IELTS CAM Inspired 14 - Reading Test 3 with Practice Test, Answers And Explanation
Luyện tập đề IELTS Online CAM Inspired 14 - Reading Test 3 được lấy từ cuốn sách IELTS CAM Inspired 14 với trải nghiệm thi IELTS trên máy và giải thích đáp án chi tiết bằng Linearthinking, kèm answer key và list từ vựng IELTS cần học trong bài đọc.
IELTS CAM Inspired 14 - Reading Test 3 With Practice Test, Answers And Explanation
Passage
❓ Câu hỏi passage 1
Question 1 - 3
Which section contains the following information?
Write the correct letter, A-J.
1
the point that researchers' underlying assumptions deserve greater scrutiny because they sit beneath formal scientific work
2
a comment on how the intellectual demands placed on children depend partly on their cultural background
3
a description of how an informal theory helps to outline the limits of a phenomenon that is not yet well understood
Question 4 - 6
Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in the Reading Passage?
YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
4
Someone's assumptions about intelligence can affect how they judge the abilities of the people around them.
5
Job interviewers are influenced by implicit theories of intelligence more than parents are.
6
When implicit and explicit theories barely match, the implicit theories are certainly the ones that are wrong.
Question 7 - 13
Match each statement with the correct theory, A, B or C.
List of Findings
A
Vargan
B
Nadeauvian
C
Kesslerian
7
Everyone ought to be given the same chances in life.
8
No group should be favoured over another by any institution.
9
Rewards should depend on what a person accomplishes, and nothing else.
10
Differences in intelligence are present from the moment of birth.
11
Those with greater intelligence ought to occupy positions of authority.
12
Any ability can, in principle, be acquired by anyone.
13
Without guidance, less intelligent people tend towards disorder.
Passage
❓ Câu hỏi passage 2
Question 14 - 20
Which paragraph contains the following information?
Write the correct letter, A-I.
14
what has brought natural compounds back into favour as a focus for medical research
15
the way a recently available laboratory technique has made work on insects less difficult
16
instances of creatures that treat themselves using materials from the wild
17
the drawbacks that make insects awkward organisms to study for drug development
18
a claim that this line of research could help to preserve wildlife
19
why remedies based on nature lost favour for a period
20
a medicine derived from an insect that is in use today
Question 21 - 22
Choose TWO letters, A-E.
Which TWO of the following help to explain why insects are appealing subjects for drug research?
A
the broad range of chemical substances insects have evolved to protect themselves
B
how closely one insect species resembles another
C
the vast quantity of individual insects found across the world
D
the chance to isolate and reproduce insects' genetic material
E
the conveniently manageable size of the typical insect
Question 23 - 26
Complete the summary below.
Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.
Research at Thornwood University
Dr Dvořák and his fellow zoologists at Thornwood University rely on their expertise in insect when they carry out bioprospecting among insects. They are especially drawn to the substances that some insects release in order to overpower and then keep fresh their . They are equally interested in the compounds that enable insects to withstand the dangerous bacteria and fungi present in their . Dr Dvořák expects that such substances may assist in creating medicines, for instance new .
Passage
❓ Câu hỏi passage 3
Question 27 - 31
Match each statement with the correct researcher, A-G.
List of Findings
A
Anand et al.
B
Calderwood et al.
C
Etienne Fournier
D
Halstrom
E
Osterlund
F
Radnor & Piek
G
Tobias Vane
27
Different varieties of play can be identified and grouped.
28
How adults join in when a child plays depends on the lessons they intend to impart.
29
It may be when play and work are merged that a child learns most effectively.
30
Some features of play carry more weight than others.
31
Play can be rated according to how playful it is.
Question 32 - 36
Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in the Reading Passage?
YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
32
A formal international agreement has recognised play as a right that belongs to all children.
33
Children will play only when adults make an effort to encourage them.
34
These days children get noticeably less time to play each week than earlier generations did.
35
Play does more for a child's development than formal lessons do.
36
People who research play have by now converged on one common definition of it.
Question 37 - 40
Complete the summary below.
Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.
Guided play
In the simplest form of guided play, an adult adds to the environment in which the child is playing. In a more involved form, an adult may step into the game as an equal and build on it, for instance by asking questions or by pointing out what the child has discovered. Such playful learning may be given a degree of structure, but the to play still has to originate with the child.
Play that goes on without adults taking part leaves the child with genuine ; when adults are involved, the play can be steered more toward particular aims. Whatever its form, play should always be a chance for children to enjoy themselves.
DOL IELTS Đình Lực
21/10/2026
📖 Bài đọc passage 1
The concept of intelligence
A
A. From one angle, intelligence is something everybody understands; from another, nobody does. Put differently, each of us carries an unspoken sense of what intelligence is — what psychologists call an implicit theory — yet none can say for certain what it really consists of. What follows examines not intelligence itself, but the ways people picture it in their minds. One might ask why that picture should matter, when surely it is intelligence itself, not opinion about it, that deserves attention. The reply is that there are at least four grounds on which people's thinking about intelligence is worth studying.
B
The first is that the private beliefs people hold about intelligence govern how they size up their own minds and those of others. To make sense of the judgements individuals reach about ability, their own and other people's, their implicit theories are a sensible place to begin. Take a parent: it is that parent's private notion of how language matures that decides the age at which they start correcting a child's speech and, more broadly, the age at which the child is thought ready for one mental task or another. The same holds beyond the home. Anyone interviewing candidates for a job draws on such beliefs when choosing whom to appoint, and so does anyone picking the people they wish to befriend. Knowledge of implicit theories matters, in short, because these theories are put to work daily, wherever people form judgements about one another.
C
A second consideration concerns researchers rather than ordinary people. The explicit theories scientists eventually put forward grow out of the implicit theories they started from, so it is worth bringing those starting assumptions to light. An implicit theory supplies a framework, one especially valuable for marking out the rough boundaries of a phenomenon that remains poorly understood. It can also reveal which features earlier studies dwelt on and which they ignored.
D
A third use arises too. Once a researcher suspects that the explicit theories in circulation are mistaken or misleading, implicit theories can act as a check. Should a study turn up little resemblance between the implicit and explicit theories, one reading is that the implicit theories are at fault; but it is every bit as possible that the explicit ones are, and then call for correction or filling out. Some implicit theories of intelligence, for instance, point to places where our explicit accounts of the construct ought to be widened.
E
A fourth and final reason is that implicit theories throw light on differences of a developmental and cultural kind. Different intellectual feats, as noted, are expected of children at different ages — but just how those expectations vary is shaped, in no small degree, by culture. A youngster brought up inside a Western style of schooling will almost inevitably be held to standards unlike those set for a youngster reared outside any such system.
F
Elsewhere I have argued that three broad implicit theories exist concerning where intelligence sits within society (Ravndal, 2004). For convenience these may be labelled the Kesslerian, the Vargan and the Nadeauvian. The labels are borrowed only loosely, not strictly, from the political outlooks of Aldous Kessler, Mirela Varga and Etienne Nadeau, three statesmen with a prominent place in their country's political history.
G
On the Kesslerian account, which recalls the older doctrine of rule by a class of guardian-sages, human beings enter the world with unequal endowments of intelligence, so that those given less of it need the guiding hand of those given more — whether such guardians are called government officials or something grander. A conviction of this sort seems to lie beneath the work of Calderwood and Reyes (1996), who anticipated the rise of a high-ability elite obliged to shoulder responsibility for the mass of less able people supposedly unfit to manage their own affairs. Leave those people to themselves, the reasoning goes, and what follows will be what has supposedly always followed: a slide into disorder.
H
Equality of opportunity, not of outcome, is where the Vargan view begins. Opportunities may lie open to everyone, yet people neither seize them to the same degree nor earn the same rewards for what they make of them; here reward simply tracks accomplishment, so that whoever achieves little takes home less than whoever achieves much. Education, then, exists not to single out or cultivate an elite, as the Kesslerian tradition would wish, but to hand every child the chance to draw the fullest use from whatever abilities they already have. My own position sits close to this one (Ravndal, 2004).
I
The Nadeauvian view maintains that people are equal not just as human beings but in their actual competencies that any one person would carry out the business of government, or of a jury, or of almost any post of responsibility, as ably as the next. Democracy, read this way, treats its citizens as essentially interchangeable, specialised skills alone excepted; and even those can be acquired through learning. It follows that institutions apt to lift one group above another are neither called for nor wanted.
J
Implicit theories of intelligence, and of how intelligence relates to society, very likely warrant a closer look than they have had, since they so often work as the buried premises beneath explicit theories and beneath the very experimental designs later received as scientific contributions. Only when scholars bring their implicit theories, and with them their assumptions, into open view are they likely to catch what colleagues actually mean as those colleagues set out their explicit theories and their data.
Zoologist Dr Marek Dvořák looks at the potential of insects in pharmaceutical research
A
A. A surprising share of the medicines we use are either taken directly from the chemistry of living organisms or modelled on it. Turning to the natural world to ease and treat our illnesses is hardly a modern habit; humans have relied on it for tens of thousands of years. Nor are we alone in this. Black lemurs, for instance, smear toxin-oozing millipedes across their fur to keep biting insects at bay, while certain songbirds weave strongly scented, medicinal plants into their nests to shield their chicks from parasites — hints that a rough understanding of medicine was probably within reach of our distant ancestors as well.
B
On top of these age-old foundations, chemistry and pharmaceutical science refined the business of extracting, identifying, altering and testing such natural products. For a time, though, the field turned its back on nature and retreated into the laboratory, where compounds were designed entirely from scratch. What prompted that retreat was a practical difficulty: nature is full of promising molecules, but tracking them down is anything but simple. Collecting enough of the relevant organism, working out the structure of the compounds it contains, and then manufacturing those compounds in bulk each present a serious obstacle.
C
Because drug discovery based in the laboratory has proved only patchily successful, researchers have begun devising fresh strategies that once more look to natural products. Now that genomes can be mined for valuable molecules, it has become clear just how little of nature's chemical variety we have so far explored. That realisation, coupled with a set of gathering health emergencies — the spread of antibiotic resistance among them — has returned bioprospecting, the hunt for useful compounds in the wild, to prominence.
D
On land, no group rivals the insects, which fill virtually every niche available to them. Their dealings with other organisms are correspondingly varied, and it is precisely these countless interactions that have pushed them to evolve a vast repertoire of intriguing compounds, some for attack and some for defence. Every other animal group on Earth, taken together, cannot match their diversity. And yet, for all that they out-number and out-vary every competitor, insects remain almost untapped as a source of therapeutic chemistry.
E
So why have insects drawn comparatively little interest from bioprospectors? One reason is sheer numbers: with so many species to weigh up, sifting through them without a focused strategy is a forbidding prospect. Another is size — insects are small, and the glands within them that release potentially useful substances are smaller still, so gathering enough of a compound to test it can be hard. A third is that the insect world's apparent abundance is deceptive; what it really amounts to is enormous populations of a few very common species. A great many kinds are seldom come across and stubbornly resist being reared in captivity, which, once again, tends to leave researchers short of material.
F
Even the handful of insects examined so far has yielded several compounds worth pursuing. Theriacin, for instance — an antimicrobial substance secreted by the maggots of a certain carrion-feeding fly — is already prescribed as an antiviral and anti-tumour treatment in Estonia and Uruguay. A few other insect larvae are currently under study for the powerful antimicrobial agents they manufacture, while, separately, a peptide drawn from the sting venom of a Brazilian paper wasp is showing early promise against cancer.
G
Working alongside colleagues at Thornwood University, I have devised a method that draws on our understanding of insect behaviour to decide where to concentrate. What fascinates us most are the many insects that release potent toxins to subdue and then preserve their quarry for eating later. More numerous still are the species that flourish in the foulest of surroundings — dung and decaying carcasses — where they face relentless assault from thousands of micro-organisms. To hold their own there, these insects are equipped with an array of antimicrobial compounds active against harmful bacteria and fungi, a strong sign that they could yield, or inspire, a fresh generation of antibiotics.
H
Helpful though this steer is, it does not by itself solve the problem of getting usable compounds out of insects. Fortunately, researchers can now cut out the stretches of an insect's DNA that encode the compounds of interest and splice them into cell lines capable of producing the substances in far larger amounts. The path from isolating and describing a promising compound to launching a commercial product remains long and strewn with pitfalls; nonetheless, the many animal-derived medicines already on the market prove that the precedent is there and worth pursuing.
I
Every patch of wilderness we lose takes a store of possible medicines with it. Much as I would relish a hand in creating some breakthrough insect-derived drug, what really drives my work is conservation. It is my firm conviction that every species, no matter how tiny or unremarkable it may appear, is entitled to exist in its own right. By throwing light into the dimmest corners of nature's medicine cabinet — examining the valuable chemistry of the planet's most varied animals — we can, I believe, change the way people think about what nature is worth.
Across every culture on earth, children play. So powerful is this urge that it surfaces under almost any conditions - where no proper toys are to be had, or where adults do nothing to encourage it. To a small child, chasing about, pretending and building things are simply enjoyable. What researchers and educators have established is that such activities nourish every side of a child's growth - social, cognitive, physical and emotional alike. Play matters so much to healthy development, indeed, that in 1989 it was formally acknowledged as a basic entitlement of every child by an international human-rights convention.
And yet the hours children actually give over to play keep shrinking, even as specialists go on building a persuasive case for how much play matters in young lives. By one estimate, a child now plays around seven hours less each week than a child did a generation earlier (Osterlund 2010). As academic demands mount, test practice is displacing play in nurseries and primary schools, while parents anxious to give their under-fives a head start are persuaded that flashcards and so-called educational 'toys' are the route to success. A false opposition between playing and learning has taken root in our culture.
It is through play that children learn to rein in their own behaviour, lay the groundwork for later study in science and mathematics, work out the delicate business of managing relationships, and assemble a store of inventive ways to tackle problems - and a great deal more besides. Adults, too, have a valuable part in steering children through opportunities for playful learning.
Those who study play have yet to settle on a single agreed definition of it. At one extreme, some accounts break play down into distinct types - physical, constructional, linguistic or symbolic, for instance - in the manner of Radnor and Piek (2011); at the other, writers such as Calderwood and colleagues (1998) favour broad checklists, grounded in observation and disposition, meant to capture what every kind of play has in common.
Most present-day definitions gather around a handful of core features. Tobias Vane, who founded the Centre for Play Research, calls play 'whatever is done spontaneously and for its own sake', and adds that it 'looks purposeless, brings pleasure and joy, and carries the player on to the next stage of mastery' (quoted in Renner 2009). In a similar vein, Radnor and Piek (2011) cast play as behaviour 'that children take up freely and direct for themselves, arising from motivation within'. Play is also, very often, ranged along a spectrum from the intensely playful to the barely playful, measured against a set of behavioural and dispositional markers (Calderwood et al. 1998).
A few qualities come up again and again. Play is enjoyable: where a child takes no pleasure in an activity, it is not play. It is intrinsically driven, undertaken purely for the satisfaction the doing itself yields, with no outside reward or purpose attached. It is centred on process - for a child at play, how things unfold counts for more than any end result. It is entered into freely and willingly; pressure of any sort tends to stop a child treating what they do as play. It calls for active involvement, of body or of mind. And it is non-literal, wrapped up in make-believe.
On this view, a child's playful behaviour can sit anywhere between wholly playful and not playful at all. Calderwood and colleagues declined to treat any one dimension as mattering more than the rest; others, though, have argued that a concentration on process, coupled with the lack of any obvious practical aim, may be what counts for most in play (Halstrom 2007).
Regarded as a continuum, play can shade into motives and attitudes that are less playful - work among them. Work, unlike play, is not usually felt to be enjoyable, and it is externally driven, directed toward a goal. Etienne Fournier (1996) argued that mixed forms of work and play, far from holding learning back, may in fact supply the richest settings for it. A child might, say, be caught up in a demanding, goal-directed task set by a teacher and yet remain genuinely engaged and driven from within. At this halfway point between work and play, the child's own motivation, together with an adult's guidance, can create powerful openings for playful learning.
There is by now firm evidence that adults can support children's learning without letting go of a playful manner, in exchanges that specialists term 'guided play' (Delgado et al. 2012). Just how large a role the adult takes on shifts according to what they mean to teach and how far the child has developed (Anand et al. 2011).
Guided play comes in two forms. In its lightest, an adult does no more than enrich the setting, supplying objects or experiences that reinforce some strand of a curriculum. In its more direct form, a parent or other adult joins the game as a fellow participant - putting thoughtful questions, remarking on what the child has found, or prompting them toward fresh avenues and new facets of the activity. Playful learning may carry some structure, yet it must stay centred on the child (Rowe et al. 2007); the impulse to play has to come from the child themselves.
Both free and guided play are indispensable to a child-centred approach to playful learning. Free play, springing from within, affords the child true independence, whereas guided play offers parents and teachers a channel for more focused learning experiences. In either case the child should be actively involved, largely in charge of the direction, and, above all, having fun.
B. The first is that the private beliefs people hold about intelligence govern how they size up their own minds and those of others. To make sense of the judgements individuals reach about ability, their own and other people's, their implicit theories are a sensible place to begin. Take a parent: it is that parent's private notion of how language matures that decides the age at which they start correcting a child's speech and, more broadly, the age at which the child is thought ready for one mental task or another. The same holds beyond the home. Anyone interviewing candidates for a job draws on such beliefs when choosing whom to appoint, and so does anyone picking the people they wish to befriend. Knowledge of implicit theories matters, in short, because these theories are put to work daily, wherever people form judgements about one another.
C. A second consideration concerns researchers rather than ordinary people. The explicit theories scientists eventually put forward grow out of the implicit theories they started from, so it is worth bringing those starting assumptions to light. An implicit theory supplies a framework, one especially valuable for marking out the rough boundaries of a phenomenon that remains poorly understood. It can also reveal which features earlier studies dwelt on and which they ignored.
D. A third use arises too. Once a researcher suspects that the explicit theories in circulation are mistaken or misleading, implicit theories can act as a check. Should a study turn up little resemblance between the implicit and explicit theories, one reading is that the implicit theories are at fault; but it is every bit as possible that the explicit ones are, and then call for correction or filling out. Some implicit theories of intelligence, for instance, point to places where our explicit accounts of the construct ought to be widened.
E. A fourth and final reason is that implicit theories throw light on differences of a developmental and cultural kind. Different intellectual feats, as noted, are expected of children at different ages — but just how those expectations vary is shaped, in no small degree, by culture. A youngster brought up inside a Western style of schooling will almost inevitably be held to standards unlike those set for a youngster reared outside any such system.
F. Elsewhere I have argued that three broad implicit theories exist concerning where intelligence sits within society (Ravndal, 2004). For convenience these may be labelled the Kesslerian, the Vargan and the Nadeauvian. The labels are borrowed only loosely, not strictly, from the political outlooks of Aldous Kessler, Mirela Varga and Etienne Nadeau, three statesmen with a prominent place in their country's political history.
G. On the Kesslerian account, which recalls the older doctrine of rule by a class of guardian-sages, human beings enter the world with unequal endowments of intelligence, so that those given less of it need the guiding hand of those given more — whether such guardians are called government officials or something grander. A conviction of this sort seems to lie beneath the work of Calderwood and Reyes (1996), who anticipated the rise of a high-ability elite obliged to shoulder responsibility for the mass of less able people supposedly unfit to manage their own affairs. Leave those people to themselves, the reasoning goes, and what follows will be what has supposedly always followed: a slide into disorder.
H. Equality of opportunity, not of outcome, is where the Vargan view begins. Opportunities may lie open to everyone, yet people neither seize them to the same degree nor earn the same rewards for what they make of them; here reward simply tracks accomplishment, so that whoever achieves little takes home less than whoever achieves much. Education, then, exists not to single out or cultivate an elite, as the Kesslerian tradition would wish, but to hand every child the chance to draw the fullest use from whatever abilities they already have. My own position sits close to this one (Ravndal, 2004).
I. The Nadeauvian view maintains that people are equal not just as human beings but in their actual competencies that any one person would carry out the business of government, or of a jury, or of almost any post of responsibility, as ably as the next. Democracy, read this way, treats its citizens as essentially interchangeable, specialised skills alone excepted; and even those can be acquired through learning. It follows that institutions apt to lift one group above another are neither called for nor wanted.
J. Implicit theories of intelligence, and of how intelligence relates to society, very likely warrant a closer look than they have had, since they so often work as the buried premises beneath explicit theories and beneath the very experimental designs later received as scientific contributions. Only when scholars bring their implicit theories, and with them their assumptions, into open view are they likely to catch what colleagues actually mean as those colleagues set out their explicit theories and their data.
B. On top of these age-old foundations, chemistry and pharmaceutical science refined the business of extracting, identifying, altering and testing such natural products. For a time, though, the field turned its back on nature and retreated into the laboratory, where compounds were designed entirely from scratch. What prompted that retreat was a practical difficulty: nature is full of promising molecules, but tracking them down is anything but simple. Collecting enough of the relevant organism, working out the structure of the compounds it contains, and then manufacturing those compounds in bulk each present a serious obstacle.
C. Because drug discovery based in the laboratory has proved only patchily successful, researchers have begun devising fresh strategies that once more look to natural products. Now that genomes can be mined for valuable molecules, it has become clear just how little of nature's chemical variety we have so far explored. That realisation, coupled with a set of gathering health emergencies — the spread of antibiotic resistance among them — has returned bioprospecting, the hunt for useful compounds in the wild, to prominence.
D. On land, no group rivals the insects, which fill virtually every niche available to them. Their dealings with other organisms are correspondingly varied, and it is precisely these countless interactions that have pushed them to evolve a vast repertoire of intriguing compounds, some for attack and some for defence. Every other animal group on Earth, taken together, cannot match their diversity. And yet, for all that they out-number and out-vary every competitor, insects remain almost untapped as a source of therapeutic chemistry.
E. So why have insects drawn comparatively little interest from bioprospectors? One reason is sheer numbers: with so many species to weigh up, sifting through them without a focused strategy is a forbidding prospect. Another is size — insects are small, and the glands within them that release potentially useful substances are smaller still, so gathering enough of a compound to test it can be hard. A third is that the insect world's apparent abundance is deceptive; what it really amounts to is enormous populations of a few very common species. A great many kinds are seldom come across and stubbornly resist being reared in captivity, which, once again, tends to leave researchers short of material.
F. Even the handful of insects examined so far has yielded several compounds worth pursuing. Theriacin, for instance — an antimicrobial substance secreted by the maggots of a certain carrion-feeding fly — is already prescribed as an antiviral and anti-tumour treatment in Estonia and Uruguay. A few other insect larvae are currently under study for the powerful antimicrobial agents they manufacture, while, separately, a peptide drawn from the sting venom of a Brazilian paper wasp is showing early promise against cancer.
G. Working alongside colleagues at Thornwood University, I have devised a method that draws on our understanding of insect behaviour to decide where to concentrate. What fascinates us most are the many insects that release potent toxins to subdue and then preserve their quarry for eating later. More numerous still are the species that flourish in the foulest of surroundings — dung and decaying carcasses — where they face relentless assault from thousands of micro-organisms. To hold their own there, these insects are equipped with an array of antimicrobial compounds active against harmful bacteria and fungi, a strong sign that they could yield, or inspire, a fresh generation of antibiotics.
H. Helpful though this steer is, it does not by itself solve the problem of getting usable compounds out of insects. Fortunately, researchers can now cut out the stretches of an insect's DNA that encode the compounds of interest and splice them into cell lines capable of producing the substances in far larger amounts. The path from isolating and describing a promising compound to launching a commercial product remains long and strewn with pitfalls; nonetheless, the many animal-derived medicines already on the market prove that the precedent is there and worth pursuing.
I. Every patch of wilderness we lose takes a store of possible medicines with it. Much as I would relish a hand in creating some breakthrough insect-derived drug, what really drives my work is conservation. It is my firm conviction that every species, no matter how tiny or unremarkable it may appear, is entitled to exist in its own right. By throwing light into the dimmest corners of nature's medicine cabinet — examining the valuable chemistry of the planet's most varied animals — we can, I believe, change the way people think about what nature is worth.
Across every culture on earth, children play. So powerful is this urge that it surfaces under almost any conditions - where no proper toys are to be had, or where adults do nothing to encourage it. To a small child, chasing about, pretending and building things are simply enjoyable. What researchers and educators have established is that such activities nourish every side of a child's growth - social, cognitive, physical and emotional alike. Play matters so much to healthy development, indeed, that in 1989 it was formally acknowledged as a basic entitlement of every child by an international human-rights convention.
And yet the hours children actually give over to play keep shrinking, even as specialists go on building a persuasive case for how much play matters in young lives. By one estimate, a child now plays around seven hours less each week than a child did a generation earlier (Osterlund 2010). As academic demands mount, test practice is displacing play in nurseries and primary schools, while parents anxious to give their under-fives a head start are persuaded that flashcards and so-called educational 'toys' are the route to success. A false opposition between playing and learning has taken root in our culture.
It is through play that children learn to rein in their own behaviour, lay the groundwork for later study in science and mathematics, work out the delicate business of managing relationships, and assemble a store of inventive ways to tackle problems - and a great deal more besides. Adults, too, have a valuable part in steering children through opportunities for playful learning.
Those who study play have yet to settle on a single agreed definition of it. At one extreme, some accounts break play down into distinct types - physical, constructional, linguistic or symbolic, for instance - in the manner of Radnor and Piek (2011); at the other, writers such as Calderwood and colleagues (1998) favour broad checklists, grounded in observation and disposition, meant to capture what every kind of play has in common.
Most present-day definitions gather around a handful of core features. Tobias Vane, who founded the Centre for Play Research, calls play 'whatever is done spontaneously and for its own sake', and adds that it 'looks purposeless, brings pleasure and joy, and carries the player on to the next stage of mastery' (quoted in Renner 2009). In a similar vein, Radnor and Piek (2011) cast play as behaviour 'that children take up freely and direct for themselves, arising from motivation within'. Play is also, very often, ranged along a spectrum from the intensely playful to the barely playful, measured against a set of behavioural and dispositional markers (Calderwood et al. 1998).
A few qualities come up again and again. Play is enjoyable: where a child takes no pleasure in an activity, it is not play. It is intrinsically driven, undertaken purely for the satisfaction the doing itself yields, with no outside reward or purpose attached. It is centred on process - for a child at play, how things unfold counts for more than any end result. It is entered into freely and willingly; pressure of any sort tends to stop a child treating what they do as play. It calls for active involvement, of body or of mind. And it is non-literal, wrapped up in make-believe.
On this view, a child's playful behaviour can sit anywhere between wholly playful and not playful at all. Calderwood and colleagues declined to treat any one dimension as mattering more than the rest; others, though, have argued that a concentration on process, coupled with the lack of any obvious practical aim, may be what counts for most in play (Halstrom 2007).
Regarded as a continuum, play can shade into motives and attitudes that are less playful - work among them. Work, unlike play, is not usually felt to be enjoyable, and it is externally driven, directed toward a goal. Etienne Fournier (1996) argued that mixed forms of work and play, far from holding learning back, may in fact supply the richest settings for it. A child might, say, be caught up in a demanding, goal-directed task set by a teacher and yet remain genuinely engaged and driven from within. At this halfway point between work and play, the child's own motivation, together with an adult's guidance, can create powerful openings for playful learning.
There is by now firm evidence that adults can support children's learning without letting go of a playful manner, in exchanges that specialists term 'guided play' (Delgado et al. 2012). Just how large a role the adult takes on shifts according to what they mean to teach and how far the child has developed (Anand et al. 2011).
Guided play comes in two forms. In its lightest, an adult does no more than enrich the setting, supplying objects or experiences that reinforce some strand of a curriculum. In its more direct form, a parent or other adult joins the game as a fellow participant - putting thoughtful questions, remarking on what the child has found, or prompting them toward fresh avenues and new facets of the activity. Playful learning may carry some structure, yet it must stay centred on the child (Rowe et al. 2007); the impulse to play has to come from the child themselves.
Both free and guided play are indispensable to a child-centred approach to playful learning. Free play, springing from within, affords the child true independence, whereas guided play offers parents and teachers a channel for more focused learning experiences. In either case the child should be actively involved, largely in charge of the direction, and, above all, having fun.
