Affordances for 1- to 3-year-olds’ risky play in Early Childhood Education and Care

Abstract

This article focuses on how Early Childhood Education and Care institutions provide for 1-to 3-yearolds' risky play-a previously little researched topic-utilizing data from an exploratory, small-scale study investigating aspects of risky play in the age-group. The main findings describe how three essentially different Early Childhood Education and Care centers provide different opportunities for risky play. These environments are assessed with the theoretical concept of affordance and suggest that versatile, flexible, and complex environments and equipment-with little objective risk-are optimal for children's risky play in this age-group. Being a new topic, the affordance assessment is discussed in relation to a standardized measurement, the Infant-Toddler Environment Rating Scale-Revised edition. Findings indicate that the two approaches partly coincide but also that there are discrepancies. Interpretations and implications are discussed.

Associations between Children’s Risky Play and ECEC Outdoor Play Spaces and Materials

“…Kleppe [ 57 ] compared how the physical environment in two ordinary ECEC centers and a nature center provided opportunities for risky play for 1- to 3-year-olds ( n = 39). Opportunities for risky play were assessed in each center utilizing the eight risk categories as described above.…”

Babies and toddlers outdoors: a narrative review of the literature on provision for under twos in ECEC settings

“…Kaarby and Tandberg (2018), for example, note that in Norway not all kindergartens divide children according to age so the indicator relating to infants and toddlers being separated may not reflect quality. In contrast, Kleppe's (2018) study among one-to three-year olds, in three Norwegian settings, is supportive of risky play. His aim was to understand where and when risky play occurs for under threes.…”

“…The indicator for quality in outdoor provision is 'an easily accessible outdoor area where infants/toddlers are separated from older children'. This immediately suggests that the youngest children need to be protected from older children and does not recognise the potential benefits of younger children being able to watch and engage with older children 'being' outdoors (Kleppe 2018;Rouse 2015). It also categorises natural features (such as exposed tree roots) as a minor hazard which suggests a problematising of the natural environment in relation to the youngest children.…”

“…There are recognised challenges in providing appropriate outdoor environments for babies and toddlers in ECEC as such spaces 'need to accommodate the needs of young babies, crawling infants, new walkers and active climbers' (Thigpen 2007, 20). Research interest has focused on how particular elements within an environment might provide specific opportunities for interaction drawing upon Gibson's concept of affordances (Gibson 1977) (Morrissey, Scott, and Wishart 2015;Kleppe 2018). A distinction is made between potential and actualised affordances (Kyttä 2002); this is important when considering birth to twos as there will be differences in development and risk tolerance.…”

Innendørs risikofylt lek: Muligheter for spenning og variasjon i barnehagens lekemiljøer?

“…Risikofylt lek i barnehagers innemiljø og denne studiens forskningsspørsmål Det er gjort svaert få studier som knytter risikofylt lek til barnehagers innemiljøer. I en studie med 1-3-åringer, var 1-åringene mer aktive i risikofylt lek innendørs, sammenlignet med utendørs (Kleppe, 2018a). Årsaker til dette kunne vaere at 1-åringene tilbrakte relativt mye tid innendørs (sammenlignet med 2-og 3-åringene i studien) og at de fysiske elementene som oftest bidrar til ulike former for risikofylt lek (klatrestativ, sklier, sykler) ikke var tilpasset de aller yngste.…”