Module4 action research_course6

Running head: GENDER DIFFERENCES 1
Gender Differences in Dramatic Play
Kristi M. Haakma
American College of Education

GENDER DIFFERENCES 2
Gender Differences in Dramatic Play
Research Purpose
“Pretend that I am the queen and you are the princess! We can wear our pretty
dresses and ride horses through the castle!” As a preschool teacher, I hear play scenarios like
this often. The imaginations of my students are endless and their play reflects their enhancing
skills, cognitively, physically, emotionally and socially. Throughout our day at preschool,
children are constantly growing and developing by engaging in different types of play. From my
daily observations, however, I have noticed that many fewer boys than girls engage and
participate in dramatic play scenarios or opportunities. The question I am pondering is: Why do
more girls than boys engage in dramatic play?
Problem Statement and Description of Setting
My research study will attempt to address my concern that more girls than boys are
engaging in dramatic play at our preschool. My idea is supported by ten months of daily
observations where girls participated in dramatic play five to ten times a day and boys
participated in dramatic play one to three times a day. My research will explore and analyze
gender differences in dramatic play by attempting to answer two research questions:
(1) Will boys engage in dramatic play more often if the dramatic play area is frequently
changed?
(2) Do gender stereotypes affect the number of boys that play in the dramatic play area?

Literature Review
In a study involving 66 preschool children, researchers conducted a study of children’s
engagement in early “engineering play” using engaging materials in a variety of play
environments. Researchers acknowledged that there are still ongoing studies and continuing
debates on gender play preferences, however, as cited in Jacklin, Maccoby, and Dick (1975),
“gender differences in play and toy preference can emerge as early as 13 to 14 months of age”
(p. 6). In this current study, researchers attempted to answer three research questions in order to
address research gaps such as, “how boys’ and girls’ play, play environments, and play materials
may be related to education benefits, early engineering play, or broader cognitive skills” (Gold,
Elicker, Young Choi, Anderson, & Brophy, 2015, p. 6). The three research questions were, (1)
Were there differences in boys’ and girls’ overall rates of engineering play? (2) Were there
differences in preschoolers’ rates of engineering play behavior within the three play settings: the
traditional playground, the dramatic play area, and play with large, manipulable, loose parts?
And (3) Were there any interactions between preschoolers’ gender and play environment in their
rates of engineering play behavior.
Over a two-month period, two researchers independently observed all participating
preschool children while engaged in the three different play settings. In the imagination
playground setting, preschoolers were encouraged to play with only the blocks rather than
integrating other toys or making use of the playground structures. In the traditional playground
setting, researchers observed while the children played freely on the different structures and with
different materials. Finally, in the dramatic play area, researchers observed as children played
with an “assortment of toys, action figures and dolls, cooking and household toys, and writing
and drawing materials” (Gold, Elicker, Young Choi, Anderson, & Brophy, 2015, p. 10).

Researchers noted that in one of the preschool settings (the university laboratory preschool), play
materials for the dramatic play area were selected according to weekly themes, where as in the
HS preschool classrooms, themes for the dramatic play area did not change as frequently.
Developed by Bairaktarova and colleagues in 2011, a nine-category system was used by
researchers to record the play behaviors consistent with children’s engineering design processes.
The nine categories included, (1) Communicates goals, (2) Generating design and construction
ideas, (3) Problem solving/replication, (4) Expresses creative/innovative ideas, (5) Solution
testing/evaluation design, (6) Explanations of how things are built/work, (7) Following patterns
of prototypes, (8) Logical mathematical thinking, and (9) Use of technical vocabulary.
Throughout their results, researchers found that there were no gender differences in the mean
rates of engineering play behavior, in the interaction effects between child gender and play
settings, or in early engineering play as observed in the three play settings. In their findings,
however, it was discussed that the dramatic play area targeted many goals that researchers were
looking for throughout their study. It was also discussed that the other two play settings
(imagination playground and play structure) fostered opportunities for dramatic play as well.
Overall, researchers state that integrating social dramatic play can encourage certain kinds of
early engineering thinking, as well as benefiting cognitive and social-emotional aspects of
learning. The researchers conclude this study with the belief that this research “lends support to
the educational value of free-choice play with open-ended, creative materials as an important
learning process in contemporary early childhood education settings” (Gold, Elicker, Young
Choi, Anderson, & Brophy, 2015, p. 17).

In an early childhood article, Aina and Cameron (2011) explore and analyze studies
related to the effects of gender stereotypes, specifically during early childhood. Throughout their
research, they discuss several areas that influence and/or effect gender stereotypes, including:
teachers, peers, family, activities, curriculum, etc. As cited in Derman-Sparks (2001),
knowledge of gender stereotypes is important, as all stereotypes “contribute to a culture of
prejudice, which is communicated in word and action to families, communities, and even young
children” (p. 11).
Aina and Cameron begin their discussion by addressing the audience of early childhood
educators. It is noted that concepts of gender identity can be placed on children before they are
born and children can continue to form those concepts throughout their early childhood.
According to Martin and Ruble (2004), “gender stereotypes are well developed by age 5, and
become rigidly defined between 5 and 7 years of age, making the preschool years a critical
period to deal with gender stereotypes” (p. 11). Aina and Cameron address that influences on
gender identity and stereotypes can come from many different sources. The first source they
discuss is popular culture, such as media portrayal, advertisements, consumer products, and
movies. Research has shown that brands such as Disney have a strong influence on children and
the perceptions they have on gender from the characters that are portrayed by the brand.
The second source Aina and Cameron discuss is early childhood education. According to
Gee & Gee (2005), “two main aspects of the early childhood environment influence perceptions
of young children’s gender and gender stereotypes: classroom materials and the instruction of
teachers” (p. 13). The early childhood classroom environment can affect how young students
understand important social issues as well as how they perceive themselves and their peers. It is

noted that teachers have a tremendous influence on children in the early years and it is important
that educators be knowledgeable not to conform to gender bias or discriminatory practices.
Next, Aina and Cameron discuss influential factors in friends and family. As cited in
Morrow (2006), “friendship patterns and peer pressure contribute to gender stereotypes,
especially among boys, who have the tendency to self-police peers, ridiculing those who show
feminine traits” (p. 13). Families also influence gender learning in a variety of ways, with
research showing that mothers tend to encourage warm, supportive, and responsive interactions
with their daughters while fathers are more likely to have a negative reaction to cross-gender
play or behaviors, particularly with sons (Leaper, 2000). Children’s literature is also discussed
as having a tremendous influence on young children, with characters in books clearly portraying
roles of masculinity and femininity.
Consequences of gender stereotyping in early childhood range from activity choices and
career aspirations to academic outcomes. Aina and Cameron highlight dramatic play as an
activity choice with stereotyping consequences. Hughes (2003) states, “female students are more
likely to choose family roles, while male students are more likely to choose adventure or action-
oriented roles, such as superheroes” (p. 15). Career aspirations are also a stereotyping
consequence, as Aina and Cameron state, young girls may already have the belief that careers
labeled as “women’s work” are not as valuable as men’s work. In academic areas, young boys
are effected by the taunting of male peers for reading a book that may be considered a “girl’s
book”. In order to support the prevention of gender stereotyping, Aina and Cameron offer
recommendations for teachers and families.
For teachers, Aina and Cameron encourage teachers to carefully inspect their classroom
environments for toys that may encourage single-gender use. Teachers can also include gender-

neutral furniture in their classrooms for all students to use and enjoy, as well as nonsexist books.
It is suggested that teachers can encourage cross-gender activities and play centers as well as
positive reinforcement for children who may be playing with non-stereotyped toys. For families,
Aina and Cameron discuss how gender differentiation and identity originates at home.
Suggestions for educators to help inform families of gender stereotyping prevention include:
“demonstrating unbiased interactions and communication, providing coaching and
encouragement, and respecting cultural differences without judgment or condescension” (p. 17).
To conclude their research and explorations, Aina and Cameron cite the insight of Small (2003),
“By equipping young children with positive messages of empowerment regardless of gender, in
addition to the critical thinking skills to identify stereotypes, teachers and families can impart in
children self-concept resiliency, even when faced with negative stereotypes” (p. 18).
In an early childhood article, Alice Hall, an associate professor in child and family
development and secretary of the National After School Association Board of Directors,
discusses the need for early childhood professionals to be intentional when setting up and
organizing their classrooms. Specifically in the area of dramatic play, Hall (2015) addresses the
need for the dramatic play center to change frequently throughout the school year and for the
changes to be intentional. She states, “when teachers intentionally change the dramatic play
center, children’s development is enhanced socially, physically, emotionally, cognitively, and
linguistically” (p. 31).
Throughout the article, Hall explains the benefits of dramatic play on child development
and shares ideas with her audience for the intentional set-up of the dramatic play area that have
been implemented by her own undergraduate students. Hall references theorists, Vygotsky and
Smilansky, when speaking of the importance of dramatic play, as both theorists had strong and

similar stances on play enhancing a variety of skills crucial to growth and development. In
previous research, Hatcher and Petty (2004), found that “children operate at more advanced
cognitive levels and exhibit a longer attention span during dramatic play than in non-dramatic
play” (p. 31). Children also enhance language skills, emergency literacy skills, and physical
development.
Hall expresses the need for intentionally planned dramatic play centers to be diverse and
relevant to the children’s lives in order to engage in a variety of play scenarios. Relevancy may
have many different meanings, such as connecting with a certain culture, displaying familiar
logos or words, or having an attention-grabbing entrance. Relevancy should also change
regularly in order to motivate and connect with the children. Hall notes that changing the
dramatic play center will be extremely time consuming, but the justification for time comes in
the form of purposeful and positive child development. Hall suggests that a “theme related
dramatic play center should include literacy materials, costumes or clothes, and enough props for
the scenarios to develop” (p. 32).
For dramatic play centers that promote language and cognitive development, Hall
suggests theme specific play such as camping, nighttime forest, the farm, space, recycling center,
and a restaurant. For dramatic play centers that promote social development, Hall suggests
encouraging as many children as possible to play in the center with themes such as a restaurant,
fire station, stores, and family. For dramatic play centers that promote emotional development,
Hall suggests themes that will help children identity and express emotions, as well as allowing
for opportunities to practice developing empathy. These themes may consist of a pet store,
nursery, or sports. For dramatic play centers that promote physical development, Hall suggests

themes that allow for both fine and gross motor skill practice such as recycling, a pumpkin stand,
restaurant, doctor or dentist office, and a grocery store.
In preparing to set up dramatic play centers, gathering or making costumes and props
may be the most time consuming. Hall recommends starting with some basic props, such as “a
play phone and cash register, blue tarp, a large square of fake green grass, and homemade back
drop sets such as a brick building and trees” (p. 34). In addition, Hall also advises to ask for
donations as a way for families and the community to get involved. After collecting basic props,
tools, and donations, teachers may choose to add literacy to the dramatic play center. Hall
suggests that including signage within the center aids to an important life skill as well as giving
children the opportunity to recognize that the theme of the center may have changed. Lastly, in
order to stay organized, teachers may create a collection of prop boxes in order to keep each
theme’s props together and separated from other themes. To conclude her article, Hall states,
“intentional early childhood teachers can be committed to making dramatic play more than home
living by changing it frequently and purposefully throughout the school year” (p. 38).
In a study over a 2-year period, Brent Mawson investigated the different leadership styles
evident in children’s collaborative play. During the study, Mawson visited two different sites to
compare leadership styles. During the first year, he focused his study in the setting of a day care
and during the second year, he focused his study in the morning session of a kindergarten
classroom. The purpose of his study was to define different leadership styles among children as
well as differences in gender leadership styles. Previous research on gender differences in
collaborative play offers the perspective that “girls were more likely to join the activity of
playmates and that the play was more likely to involve cooperative, cohesive turn-taking. On the
other hand, boys were more likely to pursue their own ideas for play [and] boys’ play was also

more likely to be characterized by abrupt shifts of topic, repeated reorganization of play episodes
and, in general, more dispersive social interaction” (Black & Hazen, 1990, p. 115).
Throughout his study, Mawson consistently identified collaborative play within the two
settings as two or more children being involved “in an episode in which there was a common
understanding of the scenario and joint interest and action to maintain and develop it” (p. 116).
Mawson’s role during this study was only to observe the children, rather than participate in any
play or scenario. Mawson documented his observations using notes, videotapes, audiotape
recordings, and photographs. In order to define specific gender leadership roles, Mawson
developed three categories for a gender-based analysis of his data: boy, girl, and mixed-gender
play.
In his findings of boys’ collaborative play, Mawson states, “In both settings there was a
very hierarchical structure to the boys’ collaborative play, with the dominant boy using a very
dictatorial approach to maintain his control of the play scenario” (p. 117). In contrast, girls’
collaborative play in both settings “was characterized by cooperation and leadership. It was
exercised in a more benign and directorial manner than was the case with the boys’ play” (p.
119). Mawson gives many examples of his observations to support the two different gender-
based styles of play. In boys’ collaborative play, there are many examples of physicality and
demands being made by one dominant individual amongst peers. In girls’ collaborative play,
there are examples of role-play, such as in the dramatic play area, and leadership roles seem to
change amongst peers.
Only in mixed-gender play did there seem to be evidence of boys taking on different
leadership styles that would normally only be present in girls’ collaborative play. Mawson states
that in mixed-gender play boys have more of an opportunity to communicate and participate in

dramatic play episodes. Mawson’s findings also indicated that there was “significantly more talk
in girls play than in boys play” (p. 122). To conclude his two-year study, Mawson states that
girls and boys collaborative play had clear gender differences with girls’ being more directorial
and boys’ more dictatorial with a clear hierarchical status. He also believes that his research
indicates “positive effects for boys who participate in mixed-gender play” (p. 123). Mawson
believes that leadership styles in children are an under-researched area and he hoped his research
would add significance to why leadership styles should be further studied and observed.
Methodology
Data collection: Observations
This observational data will be qualitative and quantitative. In order to collect
this data, I will remove and replace gender bias toys from the dramatic play center and change
the theme of the dramatic play center each week for 4 weeks. I will keep a daily observation
journal of anecdotal notes, which will include quantitative data such as: Number of boys playing
in the dramatic play center, number of girls playing in the dramatic play center, number of mixed
gender groups, and for how long each individual student (boy or girl) stays in the center. During
this data collection process, I will act as an observer and not a participant. This data will support
my research in attempting to remove gender stereotypes from the dramatic play center, and
account for how many more boys choose to play in the dramatic play center.
Data collection: Student interviews
The data I collect from interviews with my preschool students will be qualitative
data. In order to collect this data, I will create an interview sheet of approximately three to five
questions to ask my preschool students about why they may or may not be playing in the
dramatic play center throughout our school day. In this data collection process, I will interview

both boys and girls in my preschool class in order to exclude any gender bias or stereotype that
may be related to student feedback. This data will support my research in attempting to gain
student insight on likes, dislikes, and overall play preferences for the dramatic play area.
Data Analysis
The first piece of data I will analyze will be my observations. I will want to look at the
quantitative pieces of my observations first in order to determine any patterns or trends
happening in the dramatic play area. My quantitative data will have included the number of boys
who played in the dramatic play center, number of girls, number of mixed gender groups, and
accountability for each individual student over a 4-week period. The goal of removing gender
bias toys and changing the theme of the dramatic play center each week will be to see an increase
in the number of boys and mixed gender groups who choose to play in the dramatic play area, as
well as maintaining the number of girls. After analyzing my quantitative data, I will move to
analyzing the qualitative portion of my observations. From my anecdotal notes, the goal is to
review observations and conversations had by the preschool children that support the quantitative
data. If the quantitative data had a positive trend line for boys, girls, and mixed gender groups
participating in the dramatic play center, anecdotal notes should also reflect positive observations
and conversations from all children. In contrast, if the quantitative data had a negative trend line,
anecdotal notes should reflect negative observations and conversations. Anecdotal notes will be
able to tell us more about why the quantitative data was either positive or negative and also
reflect the truthful views of the preschool children.
The second piece of data I will analyze will be my student interviews. During interviews
with my students, I will have asked them three to five questions about why they may or may not
be playing in the dramatic play center. The goal of these interviews will be to have established

overall play preferences for boys, girls, and mixed gender groups while playing in the dramatic
play center. The answers to these interview questions from my students will reflect on how I can
adapt the dramatic play center to fit their needs/preferences and how often to adapt it.
Conclusions
From my research thus far, I am concluding that gender stereotypes and gender bias at a
young age do exist and may be contributing to the preference of more girls participating in the
dramatic play area than boys. Through my research I have acquired a significant amount of
knowledge on gender play preferences, gender leadership styles, and how educators can
intentionally set up and organize their classrooms to avoid bias. Unfortunately I was unable to
collect data to support my research and therefore cannot draw any one conclusion. I am hopeful,
however, that the collection of data will support my research purpose and I will be able to
conclude why less preschool boys are participating in dramatic play. I am also hopeful that
through further investigation, I will be able to pose solutions for more male participation in the
dramatic play area at preschool.
Communication of Findings
I was able to share a draft of my research report with a preschool colleague of mine, T.
Potts, who has been teaching in the preschool field for 16 years. She was able to read the draft
via email and we were later able to discuss my research over the phone. She was not at all
surprised by my research purpose, as setting up the dramatic play area is a task I enjoy doing at
preschool. In reading my research, she too became curious about the “why” behind more girls
than boys playing in the dramatic play area throughout the school day. She gave me positive
feedback on my literature reviews and encouraged me to continue pursuing research on gender
bias toys and themes. She also stated that she believes that what children choose to play with or

be involved with at school begins from influences at home. From this belief, she encouraged me
to research family influences on gender identification, bias, and stereotypes. I enjoyed speaking
with T. Potts about my research and gaining feedback from a veteran in the field of early
childhood education. She was able to give me great insight on the research I had already
completed and also encouraged me to continue research in areas connected to my purpose.
(T. Potts, personal communication, August 3, 2017).
Future Actions
For the next step in my research, I plan to implement a new theme in the dramatic play
center each week for this upcoming school year as well as collect the proposed data that will
support my existing research. I also plan to use the insightful advice of my colleague, T. Potts,
to extend my research into family influences on gender. While my research does not yet have
conclusive evidence to support my problem statement, I expect my collected data to support
positive change in early childhood classroom dramatic play areas. I would like to share my
research with other early childhood educators and professionals to potentially turn my initial
individual research concept into a collaborative effort. Although there is still much to learn in
the areas of gender and play, I believe there are positive changes we can be making to our
classrooms now in order to encourage play for all in every developmental area of education. We
can also relay this knowledge and positive change to families to further encourage play for all
both at home and at school.

References
Aina, O.E. & Cameron, P.A. (2011). Why does gender matter? Counteracting stereotypes with
young children. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 39(3), 11-19.
Gold, Z.S., Elicker, J., Young Choi, J., Anderson, T., & Brophy, S.P. (2015). Preschoolers’
engineering play behaviors: Differences in gender and play context. Children, Youth, and
Environments, 25(3), 1-21.
Hall, A. (2015). Intentionally changing dramatic play. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 43(3),
31-38.
Mawson, B. (2010). Gender and leadership styles in children’s play. Australasian Journal of
Early Childhood, 35(3), 115-123.

Module4 action research_course6

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Similar to Module4 action research_course6

Similar to Module4 action research_course6 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Module4 action research_course6