The Exploratory Problem-Solving Play and Growth Mindset for Young Children in the Light of Dweck’s Theory

Introduction

Playing has always been contributed as a main cognitive component for developing a young child’s brain and intellect. Through various research conducted, it has been identified that children obtain facts experimentally by actively engaging themselves in different types of play, examination, experimentation, and discovery (Whitebread et al., 2009). It can also be acknowledged that children’s mindset is quite similar to the initial stage of dough, which requires being formed based on well-defined structures to lead them to the prosperous development of the mind in the future. According to Bodrova, Germeroth and Leong (2013), many psychologists have proven that a young child mainly tends to be involved in various play activities, which are probably the best learning process for recurrent brain activities. Children in the early stages of their childhood can identify risk-taking attitudes, explore the unknown world around them and more importantly, they can absorb a wider range of fundamental knowledge.

The essential dimensions of play have remained a major focus for psychologists, as the enjoyable and continuous response stimuli may help in the child’s brain’s internal development to imbibe excellent growth mindset opportunities. The concept of a growth mindset in young children refers to a child’s capability to withstand challenges that come along in life (Ladd and Dinella, 2009). Such a young child who has experienced how to strive in life is more likely to persist in the face of challenges than one who has not been exposed to the outside world (Dweck, 2002). This paper aims to determine the importance of play experiences as an appropriate form to promote a young child’s growth mindset. The following essay will focus on a young child’s behaviours about embracing the structure of a growth mindset through play experiences and discussing different argumentative gestures regarding some exposition of the data that will help interpret the overall scenario.

Literature Review

The Exploratory Problem Solving Play

The research undertaken by Lubienski (2000, p.454) explained exploratory problem-solving play as the play in an environment where children can be provided with the broader horizon to play with bits and pieces in loose parts’ model. The research further professed that this kind of problem-solving play poses questions of how and why things are being done and fit together into desired certain items. Therefore, Fyfe, Rittle-Johnson and DeCaro (2012, p.1094) stated that exploratory play is regarded as the investigative play undertaken with objects’ help.

It has also been identified that these play types are associated with children’s curiosity about what is not being completely understood or novel by nature. However, Landry, Smith and Swank (2006, p.627) argued that exploratory play sometimes shares the same characteristics and overlap with another type of play called sensorimotor play. It has raised an important issue. Brown and Chandrasekaran (2014) stated that play, by definition, can be regarded as a privileging position of means over ends and when the child is provided with the objects to explore they often do so by keeping the end in mind. Therefore, an exploratory play can provide the notion of ends to means where the result will be the child’s focus and ability to solve problems effectively.

The Role Play

According to the study conducted by Liu, Cheng and Huang (2011, p.1097) roleplay are also known as imitation play which is regarded as an effective way of letting the children explore their own identities as their own personalities and as a general idea. However, Rumelhart (2017, p.17) argued that role play might involve e facts and pertinacious scenarios that can be far from reality. On the other hand, the study undertaken by Ramani and Brownell (2014, p.92) showed that role play is one that includes imitations of accents, traits, race, culture and even gender. However, some studies, such as one undertaken by VanHoorn et al. (2014) showed a significant relationship between pretend role play and mind theory. However, the study has further revealed that sometimes during role-play, children often make an imaginary companion.

Consequently, the study conducted by Brooker (2017, p.14) found that when a child has made an imaginary friend, it often results in the representation of the mental state of the companion. There might be a positive impact on a role play on a child’s cognitive thinking perspective. It has been identified in the study of Hwang, Hung and Chen (2014, p.129) that regardless of causation in correlation in social pretend and cognitive perspective thinking, it is also purported that children who have been engaged in creating imaginary friends through role-playing often have an advanced comprehension of the mind and other factors which can promote cognitive thinking.

Difference between Role Play and Exploratory Play

According to Bodrova, Germeroth and Leong (2013, p.111), exploratory problem-solving play involves blocks and bits and pieces which children are given to assemble to create something new out of their own experience. In other words, it is often associated with the novelty of the situation where a child’s curiosity plays a crucial role. On the other hand, Ladd and Dinella (2009, p.190) identified that role play is more of an individual play where children explore their own personalities by discovering alternative personalities. However, the pioneers of exploratory problem play argue that role play might create problems in developing a child’s mindset. The study conducted by Fyfe, Rittle-Johnson, and DeCaro (2012, p.1094) showed that exploratory problem-solving play is different from role play in the situations of reality and non-reality.

In this way, Landry, Smith, and Swank (2006, p.627) opined that in exploratory play children are more inclined to explore how and why of the situation which is often lacking in role-play scenarios. However, it has been argued by Hwang, Hung, and Chen (2014, p.129) that exploratory problem-solving play might not provide overall satisfaction to the children. The study has further revealed that when children are given physical pieces of objects to solve the puzzle, they often create a picture in their mind that they want to achieve. However, the issue might arise when their achievements do not match their expectations. Nevertheless, teachers’ exploratory and role play are two different scenarios to help children for a growth mindset.

Dweck’s Theory of a Growth Mindset

According to Ladd and Dinella (2009, p.190), Dweck’s theory of growth mindset has been regarded as one of the implicit theories which profess that people have certain nature and motivation through which they learn and practice. While researching the earlier stage, Dweck had identified the theories of “incremental and entity. Lubienski (2000, p.454) stated that these theories were based on whether the individuals gain more success and achieve more knowledge through the tasks that require high-level intelligence and can put their intelligence into practice. Concerning this, Fyfe, Rittle-Johnson, and DeCaro (2012, p.1094) stated that Dweck’s proposed mindset theory; the study further showed that the main reason behind proposing the theory had been the integration of ideas into one platform. Dweck (2002) stated that a growth mindset is defined as particular attributes to learn the unlearned to succeed. The researcher also professed that people with a growth mindset are not terrified or scared of failures; instead, they consider failures as a need further to pay attention to the hidden attributes of their personality.

According to Dweck (2002), individuals with growth mindsets take every failure or mistake as an opportunity to learn. However, Landry, Smith, and Swank (2006, p.627) argued that each individual has their own competencies which develop over time so if it can be stated that a growth mindset can collide with a fixed mindset cannot be wrong. Dweck proposed that motivation has been regarded as one factor through which a fixed mindset can be turned into a growth mindset. However, there has been an ongoing debate on this notion. As it has been explained by Ramani and Brownell (2014, p.94) that praising ability and intelligence cannot be regarded as an element for achieving self-esteem, it would rather jeopardize success. On the other hand, Hwang, Hung, and Chen (2014, p.129) stated that the basic encouragement should not be just praising the child for their efforts but actual guidance of what can be further done.

Exploratory Problem Solving Play in the Light of Dweck’s Theory

The study conducted by Dweck (2017) showed that exploratory problem play could be regarded as an effective method to drive curiosity in children. In the light of Dweck’s theory growth can be achieved by providing various problem-solving initiatives in children and praising them every step of the way. However, Hochanadel and Finamore (2015, p.47) argued that children have different natures and therefore, different mindsets. The study further stated that teachers might motivate young children with a fixed mindset throughout the exploratory play. The main reason behind this might be the expectation of fixed results.

Nevertheless, Dweck explained that children with a growth mindset and fixed mindset could be provided with different opportunities following their mindset and approach to the problem. However, Yeager et al. (2016, p.374) stated that exploratory play could purport the children to be more open to new opportunities and new knowledge horizons. According to Dweck, the exploratory play works better for children with a growth mindset who consider that intelligence is malleable. However, an argument has been made by Boaler (2013, p.143) that if exploratory play can be more effective for children with a growth mindset then what should be done for fixed mindsets who think that intelligence is unchangeable and fixed.