Playing for Keeps

Research shows that recess can contribute to student achlevement and the well-being of children. Unfortunately, academic pressures are pushing recess out of the school day. It\u27s always amusing when children respond to the age-old What\u27s your favorite class question with, Recess! Many of us answered the question the same way as the youngsters do. Recess, we know, is an essential component of the elementary school day. Research points to the importance of outdoor play and how essential it is to the well-being of students. A 2010 study by the Robert Wood Jolmson Foundation revealed that 96 percent of principals surveyed believe that recess has a positive impact on social development. Nearly eight in 10 principals in the same study reported that recess has a positive impact on academic achievement. Despite this, many districts have slashed recess in response to increasing pressures related to NCLB and a drive to increase test scores. School leaders may find it hard to achieve a balance. On one hand, pressure to avoid assorted watch lists continues to intensify, budgets are stressed. and more instructional time must be found. On the other hand, schools seek to temper this high-stakes atmosphere by meeting students\u27 affective, developmental, and social needs. A growing number of schools have chosen to eliminate or reduce recess time in all effort to increase instructional time and test scores. To further investigate current recess trends, we at the National Program for Playground Safety, with the Educational Leadership program at the University of Northern Iowa, conducted a study of Iowa public school principals\u27 perceptions of recess and district playground policies. A summary of the findings offers good news for schools caught between the rock and hard place of the value of recess versus achievement pressure. The findings yielded four recommendations that can easily be implemented with little to no expense

Playing for Keeps

Research shows that recess can contribute to student achlevement and the well-being of children. Unfortunately, academic pressures are pushing recess out of the school day. It\u27s always amusing when children respond to the age-old What\u27s your favorite class question with, Recess! Many of us answered the question the same way as the youngsters do. Recess, we know, is an essential component of the elementary school day. Research points to the importance of outdoor play and how essential it is to the well-being of students. A 2010 study by the Robert Wood Jolmson Foundation revealed that 96 percent of principals surveyed believe that recess has a positive impact on social development. Nearly eight in 10 principals in the same study reported that recess has a positive impact on academic achievement. Despite this, many districts have slashed recess in response to increasing pressures related to NCLB and a drive to increase test scores. School leaders may find it hard to achieve a balance. On one hand, pressure to avoid assorted watch lists continues to intensify, budgets are stressed. and more instructional time must be found. On the other hand, schools seek to temper this high-stakes atmosphere by meeting students\u27 affective, developmental, and social needs. A growing number of schools have chosen to eliminate or reduce recess time in all effort to increase instructional time and test scores. To further investigate current recess trends, we at the National Program for Playground Safety, with the Educational Leadership program at the University of Northern Iowa, conducted a study of Iowa public school principals\u27 perceptions of recess and district playground policies. A summary of the findings offers good news for schools caught between the rock and hard place of the value of recess versus achievement pressure. The findings yielded four recommendations that can easily be implemented with little to no expense

Playing for keeps

When Peter Buffett paid a visit to HKDI in November it was a delight to find that the son of America\u27s richest stock-picker is a compelling paradox of refreshing candour and Zen-like apborisms

Editor\u27s Introduction: Playing for Keeps: Games and Cultural Resistance [Special Issue]

This edition is as much about Game Studies as it about the games being studied. At its heart there are really two impulses behind the collection of critical thought we have been fortunate enough to gather for this issue of Reconstruction. First, there is the sense that games can’t do anything. Second, there is the sense that games don’t do anything. Their origin (and the underlying biases) makes these sentiments particularly intriguing. In the simplest terms, these premises delineate competing camps, as well. Roger Ebert notoriously asserts that video games will never be art (Ebert). Similarly, and yet quite differently, Espen Aarseth proclaims that a game has no intertext (cf. 48). Frankly, locating a project within these dismally disparate parameters is kind out like hitting water after falling out of a boat in the Pacific Ocean. It is, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. Nevertheless, the question of games and cultural resistance is something of a loaded one given the prevailing popular and professorial positions on the subject. For his part, Gonzalo Frasca, wonders if (video) games will ever have the purchase to qualify as progressive political texts (cf. 86). Moreover, neither of the current editors began approaching games, gamers and gaming with either or even an inkling for these positions. Quite simply, we recognize that gaming is a (kind of) social act. It doesn’t take a rhetorician—though one of us is—to notice that any assertion implies its negation, nor does it take someone versed in cultural theory—though that would be the other of us—to find that any discourse defines itself by implicitly disqualifying and that this signals a clear relationship of power

Playing for keeps : an examination of arepp : Theatre for Life's applied theatre pedagogy with regards to adolescent sexuality

Includes abstract.|Includes bibliographical references (leaves 152-163).This dissertation examines the particular method developed by arepp: Theatre for Life, a South African Non Governmental Organisation, in its work of providing sexuality and social problem solving life-skills education for adolescents, towards the development of self-efficacy in school-going youth, by means of dramatic presentations. The research is broadly located in the fields of applied theatre, experiential learning and participatory action research. Social cognitive and self-efficacy theory underpin the educational goals, whilst phenomenology, the 'eventness' of theatre, narrative and diegesis are key to the conceptual framework within which arepp: Theatre for Life's use of theatre is examined. The arepp: Theatre for Life archive, including the organisation's internal monitoring and evaluation system, provide the primary data source for this investigation, which focuses on one arepp: Theatre for Life production, Look Before You Leap: Hangin' in 2007, for specific inverstigation and the provision evidence. arepp: Theatre for Life's applied theatre pedagogy combines the concepts of observational learning through a theatre show with the processes of experiential learning through a facilitated discussion to develop self-efficacy with regard to adolescent sexuality

Kids Playing For Keeps: A Feasibility Study of Coronary Heart Disease Intervention in a Rural African American Community

The prevalence of Coronary heart disease (CHD) and the associated modifiable risk factors, combined with the known health disparities that exist in the African American (AA) community, increases the significance of prevention exponentially. Theories involving genetic and environmental factors and their interaction are gaining popularity as relevant influences on both modifiable and fixed risk factors for CHD. Innovative and targeted strategies of health promotion and preventative measures are needed to combat the growing trend of modifiable risk factors for heart disease within the southern rural AA population. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of an after school diet and exercise intervention and the results within the community. A quantitative, quasi-experimental, pre and post-test design was used to examine the feasibility in recruiting rural, school-age AAs participants (n=58), their parents (n= 21) and community members (n= 26) and the effectiveness of the intervention program. The findings of this pilot study features the significance of an intervention provided to meet specific aspects of southern rural AA communities with a high prevalence of CHD. This research describes the rationale and methods used in an individual level intervention, within a rural AA community, with children as the proponents for change. Continued research is needed to elucidate pathways by which promising strategies can be implemented to reduce the prevalence of modifiable risk factors and therefore close the gap of CHD disparities in southern, rural AA communities

Playing for keeps: The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada in the public sphere, 1983-2006

This thesis is an intellectual history of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) and its public policy activity from 1983 to 2006. The EFC represents many of the major evangelical Protestant denominations and organizations in Canada. Although some commentators interpret its work in light of the American Religious Right, the EFC is non-partisan and strives to be more politically moderate. This stance reflects the historical political moderation of Canadian evangelicalism. EFC leaders give direction to the evangelical community by contributing to the development of an evangelical identity that assumes political engagement, ecumenism, persuasion, and a high view of the state. Their model of engagement is politically pragmatic and emphasizes the imago Dei principle and the common good. The two concerns that contributed to evangelical political mobilization in the early 1980s were the increasing secularization of Canadian society and the privatization of religion. The EFC responded to these concerns in two ways. First, it defined secularism as intent on limiting religion in the public sphere. This interpretation enabled EFC leaders to mobilize their constituency, argue that public policy can never be religiously neutral, and insist that liberalism is not a neutral philosophy. However, it also meant that they did not critique the most secular of all spheres, the economy, or recognize the degree to which Christianity continues to enjoy cultural privileges as compared to other religions. The struggle against secularism took the EFC to Parliament Hill and into the courts. Second, the EFC called for religious groups to be at the policy making "table." This "table" is a liberal-democratic one that often requires participants to engage in discussions in a secular liberal manner. The impact of these requirements was evident in the EFC‘s participation in the public debates surrounding the definition of marriage. Many of its arguments employed liberal reasoning and de-emphasized religious convictions. Over time the EFC moved toward the social consensus about the need to protect same-sex relationships. This movement, however, did not indicate secularization on the part of the EFC. Rather, its leaders desired to develop publicly accessible arguments and thereby they contributed to civil society