<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Play Glossary</title>
	<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary</link>
	<atom:link href="https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description></description>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>


<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/adjacent-play_154s252</link>
<title><![CDATA[Adjacent Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[See Parallel Play
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/adjacent-play_154s252</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:41:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/affordance_154s118</link>
<title><![CDATA[Affordance]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A term coined by the American Psychologist J.J. Gibson as part of his Theory of Affordance. 

Affordances are the &#39;action possibilities&#39; or the things that could happen within a given envionment.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The concept of Affordance was first coined in 1966 by the American psychologist James Jerome Gibson (1904-1979) as part of his Theory of Affordances. 

He describes them in his book, &lsquo;The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception&rsquo; (1979) as:

&ldquo;The affordances of the environment are what it offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or ill &hellip;&rdquo; (p.127)

Further, he describes them as being &lsquo;action possibilities&rsquo; within the environment, in other words things that could happen within a given space specifically because aspects of that space allows for the possibility of those things to happen. This is true whether those affordances are deliberatly provided or they are simply inherent in the space. 

For example, a play setting that provides a slide is providing a deliberate affordance that gives children the opportunity to slide; a naturally occurring slope in an outside space might also provide the opportunity to slide even if, and this is an important point, even if that slope was not provided as a place to slide down. 

This is so because what the environment offers an individual in terms of what they could do with an affordance is not necessarily what they should or will do with it. This partly explains why there is sometimes a disconnect between what adults think children will do with a particular affordance and what children actually do with it.

What connection there is between what an affordance offers and how it might be used are dependent on how it is perceived by the individual based largely on their previous experiences. For example, a pile of carboard boxes might suggest to one person the possibility of building a &lsquo;robot&rsquo;; for another it might be saying &lsquo;spaceship&rsquo;, or &lsquo;house&rsquo;, or even &lsquo;place to hide&rsquo;.

The point being that an affordance might be deliberate or accidental and contains multiple possibilities that are brought to life by the person interacting with them.

--------------------

See also J.J. Gibson, Afforded Space, and Possibilities (coming soon).
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/affordance_154s118</guid>
<pubDate>06 Feb 2026 06:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/annihilation_154s134</link>
<title><![CDATA[Annihilation]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The final stage of the Play Cylce; the end of playing.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Annihilation in a play context is the final stage in the Play Cycle, as defined by Gordon Sturrock (1948-2019) and Perry Else (1959-2014). It marks &#39;the end of playing&#39;, or the end of a particular Play Cycle.

When observing a playspace, it is sometimes possible to spot when an Annihilation occurs. The children involved in a given Play Frame might be seen to abruptly leave the physical location where the playing was taking place; and if multiple children have been involved they may separate, moving away from each other in search of the next thing to play.

This should not be mistaken as a &#39;bad thing&#39;, though - it is an indication that all the possibilities that existed within a particular Play Frame have been exhausted; or that the playing child or children have had their immediate play needs satisfied. 

When it is a deliberate act by the children involved it is therefore a natural, and in fact necessary, part of playing that has to occur before there is (often) a pause and the next Play Cycle begins. As Perry Else says in his 2009 book, &#39;The Value of Play&#39;,

&ldquo;This &lsquo;annihilation&rsquo; is often seen not just in the sand tray but also in the bigger play space of the beach where twice a day, the tide comes in to wipe clean the playing field. Children are aware of this and will often build castles and small towns close to the water&rsquo;s edge, taking pleasure from the gradual destruction of their creations.&rdquo; (p.15)

However, there are times when an Adulteration can bring a Play Cycle to an end against the wishes of the children playing. This Premature Annihilation might have come about by an adult wishing to move the children on to something else (such as an administrative element like a meal time or transition to another activity), or an adult may have attempted to add an element to the Play Frame that the children reject.

In this latter example, children may simply &#39;lose the thread&#39; of where they are up to in their playing and as a result, the Play Frame collapses and Annihilation occurs. This is sometimes evident as it can result in frustration and even anger. 

--------------------

See also Play Cycle, Adulteration, and Recurring Play Frame (to come).
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/annihilation_154s134</guid>
<pubDate>11 Feb 2026 23:12:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/associative-play_154s253</link>
<title><![CDATA[Associative Play ]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The fifth of Mildred Parten&rsquo;s &lsquo;six stages of play&rsquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Associative Play is the fifth stage in the sociologist Mildren Parten&rsquo;s, &#39;Six Stages of Play&rsquo; Theory which appears in children between about four and four and a half years of age.

At this stage, children may be playing together yet things are not completely there yet. When in this stage, children may be quite comfortable playing with or close to others and sharing not just material resources but ideas, narrative, and characters too, yet details may be different for each player and common goals not exist within the group. Think of it as a group of individuals playing together. 

In other words, it is possible for playmates involved in this type of playing to appear to be part of a bigger group, yet all have very different ideas to each other of what exactly is going on and what direction it might develop in.  

They may for example be in a pair making something out of cardboard boxes and other loose parts but one think they are building a robot and the other a spaceship; or a group may be playing a chase game where the rules have not been fully agreed on but the game is still going on, each playing to their own interpretation of the rules.  

However, most children will be confident enough by this stage to approach other children to seek them out as playmates.

This stage is the penultimate to fully Cooperative Play and as such it is a vital step. The Playlore  &lsquo;rules&rsquo; essential to being part of a regular group of playmates are being worked out in this stage, as are the folkloric rituals that make &#39;play with rules&#39; operate smoothly. Long standing friendships are being created, and a shared culture of that specific playspace is being developed. 

 ---------------------

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Mildred Parten, Unoccupied Play, Solitary Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel Play, Cooperative Play, Game, and Playlore. 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/associative-play_154s253</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:42:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/authentic-locomotor-play_154s402</link>
<title><![CDATA[Authentic Locomotor Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[See Locomotor Play. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/authentic-locomotor-play_154s402</guid>
<pubDate>20 Apr 2026 13:16:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/chase-term_154s129</link>
<title><![CDATA[Chase Term]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A term used largely by folklorists and playlorists to describe the various terms used by children to describe their chasing games. 

Also known as a Tag Term.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Chase games are amongst the most universal of game types played by children all around the world, and so this type of game figures often in adult play memories. They are also an excellent example of how complex the Playlore of children can be, and an illustration of how detailed Playloric studies are.

The basic idea of a chase game is that someone (the &lsquo;undesired role&rsquo;) chases other people and, erm, catches them! But there&rsquo;s more.

You might know these chase games by a particular name without realising that your term is only one of many geographically located names for this.

Just in English-speaking countries there are a whole host of words beginning with T, for example: Tig, Tiggy, Tag, Tug, Tock, Tick, Tip, Tib, Touch, and Touchie. And it doesn&rsquo;t stop there with other common names including Dob, Dobby, Dobby on; and He, Het, Hit, Had, Hare, and the boring old Chasey.

Working out what term a person used in their own childhood can often narrow down where that person grew up.

There are also lots of examples of exceptions or more commonly &lsquo;avoidances&rsquo; in chase games too, in other words things you can do to avoid being caught such as being off the ground, or touching a particular colour, standing on someone else&rsquo;s shadow, or holding on to another person.

These forms of chase game have their own name and are seen as distinct games rather than just variations of &lsquo;Chasey&rsquo;. They also add another complication to working this out as sometimes (again geographically distinct) the Chase Term itself is sometimes a suffix and at other times a prefix.

Compare for example: &lsquo;Off-Ground Tig&rsquo; with &lsquo;Tigs off-Ground&rsquo; or &lsquo;Tiggy off the Ground&rsquo;. Get the term wrong in a local area and children will swear blind that they don&rsquo;t know what the alternatives mean!

---------------------

What Chase Term can you remember using?

See also Truce Terms, Avoidances, and The Undesired Role (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/chase-term_154s129</guid>
<pubDate>09 Feb 2026 03:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/childlore_154s120</link>
<title><![CDATA[Childlore]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A term popularised in the 1890s by the folklorist Alice Bertha Gomme (1853-1938).

It describes the folklore of children transmitted largely (but not exclusively) from child to child.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Childlore differs from  Folklore for Children in that while the latter deals with such things as nursery rhymes (sometimes called &lsquo;Nursery Lore&rsquo;) and &lsquo;traditional toys&rsquo;, which are more often passed from adults to children, Childlore refers to the folklore of children passed largely (though not exclusively) from child to child.

Childlore includes things such as children&rsquo;s game rituals (like Counting Out, and Respite for example), as well as jokes, witticisms, and subversions of the adult world.  

The folklorist Alice Berth Gomme (1853-1938), one of the founding members of the Folklore Society in London, is generally credited with defining Childlore as a distinct sub-genre in the wider world of Folklore in the 1890s. 

Gomme seems to have had a battle with the Society in persuading them to make this distinction, though, and so she undertook a major study of children&rsquo;s traditional games and songs herself, publishing the results in the massive two volume, &lsquo;The Traditional Games of England, Scotland and Ireland&rsquo; (1894 and 1898) as a demonstration that such a move was valid (see photo). 

In this she was largely successful. 

--------------------

[photo - an image from a page of Gomme&#39;s two volume book on children&#39;s games showing variations on &#39;string games&#39; also know as &#39;Cat&#39;s Cradle&#39;.]

See also Folklore, Playlore, and Iona and Peter Opie (to come).
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/childlore_154s120</guid>
<pubDate>09 Feb 2026 03:06:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/cooperative-play_154s254</link>
<title><![CDATA[Cooperative Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The sixith of Mildred Parten&rsquo;s &lsquo;six stages of play&rsquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Cooperative Play is the sixth and final stage in the sociologist Mildren Parten&rsquo;s, &lsquo;Six Stages of Play&rsquo; Theory which appears in children from about four and a half years of age.

At this stage, children are fully capable of being part of a larger and regular group of playmates, and very capable of moving between one game or play episode to another. Not only are resources and materials been shared out in this stage, but the group &lsquo;rules&rsquo; and roles (temporary or more fixed), shared narratives and characters are being acknowledged and contributed to. 

That is not to say that all will be hunky dory at this stage &ndash; the fact that everyone in the group is now able to contribute to what is being played and how throws up new opportunities for disagreements and fallings out. However, &lsquo;rules&rsquo; to prevent this from happening are quickly designed and introduced. 

This is the stage in which the shared culture of the playspace is being fully developed; the special terms, words, places of significance, liminal objects and spaces are being set in place to create a local Playlore and a need for secrecy begins to become important &ndash; not to keep what is being played secret from adults, but because reaching this stage forms a bit of a Rite of Passage, and only those that have made it this far are allowed to have all the secrets.

This Cooperative Stage of playing is now the one that for most children will the way they play until the day they stop playing. 

---------------------

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Mildred Parten, Unoccupied Play, Solitary Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel Play, Associative Play, Liminality, and Rites of Passage (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/cooperative-play_154s254</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:43:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/creative-play_154s198</link>
<title><![CDATA[Creative Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[One of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo; first defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in 2002.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Creative Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo; defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types.

The word &#39;creativity&#39; has a mixed history in terms of play theory and in categorizing play because it can be a difficult term to pin down, meaning different things to different people. 

Hughes defines it in his 2006 book &lsquo;Playtypes: speculations and possibilities as, &ldquo;the drive to generate flexible combinations and permutations of shapes, textures, colours, sounds, tastes and/or smells. It is the expression of the outward flow of the senses after they have passed through the prism of feelings.&rdquo; (p.38)

In defining it this way, Creative Play (like many of the other Play Types) is seen as a series of combinations rather than a single element which are consciously generated by the individual rather than being a raw emotional response. 

Hughes also emphasizes the importance of children having control over the opportunities involved in Creative Play in order to get the most from this particular Play Type. This may involve removing the adult from the equation completely and, &ldquo;&hellip; even means that children should not be told to interact with the creative materials in the first place.&rdquo; (p,38). 

Although Hughes stresses the link between Loose Parts and Creative Play, this also raises the potential for conflict between this element of the definition and the way some advocates of Loose Parts interpretate how materials should be displayed and presented for use. 

--------------------

See also Bob Hughes, The Play Types, Loose Parts
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/creative-play_154s198</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 02:41:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/dark-play_154s124</link>
<title><![CDATA[Dark Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A phrase coined in 1988 by the American academic and theatre director Richard Schechner (1934-to date).

It describes forms of playing that might be perceived by adults as &#39;not fun&#39; or not frivolous, and challenging because of its themes. It is often seen as being about children subverting social norms and hierarchies while working out their place in those structures. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The term Dark Play was first coined in 1988 by the American academic and theatre director Richard Schechner (1934-to date) (see photo). It is sometimes confused with the term &lsquo;Deep Play&rsquo; as both have the same roots.  

It describes forms of playing that might be perceived by adults as &#39;not fun&#39; or not frivolous and therefore challenging because of its themes. It is often seen as being about children subverting social norms and hierarchies while working out their place in those structures, but it may also be about teasing and frightening other players.

One defining feature of Dark Play is that other players may not realise that what is happening is still play. And in some respects, it might not be. Schechner describes this as, &ldquo;an intentional blurring of [the] playing-not playing boundary&rdquo; (p.12) when the performer (player) knows they are performing (playing) but the audience (other players) do not. 

He expands on this in a later 2015 book, &lsquo;Multiple Realities and Dark Play&rsquo;, writing, 

&ldquo;Subversive by nature, dark play is designed to be chaotic, deconstructive, expositional, but ultimately self-gratifying. Whilst more easily understood as a concept when dark play is violent and overtly disruptive, it can exist in more subtle forms.&rdquo; (p.392)

In a Playwork context this might be seen as an apparent suspension or disruption of the Play Frame by one or more players, although it is not intended to be. Take for example one player overturning a board game mid-play sending pieces flying which might be perceived as disruptive by adults watching and even other players, and yet in reality the person doing so is introducing a pretence of being disruptive. In other words, exploring the role of a distruptive person by playing that role.

That this idea should come from within the field of theatre should not be a surprise, as &lsquo;play&rsquo; (in the sense of children&rsquo;s play) and &lsquo;play&rsquo; (in a theatre sense) have close theoretical connections. 

The theatre director and trainer Cliver Barker (1931-2005) for example writes in his 1977 book, &lsquo;Theatre Games&rsquo;, &ldquo;I have never found a technical exercise [in the theatre] for which I couldn&rsquo;t find a direct parallel in the world of children&rsquo;s games.&rdquo; (p.62)

Dark Play themes are very evident throughout the entertainment world. The craze for the TV game show &lsquo;Traitors&rsquo; is a current example, as was the hugely popular 2004-2010 TV series &lsquo;Lost&rsquo; which (though not evident until almost the very end) was one big example of Dark Play in entertianment. 

--------------------

[photo - Richard Schechner (1934-to date)]

To learn more about the TV series &#39;Traitor&#39; see [here] and for the TV series &#39;Lost&#39; go [here]

See also Deep Play, Liminality,  Flow and Teasing  (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/dark-play_154s124</guid>
<pubDate>09 Feb 2026 03:24:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/dramatic-play_154s201</link>
<title><![CDATA[Dramatic Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Dramatic Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo; defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Dramatic Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo; defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types.

On the surface, Dramatic Play may seem to be primarily around dressing up and imagined fantasy roles, yet there is another element that differentiates it from other similar pretend based Play Types &ndash; playing to an audience. 

In this respect, you could say that Dramatic Play is not really a form of pretend play at all as there is a &lsquo;real world&rsquo; element to it in the form of the essential audience. This should not be confused with the need for a stage or &lsquo;performance area&rsquo; and a formally gathered audience, though &ndash; the key here is adopting a role and &lsquo;playing up&rsquo; to the people who just happen to be around. As well as the stage stuff. 

--------------------

See also Bob Hughes, The Play Types, 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/dramatic-play_154s201</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 02:43:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/folklore_154s122</link>
<title><![CDATA[Folklore]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Folklore is the term used to describe the traditional beliefs, customs, practices, and stories of people that are passed down through the generations often by word of mouth.

This includes the Folklore for Children which is transmitted largely (but not exclusively) from adult to child.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Folklore is the term used to describe the traditional beliefs, customs, practices, and stories of people that are passed down through the generations often by word of mouth. 

As an area of study and an academic discipline, it begins in 17th Century Europe with the collection of folktales and songs made by antiquarians (people interested in things of the past). The term &lsquo;folklore&rsquo; (originally &lsquo;folk-lore&rsquo;) was not coined until 1846 by Willian John Thoms (also known by his pseudonym Ambrose Merton).* 

Today, Folklore and Folklorists are a well-establish element of the academic world with university positions, many amateur folklorists, and organised societies all over the world.

The discipline of folklore is often sub-divided into:


	Verbal folklore - such as myths, legends, fairy tales; proverbs, jokes, riddles, songs, dialect, and contemporary legends



	Material folklore - such as folk art, clothing, traditional foods and recipes



	Customary folklore - such as festivals, superstitions and beliefs, folk dances, hand gestures and spooky characters


The &#39;Folklore for Children&#39; refers specifically to folklore regarding children and young people which, as opposed to Childlore and Playlore, is transmitted largely (but not exclusively) from adult to child rather than child to child. This may include things like traditional toys, children&#39;s clothing, and nursery rhymes.

 



Interest in children&#39;s play and games appears early in the history of folklore.

For example, the first modern folklorist (though still referred to as an antiquarian) is generally considered to be Joseph Strutt (1749-1802), a British historian and writer who was particularly interested in the day to day lives of ordinary people (see photo). 

This is evident in the subject of his books which included a history of clothing, of hairstyles, make up and, significantly, in 1801 &lsquo;Sports and Pastimes of the People of England&rsquo; in which he describes the games people played going back to at least the early 1700s. 

Many of the early folklorists interested in children&#39;s play and games, including Strutt, began their collections because of a belief that games and play-forms were fast disappeering. However, these collections have actually created the body of evidence that shows this fear to have been incorrect. 

The British folklorists Iona and Peter Opie in their 1969 book, &#39;Children&#39;s Games in Street and Playground&#39; concluded instead that,  

&quot;The belief that traditional games are dying out is itself traditional&quot;. (p.14)

Other prominent folklorists in the English-speaking world involved in the folklore of children have included those such as the British, Alice Bertha Gomme, James Ritchie and Iona and Peter Opie; Americans, such as Dorothy Howard, and Mary and Herbert Knapp; and Australians, such as June Factor, Gwenda Davey, and Judy McKinty. 

--------------------

* For a very interesting background of Thoms and the development of Folklore as a discipline see the Library of Congress blog at https://blogs.loc.gov/folklife/2014/08/he-coined-the-word-folk-lore/

[Photo of Joseph Strutt]

See also Childlore, Playlore, Contemporary Legends, and Urban Myths (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/folklore_154s122</guid>
<pubDate>09 Feb 2026 03:16:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/game_154s154</link>
<title><![CDATA[Game]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[
A &lsquo;game&rsquo; is &lsquo;play with rules&rsquo;, as opposed to &lsquo;play without rules&rsquo; which we usually define simply as, erm, &lsquo;play&rsquo;.

]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Background

&lsquo;Play&rsquo; and &lsquo;Games&rsquo; are methodologically very different forms of playing yet confusingly are still both &lsquo;playing&rsquo;. The former (play) is often referred to as &lsquo;play without rules&rsquo;, and the latter (games) as &lsquo;play with rules&rsquo;. This distinction, which begins in the classical Greek and Roman world of around 500BC (a period considered to a hotbed of philosophical thinking around the concept of play) gives a big clue to the difference in practice.

The word &lsquo;Play&rsquo; originates with the Greek term &lsquo;paidia&rsquo; which refers to forms of play that were considered &lsquo;non-serious&rsquo;, trivial, light-hearted and therefore not particularly significant to the then adult world. This would include things like playing with dolls and figures, making marks, and building with bricks, for example.

The word &lsquo;Game&rsquo;, on the other hand, has its origin with the Roman term &lsquo;ludus&rsquo; which is associated with &lsquo;seriousness&rsquo;, rules, structure, and is often goal oriented, competitive, and have highly defined characters. This was considered to be much more serious and productive to the adult world. The connection here with &lsquo;sport&rsquo; should be obvious, though we are not talking here of that organised adult activity but that which children themselves are organising on a more informal basis. So, a game of &lsquo;hide and seek&rsquo;, circle games like &lsquo;duck duck goose&rsquo;, and pretty much all forms of chasing games, for example.

In more recent years, these terms have been refined and given greater clarity by theorists such as Johan Huizinga (1872-1945) and Roger Cailois (1913-1978), for example, although its worth noting that these refinements to definition have often caused as much disagreement as consensus. The degree to which &lsquo;characters&rsquo; and &lsquo;narrative&rsquo; are with-rules or without-rules, for eample, is a contentious issue. 

Also, the whole concept of &lsquo;ludus&rsquo; is tricky at times as the definition of this word in Latin is broad and overlapping and can refer to competitive sports, formal education and learning, and playing in an informal way &ndash; which produces yet another confusion point between &lsquo;game&rsquo; and &lsquo;sport&rsquo;. This confusion is less present around the concept of &lsquo;paidia&rsquo;, and some suggest this is because &lsquo;ludus&rsquo; is serious and &lsquo;paidia&rsquo; is not. 

An easier way

There is a simpler way to consider the difference between the two. Think of it like this:

Both play with and without rules contain a &lsquo;beginning&rsquo;, a &lsquo;middle&rsquo;, and an &lsquo;end&rsquo; (often referred to as a &lsquo;play episode&rsquo;); yet there is a fundamental difference between how this works in both cases.

A game (play with rules) is likely to begin and end in the exact same way or similar every time it is played. The middle is also likely to have a usual and predictable path. 

Think of a common chase game, for example: if the players have to choose the &lsquo;it&rsquo; player before beginning and always use a counting out method to choose them, then this is a largely an unchanging structural start to the game. If the game always ends with the last player being caught and that person then becomes the &lsquo;it&rsquo; player for the next round, then that is also an unchanging structure used to end it.

So, it&rsquo;s a game.

Now compare that to a group of children playing with teddy bears who suddenly decide to host a tea party. They may do this often yet quite how that tea party begins and ends may be completely different each time this is played; and the middle (in particular) could go off in any number of unpredictable tangents. So, every time the &lsquo;tea party&rsquo; is played it could be entirely distinct. There are no hard and fast, unchanging rules here governing the beginning and end of this example.

So, it is play. 

Age differences

The play of very young children tends to be exclusively &lsquo;play without rules&rsquo; yet as children reach around four years old &lsquo;play with rules&rsquo; has begun to take up a proportion of playing, and by around seven and eight often dominates.

Yet in a kindergarten concept it is possible to see the journey from not-rules to with-rules developing from around three years of age onwards, albeit with conflict as the ability to fully decern the difference between the concepts can cause fallings out, disagreements, and occasional fisticuffs. The cause of this kind conflict that derives from young children trying to understand a compex play concept is easy to miss. If you can&#39;t understand the cause, then you can&#39;t fix it.

Interestingly, a similar thing happens among the older age groups too as &lsquo;play with rules&rsquo; becomes less popular again among older children and teenagers, soon to be replaced (again) with a greater interest in &lsquo;play without rules&rsquo; - such as hanging around with mates in an informal, non-goal-oriented way.

In turns out, therefore, the concept of &#39;game&#39; and &#39;play&#39; presents an example in how the action of playing goes through changes and developments, and how making sense of all this requires understandable definitions.

--------------------

Photos taken by Marc in Ancient Times (1980s) - top &#39;Play with Rules&#39;, bottom &#39;Play without Rules&#39;. Can you make out what is actually being played here?

See also Play,  Play Episode,  Softwar, Counting Out, Johan Huizinga, Roger Callois (to come)

 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/game_154s154</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 02:06:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/independent-play_154s249</link>
<title><![CDATA[Independent Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[See Solitary Play.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/independent-play_154s249</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/linear-playground_154s130</link>
<title><![CDATA[Linear Playground]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A linear playground is one in which playground equipment and other play features are placed along a well-used route rather than gathered together into a single space.  
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Most public playgrounds are typically an allocated space within a neighbourhood area sometimes demarcated by a fence or some other kind of boundary. Such a space implies that in order to play children must come &lsquo;to this space&rsquo; and all the playing that then happens is expected to take place within that boundary.

Such a concept is a common cause of friction between children making use of their broader environment for playing and adults who feel playing should only take place within this specific allocated space. 

A linear playground is very different. Rather than the declared boundary of the space being the limitation of playing, a linear playground is designed along a route that children and young people are known to frequent, such as a route to and from school, for example. 

Playground equipment and other play features, such as sand pits, enclosed ball games areas (also known as MUGAs &ndash; multi use games areas), single basketball hoops, balance features, and communal sitting places etc, are placed along this route rather than being gathered together and surrounded by a fence. 

This results in children playing in a way that is more reflective of how children play in general when moving around their neighbourhoods. 

See also Free Movement, and Marketta Kytta (to come). 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/linear-playground_154s130</guid>
<pubDate>10 Feb 2026 00:50:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/locomotor-play_154s205</link>
<title><![CDATA[Locomotor Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Locomotor Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo; defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Locomotor Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo; defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types.

&lsquo;Movement&rsquo; is a key component of Locomotor Play, be it running, jumping, climbing or chasing for example. Yet Hughes takes this further by adding a requirement of the child having control over that movement. When the twin elements of movement and control are present, Hughes refers to this as &lsquo;authentic locomotor play&rsquo;. 

This creates a distinction between, say, a child riding a skateboard under their own power and being on a skateboard while pushed along by someone else; and running freely across the playspace rather than taking part in a race or an obstacle course. 

Again, if this combination of movement and control are present this Play Type overlaps with a number of others, particularily Deep Play, Mastery Play, and Rough &amp; Tumble Play.

---------------------

See also Free Movement Play (not to be confused with Speed &amp; Free Movement, or Forced Movement (to come).

See also Bob Hughes, The Play Types
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/locomotor-play_154s205</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 02:47:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/onlooker-play_154s250</link>
<title><![CDATA[Onlooker Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The third of Mildred Parten&rsquo;s &lsquo;six stages of play&rsquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Onlooker Play is the third stage in the sociologist Mildren Parten&rsquo;s, &lsquo;Six Stages of Play&rsquo; Theory which occupies children between about two and a half and three and a half years of age. 

At this stage, children still appear to be non-social; in fact, it would be easy to interpret what is happening here as not play at all (hence why some people refer to this stage as &lsquo;onlooker behaviour&rsquo;, as opposed to &lsquo;play&rsquo;).

Unlike the previous two stages, children when &lsquo;onlooking&rsquo; are very aware that others are playing around them, and a key characteristic of this can be them intently watching and listening to others playing yet not themselves joining in (see also &lsquo;Play Facing&rsquo; and the &lsquo;Stop and Stare&rsquo;).

That this stage might appear between two and a half and three and a half years of age is significant &ndash; this is the point at which &lsquo;play with rules&rsquo; (games) are being introduced to children&rsquo;s play repertoire, and so this observation and listening is largely about learning what the &lsquo;rules&rsquo; are (see also Playlore).

This also emphasises why the location of sitting places close to where children commonly play is important. 

Originally, it was felt that the various stages in the theory were progressive and once passed through were abandoned, yet modern views on the idea recognises that onlooking is something that children of any age (and adults) regularly engage in. 

 ---------------------

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Mildred Parten, Unoccupied Play, Solitary Play, Parallel Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play, Game, Playlore, Play Facing, and Stop and Stare. 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/onlooker-play_154s250</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:40:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/outdoor-play_154s334</link>
<title><![CDATA[Outdoor Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Playing that takes place outdoors. That&#39;s it. It&#39;s not complicated.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/outdoor-play_154s334</guid>
<pubDate>19 Apr 2026 04:24:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/parallel-play_154s251</link>
<title><![CDATA[Parallel Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The fourth of Mildred Parten&#39;s &#39;Six Stages of Play&#39;. 

Sometimes also called &#39;Adjacent Play&#39;

 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Parallel Play is the fourth and perhaps best-known stage in the sociologist Mildren Parten&rsquo;s, &lsquo;Six Stages of Play&rsquo; Theory which appears in children between about three and a half and four years of age. It is the first of the &lsquo;social&rsquo; stages in the theory.

It describes the play of children who are physically close to each and may be playing more or less the same thing, in more or less the same space, with more or less the same toys and materials, and using more or less the same narrative or story line &ndash; yet they are still not playing together. Think of it as a halfway house between non-social play and social play. 

Seeing children playing back-to-back while in this stage is very common and, even though they may appear unaware of each other (at least on a surface level), there can be conflict over materials during this stage because on some level they actually are aware of each other what they are doing and with what. &ndash; which might lead one child to feel that there is an easy to hand extra stock of materials very close by to grab and add to their own playing.

Originally, it was felt that the various stages in the theory were progressive and once passed through were abandoned, yet modern views on the idea recognises that not only is Parallel Play something that children of all ages engage in, but that it can involve pairs and small groups of children as well as single players. 

It may be that younger children use Parallel Play as a transision from non-social to social play yet that is clearly not the case with older children who are quite capable of playing with others yet will choose at times to play in this parallel way. 

 ---------------------

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Mildred Parten, Unoccupied Play, Solitary Play, Onlooker Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/parallel-play_154s251</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:40:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/parten-mildred-parten_154s115</link>
<title><![CDATA[Parten, Mildred Parten]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Mildred Parten (1902-1970), also known as Mildred Parten Newhall, was an American sociologist known for proposing the &#39;six stages of play&#39; in 1929. 

Those six stages being: Unoccupied Play, Solitary (or Independent) Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel (or Adjacent) Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Mildren Parten (1902-1970), also known as Mildred Parten Newhall, was an American sociologist and play theorist who proposed there being &lsquo;six stages of play&rsquo; in 1929. These stages were based significantly on a series of experimental observations made of children playing for short periods of time.

The six stages being:


	Unoccupied play, in which a child may or may not be on their own yet is playing on their own without reference to any other children
	 
	Solitary (or independent) play, in which a child is playing on their own and may or may not appear unaware of what other children are playing around them
	 
	Onlooker play, in which a child is watching other children playing, yet is not joining in with them
	 
	Parallel (or adjacent) play, in which a child may be playing more or less the same thing as other nearby children, with more or less the same objects and materials, and more or less the same narrative or storyline but is separate from them
	 
	Associative play, in which a child may appear to be part of a group of playmates and even sharing playthings with them, yet is not actually directly connected or communicating with them
	 
	Cooperative play, in which a child is actively engaged in a group of people playing and is fully part of that narrative 



Often confused as a psychologist, Parten was a sociologist and this is evident in her ideas in which dynamics between pairs and groups of children are key. In fact, one of the criticisms often laid against the six stages is that they give prominence to ideas of socialisation as a form of development rather than the cognitive &ndash; except that&rsquo;s the point of using a sociological approach!

As a contemporary of people such as Jean Piaget and Lev Vygoysky it is probably not surprising that the six stages are often interpreted as being progressive; in other words, all children begin with solitary play before moving on to onlooker play, etc., in order. Yet more recent observations suggest that the link with age and progression may not be as clear cut as first suggested. 

The six stages have also tended to be considered more relevant to the early years (Parten&rsquo;s own observations were of children between two and five years of age) yet it is clearly the case that the six stages could easily be applied as a descriptive tool of older children playing too. 

--------------------

What do you think? Are Parten&rsquo;s &lsquo;six stages&rsquo; still relevant today? 

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Unnocupied Play, Solitary Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel Play, Associative Play,  and Cooperative Play
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/parten-mildred-parten_154s115</guid>
<pubDate>06 Feb 2026 05:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/play-episode_154s117</link>
<title><![CDATA[Play Episode]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A distinct piece of playing with an identifiable beginning, middle and end.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[A distinct piece of playing with an identifiable beginning, middle and end. 

When owned by the children playing, a Play Episode is an example of spontaneous playing in which a physical location, objects, playmates, and a narrative/storyline come together to produce a distinct example of playing that has an identifiable beginning, middle, and end. 

More accurately, it has a beginning, middles (plural), and an end as the middle is likely to go through a series of related changes as the narrative and storyline develops. In other words, children may make (or propose) a change to the narrative in their playing which, if accepted by the other players, subtly changes the direction of that playing leading to yet other proposals.

Over time, the narrative may seem completely different from how it started but if no &lsquo;end&rsquo; has been reached yet then all that change is part of the same Play Episode. 

All this playing takes place within a Play Frame yet what begins this Play Episode is likely to have taken place outside the context of the Play Frame and may have formed the spark that created it in the first place. 

--------------------

See also Spontaneous Playing, Game, Play Frame and Play Spark (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/play-episode_154s117</guid>
<pubDate>06 Feb 2026 05:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/playlore_154s121</link>
<title><![CDATA[Playlore]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A term first coined in the 1950s by the folklorists Iona and Peter Opie.

It describes the childlore associated with children&#39;s play, games and playthings .
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Although there had been an interest in what and how people played from a very early point in the development of Folklore as an area of study, it took until the 1950s and the work of the husband and wife team, Iona (1923-2017) and Peter Opie (1918-1982) for Playlore, the study of childlore associated with children&rsquo;s play, games, and playthings, to be considered a legitimate sub-genre. 

Prior to this, descriptions of &lsquo;play&rsquo; and &lsquo;games&rsquo; were usually mixed up in a broader sense with other aspects of folklore and childlore. For example, in Joseph Strutt&rsquo;s 1801 book, &lsquo;Sports and Pastimes of the People of England&rsquo; he describes the games people were playing as far back as the early 1700s and illustrated many of these games with his own woodcuts. However, it is unclear from Strutt&rsquo;s text and illustrations which of these games are being played by adults, which by children, or both.

Throughout the later 19th and early 20th centuries, folkloric studies of play and games tended to be referred to as part of &lsquo;children&rsquo;s street culture&rsquo; and included much more than what children were playing. As in so many other areas of exploring children&rsquo;s lives, the play element often took second place to what were considered more important aspects.

And then came the Opie&rsquo;s.

The story goes that when the Opie&rsquo;s wanted to research for and publish a work specifically on child-to-child lore, with an emphasis on their playing, their publishers expressed doubt that there would be enough material to publish a single work. Six books later they admitted they may have been wrong.

As the Opie&rsquo;s write in the introduction to their 1969 book, &lsquo;Children&rsquo;s Games in Street and Playground&rsquo;, 

&ldquo;In the present study we are concerned solely with the games that children, aged about 6-12, play of their own accord when out of doors, and usually out of sight. We do not include, except incidentally, party games, scout games, team games, or any sport that requires supervision.&rdquo; (preface)

Today, Playlore concentrates largely on that &lsquo;out of sight&rsquo; aspect of children&rsquo;s play, and aims at uncovering what is in many respects a &lsquo;secret world&rsquo;. It explores such things as:


	Starting a Game
	Choosing the &lsquo;it&rsquo; person
	Respite and Truce Terms
	Chasing and Catching Games
	Chase Terms 
	Seeking and Hunting Games
	Racing Games
	Duelling Games
	Daring Game
	Guessing Games
	Acting Games, and Pretending Games
	Rough and Tumble games.


 

Arguably, the greatest contribution of Playlore to the study of children&rsquo;s lives through the past through to the present would be that far from showing that children&rsquo;s play and games have declined, what it actually shows is very little difference in the play of children in Joseph Strutt&rsquo;s day to modern times.

--------------------

[photo: above, a woodcut illustration from Stutt&rsquo;s 1801 book, and below a collection of Opie titles from Marc&#39;s bookshelves]

See also Folklore and Childlore, Iona and Peter Opie, Truce Terms, Chase Terms, Counting Out
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/playlore_154s121</guid>
<pubDate>09 Feb 2026 03:06:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/recapitulative-play_154s209</link>
<title><![CDATA[Recapitulative Play ]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Recapitulative Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo;, defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types.

It is possibly the most misunderstood of the sixteen and is sometimes referred to as &lsquo;the missing Play Type&rsquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[This is a long one. 

Recapitulative Play is one of the sixteen &lsquo;play types&rsquo;, defined by British Playworker Bob Hughes in his 2002 Taxonomy of Play Types

Since the sixteen Play Types were first presented in 2002 , they have often been reproduced with just fifteen listed rather than sixteen, with Recapitulative Play left off the list giving it the unofficial title of &lsquo;the missing Play Type&rsquo;. 

This may have come about in part because the concept has a &lsquo;difficult to believe&rsquo; element to it which has led to this Play Type being rejected by many. Plus, there seems to be general confusion over how to actually cater for it. Personally, Hughes felt troubled by this confusion and rejection of the idea believing that this Play Type was the most significant one of all because of its evolutionary roots and potential as a survival tool across the generations. He also felt that this one Play Type was at the root of many of the others (personal correspondence).

In his 2006 book, &lsquo;Play Types: speculations and possibilities&rsquo;, Hughes concluded that, &ldquo;&hellip; recapitulation could be a vital component of the human evolutionary process and may have been so for millions of years. In other words, recapitulation is an evolutionary imperative that is rooted in natural selection, in the avoidance of extinction pressures and in our very continued existence as a species.&rdquo; (p.50)

The origins behind Recapitulative Play, as defined by Hughes, is in the post 1865 evolutionary ideas being applied to early biological explanations for play. It was believed by many of these early play theorists that previous evolutionary phases of human evolution were reflected in the play of children. Quite how this worked was not understood but a modern interpretation of this would be of &lsquo;biological behaviour passed down through the genes&rsquo;. 

Hughes says, &ldquo;&hellip; what children are doing when they play might be a recap of aspects of our collective evolutionary history.&rdquo; (p.51)

So, the move of mammals from the seas onto land would be represented in a period of crawling, the move from the grass plains into the trees would be represented in the desire to climb and swing, a growing sense of cooperation and community would be reflected in the need to light and huddle around the fire, and the change from hunter gathering to settled communities reflected in shelter building.

However, there is a major problem with this interpretation as there both was and is a serious lack of empirical evidence to support it. Modern genetic research shows very clearly that information in the genes is not transmitted through the generations in this way and these early biological views on the recapitulated transmission of behaviour in general have been thoroughly scientifically debunked. 

This means that the idea of Recapitulation Play as originally presented contains a fatal flaw.

However, there is an alternative explanation for the general idea that does have supporting evidence for it and comes from a non-biological field of study. That is the transmission of behaviours through the generations not via biological genes but through memes, in other words transmission through folk memories and ideas. 

What Hughes appears to have accidentally done in describing Recapitulative Play is combined the biological/gene view of recapitulation (which is not well supported) with the anthropological/folkloric/meme view (which is well supported) but placed a disproportionate amount of emphasis on the former. 

If the gene-based interpretation is completely replaced by the meme-based approach, the idea of Recapitulative Play makes perfect sense. In fact, when Recapitulative Play is listed among the other Play Types, it is often accompanied by meme-based examples rather than gene-based ones simply because they are more believable and make more sense. 

--------------------

See also Bob Hughes, The Play Types, Folklore, Childlore, Playlore  
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/recapitulative-play_154s209</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 02:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/respite-term_154s131</link>
<title><![CDATA[Respite Term]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[See Truce Term. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/respite-term_154s131</guid>
<pubDate>10 Feb 2026 01:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/sand_154s116</link>
<title><![CDATA[Sand]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A natural play material with a long history of facination from children yet only introduced as a deliberate play material around 170 years ago.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[A natural play material made up of teeny tiny pieces of (usually) silica that has taken thousands of years to break down. 

Children have probably used sand as a play material for as long as there have been children and beaches, yet the first person recorded to provide sand in a deliberate way for playing and learning from was in 1847 by the German kindergarten pioneer Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852). However, it does appear that Froebel was acting on the suggestions of a former student.

He designed a box-like structure on a framework with legs and wheels that children stood up to use, very much like what we might call a &lsquo;sand tray&rsquo; today, as can be found in early years provision all over the world. 

These sand trays were very much an indoor feature but influenced by the concept, the City of Berlin took the idea outside. They had begun incorporating places to play within existing city parks in the 1850s (playgrounds not being a common feature yet) and soon added sand. 

At first this took the form of creating &lsquo;sand bergs&rsquo; (literally sand piles) that reportedly proved fascinating for children. This eventually transformed into &lsquo;sand boxes&rsquo; (also called &#39;sand pits&#39;) probably as a way of managing and preserving sand stocks. 

By the end of the 1880s, the inclusion of sand boxes in the fast-growing number of public playgrounds around the world was becoming a standard feature.

The existence of sand on the beach is probably one reason why beaches hold such a facination for children and why they are almost always on the list of &lsquo;favourite places to play &rsquo; in surveys of children and young people. 

Yet one question remains: in a playing context, is sand a &lsquo;loose part&rsquo; or part of an afforded environment? 

What do you think?

--------------------

[photo taken in the 1990s by Marc of the &#39;sand berg&#39; in use at the Tree House Primary School in Belgium. By not being constrained within a &#39;sand box&#39;, every time the sand is topped up it could, and often is, dumped in a completely different place]

See also Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852) (to come)

 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/sand_154s116</guid>
<pubDate>06 Feb 2026 05:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.marc-armitage.com/uploads/154/116/med-PHOTO-Sand-Berg-Tree-House-Primary-School.png' length='1571895' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/six-stages-of-play-theory_154s246</link>
<title><![CDATA[Six Stages of Play Theory]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A sociological theory of Play developed by in 1929 by Mildred Parten (1902-1970).

 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The Six Stages of Play Theory was first proposed by the American Sociologist Mildred Parten (1902-1970), also known as Mildred Parten Newhall, in her PhD Thesis of 1929. 

Parten&rsquo;s theory is particularly important in explaining play for it being one of the very few sociology-based theories of development, despite often being identified as a psychology-based theory, and Parten herself miss-credited as being an educational psychologist. 

In keeping with similar theoretical positions on play of the day, the &lsquo;stages&rsquo; were originally seen as being strictly progressive. In other words, children would become capable of unoccupied play before solitary play, followed by onlooker play, and so on in sequence. This, and a similar tight assumption over the age at which each stage became apparent, are now considered to be fuzzier than strictly progressive, with children often moving back and forth between stages depending on context.  

Despite Parten&rsquo;s original fieldwork being carried out with children under six years of age, and that there is still today a general perception that the stages are relevant only to pre-school children, there has been a shift on this element of the theory too.  For example, It is evident that the six stages can still be applied when describing the play of older children.  

The six stages are: Unoccupied Play, Solitary (or Independent) Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel (or Adjacent) Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play.

------------------------

[Photo - an example of Parallel Play (the fourth stage in Parten&#39;s Six Stages of Play) taken by Marc at Takoma Park Cooperative Nursery School, MD USA in 2013]

See also: Mildred Parten, Unnocupied Play, Solitary Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play. 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/six-stages-of-play-theory_154s246</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:36:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/softwar_154s267</link>
<title><![CDATA[Softwar]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Softwar is a game concept created by the American counter-culture activist Stuart Brand in 1966 that aims to provide playful opportunities to embrace a natural human need for conflict without it developing into aggression.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The term &lsquo;Softwar&rsquo; was first coined in 1966 by the American social activist Stewart Brand (the originator of the New Games Movement). This was done largely in response to human-made aggression around the world particularly, at the time, the Vietnam War. The idea was based on a recognition that conflict is a natural facet of human life, yet that conflict can and does develop into aggression and war. 

As Brand said at the time, &ldquo;It suggested to me that there was something wrong with our conflict forms here.&rdquo; 

So, as a result of a challenge set by San Francisco State College to explore alternatives to these conflict forms, Brand employed his history of applying playful solutions to problems. The result was a series of games. 

&ldquo;What I wanted [Brand said] was a game which would involve fairly intense physical interaction between players&rdquo;, but which would also separate the need for conflict becoming aggression. 

The resulting games were not just meant to be this alternative but also to generate discussion, possibly by adding a spot of controversy. This can be seen in the first game of its type that Brand presented at an anti-war rally for the San Franciso State College &ndash; he called it &lsquo;Slaughter&rsquo;.* 

In this way, Brand introduced, &ldquo;&hellip; the idea that people could design their conflict forms to suit everyone&rsquo;s needs.&rdquo; This directly led to the creation of New Games and the New Games Movement, which sought to bring people together to play together, to form playful experiences together, and provide an opportunity to discuss and learn from each other. 

If this reminds you of another traditional outlet for conflict and combat, it should. He writes, &ldquo;If you don&rsquo;t see much difference between softwar and sports, you&rsquo;re getting the point.&rdquo; It should not come as a surprise to learn, therefore, that various formal sporting bodies around the world in the 1960s and 70s began incorporating elements of softwar into their tournaments in an effort to reduce levels of on-pitch aggression. 

There are also parallels here with (the largely adult form) Softwar and forms of (largely child-based) Rough &amp; Tumble play in which individuals engage in playful conflict even though it is sometimes wrongly perceived as being aggression and violence from those outside the game. 

Both forms of play can result in &lsquo;injury&rsquo; and even &lsquo;death&rsquo;, but while being played in the context of softwar there is a recognition by those playing that this is &lsquo;not real&rsquo; and far from being violent it is actually rule-based, enjoyable and bonding.  

Since the days of the New Games Movement, the concept of softwar has also become a key development concept within the Digital Play/Computer Game world. 

* one of Brand&rsquo;s other games designed to highlight a different issue of the day for discussion was called, &lsquo;Clench a Wench&rsquo;. Can you guess what that was about?

---------------------

Photo: Stuart Brand photographed in 2010.

Notes: all Stuart Brand quotations from the &lsquo;New Games Book&rsquo; (1976) and &lsquo;More New Games&rsquo; (1981) both published by the New Games Foundation.

See also Stuart Brand, New Games/New Games Movement, Rough &amp; Tumble Play, Digital Play, and Game (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/softwar_154s267</guid>
<pubDate>16 Mar 2026 00:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/solitary-play_154s248</link>
<title><![CDATA[Solitary Play]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The second of Mildred Parten&rsquo;s &lsquo;six stages of play&rsquo;.

Sometimes also refered to as &#39;Independent Play&#39;. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Solitary (or Independent) Play is the second stage in the sociologist Mildren Parten&rsquo;s, &lsquo;Six Stages of Play&rsquo; Theory and appears in children between about three months and two and a half years of age. 

At this stage, children may appear to be unaware of what others around them are doing yet unlike in Unoccupied Play (the stage immediately before this one) it appears that children are making an active choice to play in a non-social way. 

They may be playing with building bricks or colouring in, for example, but are more focussed and sustained than in the previous stage. 

Originally it was felt that the six stages were rigidly progressive in that each stage followed and replaced the previous one; but modern views of the theory now recognise that children move backwards and forwards through the stages depending on circumstances and that the age ranges first considered in the theory are less rigid.

Unoccupied Play is the first stage in the theory were this might be evident as it is clear that children of all ages (and sometimes adults) will play independently yet quite happily of others, and be either aware or not of what others are doing around them.  

 ---------------------

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Mildred Parten, Unoccupied Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/solitary-play_154s248</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:38:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/spontaneous-playing_154s119</link>
<title><![CDATA[Spontaneous Playing]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A way of describing playing in which children do not need nor seek out the involvement of an adult to begin, develop, and end their playing, first coined by the Playworker Marc Armitage in the early 2000s.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The idea of &lsquo;spontaneous playing&rsquo; (also called autonomous playing, or spontaneous and autonomous playing) is based on a quotation in the Paul Bonel and Jennie Lindon book, &lsquo;Good Practice in Playwork&rsquo; first published in 1996.

&ldquo;For play to take place in a free and spontaneous way the conditions have to be right.&rdquo;  (p.14)

The idea was developed further by the playworker Marc Armitage in the early 2000s as a central pillar in the idea of &#39;initial possibilities&#39; and &#39;initial Play Cues and initial Play Returns&#39;.

Spontaneous playing refers to the ability of children to be in complete control of their playing from the very beginning to the end in which they do not need nor seek out the involvement of an adult. This could be further defined as:


	play which children begin autonomously, without the need or involvement of an adult
	 
	play which children change, develop, extend autonomously, without the need or involvement of an adult, and
	 
	play which children end in their own time autonomously, without the need or involvement of an adult


If you are thinking that this description looks remarkably similar to the way children play when there are no adults present, you would be correct. The difference here is that spontaneous playing is being applied within a staffed setting as a deliberate policy to reflect as closely as possible the way children play outside of that setting. 

The &lsquo;conditions being right&rsquo; in this context simply means that the physical space and the objects (in that space), have been curated by the adults (in that space) in such a way that playing can begin, develop, and end without the direct involvement of those same adults.  

--------------------

See also Initial Possibilities, Dynamic or Continuing Possibilities, and BOOK: Good Practice in Playwork (1996) (to come)
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/spontaneous-playing_154s119</guid>
<pubDate>06 Feb 2026 06:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/tag-term_154s132</link>
<title><![CDATA[Tag Term]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[See Chase Term. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/tag-term_154s132</guid>
<pubDate>10 Feb 2026 01:17:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/truce-term_154s128</link>
<title><![CDATA[Truce Term]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A term used largely by folklorists and playlorists to describe the stategy that children use to temporarily make them imune from capture within a game. Also known as a Respite Term.

These special words are often local to a specific location and include terms such as &#39;kings&#39;, &#39;crosses&#39;, &#39;barley&#39;, and &#39;time-out&#39; among others. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[A Truce Term, sometimes also called a Respite Term, is a word (often associated with some kind of hand signal) that provides temporary respite during a game.

For example, stopping in the middle of a chasing game, calling out &ldquo;Kings!&rdquo; while crossing the first two fingers of one hand would mean that person cannot be caught for a moment. 

These terms have a geographical context to them to such an extent that it is possible to guess roughly where an individual is from by asking what Truce Term they used as a child. This also means that a term that works in one place might not work in another.

Truce Terms used in this way have a history in Europe that goes back at least as far as the 14th Century and are yet another example of children and young people preserving a concept that was at one point common in the adult world. But, as the folklorists Iona and Peter Opie point out in their book, &lsquo;The Lore and Language of School Children&rsquo; (1959),

&ldquo;&hellip; when a child seeks respite he uses a term to which there is now no exact equivalent in adult speech.&rdquo; (p.141/142)

Common Truce Terms in the British Isles include Kings, Crosses, Fainites, Vainites, Skinch, Barley, Cree, Pax, and the more recent Time-Out. Variations on these terms can be found all over the world; in Australia, for example, local Truce Terms such as Bar, Bars, and Barley, all of which have a particularly Scottish origin, are common.

They are often used in association with some form of hand signal, the most common which is a simple crossing of the fingers but in Scotland and France in particular the most common hand signal is to hold up a thumb. Various other combinations of crossed fingers are common too (see photo).

Where common Truce Terms overlap they sometimes combine to make a new term. For example, &#39;Kings&#39; and &#39;Crosses&#39; are both common Truce Terms in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire (UK) and parts of the USA yet geographically when these two terms come into contact they often become the single phrase &#39;Cross Kings&#39;. 

What did Truce Term did you use when you were younger, and where did you spend your childhood?

--------------------

See also Childlore, and Playlore

[photo taken by Marc in 1989 at a school in Lincolnshire during a project to explore the playlore terminology of the playground, which was published by Boothferry Borough Council as &#39;A Rhyme in Time&#39; (1994)]

 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/truce-term_154s128</guid>
<pubDate>09 Feb 2026 03:41:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/unocupied-play_154s247</link>
<title><![CDATA[Unocupied Play ]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The first of Mildred Parten&rsquo;s &lsquo;six stages of play&rsquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Unoccupied Play is the first stage in the sociologist Mildren Parten&rsquo;s, &lsquo;Six Stages of Play&rsquo; Theory which appears in children between birth and about three months of age.

At this stage, very young children may or may not be on their own but are playing on their own in a non-social way without reference to any other children and even apparently unaware of the presense of others. 

They may be playing with an object they&rsquo;ve found or some aspects of the environment like a light reflecting on the floor, for example, but are easily distracted by another object or element of the environment &ndash; a lack of focus is one of the key characteristics of this stage. 

Originally it was felt that this is the form of play that most occupies children between birth and around three months of age after which it develops into the next stage and more or less disappears, but modern views of the theory are not so rigid in this thinking. 

---------------------

See also the Six Stages of Play Theory, Mildred Parten, Solitary Play, Onlooker Play, Parallel Play, Associative Play, and Cooperative Play 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.marc-armitage.com/glossary/unocupied-play_154s247</guid>
<pubDate>16 Feb 2026 03:37:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
