Fostering Play Through Virtual Teaching: Challenges, Barriers, and Strategies

Abstract

Early childhood teachers routinely facilitate play-based learning experiences in their physical classrooms; however, the pivot to virtual teaching platforms created a barrier for providing age appropriate, play-based learning opportunities during the COVID-19 pandemic. There are few studies exploring how to promote play in the virtual classroom or what types of activities and learning experiences promote play in synchronous and asynchronous settings. Therefore, this study explored the barriers and challenges to fostering play through virtual teaching and the types of play-based instruction teachers were effectively able to implement in their virtual classroom. This study used content analysis along with descriptive analysis of an online survey with open-ended prompts that early childhood teachers completed (n = 76). Findings revealed two major themes related to challenges and barriers in teachers’ efforts to foster play-based learning through virtual formats. Even though teachers noted significant challenges and barriers they identified multiple play-based activities they were able to facilitate effectively through virtual formats. These activities were categorized through the theoretical framework of Piaget’s stages of the development of play with the addition of guided play. Implications for how play can be fostered through virtual teaching in early childhood classrooms were discussed.

Due to the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic, many early childhood centers and schools transitioned to virtual (online) learning, which is an educational process that takes place over the internet (Merriam-Webster, n.d.); this shift changed the nature and scope of teaching and learning. Teachers who had to transition to teaching virtually adapted to the unprecedented situation and made significant efforts to provide virtual learning activities (Steed & Leech, 2021).

Rooted in developmentally appropriate practice (Copple & Bredekamp, 2008), the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the Fred Rogers Center provided the position statement which noted that when used intentionally and appropriately, technology and interactive media can be effective tools to support children’s learning in 2012 (National Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC], 2012). Still, virtual teaching is not the norm for most teachers. Therefore, it poses significant challenges (Dhawan, 2020), especially for early childhood educators. For example, early childhood teachers may have trouble translating play-based learning experiences to the virtual setting.

According to constructivist theory, the principal theory of learning in early childhood education (ECE), play is a central component in early learning. Play-based learning combined with some degree of adult guidance and scaffolding engages children to construct new knowledge (Van Hoorn et al., 2015; Weisberg et al., 2016) and has been linked with higher academic achievement (Marcon, 2002; Zosh et al., 2013) and executive functioning (Berk & Meyers, 2013). Children in child-centered, play-based environments have been shown to be engaged in more effective problem-solving behaviors compared to children in more teacher-directed environments (Gmitrová & Gmitrov, 2004; McInnes et al., 2009).

Although ECE teachers routinely create play-based learning experiences in the classroom, the virtual setting can pose a barrier for providing interactive and engaging learning experiences. Even though there is emerging evidence on various opportunities and challenges for ECE teachers’ virtual teaching (e.g., Dayal & Tiko, 2020; O’Keeffe & McNally, 2021), information on how teachers incorporate play into virtual teaching to support children’s learning is scarce. Thus, the current study examined the challenges and barriers ECE teachers faced in their efforts to foster play through virtual teaching, focusing on the types of play-based instruction teachers were effectively able to facilitate virtually.

Theoretical Framework

The constructivist approach guides our study, which endorses play as child-directed, active, engaging, and involving a child’s social world and community (Mooney, 2013). For this paper, the understanding and organization of play in virtual settings are based on Piaget’s stages of the development of play (Van Hoorn, et al, 2015) and extended by including the category of guided play (Weisberg et al., 2016).

Piaget’s stages of the development of play, also known as types of play, include the categories of functional play and symbolic play, which consist of constructive play, dramatic play, and games with rules (Van Hoorn et al., 2015). Functional play is predominantly a form of play for infants and toddlers in which children repeatedly practice interacting with objects, people, and language to develop schemes (Gestwicki, 1999). However, older children also engage in functional play such as riding bikes, moving their bodies to music, repeatedly putting the same puzzle together, along with several other repetitive activities they find engaging. Symbolic play involves mental representation and make-believe, also known as pretend play. It forms the foundation for abstract thinking and is critical to human development (Van Hoorn et al., 2015). Constructive play is a form of symbolic play because it involves children representing their experiences by utilizing objects to make other things (Gestwicki, 1995). For example, a child may construct a house out of blocks or draw a picture to illustrate a firetruck. Dramatic play is another form of symbolic play; children create imaginary roles and situations using representations of objects that are more abstract, utilizing language and gestures (Van Hoorn et al., 2015). Finally, games with rules are one more form of symbolic play that includes adherence to external governed play, such as Chutes and Ladders, or negotiated or agreed upon rules that the children can invent (Gestwicki, 1995; Van Hoorn et al., 2015).

Another category of play is guided play. Weisberg et al. (2016) describe guided play as play-based activities integrating teacher engagement to support learning. This type of play is referred to as ‘intentional teaching’ (Epstein, 2007), ‘conceptual play’ (Fleer, 2011), ‘educational inquiry’ (Youngquist & Pataray-Ching, 2004), and ‘pedagogical play’ (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie, 2013). While play holds the characteristic of being child-centered, in an ECE classroom, the teacher remains key to the play centered-curriculum. Therefore, in guided play, the knowledgeable teacher offers scaffolding when appropriate and orchestrates the classroom environment or activity in a way that meets and fosters the developmental needs of the children in their play (Van Hoorn et al., 2015).

Use of Technology and Virtual Teaching in Early Childhood Classrooms

Virtual teaching has grown in the last two decades (Singh & Thurman, 2019). Research in the last decade has shown that virtual instruction in some early intervention and K-12 settings has been effective in improving students’ learning outcomes (Behl et al., 2017; Merchant et al., 2014; Olsen et al., 2012; Poole et al., 2020). Despite its growing popularity and potential benefits, research findings on the quality and impact of virtual teaching are mostly mixed, which has raised concern among practitioners, researchers, and the public about the effectiveness of such methods (Dong et al., 2020; Dorn et al., 2020; Duckworth et al., 2021; Means et al., 2009). Also, most studies on virtual teaching were conducted in K-12 or early intervention settings but not in early childhood settings. While these findings are informative, they may not apply to virtual teaching in ECE settings due to its inherent differences from early intervention (e.g., serving multiple children vs. one–one–one interaction). Evidence on virtual teaching and learning in ECE settings is emerging, but there is still a significant gap in the literature.

In the field of ECE, integrating technology into classrooms for young children has not received positive views from teachers and parents (Chen & Chang, 2006; Mertala, 2019). Many ECE teachers believe that traditional methods (e.g., hands-on and in-person) are more effective and afford a tactile experience for the child which allows for a more active learning role (Mertala, 2019). While this belief is supported by educational theory, the fact that virtual teaching is becoming more of a permanent option for children and families suggests there is a need for a mindset that incorporates ways to teach children virtually using developmentally appropriate practices. Teachers' positive views and attitudes toward technology integration are critical as they affect teachers’ use of technology and virtual teaching practices and impact children's motivation and learning (Kara & Cagiltay, 2017; Mertala, 2019; Miranda & Russell, 2012). Another common concern is the lack of training and support for using technology and virtual teaching for ECE teachers (Trust & Whalen, 2020). This lack of training and support may make teachers feel unprepared and incompetent in choosing and implementing new technologies (Chen & Chang, 2006).

During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual teaching became mandatory in many ECE settings. Several teachers and administrators expect that the need for virtual teaching will continue in the future (Hu et al., 2021). With the shift to virtual teaching, early childhood teachers attempted to quickly create online lessons for children in various ways (Hodges et al., 2020), such as replicating their traditional classes via video conferencing platforms (Lederman, 2020) and modifying their traditional methods to engage children (Allen et al., 2020). In the past, early childhood teachers have used technology as a teaching tool (e.g., showing pictures or video, Kalogiannakis, 2010), but teaching virtually requires next-level knowledge and skills in technology integration. Teaching virtually as a primary teaching modality requires teachers to gain new skills and feel competent in providing meaningful learning experiences online (Chen & Chang, 2006; Dhawan, 2020; Trust & Whalen, 2020).

Providing play-based experiences is vital in creating meaningful learning environments for children. However, some evidence suggests teachers are experiencing barriers to providing play virtually. As indicated by Ford et al. (2021), virtual teaching is inherently challenging for any age group, but it would be even more challenging for young children. The abrupt transition to virtual teaching does not allow much time to prepare for virtual teaching and has intensified job demands and stress (Allen et al., 2020). Many teachers reported that children do not have access to basic technological equipment and internet access to access learning content and participate in virtual classes (Dias et al., 2020; Ford et al., 2021). Teachers often reported difficulty engaging children and communicating with parents through virtual teaching (Dayal & Tiko, 2020; Dias et al., 2020; Ford et al., 2021; Hu et al., 2021; Szente, 2020; Tarrant & Nagasawa, 2020). As teachers experienced various challenges, many teachers experienced lack of resources and support, training, and consistent guidance for virtual teaching (Ford et al., 2021).

According to Hu et al., (2021), most preschool teachers provided digital content (e.g., uploading videos, sharing virtual resources) and have limited teacher–child interactions to deliver teaching (e.g., real-time interaction in a synchronous environment). Despite myriad challenges and lack of resources and training, many ECE teachers actively sought resources, learned independently, and collaborated with others to engage children and provide them developmentally appropriate and play-based virtual learning experiences (Ford et al., 2021).

While more research evidence on virtual teaching is emerging, there is still a lack of research on how teachers deliver content, which includes their ability to support play. As the effects and impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic may be long-lasting, play is even more necessary as it provides a natural medium to help reduce stress and build resilience in children, particularly in times of crisis (Anderson-McNamee & Bailey, 2010; Rao, 2018). In addition, play provides a valuable escape from uncertainty and stress, offering a sense of normalcy and safety (Yogman et al., 2018). Thus, it is crucial to study how ECE teachers provided learning opportunities through play in a virtual space during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Current Study

There are a few studies that indicated endorsement for play-based virtual teaching (O’Keeffe & McNally, 2021), but there is uncertainty regarding the capacity for ECE teachers to use this type of teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic (Steed & Leech, 2021). Currently, limited resources and research are available on how to apply developmentally appropriate practices (including play-based instruction) in an ECE virtual classroom. Further, understanding the challenges associated with implementing play-based learning through virtual teaching is an understudied area. More research is needed to understand teachers’ experiences and what types of activities and learning experiences promote play in a virtual classroom. Thus, the current study examined ECE teachers’ provision of virtual teaching, focusing on play-based learning activities and related challenges by seeking to answer the following research questions:

1. What challenges and barriers to providing play-based instruction are more prevalent in virtual teaching?

2. What type of play-based instruction did teachers effectively implement in their virtual classroom?

Methods

This qualitative study used content analysis of the open-ended responses along with descriptive analysis of an online survey to understand how ECE teachers implemented play-based instruction in a virtual setting and what challenges and barriers existed.

Participants

After obtaining IRB approval, ECE teachers (serving children from birth through age 8) who had taught any form of virtual instruction in the United States (hybrid, synchronous, asynchronous) during the 2020–2021 school year were invited through email and social media to participate in this study. Recruitment methods included emailing local schools, using social media such as Facebook, and reaching out through national organizations. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a shift in school functioning with closures beginning in March 2020 and various rearrangements of teaching options by January 2021, including in-person or virtual teaching (i.e., hybrid, synchronous, asynchronous) options. Therefore, recruitment efforts reached teachers with a range of experience teaching virtually. Between January and June 2021, an online consent form and survey were sent out to teachers who were currently teaching in ECE classrooms. To participate, teachers had to have utilized some form of virtual teaching in the 2020–2021 school year and have taught children between the ages of birth through third grade between the 2020–2021 school year. Initially, 86 teachers completed the survey however, ten were excluded because they either taught higher-ed or served in a non-teaching role (i.e., retired, principal). Therefore, 76 early childhood teachers from around the United States participated in this study (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Teacher demographics and background information (n = 76 teachers)

Characteristics	%
Age (years)
18–24	7.9
25–34	22.4
35–44	32.9
45–54	26.3
55+	10.5
Race
White	77.3
Black	4.0
American Indian/Alaska Native	8.0
Asian	6.7
Other	4.0
Hispanic/Latino Origin (yes)	5.3
Gender
Female	99.0
Other	1.0
Education level
Graduate degree	30.3
Bachelor’s degree	64.5
Associate degree or lower	5.2
No experience teaching virtually prior to COVID-19	89.0
Total years teaching
1–5 years	26.3
6–10 years	26.3
11–15 years	15.8
15+ years	31.6
Age teaching (2020–2021 school year)
Infant/Toddler (birth—2 years old)	5.3
Preschool/PreK (3–5 years old)	63.2
Kindergarten	7.9
First grade	7.9
Second grade	7.9
Mixed ages/other	7.9
Taught a different ECE age/grade in the previous year	21.1
Teaching Modality (2020–2021 school year)
Fully in-person	22.7
Fully online	25.3
Hybrid (some in-person/some online)	32.0
Began in-person and moved online	6.7
Began online and moved to in-person	8.0
Other combination of modalities	5.3
Teaching Philosophy
Constructivist	77.1
Behaviorist	4.3
Maturationist	5.7
Combination	12.9

Measures

Teachers in the study completed an online survey with multiple choice and open-ended response questions. Multiple choice questions addressed demographic and background information (e.g., What grade do you currently teach?, Have you had previous experience teaching prior to the COVID-19 pandemic?), and questions about teaching experience, play-based instruction, and teaching beliefs and practices (e.g., How have you incorporated play-based instruction in the virtual classroom using pretend, imaginative, or dramatic play?, How would you describe your personal teaching philosophy?). The purpose of the teaching beliefs and practices questions was to better understand teachers' foundational beliefs related to play-based instructional practices, given that certain philosophies more clearly align with implementing play (i.e., constructivist and maturationist philosophies) (Kohlberg & Mayer, 1972). Open-ended response questions asked teachers their personal perspectives on:1) types of play-based activities that were effectively implemented in their online classroom, and 2) challenges and barriers they experienced when trying to implement play-based activities in their online classroom.

Data Analysis

Content analyses of open-ended responses and descriptive analysis were used for this study. Content analysis as a research technique allowed the researchers to determine the presence of words, concepts, and themes within given qualitative data of participant responses and analyze the meanings and relationships among those words, concepts, and themes (Berelson, 1954). This technique has been applied to the verbatim responses to code those responses into a meaningful set of categories that lend themselves to further analysis (Berelson, 1954).

Descriptive statistics were used to analyze teacher and background information and the frequency of play categories teachers found effective in their virtual teaching. Qualitative analysis was used for the open-ended survey questions and included conducting level one (provisional coding) and level two (pattern) coding (Saldaña, 2021). After cleaning the data, the first two authors developed a list of provisional codes and then individually coded the qualitative data (i.e., teachers’ open-ended responses in the online survey). Once all responses were coded, the authors met to refine codes and categories and discuss any discrepancy until reaching consensus. Finally, the two authors conducted reliability checks with all responses to the open-ended question and established inter-coder reliability ranging from 90 to 100% agreement.

Each open-ended question was analyzed separately using two cycles of coding. First, the open-ended question on challenges and barriers to implementing play-based virtual instruction was analyzed using provisional codes for level one (Saldaña, 2021) that were developed before the analysis. These codes (e.g., technical issue, connectivity issue, parent involvement, and student participation) were based on research related to challenges and barriers to virtual teaching (Dayal & Tiko, 2020; O’Keeffe & McNally, 2021) and play-based instruction (e.g., Kane, 2016). Pattern coding was used for level two coding (Saldaña, 2021) with emerging themes related to whether challenges and barriers were unique to virtual instruction (connection issues, home distractions, and lack of access to materials) or specific to fostering play virtually (lack of experience teaching virtually, lack of support, and teacher mindset).

The second open-ended question on forms of play in the virtual classroom asked teachers to describe effective ways they implemented play-based activities in the virtual classroom. Level one provisional codes (Saldaña, 2021) were based on common but not mutally exclusive characteristics of play (e.g., child-directed, open-ended, scaffolding, hands-on, pretend play, games, inquiry, and physical movement) (Van Hoorn, et al., 2015; Weisberg et al., 2016). The process of level two pattern coding (Saldaña, 2021) organized the play-based activities into categories of play guided by the theoretical framework). Once all responses were coded and inter-coder reliability was established for this question, the frequency of occurrence of the activities in each type of category of play was calculated.

Results

Challenges and Barriers

The survey data collected teachers’ open-ended responses that described challenges and barriers they encountered when trying to incorporate play-based instruction in their virtual classroom. Two major themes emerged from the analysis of the open-ended responses using the two-level coding process: (1) challenges related to virtual instruction and (2) specific barriers to fostering play-based instruction.

Challenges Related to Virtual Instruction

The first major theme of challenges related to virtual instruction included reported difficulties unique to teaching online. The greatest challenge reported regarding virtual instruction was that students did not consistently have access to materials at home that were needed for lessons. One teacher explained, “Not every student has the same resources at home” while another teacher listed, “Lack of knowing what is available at home” to be a significant challenge. The second greatest challenge reported was student engagement in the virtual setting. Teachers reported a range of student participation and interaction. For example, some teachers with asynchronous classrooms did not directly interact with the students and reported having inadequate information on whether they participated and how they engaged with the material and activities. Several teachers with synchronous classrooms also expressed difficulty fostering student engagement and interaction. A few teachers attributed this challenge to children’s age and comfort level. For instance, a teacher explained it is “hard for preschoolers to interact with peers or teachers in a play situation” in a synchronous virtual classroom. Another teacher noted, “Students are more shy on camera than in person and some refuse to interact.” External distractions such as background noise or siblings interfering and distracting the students were also often mentioned as interruptions to the level of engagement in a virtual classroom. Lastly, several teachers also listed common technology issues, such as bad internet connections and insufficient wi-fi, as being a virtual instruction challenge.

Barriers to Fostering Play Virtually

The second major theme that emerged was specific barriers to fostering play virtually. The most highly reported barrier was the lack of support. Survey responses showed that most teachers felt they had a higher degree of autonomy in their instructional practices (52.9% felt a great extent of autonomy) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Whereas, during the 2020–2021 school year 49.3% felt they had more autonomy. Teachers noted a lack of support from both parents and school administration. Regarding lack of support from parents, one teacher wrote, “Many parents don’t understand play-based instruction and prefer rote learning.” Another noted, “Lack of understanding of the importance of play from parents despite different ways of explaining it.” One teacher explained that in asynchronous classrooms,

It’s hard to document what standard play is covering. It’s also hard to get parents to take a picture or record a video of the students playing for documentation purposes. Without me being right there, it is hard for me to justify putting that as a completed standard or assignment.

In addition, a teacher shared that some parents’ lack of support for play-based activities was due to not wanting “a mess or a ton of things to clean-up.” This comment refers to the fact that hands-on and exploratory activities may utilize “messy” materials such as paint, mud, or water or require many materials that require extensive clean-up (i.e., small beads or pretend food). Teachers also referenced the lack of support from administration in implementing play-based teaching with statements such as, “Being forced to follow curriculum to fidelity,” “schedule is rigid,” and “everyone has different expectations.”

A second barrier highly reported related to implementing play virtually was teachers’ lack of experience with virtual instruction. This lack of experience teaching virtually was woven throughout the teachers’ comments related to their lack of experience with the technology platform chosen by their school district, and lack of education on how to teach in a virtual classroom. Teachers’ lack of experience was also evident in comments like “[providing play virtually is] impossible.” These types of ‘absolute’ comments came from many teachers even though 77.1% of teachers in the study identified themselves as having a constructivist teaching philosophy (see Table 1). In addition, teachers expressed how difficult it was to not be able to teach in person, saying, “The time for extended free play and dramatic play that would happen in a classroom is not feasible online.” Another explained, “Young children do not have the attention span that would allow them to remain attentive through a virtual lesson.”

Play-Based Lessons Facilitated Virtually

Even with significant challenges and barriers to fostering play through virtual teaching, many teachers provided specific explanations for play-based lessons or activities they were able to facilitate virtually. Of the 76 participating teachers who completed the survey, 40 teachers provided a total of 57 examples of types of play that were implemented effectively in the virtual classroom (see Table 2). Some participants listed multiple examples of play-based activities which explains why there were more examples than the number of teachers’ responses. Findings were organized and guided by our theoretical framework of Piaget’s stages of the development of play (Van Hoorn et al., 2015) with the addition of guided play (Weisberg et al., 2016). It is important to note that some examples provided under each type of play could be interpreted to fit in another type of play, which demonstrates that play is not one-dimensional and is influenced by each child’s individuality and unique nature.

Table 2.

Frequency of reported effective play-based lessons or activities in virtual classroom (n = 40 teachers)

Type of play	Frequency	%	Sample comments
Functional play	13	23	“Object play—everyone had same household object to explore together”
Constructive play	8	14	“Using loose parts for building.”
Dramatic play	11	19	“A favorite of the students was a dramatic play experience, where we either dressed up as a character, or used puppets or stuffed animals and pretended to be the puppet or stuffed animal. We would talk, ask them, think of games that the animal/character would enjoy, think about how they would respond, etc.”
Games with rules	16	28	“We played Simon Says…, made up Bingo games…, played I Spy games as well as guessing sounds of animals and guessing songs.”
Guided play	9	16	“Activities that asked children to go outside, look for things, create using those things.”

Frequency calculations based on the total number of examples (57) provided by teachers

^aCategories of play are listed by the theoretical framework rather than by the highest frequency

Play-based activities in the category of functional play were reported thirteen times (23%). Functional play was evident when teachers described lessons in which the children engaged in:

• Singing, fingerplays, Go Noodle, yoga, dance parties

• Sink or float activities

• Making shadows with flashlights

• Interacting with White Board features

Constructive play was reported the least frequently with eight examples (14%). Constructive play was represented through:

• Open-ended play with blocks, Play-Doh, Legos

• Making caves or forts at home

• Pretending to go on adventures with pretend equipment such as rope and ladders.

Dramatic play was reported 11 (19%) times as an effective play-based virtual activity. Dramatic play is when children create imaginary roles that often goes along with their constructive play, however it is more abstract utilizing language, gestures and role playing with others. Examples teachers noted in the survey include:

• Virtual “tea party”

• Acting out stories with household objects

• Pretend cooking

• Pretend adventures

• Dress-up as character in books

• Use puppets and stuffed animals and talk for them

• Use story starters and children role play their own endings

• Pretend play (bakery, grocery shopping)

The most frequently reported virtual play-based activity category was games with rules (28%). Examples of games with rules teachers provided included:

• Scavenger hunts

• Simon Says

• Bingo

• I Spy

• Hide and Seek (with objects and families helping)

Next, virtual play-based activities in the category of guided play were reported approximately 16% of the time. Examples of guided play included:

• Investigative questioning of concepts

• Open-ended science activities

• Science experiments

• Outdoor investigations

• Nature walk, collecting materials, journaling

• Patterning and counting with toys

• Looking for things outdoors and creating with those items

The findings suggest each type of play can be facilitated virtually; however, some types of play were reported to be effectively implemented more often than others. Games with rules and functional play were the two most frequently reported types of play used in virtual teaching by the teachers in this study.

Discussion

This study sought to answer questions related to what challenges and barriers exist for ECE teachers when implementing play-based instruction virtually and how teachers implemented virtual play-based activities effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study adds to the growing body of literature that has come out of the questions that arose from the pandemic’s impact on education. Given the lack of literature on virtual teaching and how teachers deliver content to children, our study is unique in that it captured teachers’ perspectives of ways to implement play-based instruction virtually during the pandemic when virtual teaching in ECE was increasing in use.

Most teachers (89%) participating in our study did not have any experience teaching virtually, with limited training in this area prior to the 2020 school year. With our focus on play-based instruction, our findings highlight the unique demands of the virtual learning environment in ECE settings. Given that the option for virtual teaching in one form or another is here to stay even after the pandemic, it is necessary to examine the needs specific to ECE settings to understand and inform how to best support teachers in providing play-based virtual instruction.

The biggest challenge to teaching virtually for the ECE teachers in our study was children’s lack of access to needed materials. Developmentally appropriate practices for ECE are grounded in teaching through experiences that often involve the use of hands-on materials (NAEYC, 2022), including items such as counting manipulatives, art supplies, building materials and visual supports. In a physical, in-person classroom, teachers utilize these typical ECE classroom materials or may borrow materials from other teachers in their school. However, in a virtual classroom, teachers must rely on the materials students have access to in their homes. Navigating the range of access to materials their students can use may decrease instruction quality or force teachers to rely on their own personal finances to purchase individual supplies for students as reported by teachers in other studies (i.e., Atiles et al., 2021). Teachers also reported difficulty engaging children virtually and reducing distractions, which suggests the ECE virtual learning environment requires a different way of engaging children. Teachers understand that play is essential to children’s learning and development and have reported the desire to reach and engage their students in developmentally appropriate ways, even virtually, which is consistent with previous studies (Crawford et al., 2021; Ford et al., 2021; Kwon et al., 2022; Szente, 2020). This commitment has been evidenced by teachers’ ability to pivot their teaching to a virtual modality while still trying to incorporate play-based instruction. However, the highly reported challenge of engaging children mentioned in other recent research (e.g., Ford et al., 2021; Hu et al., 2021) suggests that teachers need to be better equipped to teach virtually in developmentally appropriate ways (Atiles et al., 2021; Crawford et al., 2021; Szente, 2020).

Debates about supporting play in the in-person classroom are not new (Chien et al., 2010; Pyle & Danniels, 2017), and teachers in our study expressed a lack of support as a barrier to providing play-based instruction in their virtual classroom. While many of the teachers assumed a level of teacher autonomy, the lack of parent and administrative support in their fostering play-based instruction was prevalent. This could have been due to the unprecedented situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, where school administrators and teachers alike might have felt overwhelmed by the changes. However, as schools have adapted more to providing virtual instruction since the onset of the pandemic, another examination of teachers’ feelings of support in this context is needed (Ford et al., 2021).

Many teachers also expressed that lack of support from parents was a significant barrier to fostering play-based instruction, which supports the findings of previous studies (Dias et al., 2020; Ford et al., 2021; Hu et al., 2021; Kwon et al., 2022). The most notable reason was due to parents’ lack of understanding of the role play has on children’s learning, which is often an issue for teachers even when they are teaching in person. Ultimately, parents want what is best for their children and they likely experienced behavioristic, traditional teaching practices throughout their own schooling and think that is how one learns. Play has often been considered frivolous or something children do to relax and entertain themselves, not academic or a way of learning. This indicates that educators must find ways to share with families how play is essential to children’s learning and the merits it has in children’s development. Since this has been a challenge for early childhood educators for decades, it might be wise to change our approach. Guided play was listed as a type of play in the research and in the data analysis for this study. Purposefully framed play or guided play can be connected to standards for learning and documented accordingly, which may help parents and even educators be more receptive to such instructional processes. As virtual teaching is becoming a more adopted modality, these findings provide insight into how to support teachers who offer play-based instruction virtually.

Teachers also reported their lack of experience teaching virtually as a barrier to implementing play. This finding extends recent research findings that ECE teachers experience a lack of preparation for teaching online (Ford et al., 2021) by specifically focusing on implementing play. Interestingly, while some teachers tended to take an approach that was flexible, creative, and oriented to problem-solving, several teachers in our study were hesitant to try facilitating play virtually. Some comments inferred a strong resistance to fostering play through virtual teaching, indicating a fixed mindset. Teachers’ attitudes about integrating technology and teaching can have an influence on their ability to use it as an effective tool for teaching, even in the early childhood ages (NAEYC, 2012; Nuri & Cagiltay, 2017). O’Keeffe & McNally (2021) found that generally early childhood teachers believed play-based activities are an important pedagogical tool in supporting children’s learning, even in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, it could be that the stressful experiences reported by teachers in our study could explain some teachers reverting to traditional, behavioristic practices such as teaching mainly through direct instruction and worksheets or cause some teachers to adopt a mindset that it is not possible or feasible to foster play through virtual teaching.

While the consideration of the challenges and barriers is important in knowing how to best support teachers who are teaching virtually, perhaps the equally important finding is that despite reported barriers and challenges, teachers found ways to foster play in the virtual setting in every category of play. The most frequently reported category of play was games with rules such as scavenger hunts, Bingo, and Hide-and-Seek to engage children with learning material available at home. This type of symbolic play may have been the most seamlessly translated to the online format, given that many versions of online games already exist, and games with rules allow for some teacher-direction and built-in structure. Teachers in our study reported that engaging children was a challenge to virtual teaching, and the use of games may have been a way that helped encourage children to participate and interact.

Given the lack of research on what teachers do in their virtual classrooms (e.g., their use of developmentally appropriate and play-based teaching strategies to promote children's learning), it is promising that we found a variety of examples of play-based instruction provided in each category of play during the pandemic. Teachers were able to facilitate dramatic play, provoke children’s thinking through investigations, encourage physical activity, as well as provide opportunities for open-ended exploration. These findings offer hope that a mindset can be shifted away from the belief that providing play in a virtual setting is “impossible”. Teachers are motivated to best meet children’s learning needs by providing opportunities for play and exploration (O’Keefe & McNally, 2021). With additional support and training, those who may be assigned to teach virtually will be able to do so effectively and more confidently.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. First, the study is somewhat limited in that it primarily focused on which activities teachers used to foster play virtually and the challenges and barriers they faced. Much more information is needed regarding teaching children virtually, such as how teachers connect play experiences to state standards and how they assess children’s learning. More research documenting whether teachers are having success in scaffolding children’s play virtually and what strategies they are utilizing is needed. Second, the online survey data were collected between January and June 2021 during the pandemic. While data were collected for a six-month span, the COVID-19 cases and school responses to the pandemic (e.g., transitioning from one teaching modality to another repeatedly) have fluctuated since its onset. Our data only serves as a snapshot and does not capture how teachers adjusted and tailored their teaching to the ongoing changes and challenges during COVID-19. It would be ideal to collect longitudinal data to address this process. In addition, most teachers in our study were highly educated and taught PreK and children in public school settings. Thus, it may not fully represent the teachers in a range of ECE settings. More research is needed to understand the perspective of teachers serving other age groups in different ECE settings (e.g., childcare, Head Start programs). Notably, the perspectives of teachers who served in early care and education centers or family childcare homes (i.e., serving infant, toddler, and preschool-aged children) are needed, given that these teachers tend to have potential unique needs and experiences when related to virtual teaching.

Implications for Practice and Policy

This study has implications for practice. First, this study’s findings highlight the need to prepare teachers to provide play-based and developmentally appropriate instruction virtually. While various professional organizations (e.g., NAEYC, the Division for Early Childhood) provide valuable resources and information, teachers benefit from more resources and training on different strategies for engaging children virtually. Although, evidence from this study demonstrates that teachers are capable of creatively fostering play through virtual teaching that includes all types of play, teachers face various challenges and barriers when trying to implement play-based instruction virtually. Teachers in the field need to be provided with training that keeps them up to date with the virtual teaching and learning platforms as well as strategies that can elicit student engagement. Ideas and tips from experts in special education and early intervention, practitioners in telehealth, and faculty in higher education can be adopted for the ECE classroom such as chunking time and information into smaller parts, adding humor, adding an element of performance, and storytelling (Cavanagh, 2019; Olsen et al., 2012). Teacher educators also need to be knowledgeable in virtual teaching practices and online learning systems that are being used in schools and programs and teacher preparation programs need to incorporate elements of virtual instruction into their courses. Second, schools and programs need to equip families with the knowledge of how play and learning are connected in the early childhood years. Administrators must understand teacher challenges and barriers and support teachers in overcoming these difficulties. Families need to be educated on the importance of play, even in virtual settings. This can be achieved through family engagement activities, informational sessions, and school-family communication.

This study also has implications for policy and research. As virtual instruction is more prevalent, policies need to be implemented that provide equitable access to materials including educational hands-on materials, as well as stable access to the internet and needed devices. For schools that offer the options for virtual instruction, it is vital for administrators to consider this need for students to access educational materials that are appropriate for early childhood ages. Schools can confront this challenge through suggestions such as allowing space in their budget to purchase materials for students to use at home or having community resource centers where virtual students can borrow materials they may not have at home. More research is needed on how to make virtual learning more equitable. In addition, more research is necessary to examine any changes in early childhood teachers’ ability to provide play-based instruction in a post-pandemic era. Given the known barriers and challenges that currently exist, research similar to this study will help to illuminate the struggles teachers face and allow for better approaches to meet the needs of teachers and children.

Our ultimate responsibility as educators is to set the conditions for learning and development, which can include a virtual environment. This can be accomplished by supporting play in efforts to guide children’s learning related to academic standards in ways that honor children’s development (Van Hoorn et al., 2015). Our research is not making a case for virtual learning with young children; however, the study provides essential information for when virtual teaching is the modality being used and the importance of play-based teaching regardless of whether it is in person or virtual. It has been documented that play is the primary force in child development and learning and therefore, it is essential for early childhood teachers to incorporate different kinds of play in their teaching pedagogies whether they are in person or virtual. In this new era, schools will likely continue to utilize virtual teaching to some degree to make up for children's time away from school due to weather, illness, and a host of other reasons. Therefore, it is critical that the findings of such research are disseminated in the field of ECE. This research helps to expand notions of how play can be encouraged, supported, and scaffolded through both synchronous and asynchronous formats. The sharing of ideas and lessons learned regarding fostering play through virtual teaching is always a great way to build cognitive, social, and emotional connections that will influence teaching, research, and service.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work. The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.