What should we call play? Teachers’ discursive negotiation of play’s legitimacy in schools

Although play is widely recognised as important for children’s learning, wellbeing, and development, it often occupies an uncertain place in formal schooling. Existing research has largely focused on the benefits, barriers, and provision of play, with less attention to the terminology through which play is framed and legitimised. This article examines how teachers across diverse international contexts use, adapt, and resist terminology for play and recess in schools. Drawing on qualitative responses from 135 in-service teachers across 25 countries, the paper analyses teachers’ terminology choices and the rationales underpinning those choices. Guided by Framing Theory, the analysis generated four themes: rebranding play for institutional legitimacy, resisting relabelling to protect authenticity, competing semantic pathways of legitimisation, and terminology as audience-oriented professional strategy. The article argues that play in schools is negotiated not only through policy and provision, but also through language.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Educational Studies
Published
2026-07-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2026.2709584
Primary Topic
Early Childhood Education and Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What should we call play? Teachers’ discursive negotiation of play’s legitimacy in schools

Brendon Hyndman
Educational Studies
Early Childhood Education and Development
article

What should we call play? Teachers’ discursive negotiation of play’s legitimacy in schools

Brendon Hyndman
article en

Abstract

Although play is widely recognised as important for children’s learning, wellbeing, and development, it often occupies an uncertain place in formal schooling. Existing research has largely focused on the benefits, barriers, and provision of play, with less attention to the terminology through which play is framed and legitimised. This article examines how teachers across diverse international contexts use, adapt, and resist terminology for play and recess in schools. Drawing on qualitative responses from 135 in-service teachers across 25 countries, the paper analyses teachers’ terminology choices and the rationales underpinning those choices. Guided by Framing Theory, the analysis generated four themes: rebranding play for institutional legitimacy, resisting relabelling to protect authenticity, competing semantic pathways of legitimisation, and terminology as audience-oriented professional strategy. The article argues that play in schools is negotiated not only through policy and provision, but also through language.

Educational Studies
Charles Sturt University (AU)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Early Childhood Education and Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.