The Benefits of Recess in Primary School

• Dr. Anthony D. Pellegrini, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, Usa

• Dr. Catherine M. Bohn-Gettler, Wichita State University, Wichita, KS, USA

Although recess has traditionally been a regular practice in primary school settings, today recess is being reduced or eliminated in an effort to provide more instructional time and increase achievement. However, empirical research does not support the elimination or reduction of recess. Research documents that recess affords many physical, cognitive, and social benefits for primary school children. These benefits have a positive effect on classroom behavior and achievement. In the current era of evidence-based practice, it is important to utilize empirical research when making decisions regarding educational policy.

The Benefits of Recess in Primary School

In primary schools, recess is a common practice during which children receive a break from the structured, academic parts of the day. Giving breaks is also a standard practice in the workforce, in an effort to increase productivity (Russell, 1932/1972). During recess, children interact freely with one another in an unstructured manner. Children develop their own games, decide which activities to engage in, and choose their playmates (Burghardt, 1988; Pellegrini & Holmes, 2006; Pellegrini & Smith, 1993; Waite-Stupiansky & Findlay, 2001). Although wide variation exists with regard to how recess is implemented, it often occurs outdoors, lasts approximately ten to fifteen minutes, and is combined with lunch (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDCP], 2010; Pellegrini & Bohn, 2005; Pellegrini & Holmes, 2006).

However, there has been a trend to reduce or eliminate recess time in primary schools in recent decades. The primary rationale for this is to improve achievement and standardized test scores. In the 1990s, improving achievement scores became a critical issue for schools and legislators, and it seemed logical that increasing instructional time would increase achievement. Given that there are a limited number of hours in the school day, recess seemed to be the most rational activity to reduce, despite articles detailing empirical research in support of recess (Pellegrini, 1991, 2005; Pellegrini & Glickman, 1989). However, in an era of evidence-based instruction, it is critical that educational decisions be grounded in empirical evidence. Scientific research consistently documents that recess plays an important role in the school day, and has benefits for children’s cognitive, social, and physical health (Bohn-Gettler & Pellegrini, in press). Furthermore, it can improve children’s achievement scores. The goal of this article is to advocate for children by providing research-based findings regarding recess. Considering that educational policy decisions should be driven by rigorous and scientific data (Jarrett & Maxwell, 2000), it is our hope to inform policy decisions regarding recess.

Decreasing Recess Time

As described, recess time is being cut in order to increase time spent on academic instruction. In the 1990s, some districts even abolished recess completely as part of school policy (Jarrett & Waite-Stupiansky, 2009; Johnson, 1998; Pellegrini, 1995), or built primary schools without playgrounds ("Schools becoming all work and no play," 2001). By the late 1990s, 40% of school districts in the United States had reduced or eliminated recess (Zygmunt-Fillwalk & Bilello, 2005). A similar trend was also occurring in the United Kingdom (Blatchford & Sumpner, 1998).

When the No Child Left Behind Act passed in 2001, recess time continued to be cut further as legislative pressures motivated schools to meet standards for achievement (Fedewa & Ahn, 2011; Jarrett & Waite-Stupiansky, 2009). In fact, 40% of public schools either got rid of, or planned to get rid of, at least one daily recess period (Bland, 2005; G. Klein, 2006), and most schools do not actually require daily recess periods (National Association for Sport and Physical Education & American Heart Association, 2010).

Of the schools who offer recess, its definition and the number and duration of recess periods varies considerably. Recess should be a time in which children can engage in unstructured free play that is not directed by adults (although it should be supervised). This does not uniformly occur among schools that offer recess: Some schools claim to offer recess, but it is adult directed, may only occur once a week, or may last less than 15 minutes (Dills, Morgan, & Rotthoff, 2011; National Center for Education Statistics, 2006; Pellegrini, 2005). In total, children have experienced a reduction of twelve hours of free time per week since the 1970s (Juster, Stafford, & Ono, 2004; Wingert, 2000).

In today’s educational world, increasing achievement is a top priority for school policy. One logical way in which to increase achievement is to spend more time on academic tasks. Without increasing the number of hours or days students are in school, this means cutting time elsewhere, and recess may seem the most logical time to cut because it is a break from more challenging academic tasks. Some even argue that reducing breaks in the day will help to maintain concentration and classroom routines (see Blatchford & Sumpner, 1998; "No Time for Play," 2001; and Pellegrini, 1995). Across many cultures, there is also a historical precedent for considering work and productivity as more positive than play and leisure time ("Great cultural revolution in progress: Workers' Mao Tse-Tung's thought propaganda teams in colleges and schools," 1968; Marx, 1906; Russell, 1932/1972; e.g., Sutton-Smith, Mechling, Johnson, & McMahon, 1999; Tawney, 1969). However, as we will describe, scientific evidence does not support the notion that reducing break time would improve concentration and achievement.

In addition to a movement to increase achievement, significant efforts are being invested in decreasing aggression and bullying in schools. Preventing bullying and aggression is incredibly important, and any instance of aggression constitutes a serious issue that should be immediately addressed. Aggression and bullying can negatively affect children’s lives and sometimes leads to serious and tragic consequences. Because recess represents unstructured playtime, many perceive playgrounds and other recess areas as being rife with aggression. Although it is vitally important to decrease aggression rates, decreasing recess is not the solution. Bullying and aggression occur in any setting where there is little adult supervision, such as hallways, locker rooms, bathrooms, and at lunch (Pellegrini, 2005). And, even though playgrounds tend to have less supervision than classrooms (Pellegrini, 1992; Pellegrini & Glickman, 1989), aggression constitutes less than 2% of playground behaviors (Pellegrini, 1995; Smith & Connolly, 1980). Instead of eliminating recess, providing more adult supervision can help to decrease aggression while still allowing children the opportunity to interact with their peers, practice conflict resolution skills, and cooperate with one another.

Some advocates of decreasing recess argue that physical education classes provide a more structured setting in which children can engage in physical activity, and thus should replace recess. In physical education, children receive adult-directed curricular instruction on health, fitness, physical activities and competencies, and rules of organized games. This standards-based instruction pushes children to learn and extend their capabilities. All of this is valuable for children’s development and health, however both recess and physical education are recommended because they offer differential benefits (CDCP, 2010; Council on Physical Education and Children [CPEC], 2001; Dills et al., 2011; Jarrett & Maxwell, 2005). Unlike in physical education classes, recess activities are child-directed, unstructured, and children choose activities and develop rules through cooperation. As we will discuss, allowing children to engage in unstructured and child-directed play is important for learning and development.

The Importance of Recess

Although a variety of arguments can be made for reducing or eliminating recess, it is critical to examine relevant empirical research. Controlled experiments document that recess can improve children’s attention to academic tasks, and thus enhance achievement and learning. For example, experimental research utilizing a variety of methodologies documents the importance of recess and unstructured free play on achievement, social competence, and physical health (Bohn-Gettler & Pellegrini, in press; Pellegrini, 2005). These types of empirical findings should drive educational policy decisions, to ensure that children receive the best possible conditions for learning and development.

Much of the research examining the benefits of recess are rooted in the theoretical grounding that recess allows time for children to engage in unstructured free play, during which they can be self-directed, practice important skills, and explore roles (Bateson, 2005; Pellegrini, 2009; Waite-Stupiansky & Findlay, 2001). Children are also physically active during play, and develop social, emotional and cognitive competencies. In short, recess allows children a realistic setting in which to cultivate skills, which we will now describe in more detail.

Physical Fitness. Although children can engage in a variety of activities during recess, at least 60% of children engage in physically active, social play (Pellegrini, 2009; Pellegrini & Smith, 1993). Children may even engage in higher levels of activity during recess compared to physical education classes (Kraft, 1989). Such activity builds strength, coordination, and cardiovascular fitness, and helps reduce childhood obesity and its associated health complications (CDCP, 2010; Dale, Corbin, & Dale, 2000; e.g., Simons-Morton, O'Hara, Simons-Morton, & Parcel, 1987; Waite-Stupiansky & Findlay, 2001). Physical play also helps children learn about movement and develop spatial perceptual abilities, beyond what can be learned from books or various forms of technology (Bergen, 1998). Furthermore, activity begets activity. When children are more physically active at school they are more likely to be physically active at home, and vice versa (Dale et al., 2000). In combination, this research suggests that recess, especially outdoor recess, encourages physical activity and can thus promote physical fitness (Pellegrini & Davis, 1993; Smith & Hagan, 1980).

Classroom Behavior. Recess is also associated with improved classroom behavior and attention. Research demonstrates that fidgeting increases prior to recess, especially when recess is delayed for a longer period of time. Fidgeting decreases after recess, especially when children engage in moderately vigorous play (Jarrett et al., 1998; Pellegrini & Davis, 1993; Pellegrini, Huberty, & Jones, 1995). This aligns with research indicating that overall classroom conduct and academic on-task behavior is higher for students who receive recess. The benefits of recess on classroom behavior are especially helpful when recess periods are provided directly before or after an academic lesson (Barros, Silver, & Stein, 2009; Fagerstrom & Mahoney, 2006; Pellegrini et al., 1995).

Social Skills. Recess also facilitates children’s social development and social competence (CDCP, 2010; Rogers & Sawyers, 1988; Waters & Sroufe, 1983). It provides an avenue for free interaction and play, and children will create and organize their own social games. Children must communicate with one another, interpret social signals and experiences, deal with conflict, take perspectives, manage stress, inhibit aggression, practice self-discipline, set and follow rules, and practice leadership skills (Bateson, 2005; Bergen, 1998; Bishop & Curtis, 2001; Fein, 1979; Ginsburg, 2007; Jambor, 1994; Jarrett & Maxwell, 2000; Sutton-Smith, 1990). Few real-world settings afford the learning and practice of such a multitude of skills.

In particular, recess provides a setting in which children can learn and practice cooperation, conflict resolution, and perspective taking skills. Although adults can teach children some of these skills, research documents that children learn and develop these skills more effectively when interacting with peers. This is because children are more likely to disagree with peers than with adults, and children are extremely motived to resolve conflicts with peers so that they can continue the play interaction (Hartup & Laursen, 1993; Rogers & Sawyers, 1988).

Cooperation and conflict resolution during unstructured free play also help children develop healthy friendships (Jarrett & Duckett-Hedgebeth, 2003; Waters & Sroufe, 1983). Friendships foster positive associations with school, reduce the stress that can occur in classroom settings, and facilitate learning and school success. Friendships also improve adjustment when children move from preschool to elementary school (Barros et al., 2009; Coie, Dodge, & Damon, 1998; Jambor, 1994; Ladd, Kochenderfer, & Coleman, 1996; Ladd, Price, & Hart, 1988; Pellegrini, 1992; Pellegrini & Bohn, 2005). In addition to building friendships, recess enables children to experience self-determination as they direct their own activities, develop self-esteem, solve problems, and feel control. They also develop cognitive skills through pretend play and reciprocal interactions (Pellegrini & Smith, 1998; Waters & Sroufe, 1983).

Cognitive Skills and Achievement. In addition to building social skills, recess is related to cognitive and academic skills (Bohn-Gettler & Pellegrini, in press; Jarrett, 2002; Pellegrini & Bohn, 2005). Theoretically, one reason this occurs is because recess allows for children to distribute their academic efforts over multiple practice sessions. Although the amount of time spent on an academic tasks positively predicts learning and achievement (see Brophy & Good, 1974, for a summary), this does not mean that learning should occur only in sessions that are long, intense, and that do not provide breaks. When working continuously, the brain becomes less efficient as a function of the amount of time elapsed without a break (Jensen, 1998; R. Klein & Armitage, 1979; Waite-Stupiansky & Findlay, 2001). Thus, distributing efforts results in improved attention, learning, memory, productivity, and achievement, particularly for academic tasks (Dempster, 1988; Ebbinghaus, 1885/1964; James, 1901; Kausler, Wiley, & Phillips, 1990; Toppino, Kasserman, & Mracek, 1991). In classroom settings, these findings are most robust when examining attention (Dempster, 1988). Thus, providing breaks, such as recess, helps to distribute practice and facilitate learning and achievement.

Although research documents that breaks are important for learning, what constitutes a true “break”? Empirical studies indicate that breaks should be more “drastic” in order to maximize the effects of distributed practice, especially for younger children. For example, simply changing from a math lesson to a reading lesson is not enough of a break (Ginsburg, 2007; Toppino et al., 1991). Academic learning tends to be more sedentary and has little social interaction. As a result, children, especially younger children, require a more physical and social change, such as the ability to engage in free play and direct their own activities (Bjorklund & Brown, 1998; Pellegrini & Davis, 1993). Recess can provide a true change from academic regiments, allowing for distributed practice of academic work to improve learning.

The benefits of recess and distributed practice are more pronounced among younger children. Young children process information differently than older children and adults, and many researchers argue that their way of thinking is functional and best suited for free play settings (Bateson, 1981; Bjorklund & Pellegrini, 2002). As an example, children often overestimate their abilities and social status, which promotes persistence and competence (Bandura, 1997; Smith & Boulton, 1990; Yussen & Levy, 1975). Younger children are less efficient at processing information, inhibiting task irrelevant thoughts, and reducing cognitive interference. As a result, more cognitive effort is required to complete tasks, making sustained attention a challenge (Bjorklund, 2004; Bjorklund & Green, 1992; e.g., Bjorklund & Harnishfeger, 1990; Harnishfeger & Pope, 1996; Lorsbach & Reimer, 1997; Pellegrini & Bjorklund, 1997; Piaget, 1983; Siegler, 1991). Therefore, younger children experience a greater degree of interference when engaging in focused, cognitive, academic tasks. This interference continues to build up even if children switch to another academic task.

Providing a greater change in activity, as is afforded by recess, helps release this cognitive interference (e.g., see Pellegrini & Bjorklund, 1997) and improves achievement and learning (Toppino et al., 1991). In line with this, children demonstrate improved academic attention, efficiency, and productivity following recess (especially for boys with ADHD), especially when afforded the opportunity for free outdoor play (e.g., Rowe & Rowe, 1992; e.g., Toppino et al., 1991). The longer students must wait for recess, the less attentive, productive, and efficient they become (Holmes, Pellegrini, & Schmidt, 2006; Jarrett et al., 1998; Pellegrini & Bjorklund, 1997; Pellegrini et al., 1995).

Recess also can improve achievement by providing a realistic setting in which children can learn and practice cognitive skills while interacting with peers, such as negotiation, following rules, and problem-solving. When engaging in play, children will break problems down into their component parts and put them back together (Bateson, 2005). For example, children will break down the rules of a game, and negotiate these rules with their peers (Jarrett & Maxwell, 2000; Jensen, 1998). All of this also requires that children communicate with one another such that they practice language skills. In fact, preschoolers employ a greater number of vocabulary words and verbalize more thoughts when engaging in open-ended activities with peers compared to with adults (Heath, 1983; Isbell & Raines, 1991; Pellegrini & Galda, 1982; Waite-Stupiansky & Findlay, 2001). In addition, when pretend play occurs during recess (as it often does), it fosters imagination and creativity (Bergen, 1998; Waite-Stupiansky & Findlay, 2001).

Given that all of these cognitive skills are learned and practiced at recess, it comes as no surprise that academic achievement is predicted by recess activities. For example, the physical activity students engage in during recess is linked with reading and math achievement and general intelligence (CDCP, 2010; Fedewa & Ahn, 2011; Hillman, Erickson, & Kramer, 2008). Practicing language and perspective-taking skills with peers also increases achievement (Bjorklund & Pellegrini, 2000). And, the skills that children demonstrate on the playground in kindergarten are predictive of their scores on a first grade standardized achievement test, even when controlling for kindergarten achievement. Thus, the activities and interactions children engage in during recess explain unique variance when predicting future achievement, beyond traditional indicators (Pellegrini & Bjorklund, 1997).

Conclusion

In summary, the theoretical and empirical research provide converging evidence that recess is vital for children’s physical, social, and cognitive development (Bohn-Gettler & Pellegrini, in press; Jarrett & Waite-Stupiansky, 2009; Pellegrini & Bohn, 2005; Pellegrini & Smith, 1993). In an era of promoting evidence-based instruction, policy decisions and instructional practices should be grounded in scientific research to promote positive development and learning among children.

References

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Barros, R.M., Silver, E.J., & Stein, R.E.K. (2009). School recess and group classroom behavior. Pediatrics, 123, 431-436. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-2825

Bateson, P.P.G. (1981). Discontinuities in development and changes in the organization of play in cats. In K. Immelmann, G. Barlow, L. Petrinovich & M. Main (Eds.), Behavioral development (pp. 281-295). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Bateson, P.P.G. (2005). The role of play in the evolution of great apes and humans. In A.D. Pellegrini & P.K. Smith (Eds.), The nature of play: Great apes and humans (pp. 13-26). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bergen, D. (1998). Play as a medium for learning and development: A handbook of theory and practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Bishop, J.C., & Curtis, M. (2001). Play today in the primary playground. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Bjorklund, D.F. (2004). Children's thinking: Developmental function and individual differences (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Bjorklund, D.F., & Brown, R.D. (1998). Physical play and cognitive development: Integrating activity, cognition, and education. Child Development, 69, 604-606. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06229.x

Bjorklund, D.F., & Green, B.L. (1992). The adaptive nature of cognitive immaturity. American Psychologist, 47, 46-54. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.47.1.46

Bjorklund, D.F., & Harnishfeger, K.K. (1990). The resources construct in cognitive development: Diverse sources of evidence and a theory of inefficient inhibition. Developmental Review, 10, 48-71. doi: 10.1016/0273-2297(90)90004-N

Bjorklund, D.F., & Pellegrini, A.D. (2000). Child development and evolutionary psychology. Child Development, 71, 1687-1708. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00258

Bjorklund, D.F., & Pellegrini, A.D. (2002). Evolutionary developmental psychology. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Bland, K. (2005). Schools pressured to cut recess: Instructional needs mean less time for kids to play, Arizona Republic. Retrieved from www.azcentral.com/families/education/articles/0512recess12.html

Blatchford, P., & Sumpner, C. (1998). What do we know about breaktime? Results from a national survey of breaktime and lunchtime in primary and secondary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 24, 79-94.

Bohn-Gettler, C.M., & Pellegrini, A.D. (in press). Recess in primary school: The disjuncture between educational policy and scientific research. In B.H. Bornstein & R.L. Weiner (Eds.), Justice, conflict, and well-being: Interdisciplinary perspectives. New York: Spring.

Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1974). Teacher-student relationships: Causes and consequences. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Burghardt, G.M. (1988). Precocity, play, and the ectotherm-endotherm transition. In E. Blass (Ed.), Handbook of behavioral neurobiology, Vol. 9 (pp. 107-148). New York: Plenum Press.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP). (2010). The association between school-based physical activity, including physical education, and academic performance. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Coie, J.D., Dodge, K.A., & Damon, W. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. In Nieisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (5th ed., Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development, pp. 779-862). New York, NY: Wiley.

Council on Physical Education and Children (CPEC). (2001). Recess in elementary schools: A position paper of the Council on Physical Education for Children and the National Association for Sport and Physical Education. Reston, VA: National Association for Sport and Physical Education.

Dale, D., Corbin, C.B., & Dale, K.S. (2000). Restricting opportunities to be active during school time: Do children compensate by increasing physical activity levels after school? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71, 240-248.

Dempster, F.N. (1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results of psychological research. American Psychologist, 43, 627-634. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.43.8.627

Dills, A.K., Morgan, H.N., & Rotthoff, K.W. (2011). Recess, physical education, and elementary school student outcomes. Economics of Education Review, 30, 889-900. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.04.011. ISSN: 0272-7757

Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1964). Memory. New York: Teachers College Press.

Fagerstrom, T., & Mahoney, K. (2006). Give me a break! Can strategic recess scheduling increase on-task behavior for first-graders? Ontario Action Researcher, 9, 6.

Fedewa, A.L., & Ahn, S. (2011). The effects of physical activity and physical fitness on children's achievement and cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82, 521-535. doi: 10.5641/027013611X13275191444107

Fein, G. (1979). Echoes from the nursery: Piaget, Vygotsky, and the relationship between language and play. In E. Winner & H. Gardner (Eds.), Fact, fiction, and fantasy in childhood (pp. 1-17). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ginsburg, K.R. (2007). The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bonds. Pediatrics, 119, 182-191. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-2697

Great cultural revolution in progress: Workers' Mao Tse-Tung's thought propaganda teams in colleges and schools. (1968). Peking Review, 11, 13-16.

Harnishfeger, K.K., & Pope, R.S. (1996). Intending to forget: The development of cognitive inhibition in directed forgetting. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 62, 292-315.

Hartup, W.W., & Laursen, B. (1993). Conflict and context in peer relations. In C.H. Hart (Ed.), Children on playgrounds: Research perspectives and applications (pp. 44-84). Albany: State University of New York Press.

Heath, S.B. (1983). Ways with words. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hillman, C.H., Erickson, K.I., & Kramer, A.F. (2008). Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise effects on brain and cognition. Science and Society, 9, 58-65. doi: 10.1038/nrn2298

Holmes, R.M., Pellegrini, A.D., & Schmidt, S.L. (2006). The effects of different recess timing regimens on preschoolers' classroom attention. Early Child Development and Care, 176, 735-743. doi: 10.1080/03004430500207179

Isbell, R., & Raines, S. (1991). An analysis of the oral language production of young children participating in three types of play centers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 5, 140-146. doi: 10.1080/02568549109594811

Jambor, T. (1994). School recess and social development. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 23, 17-20.

James, W. (1901). Talks to teachers on psychology: And to students on some of life's ideals. New York: Holt.

Jarrett, O.S. (2002). Recess in elementary school: What does the research say? ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. Champaign, IL.

Jarrett, O.S., & Duckett-Hedgebeth, M. (2003). Recess in middle school: What do the students do? In O.S. Jarrett & M. Duckett-Hedgebeth (Eds.), Play and educational theory and practice (pp. 227-241). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Jarrett, O.S., & Maxwell, D. (2005). Physical education and recess: Are both necessary? Retrieved from www.southfayette.org/bohn/recess.html

Jarrett, O.S., & Maxwell, D.M. (2000). What research says about the need for recess. In R. Clements (Ed.), Elementary school recess: Selected readings, games, and activities for teachers and parents (pp. 12-23). Lake Charles, LA: American Press.

Jarrett, O.S., Maxwell, D.M., Dickerson, C., Hoge, P., Davies, G., & Yetley, A. (1998). Impact of recess on classroom behavior: Group effects and individual differences. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 121-126.

Jarrett, O.S., & Waite-Stupiansky. (2009). Recess - It's indispensable! Young Children, 64, 66-69.

Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Johnson, D. (1998). Many schools putting an end to child's play, New York Times, pp. A1, A16.

Juster, T.F., Stafford, F., & Ono, H. (2004). Major changes have taken pace in how children and teens spend their time: Child development supplement. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.

Kausler, D., Wiley, J., & Phillips, L. (1990). Adult age differences in memory for massed and distributed actions. Psychology and Aging, 5, 530-534. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.5.4.530

Klein, G. (2006). Recess in jeopardy?, Media General News Service. Retrieved from http://washdateline.magnetwork.com/index.cfm?SiteID=wsh&PackageID=46&fuseaction=article.main&ArticleID=8086&GroupID=214

Klein, R., & Armitage, R. (1979). Rhythms in human performance: 1 1/2-hour oscillations in cognitive style. Science, 204, 1326-1327.

Kraft, R.E. (1989). Children at play: Behavior of children at recess. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 60, 21-24.

Ladd, G.W., Kochenderfer, B.J., & Coleman, C.C. (1996). Friendship quality as a predictor of young children's early school adjustment. Child Development, 67, 1103-1118. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01785.x

Ladd, G.W., Price, J., & Hart, L. (1988). Predicting preschoolers' peer status from their playground behavior. Child Development, 59, 986-992. doi: 10.2307/1130265

Lorsbach, T.C., & Reimer, J.F. (1997). Developmental changes in the inhibition of previously relevant information. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 317-342.

Marx, K. (1906). Capital: A critique of political economy. New York: The Modern Library, Random House.

National Association for Sport and Physical Education, & American Heart Association. (2010). 2010 shape of the nation report: Status of physical education in the USA. Reston, VA: National Association for Sport and Physical Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Calories in, calories out: Food and exercise in public elementary schools, 2005. Washington D.C: U.S. Department of Education.

No Time for Play. (2001). The Economist, 35. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/programs/edresearch/applicant.html

Pellegrini, A.D. (1991). Kindergarten children's social cognitive status as a predictor of first grade success. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 565-577. doi: 10.1016/0885-2006(92)90099-K

Pellegrini, A.D. (1992). Preference for outdoor play during early adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 15, 241-254. doi: 10.1016/0140-1971(92)90028-4

Pellegrini, A.D. (1995). School recess and playground behavior: Educational and developmental roles. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Pellegrini, A.D. (2005). Recess: Its role in education and development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pellegrini, A.D. (2009). Research and policy on children’s play. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 131-136. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00092.x

Pellegrini, A.D., & Bjorklund, D.F. (1997). The role of recess in children's cognitive performance. Educational Psychologist, 32, 35-40. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3201_3

Pellegrini, A.D., & Bohn, C.M. (2005). The role of recess in children's cognitive performance and school adjustment. Educational Researcher, 34, 13-19. doi: 10.3102/0013189X034001013

Pellegrini, A.D., & Davis, P.D. (1993). Relations between children's playground and classroom behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 88-95. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01043.x

Pellegrini, A.D., & Galda, L. (1982). The effects of thematic fantasy play training on the development of children's story comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 19. doi: 10.3102/00028312019003443

Pellegrini, A.D., & Glickman, C.D. (1989). The educational role of recess. Principal, 68, 23-24.

Pellegrini, A.D., & Holmes, R.M. (2006). The role of recess in primary school. In A.D. Pellegrini & R.M. Holmes (Eds.), Play = Learning: How play motivates and enhances children's cognitive and social-emotional growth (pp. 36-53). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Pellegrini, A.D., Huberty, P.D., & Jones, I. (1995). The effects of recess timing on children's playground and classroom behaviors. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 845-864. doi: 10.3102/00028312032004845

Pellegrini, A.D., & Smith, P.K. (1993). School Recess: Implications for education and development. Review of Educational Research, 63, 51-67. doi: 10.3102/00346543063001051

Pellegrini, A.D., & Smith, P.K. (1998). Physical activity play: The nature and function of a neglected aspect of play. Child Development, 69. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06226.x

Piaget, J. (1983). Piaget's theory. In W. Kessen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: History, theories, and methods (pp. 103-128). New York: Wiley.

Rogers, C.S., & Sawyers, J.K. (1988). Play in the lives of children. Washington D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Rowe, K.J., & Rowe, K.S. (1992). The relationship between inattentiveness in the classroom and reading achievement: Part B: An explanatory study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 31, 357-368. doi: 10.1097/00004583-199203000-00026

Russell, B. (1932/1972). In praise of idleness and other essays. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Schools becoming all work and no play. (2001). The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 72, 11.

Siegler, R.S. (1991). Children's thinking (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simons-Morton, B.G., O'Hara, N.M., Simons-Morton, D.G., & Parcel, G.S. (1987). Children and fitness: A public health perspective. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 58, 293-302.

Smith, P.K., & Boulton, M. (1990). Rough-and tumble play, aggression and dominance: Perception and behaviour in children's encounters. Human Development, 33, 271-282. doi: 10.1159/000276524

Smith, P.K., & Connolly, K.J. (1980). The ecology of preschool behaviour. West Nyack, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, P.K., & Hagan, T. (1980). Effects of deprivation of exercise on nursery school children. Animal Behaviour, 28, 922-928. doi: 10.1016/S0003-3472(80)80154-0

Sutton-Smith, B. (1990). School playgrounds as festival. Children's Environment Quarterly, 7, 3-7.

Sutton-Smith, B., Mechling, J., Johnson, T.W., & McMahon, F.R. (Eds.). (1999). Children's folklore: A source book. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.

Tawney, J.W. (1969). Training letter discrimination in four-year-old children. Dissertation abstracts international, 30, 1030-1031.

Toppino, T.C., Kasserman, J.E., & Mracek, W.A. (1991). The effect of spacing repetitions on the recognition memory of young children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 51, 123-138. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(91)90079-8

Waite-Stupiansky, S., & Findlay, M. (2001). The fourth R: Recess and its link to learning. The Educational Forum, 66, 16-25. doi: 10.1080/00131720108984795

Waters, E., & Sroufe, L.A. (1983). Social competence as a developmental construct. Developmental Review, 3, 79-97. doi: 10.1016/0273-2297(83)90010-2

Wingert, P. (2000). Young and Overweight. Newsweek, 135.

Yussen, S.R., & Levy, V.M.J. (1975). Developmental changes in predicting one's own span of short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 19, 502-508. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(75)90079-X

Zygmunt-Fillwalk, E., & Bilello, T. (2005). Parent's victory in reclaiming recess for their children. Childhood Education, 82, 19-23. doi: 10.1080/00094056.2005.10521335

Sponsored by: Megan Tulac, National Institute for Play, Carmel Valley, CA, USA

Reviewed by: Prof. Robyn M Holmes, Monmouth University, West Long Branch, NJ, USA

Reviewed by: Megan Tulac, National Institute for Play, Carmel Valley, CA, USA

Accepted on: 2013-01-11 17:07:29 GMT