teacher, 1 processes, internal models
Society for Assistant documentation of of structural
Engineering Teacher, 1 structures built concepts,
Education. 1- AM by students understanding
11. Teacher’s the usefulness of
Aid, 1 PM structures, and
Teacher’s Aid “the ability to
construct beyond
a simple visual
representation of
an imaginary
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 33

world to an
actual structure
(Brophy et al.,
2017).
Researchers
concluded that
preschool-aged
children are
continuing to
expand the
developmental
and experiential
precursors
necessary to later
create imaginary
and concrete
worlds of their
own.
3 Gold, Z. Action 68 preschool Search and Researchers did
(2014). Research students at review of related not conclude any
Preschooler’s and (ranging in literature and gender
physical, Experiment age from 3 to research, indoor differences in the
social, and al Design 5 years; 29 and outdoor frequency of
engineering girls and 37 observations in early engineering
play boys) three thinking play
behaviors: enrolled in a environments, a occurrences,
differences in university- systematic however
gender and based review and children’s play
play childcare completion of with large loose
environment. facility Child parts was
Purdue Observation associated with a
University. 1- Forms and frequency of
78. Observation engineering
Category thinking play
Definitions which was three
times greater
than in a
traditional
outdoor play
setting.
Researchers also
observed higher
levels of gross
and fine motor
play, and
positive social
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 34

behaviors.
Researchers
suggest that play
with open-ended
materials may
benefit children’s
development in
multiple
domains.
4 Maxwell, E., Action 32 children Search and After adding
Mitchell, M., Research enrolled in review of related loose parts to
& Evans, G. and university- literature and two specific
(2008). Experiment based research, environments on
Effects of al Design laboratory naturalistic the childcare
play daycare observations of facility’s outdoor
equipment program students in two playground,
and loose (ranging in distinct researchers
parts on age from 48 environments concluded that
preschool to 60 months; constructive play
children’s equal number behaviors
outdoor play of boys and increased in
behavior: an girls) areas where
observational open-ended
study and materials were
design provided.
interventions. Children were
Children, also more
Youth and motivated to
Environment participate in
s. 18(2). dramatic play,
construct their
own spaces, and
utilize
communication
and negotiation
skills in these
areas.
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 35

References

Biddle, K. A., Garcia-Nevarez, A., Roundtree Henderson, W. J., Valero-Kerrick, A. (2013). Play

and the learning environment. Early Childhood Education: Becoming a Professional (pp.

256-285). Newbury Park, California: SAGE Publications.

Biermeier, M. (2015). Inspired by Reggio Emilia: emergent curriculum in relationship-driven

learning moments. Young Children. 1-13.

Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. (2015). Vygotskian and post-Vygotskian views on children’s play.

American Journal of Play. 371-388.

Britz, J. (1993). Problem solving in early childhood classrooms. ERIC Digest. 3-6.

Brophy, S., & Evangelou, D. (2007). Precursors to Engineering Thinking. American Society for

Engineering Education. 1-11.

Burman, A. (2012). Constructive play in early learning environments. CMAS: Supporting

Childcare in the Settlement Community. 1-2.

Daly, L. & Beloglovsky, M. (2015). Introducing loose parts to preschoolers. Teaching Young

Children, 1(9).

de Valk, L., Bekker, T., & Eggen, J. H. (2015) Designing for social interaction in open-ended

play environments. International Journal of Design, 9(1), 107-120.

Drew, W. & Rankin, B. (2004). Promoting creativity for life using open-ended materials. Young

Children. 1-8.

Eberle, S. (2014). The elements of play: toward a philosophy and a definition of play. American

Journal of Play, 6(2), 214-233.

Gandini, L. (2011). Play and the hundred languages of children. American Journal of Play, 4(1),

1-18.
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 36

Gold, Z. (2014). Preschooler’s physical, social, and engineering play behaviors: differences in

gender and play environment. Purdue University. 1-78.

Katz, L. G. (2010). STEM in the early years. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 1-7.

Lifler, K., Foster-Sanda, S., Arzamarski, C., Briesch, J., & McClure, E. (2011). Overview of

play: its uses and importance in early intervention/early childhood special education.

Infants and Young Children, 24(3), 225-245.

Malaguzzi, L. (1993). Your image of the child: where teaching begins. Seminar by Loris

Malaguzzi. 1-5.

Martinez, N. (2016). What will it be? An investigation of play with open-ended materials in a

preschool classroom. Sonoma State University. 1-55.

Maxwell, E., Mitchell, M., & Evans, G. (2008). Effects of play equipment and loose parts

on preschool children’s outdoor play behavior: an observational study and design

interventions. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2).

Mcleod, S. (2018). Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Simply Psychology. 1-16.

Mirzeoglu, A. (2015). The experiences and achievements of classroom teacher candidates during

a play-based reflective workshop in which open-ended materials were used. Education

and Science, 40(180), 197-215.

Neill, P. (2013). Open-ended materials belong outside too!. High scope, 27(2), 1-8.

Nell, M. & Drew, W. (n.d.). Five essentials to meaningful play. National Association for the

Education of Young Children. 1-4.

Pantoya, M. L., Aguirre-Munoz, Z., & Hunt, E. M. (2015). Developing an engineering identity in

early childhood. American Journal of Engineering Education, 6(2), 61-68.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 37

Pellegrini, A., & Smith, P. (1998). The development of play during childhood: forms and

possible functions. Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review, 3(2), 51-57.

Prairie, A. (2013). Supporting sociodramatic play in ways that enhance academic learning. Young

Children. 62-68.

Ramani, G. (2012). Influence of a playful, child-directed context on preschool children’s peer

cooperation. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 58(2), 159-190.

Rubin, K. (1977). Play behaviors of young children. Young Children. 16-24.

Rubin, K., Watson, K., & Jambor, T. (1978). Free-play behaviors in preschool and kindergarten

children. Child Development, 49(2), 534-536.

Rushton, S., Juola-Rushton, A., & Larkin, E. (2009). Neuroscience, play and early childhood

education: connections, implications and assessment. Early Childhood Education

Journal. 37. 351-361

Shrier, C. (2016). Shopping for children? Consider open-ended toys this holiday season.

Michigan State University Extension. 1-5.

Shroff, A. (2017). Piaget Stages of Development. WebMD Medical Reference. Retrieved from

https://www.webmd.com/children/piaget-stages-of-development

Smith, P. & Pellegrini, A. (2008). Learning through play. Encyclopedia on Early Childhood

Development. 1-6.

Valk, L., Bekker, T., & Eggen, J.H. (2015) Designing for social interaction in open-ended play

environments. International Journal of Design, 9(1), 107-120.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 38

APPENDICES
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 39

Appendix A. Checklists

A.1 Child Observation Forms (Gold, 2014)

OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 40
OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS 41

Appendix B. Maps of Play Environments

B.1 Playground Intervention Areas (Maxwell et al., 2008).