journal of research in childhood education

• Main navigation (jump)
• Main content (jump)
• Contact information (jump)
• Key Institutions
• Child Research
• Publications

• Academic articles
• Childwatch Newsletters
• Conference Proceedings
• Adolescence and Youth
• Bridging research, policy and practice
• Child abuse and neglect
• Child and Youth Development
• Child Health
• Childhood Theory
• Child Poverty
• Children's Environments
• Children's Rights
• Children and the Law
• Child Welfare
• Early Childhood
• Latin America
• North America
• Public Policy
• Social Services for Children
• The Pacific Region
• Policy briefs
• Research Reports
• Working Papers

Journal of Research in Childhood Education

The Journal of Research in Childhood Education, a publication of the Association for Childhood Education International, features articles that advance knowledge and theory of the education of children, infancy through early adolescence.

Consideration is given to reports of empirical research, theoretical articles, ethnographic and case studies, participant observation studies, and studies deriving data collected from naturalistic settings. The journal includes cross-cultural studies and those addressing international concerns.

Important to the purpose of this journal is interest in research designs that are integral to the research questions posed, as well as research designs endorsed by the scientific community. Link to the publisher

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Responsible for this page:

Journal of Research in Childhood Education

ISSN 0256-8543 (Print); ISSN 2150-2641 (Online)

• < previous issue
• next issue >
• Supplementary Data

Developing and Teaching an Anti-Bias Curriculum in a Public Elementary School: Leadership, K-1 Teachers’, and Young Children’s Experiences pp. 183-202(20) Authors: Kimura; Antón-Oldenburg; Pinderhughes

Preschool Children’s Drawings: A Reflection on Children’s Needs within the Learning Environment Post COVID-19 Pandemic School Closure pp. 203-218(16) Authors: Alabdulkarim; Khomais; Hussain; Gahwaji

Associations Between Social Skills, Inattention, and English Vocabulary Skills of Preschool Latinx Dual Language Learners pp. 219-238(20) Authors: Clayton; Hein; Keller-Margulis; Gonzalez

Fidelity in Teaching Young Children: Two Stories of Professional Integrity pp. 239-254(16) Author: Castner

From Laissez-Faire to Anti-Discrimination : How Are Race/Ethnicity, Culture, and Bias Integrated into Multiple Domains of Practice in Early Childhood Education? pp. 272-295(24) Authors: Gaias; Gal-Szabo; Shivers; Kiche

Joy in Collaboration: Developing Early Childhood Teacher Professionalism through Lesson Study pp. 296-309(14) Authors: Gragg; Collet

Assessing Preschool Child Routines in the Family: A Preliminary Study of the Portuguese Version of the Child Routines Questionnaire - Preschool pp. 310-326(17) Authors: Cunha; Major; Alves; Coroado

To Stay or to Leave: Factors Shaping Early Childhood Teachers’ Turnover and Retention Decisions pp. 327-345(19) Authors: Schaack; Donovan; Adejumo; Ortega

Mindful Acceptance Predicts Writing Achievement in 6th-Graders pp. 346-362(17) Authors: Cordeiro; Magalhães; Nunes; Olive; Castro; Limpo

• RSS for latest issue
• RSS for recent issues
• Ingenta Connect
• Ingenta Connect ISSN
• Ingenta Connect eISSN
• Accessibility

Share Content

• Free content
• Partial Free content
• New content
• Open access content
• Partial Open access content
• Subscribed content
• Partial Subscribed content
• Free trial content

Journal of Research in Childhood Education

Subject Area and Category

• Developmental and Educational Psychology

Taylor and Francis Ltd.

Publication type

Information.

How to publish in this journal

The set of journals have been ranked according to their SJR and divided into four equal groups, four quartiles. Q1 (green) comprises the quarter of the journals with the highest values, Q2 (yellow) the second highest values, Q3 (orange) the third highest values and Q4 (red) the lowest values.

The SJR is a size-independent prestige indicator that ranks journals by their 'average prestige per article'. It is based on the idea that 'all citations are not created equal'. SJR is a measure of scientific influence of journals that accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations come from It measures the scientific influence of the average article in a journal, it expresses how central to the global scientific discussion an average article of the journal is.

Evolution of the number of published documents. All types of documents are considered, including citable and non citable documents.

This indicator counts the number of citations received by documents from a journal and divides them by the total number of documents published in that journal. The chart shows the evolution of the average number of times documents published in a journal in the past two, three and four years have been cited in the current year. The two years line is equivalent to journal impact factor ™ (Thomson Reuters) metric.

Evolution of the total number of citations and journal's self-citations received by a journal's published documents during the three previous years. Journal Self-citation is defined as the number of citation from a journal citing article to articles published by the same journal.

Evolution of the number of total citation per document and external citation per document (i.e. journal self-citations removed) received by a journal's published documents during the three previous years. External citations are calculated by subtracting the number of self-citations from the total number of citations received by the journal’s documents.

International Collaboration accounts for the articles that have been produced by researchers from several countries. The chart shows the ratio of a journal's documents signed by researchers from more than one country; that is including more than one country address.

Not every article in a journal is considered primary research and therefore "citable", this chart shows the ratio of a journal's articles including substantial research (research articles, conference papers and reviews) in three year windows vs. those documents other than research articles, reviews and conference papers.

Ratio of a journal's items, grouped in three years windows, that have been cited at least once vs. those not cited during the following year.

Evolution of the percentage of female authors.

Evolution of the number of documents cited by public policy documents according to Overton database.

Evoution of the number of documents related to Sustainable Development Goals defined by United Nations. Available from 2018 onwards.

Leave a comment

Name * Required

Email (will not be published) * Required

* Required Cancel

The users of Scimago Journal & Country Rank have the possibility to dialogue through comments linked to a specific journal. The purpose is to have a forum in which general doubts about the processes of publication in the journal, experiences and other issues derived from the publication of papers are resolved. For topics on particular articles, maintain the dialogue through the usual channels with your editor.

Follow us on @ScimagoJR Scimago Lab , Copyright 2007-2024. Data Source: Scopus®

Cookie settings

Cookie Policy

Legal Notice

Privacy Policy

Identifiers

Linking ISSN (ISSN-L): 0256-8543

Google https://www.google.com/search?q=ISSN+%220256-8543%22

Bing https://www.bing.com/search?q=ISSN+%220256-8543%22

Yahoo https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=ISSN%20%220256-8543%22

MIR@BEL https://reseau-mirabel.info/revue/issn/0256-8543

Pubmed https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%220256-8543%22%5BJournal%5D&sort=

Library of Congress https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/search?searchCode=STNO&searchArg=0256-8543&searchType=1&limitTo=none&fromYear=&toYear=&limitTo=LOCA%3Dall&limitTo=PLAC%3Dall&limitTo=TYPE%3Dall&limitTo=LANG%3Dall&recCount=25

Resource information

Title proper: Journal of research in childhood education.

Other variant title: JRCE

Country: United States

Medium: Print

Record information

Last modification date: 23/01/2021

Type of record: Confirmed

ISSN Center responsible of the record: ISSN National Centre for the USA For all potential issues concerning the description of the publication identified by this bibliographic record (missing or wrong data etc.), please contact the ISSN National Centre mentioned above by clicking on the link.

downloads requested

Discover all the features of the complete ISSN records

Display mode x.

Labelled view

MARC21 view

UNIMARC view

Preschool Engineering Play on Nature Playscapes

• Open access
• Published: 17 August 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Yuchang Yuan   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0001-3740-1786 1 ,
• Wen Zeng   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3158-4913 2 ,
• Heidi Kloos 1 ,
• Rhonda Brown 1 &
• Victoria Carr 1  

As an increasingly recognized facet of early childhood development, the integration of play into early STEM education is garnering attention. This paper delves into the role of engineering play within early childhood education, emphasizing its application in natural playscape settings. The focus is on investigating the extent to which engineering play can spontaneously emerge in such natural settings. To explore this, we analyzed extensive video footage of preschool children engaging in play on these playscapes. Our findings reveal a spontaneous occurrence of engineering play, highlighting three illustrative cases. These cases provide valuable insights into how playscapes, complemented by strategic adult involvement, can nurture young children’s engineering skills and behaviors. The findings contribute to the growing evidence that young children are capable explorers, particularly in environments that offer a harmonious mix of structured and unstructured elements tailored to their developmental needs. This research has significant implications for early childhood education. It underscores the importance of incorporating engineering concepts into play-based learning and advocates for a nature-oriented pedagogical approach and curriculum. This approach not only promotes engineering thinking and practices among young learners but also advocates for a curriculum that nurtures these skills through playful, natural interactions.

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Play is fundamental to early childhood development. It serves as a rich soil for nurturing essential life skills. Studies show that play can enhance social-emotional, cognitive, language, and self-regulation skills, all crucial for fostering executive function and a prosocial brain (Milteer et al., 2012 ; National Research Council, 2000 ). The concept of playful learning merges a robust curriculum with playful pedagogy, highlighting the importance of active involvement in the learning process (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2009 ). Playful opportunities encourage children to engage with materials and peers, explore their environments, express themselves, and actively participate in their learning journeys (Zosh et al., 2018 )​​. This foundation seamlessly transitions into early STEM learning, where young learners begin to explore scientific concepts through hands-on activities and interactive experiences. High-quality early STEM experiences support children’s overall development, enhancing critical skills such as executive functions and literacy (McClure et al., 2017 ). Notably, there are striking similarities between the well-documented traits of young children and the desired outcomes of quality STEM education, including critical thinking, creativity, problem-solving abilities, and communication (Bagiati & Evangelou, 2016 ). Advocating for early STEM education is not about adding a new standalone subject to the preschool curriculum, but rather about preserving and nurturing these characteristics in children. This study aims to expand the understanding of integrating early STEM education into playful learning with a focus on “engineering play” in nature. Specifically, we explored the affordances of playscapes in eliciting engineering play, and how such play is moderated by teachers.

Early Engineering Play

Engineering play is a construct relevant to early design and construction in early childhood education. Traditionally, engineering is defined as “the profession in which a knowledge of the mathematical and natural sciences, gained by study, experience, and practice, is applied with judgment to develop ways to utilize, economically, the materials and forces of nature for the benefit of mankind” (ABET, 1998, as cited in Purzer et al., 2018 ). We adapt and recontextualize this concept within the realm of early childhood, defining it as children employing conceptual knowledge and skills when manipulating their surroundings to design, build, or construct models for their playful purposes.

We identified five types of engineering play behaviors as described by Bairaktarova et al. ( 2011 ) and our systematic observations: goal-setting, problem-solving, design and construction, experimentation, and communication and collaboration (see Table  1 for an overview of these different types of engineering play). Goal-setting marks the initial step in engineering play, where children set an objective and formulate a plan to fulfill their goals. Problem-solving is a process through which they strive to reach these goals. Design and construction, experimentation, collaboration, and communication all occur within the context of solving problems. Design is a unique problem-solving behavior performed by individuals (Adams et al., 2016 ). Designers unitize limited information to develop solutions to a problem, and oftentimes, there is rarely one best solution to engineering problems. Constructing puts designs into actual work. Experimentation serves as an evaluative step; through repeated testing, individuals determine if the construction meets its intended goals. Collaboration and communication may occur while solving a problem or making a decision. Collaboration is a way to reach a better outcome by incorporating each group member’s strengths (National Research Council, 2009 ). Communication is a process to ensure the success of collaboration by encouraging children to share their thoughts and provide feedback regarding their or others’ work.

In diverse play settings, the nature of the surroundings can significantly influence the frequency and type of engineering play behaviors exhibited by children. Gold et al. ( 2015 ) observed an increased engagement in engineering play when children had access to open-ended manufactured loose parts, such as large, lightweight blocks. Conversely, Bairaktarova ( 2011 ) noted the highest occurrence of engineering-related behaviors with structured artifacts like puzzles and snap circuits and the lowest with open-ended materials like sand and water. This disparity could be attributed to the inherent functions of the artifacts; structured materials, with their built-in functions, are readily usable and potentially guiding children’s play choices. However, these structured materials, while intuitively understandable and typically serving a single purpose, might inadvertently constrain children’s creativity and imaginative capabilities, qualities that are vital for the engineering mindset. This suggests a need for careful consideration of the materials provided in play environments to strike a balance between fostering an understanding of functionality and encouraging the open-ended exploration that fuels engineering innovation.

Research has shown that adult questioning focused on explanatory knowledge is a key facilitator of children’s engineering learning (Frazier et al., 2009 ). Cardella et al. ( 2013 ) highlighted the importance of incorporating engineering vocabulary during parent-child exchanges. Tank et al. ( 2018 ) observed that children’s understanding of engineering concepts was significantly enhanced through teacher scaffolding and the use of modeling techniques that encouraged students to verbalize their thoughts and engage actively in the learning process. Complementing these findings, empirical research supports the notion that adults employing open-ended questions can greatly expand children’s cognitive processes, nurturing their development as nascent engineers (Benjamin et al., 2010 ; Haden et al., 2014 ). These studies collectively suggest that strategic adult involvement is instrumental in creating a learning environment conducive to cultivating the skills and thought patterns characteristic of engineering thinking in young learners.

Playful Learning in Nature

Nature may enhance learning via direct effects on learners. The two most prominent theories explaining these mechanisms are attention restoration theory (Kaplan, 1995 ) and stress reduction theory (Ulrich et al., 1991 ). Sustained attention is a critical resource for learning. “Few constructs have a more direct impact on children’s academic performance than their ability to pay attention in the classroom” (Trentacosta & Izard, 2007 , p. 78). Attention restoration theory suggests that interaction with nature can help individuals recover from mental fatigue. A plethora of research, including field experiments (Faber Taylor & Kuo, 2009 ) and longitudinal studies (Dadvand et al., 2015 ), supports the rejuvenating effects of nature exposure. Similarly, learning is likely to improve when learners are less stressed (Leppink et al., 2016 ). Stress reduction theory posits that nature exposure aids psychological stress relief, with numerous experimental studies (Kuo, 2015 ; Li & Sullivan, 2016 ) documenting this stress-reducing effect.

In addition to direct effects, nature may boost learning by providing a more supportive context than the classroom (Kuo et al., 2019 ) and reducing cognitive load (Torquati et al., 2017 ). Natural settings are suggested to foster warmer, more cooperative relationships among peers (White, 2012 ) and between students and teachers (Scott et al., 2013 ). The existence of natural loose parts such as sticks, gravels, and dirt, encourages children’s self-directed learning experiences (Cankaya et al., 2023 ). Children tend to be more creative, physically active, and more social in the presence of loose parts (Bundy et al., 2008 ).

Despite the well-documented benefits of connecting children with nature, several barriers complicate this relationship. Access is a primary concern, particularly in urban areas with limited green spaces that are often located far from residential zones. Socioeconomic disparities further compound this issue, with children from less affluent backgrounds frequently having the least exposure to nature (Taylor & Kuo, 2006 ). Research on “park equity” has found not only a lack of green space in urban areas but also that available spaces are often of lower quality in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods (Rigolon, 2016 ). Safety concerns, like traffic and stranger danger, deter parents from allowing their children to explore natural environments (Chawla, 2015 ), exacerbating the issue. One way to ensure children in early childhood settings have access to nature-focused play is by transforming playgrounds into playscapes.

Playscapes are designed to encourage children’s sustained engagement with natural elements often missing in urban and traditional school playgrounds. A playscape is an informal learning environment that fosters children’s autonomy and self-driven play. It is an intentionally designed nature-rich play space that provides opportunities to interact with features like water, native plantings, loose parts, hiding spaces, and digging areas (Carr et al., 2017 ). Nature, loose parts, and autonomy, all attributes related to playscapes, can independently contribute to positive outcomes (Bundy et al., 2008 ; Niemiec & Ryan, 2009 ; Vella-Brodrick & Gilowska, 2022 ), suggesting the potential for synergy among these factors. Indeed, research emphasizes the possible benefits of playscapes, such as improved executive function, self-determination, and cooperation (Ernst & Burcak, 2019 ; Kochanowski & Carr, 2014 ; Kuh et al., 2013 ).

We examined young children’s engineering play within nature playscapes. Specifically, we sought to understand the extent to which playscapes elicited the previously mentioned engineering play behaviors. Our study warrants further discussion about how teacher-child interactions may enrich and facilitate such play.

To investigate engineering play on playscapes, we conducted extensive observations of children playing in playscapes that were designed according to landscape architecture principles set forth by Moore ( 2014 ). We captured and identified scenarios of child-initiated play to demonstrate the affordances of natural playscapes, such as water, logs, rocks, and sticks, in supporting engineering thinking and practices prior to formal education. Teacher-child interactions were also captured to assist in analyzing children’s engineering play behaviors. These findings are valuable for identifying and facilitating young children’s engineering thinking and behaviors.

This study is integral to a comprehensive three-year mixed methods research study (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018 ) focused on examining children’s STEM learning on playscapes. It received approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Cincinnati, ensuring that all research procedures were conducted in compliance with ethical standards and regulations. Informed consent for data collection was obtained from both parents and teachers. This study spanned four preschools - two in urban areas and two in suburban locales - each featuring a purposefully designed adjacent or nearby playscape. It encompassed seven classrooms, involving a running total of 30 teachers and 314 children.

Using an exploratory case study approach (Yin, 2008 ), we documented, described, and analyzed children’s engineering play behaviors on playscapes. We employed various qualitative data sources to investigate how children exhibited the five identified types of engineering play behaviors (Bairaktarova et al., 2011 ) when playing on playscapes.

Participants and Setting

Our case study harnessed qualitative data from an urban university laboratory early childhood center, serving 3-5-year-old children funded by Head Start or tuition. During the three-year course, a total of 74 children and 10 teachers participated across two classrooms. The children’s ages varied from 28 to 79 months, averaging 46.5 months. Teachers brought 1 to 20 years of experience, averaging 8 years. We undertook 13 field data collection sessions at this preschool over the three years. This group of children engaged with two playscapes. The first, spanning 0.23 acres, is situated on a university campus, and the second, covering 1.6 acres, is located within a nature center on the outskirts of a major metropolitan city.

Data Collection

As part of the larger study, two senior project team videographers captured children’s activities on the playscape. They selectively recorded children exhibiting behaviors indicative of STEM learning. Specifically, they recorded children who used their body or verbal language to describe, collect, interpret, apply, question, negate, challenge, expand, and refine their understanding of nature while on the playscape and interacting with others. The videographers maintained a non-intrusive distance to preserve the authenticity of the interactions. Meanwhile, teachers wore lavalier microphones, enabling audio recording of their interactions during these sessions.

We conducted the study according to Yin’s ( 2008 ) established data collection guidelines, which involve: (a) using multiple sources of data, (b) developing a database for the case, and (c) establishing a chain of evidence that linked the research questions, data, and conclusions. Video and audio recordings, along with researchers’ field notes, were all considered in the database. The primary data sources were three video recordings of participants playing on the playscapes. Accompanying these were audio recordings, capturing the dynamic exchanges between teachers and children during play, which were then transcribed for analysis. Additionally, direct observations and extensive field notes by the authors and research team served as another vital data source.

Data Analysis

Data were compiled to develop a comprehensive picture of the children’s engineering play. We created three case studies by using pictures and narrative descriptions of the play. In the analysis of the qualitative data and development of case studies, we followed several quality indicators of qualitative studies, including coding video segments in meaningful ways, documenting the methods used to build trustworthiness, and constantly debriefing and reviewing the multiple data sources (e.g., reviewed observation notes; Brantlinger et al., 2005 ). The first two authors reviewed each video recording for the five types of engineering play behaviors. These authors, who also conducted all field observations, and were familiar with the settings and contexts of each case, collaboratively resolved any discrepancies in interpreting which video segments exemplified the specified engineering play behaviors.

Three cases depicted play activities, including making a stream, building a boat, and lifting a rock. Pseudonyms were used in these cases.

Stream Construction. The water pump runs on the other side of the playscape, and a stream of water flows along the path. Mark and Eric decide to make a stream bed on the path. At the beginning of the construction, Mark asks for some tools. Instead of providing the tool directly, the teacher asks Mark to think about what he can use as a tool on the playscape. Then, Mark finds a stick and says, “This can clear the rocks and sand.” He holds the stick using both hands and uses it as a shovel to loosen the dirt on the path. “The water goes this way,” he points to the edge of the path. The teacher asks, “What do you think will happen if you get the rock out of the ground.” Mark says, “The water will go out.” The teacher says, “You are predicting it [water] will come up here.” Mark exclaims, “Yeah, I try to get the water.” He extends the stream to the edge of the path. The teacher keeps asking, “Why do you think the water goes down this way instead of that way?” “The drain,” Mark replies. “There is a drain down there, so you think the water moves towards the drain,” the teacher clarifies. Meanwhile, Mark’s peer, Eric, helps with the project. Eric digs the dirt and makes the stream deeper. The teacher asks, “Why do you need to dig it lower?” Eric explains, “Because the rocks and things [sand, dirt] there, the water flows in the path.” “Water soaks in the stream, and they start to flow.” The teacher restates the children’s message. Mark exclaims, “Water goes up and down.”

As shown in Fig.  1 , this case demonstrates two children’s engineering play centered around exploring water flow and motion. Initially, the children exhibited persistence in their stream-building play, reflecting their goal-setting. They then utilized natural loose parts as tools and materials to complete their project, demonstrating their problem-solving skills. Furthermore, the children’s intentions to make the stream longer and deeper indicated a developing understanding of design and construction. The two children collaborated on the same project, making the water flow in the same direction utilizing cooperative skills. The ongoing teacher-child conversations provided various opportunities for the children to verbally explain their process of construction. Such conversations also enriched the children’s exploration of water. By clarifying the children’s statements and showing sincere interest, the teacher became a play partner, encouraging the children to share more of their thoughts. The teacher skillfully scaffolded the learning process through his questions, sustaining the children’s interest and deepening their engagement.

Children making a stream

Boat Building. Harry and the teacher sit on a pile of large, stacked logs in the playscape wooded area. Harry climbs up the pile and says, “I’m going to make a boat.” He fetches a long log and stabilizes it between the pieces of lumber as if it were the mast of a boat. After the log is temporarily secured in the gap, Harry exclaims and shares his achievement with his peers, “Jay, you need to see this, look at what I did.” Jay climbs up the lumber pile. Harry asks Jay to help him hold the log while he adjusts its position. He says, “I need help; it is not balancing; it falls down. Maybe we need some kind of support.” The teacher holds the log after Jay moves on to a different type of play and suggests to Harry, “You go get what you need. What sorts of things can support it?” Harry responds, “Maybe I can get some logs.” After Harry fetches another long log, the teacher asks him, “Which way do you want to place it?” Harry points in a direction and says, “That way.” Then, Harry carefully places the log to support the mast, “Now we need something else on the other side. Now I am going to get other things.” He climbs down to gather more logs and continues adjusting the position of the supporting materials until the mast can stand steadily.

As shown in Fig.  2 (A) and (B), this case portrays how a child initiated and achieved his goal in an engineering activity. Harry demonstrated independence and creativity throughout the entire play session. He verbally stated his play goal at the beginning and then collected loose natural materials to construct the boat he aimed to build. He articulated the functions of different logs, using the longest log as the boat’s mast and shorter logs for support. His adjustment of the supporting logs’ positions to ensure the mast’s stability indicated his experimentation skills with the materials. Moreover, in his verbal communication with the teacher and peers, Harry identified what he needed to do to make the mast stand and sought help from others. The fixed structure (i.e., the pile of logs) and the flexibility of natural loose parts created opportunities for Harry to construct what he envisioned. Harry demonstrated high levels of independence and problem-solving skills. Therefore, the teacher did not intervene in his play activity. The only assistance the teacher provided occurred when Harry needed to find additional logs. This depicted a typical child-initiated, teacher-supported play scenario, showing that the teacher was comfortable stepping back during the learning process.

A child constructing a boat

Rock Lifting. Tina, Andrew, and Paul gather around a huge, heavy rock. Tina places a plank-shaped piece of wood underneath the rock and tries to lift it, with Andrew and Paul assisting using their hands. The teacher suggests, “She is using a piece of wood as a tool. If you could find another piece of wood, that would be a safe choice. Otherwise, your fingers might get pinched or crushed underneath the rock.” Then, the teacher asks Tina, “Are you using the log to move?” Meanwhile, Andrew tells Paul, “Go get a stick.” Andrew then fetches a long, slim tree branch. He inserts the stick in the gap between the rock and the ground on the opposite side. After positioning the stick, Tina and Andrew use their hands to pry with their levers, the plank-shaped piece of wood, and tree branch, to lift the rock simultaneously. However, the rock does not budge. Paul retrieves a piece of log and replaces the tree branch. Tina and Paul try again, standing on the ends of the levers and applying pressure to move the rock.

As shown in Fig.  3 (A), (B), and (C), this case illustrates how children applied their emerging engineering thinking and behaviors to lift a huge, heavy rock. The children showed curiosity and interest in lifting the rock and experimenting with different tools and methods. They used natural loose parts, such as wood, sticks, and logs, as tools to support their goal. Their attempts to raise and press the levers to see if the rock could be lifted demonstrated their problem-solving skills and experimentation. Throughout this play activity, the children were active agents who collaborated and communicated as a team to achieve their goals. The teacher’s engagement in the play activity was minimal; he emphasized the safety issue during the children’s play and then stepped back, monitoring the process instead of interfering with the children’s decision-making and experimenting.

Children lifting a heavy rock

This paper describes five featured engineering preschool play behaviors (Bairaktarova et al., 2011 ) observed on nature playscapes and illustrates the extent to which the affordances within the playscapes elicited such behaviors. It also discusses how teacher-child interactions enriched and facilitated these behaviors. Through the detailed documentation of three cases of engineering play, we found that the accessibility and affordances of various natural materials (e.g., plants, gravel, sticks), intentionally designed fixed features on the playscape (e.g., log fort, creek, sandbox), and unstructured open spaces provided abundant opportunities for children to engage their senses, implement engineering play behaviors, and develop their engineering thinking. Teacher-child interactions were moderated in the context of playscapes, where children, themselves, directed play and teachers acted as facilitators. This approach, in turn, scaffolded children’s play and learning in an informal and supportive manner.

In all three cases, children demonstrated multiple engineering behaviors during play activities, usually starting with setting a goal, either verbally or nonverbally. They demonstrated persistence in achieving their goals, proceeding through subsequent design and construction. On playscapes, child-directed or child-initiated activities are often seen. These activities are usually intrinsically motivated as children engage in what interests them. Their sense of place – being emotionally attached to the environment and feeling capable of utilizing it – endowed them with a sense of freedom and autonomy to proceed with their play activities as they wished (Scannell & Gifford, 2017 ).

Problem-solving skills are critical in engineering learning. There is rarely a single best solution to an engineering problem (Frezza et al., 2013 ). Being creative and flexible is therefore crucial in solving problems. The variety of natural materials on playscapes encourages children to use their imagination, be creative, and think innovatively because there is no single use for those materials. In this study, when manufactured tools were not available, children demonstrated creativity in using natural loose elements as functional tools. This aligns with the idea that children are more likely to explore when given open-ended opportunities with materials than with direct instruction (Bonawitz et al., 2011 ).

Design and construction are key components of engineering practice. Playscapes provide an ideal environment for children to engage in these activities, allowing them to decide what to use and how to manipulate materials in their constructions. For instance, children need to decide where to stack logs to hold the “castle” stand. Alongside design and construction, experimentation is often observed in children’s play on playscapes. The process involves higher-order thinking, such as evaluating actions, asking critical questions like “why”, and adjusting strategies accordingly. For example, if their “castle” collapses, they may need to adjust the position of logs or try different arrangements to improve stability. The natural loose elements, with their varying shapes, weights, and textures, set no boundary on how they should be used. This feature encourages children to explore and test multiple approaches.

Cooperation and communication are core components of engineering work. Many features on playscapes are designed to encourage social interactions, serving as a natural context for children to practice and refine these skills. Studies have shown that the greater availability of affordances and the higher quality of preschool outdoor environments, such as playscapes, support children’s social play (Larrea et al., 2019 ; Brown & Patte, 2013 ) and increase the time they spend in social proximity with peers (Moreira et al., 2022 ). Noticeably, communication within this study was not limited to verbal language; young children also used body gestures to convey information.

Playscapes moderate teacher-child interaction. On playscapes, teachers often take on the role of facilitators or guides. They naturally respond to child-initiated activities, build on children’s interests (Waters & Maynard, 2010 ), and encourage children’s exploration and engagement in the inquiry process. This approach centers on children’s curiosity and emphasizes their active learning role. Teachers’ engagement in the learning process on playscapes is typically informal and experiential. This informality was evident in the dialogical discourse between teachers and children in this study, which encouraged children’s exploration of engineering-related behaviors through hands-on experiences like doing, touching, and observing. Such conversations were particularly effective in facilitating children’s construction of meaning and understanding, especially when the questions were cognitively challenging. Through play activities, teachers modeled how to ask and answer thought-provoking questions, thereby nurturing children’s problem-solving skills and critical thinking.

As STEM education becomes more prevalent in early childhood programs, engineering has received substantially more attention (Lippard et al., 2017 ), emphasizing the importance of starting these practices early. Recent studies have shown that preschool-age children can take in information and later apply it to generate hypotheses (Lucas et al., 2014 ). The ability to process and use information is crucial for engineering thinking. Playscapes provide an ideal environment for fostering these skills, as children engage with an environment where each piece contains various information that could be interpreted differently by each child. For example, a stick in case one was used as a digging tool, whereas children in case three used it as a levering tool. Children are generally comfortable playing within a well-designed playscape, which is safe to explore and allows them to demonstrate play behaviors that aid their informal learning of engineering concepts and practices. Further, playscapes offer a rich context for hands-on, exploratory, and play-based activities that align with children’s developmental stages and individual needs. They are inclusive and unique to each child, reflecting and respecting the social contexts and local ecosystem, with elements on playscapes that are familiar and relatable to children. Playscapes underpin STEM learning by providing a rich, dynamic environment where children can engage in meaningful play, develop essential skills, and experience holistic growth. The interaction between children and their natural surroundings, facilitated by thoughtful educator involvement, creates a powerful context for early learning and development (Kloos et al., 2018 ).

Implications for Practice and Research

This research highlights examples of how children engage in engineering thinking and play in preschool settings. It describes how engineering play behaviors may be employed, thereby assisting teachers and parents with a framework to identify engineering play as it appears and support and scaffold these types of play behaviors. These cases also highlight how playscapes designed for play and learning serve as environmental pedagogical approaches for promoting engineering thinking and practice (Carr & Luken, 2014 ). However, there are several limitations to our study. First, the data were observational and a retrospective summary of the researchers’ field notes, rather than systematic data on the children’s play behavior on the playscape or their progress with specific engineering learning as it occurred. Second, these cases did not represent all children in this age group or all teachers who taught in this age group, nor were they randomly selected. The participants were selected based on convenience sampling because they were in the university laboratory early childhood center where the researchers worked. In addition, findings from these cases may be strongly related to children’s play interests and habits. Thus, generalizations of these findings should not be made; rather our aim was to provide a rich, contextualized understanding of how engineering play occurs within intentionally designed nature playscapes. This study warrants future research using other methodologies on the utilization of playscapes in different social and environmental contexts with diverse children (e.g., children with disabilities, culturally and linguistically diverse children) to explore engineering play or other areas of STEM learning in nature play.

Adams, R. S., Cardella, M., & Purzer, Ş. (2016). Analyzing design review conversations: Connecting design knowing, being and coaching. Design Studies , 45 , 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.03.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2016). Practicing engineering while building with blocks: Identifying engineering thinking. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal , 24 (1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1120521

Bairaktarova, D., Evangelou, D., Bagiati, A., & Brophy, S. (2011). Early engineering in young children’s exploratory play with tangible materials. Children Youth and Environments , 21 (2), 212–235.

Benjamin, N., Haden, C. A., & Wilkerson, E. (2010). Enhancing building, conversation, and learning through caregiver–child interactions in a children’s museum. Developmental Psychology , 46 (2), 502–515. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017822

Bonawitz, E., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Goodman, N. D., Spelke, E., & Schulz, L. (2011). The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition , 120 (3), 322–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.001

Brantlinger, E., Jimenez, R., Klingner, J., Pugach, M., & Richardson, V. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children , 71 (2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205

Brown, F., & Patte, M. (2013). Rethinking children’s play . Bloomsbury.

Bundy, A. C., Luckett, T., Naughton, G. A., Tranter, P. J., Wyver, S. R., Ragen, J., & Spies, G. (2008). Playful interaction: Occupational therapy for all children on the school playground. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy , 62 (5), 522–527. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.62.5.522

Cankaya, O., Rohatyn-Martin, N., Leach, J., Taylor, K., & Bulut, O. (2023). Preschool children’s loose parts play and the relationship to cognitive development: A review of the literature. Journal of Intelligence , 11 (8), 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11080151

Cardella, M. E., Svarovsky, G. N., Dorie, B. L., Tranby, Z., & Van Cleave, S. (2013). Gender research on adult-child discussions within informal engineering environments (GRADIENT): Early findings. In 120th American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition

Carr, V., & Luken, E. (2014). Playscapes: A pedagogical paradigm for play and learning. The International Journal of Play , 3( (1),), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2013.871965

Carr, V., Brown, R. D., Schlembach, S., & Kochanowski, L. (2017). Nature by design: Playscape affordances support the use of executive function in preschoolers. Children Youth and Environments , 27 (2), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.27.2.0025

Chawla, L. (2015). Benefits of nature contact for children. Journal of Planning Literature , 30 (4), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595441

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Dadvand, P., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Esnaola, M., Forns, J., Basagaña, X., Alvarez-Pedrerol, M., & Sunyer, J. (2015). Green spaces and cognitive development in primary schoolchildren. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 112 (26), 7937–7942. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503402112

Ernst, J., & Burcak, F. (2019). Young children’s contributions to sustainability: The influence of nature play on curiosity, executive function skills, creative thinking, and resilience. Sustainability , 11 (15), Article4212.

Faber Taylor, A., & Kuo, F. E. (2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park. Journal of Attention Disorders , 12 (5), 402–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054708323000

Frazier, B. N., Gelman, S. A., & Wellman, H. M. (2009). Preschoolers’ search for explanatory information within adult-child conversation. Child Development , 80 (6), 1592–1611. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01356.x

Frezza, S., Nordquest, D., & Moodey, R. (2013). Knowledge-generation epistemology and the foundations of engineering. In 2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 818–824). IEEE.

Gold, Z. S., Elicker, J., Choi, J. Y., Anderson, T., & Brophy, S. P. (2015). Preschoolers’ engineering play behaviors: Differences in gender and play context. Children Youth and Environments , 25 (3), 1–21.

Haden, C. A., Jant, E. A., Hoffman, P. C., Marcus, M., Geddes, J. R., & Gaskins, S. (2014). Supporting family conversations and children’s STEM learning in a children’s museum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly , 29 (3), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.04.004

Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., & Singer, D. G. (2009). A mandate for playful learning in preschool . Oxford University Press.

Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 15 , 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2

Kloos, H., Maltbie, C., Brown, R., & Carr, V. (2018). Listening in: Spontaneous teacher talk on playscapes. Creative Education , 9 (3), 426–441. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.93030

Kochanowski, L., & Carr, V. (2014). Nature playscapes as contexts for fostering self-determination. Children Youth and Environments , 24 (2), 146–167. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.24.2.0146

Kuh, L. P., Ponte, I., & Chau, C. (2013). The impact of a natural playscape installation on young children’s play behaviors. Children Youth and Environments , 23 (2), 49–77. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.23.2.0049

Kuo, M. (2015). How might contact with nature promote human health? Promising mechanisms and a possible central pathway. Frontiers in Psychology , 6 , 1093. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01093

Kuo, M., Barnes, M., & Jordan, C. (2019). Do experiences with nature promote learning? Converging evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 305. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00305

Larrea, I., Muela, A., Miranda, N., & Barandiaran, A. (2019). Children’s social play and affordance availability in preschool outdoor environments. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal , 27 (2), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2019.1579546

Leppink, E. W., Odlaug, B. L., Lust, K., Christenson, G., & Grant, J. E. (2016). The young and the stressed: Stress, impulse control, and health in college students. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease , 204 (12), 931–938. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000000586

Li, D., & Sullivan, W. C. (2016). Impact of views to school landscapes on recovery from stress and mental fatigue. Landscape and Urban Planning , 148 , 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.12.015

Lippard, C. N., Lamm, M. H., & Riley, K. L. (2017). Engineering thinking in prekindergarten children: A systematic literature review. Journal of Engineering Education , 106 (3), 454–474. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20174

Lucas, C. G., Bridgers, S., Griffiths, T. L., & Gopnik, A. (2014). When children are better (or at least more open-minded) learners than adults: Developmental differences in learning the forms of causal relationships. Cognition , 131 (2), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.010

McClure, E., Guernsey, L., Clements, D., Bales, S., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. (2017). How to integrate STEM into early childhood education. Science and Children , 55 (2), 8–10.

Milteer, R. M., Ginsburg, K. R., Council on Communications and Media Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, Mulligan, D. A., Ameenuddin, N., Brown, A., & Swanson, W. S. (2012). The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bond: Focus on children in poverty. Pediatrics , 129 (1), e204–e213. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-2953

Moore, R. C. (2014). Nature play and learning places. Creating and managing places where children can engage with nature . Natural Learning Initiative and National Wildlife Federation.

Moreira, M., Cordovil, R., Lopes, F., Da Silva, B. M., & Veiga, G. (2022). The relationship between the quality of kindergartens’ outdoor physical environment and preschoolers’ social functioning. Education Sciences , 12 (10), 661. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100661

National Research Council. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development . National Academies. https://doi.org/10.17226/9824

National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects . National Academies.

Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education , 7 (2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318

Purzer, S., Moore, T. J., & Dringenberg, E. (2018). Engineering cognition: A process of knowledge acquisition and application. Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education (pp. 167–190). Springer.

Rigolon, A. (2016). A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning , 153 , 160–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.017

Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2017). The experienced psychological benefits of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 51 , 256–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.04.001

Scott, G., Boyd, M., & Colquhoun, D. (2013). Changing spaces, changing relationships: The positive impact. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education , 17 (1), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03400955

Tank, K. M., Rynearson, A. M., & Moore, T. J. (2018). Examining student and teacher talk within engineering design in kindergarten. European Journal of STEM Education , 3 (3), 10–24.

Taylor, A. F., & Kuo, F. E. (2006). Is contact with nature important for healthy child development? State of the evidence. In C. Spencer & M. Blades (Eds.), Children and their environments: Learning, using and designing spaces (pp. 124–158). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521232.009

Torquati, J., Schutte, A., & Kiat, J. (2017). Attentional demands of executive function tasks in indoor and outdoor settings: Behavioral and neuroelectrical evidence. Children Youth and Environments , 27 (2), 70–92. https://doi.org/10.1353/cye.2017.0004

Trentacosta, C. J., & Izard, C. E. (2007). Kindergarten children’s emotion competence as a predictor of their academic competence in first grade. Emotion , 7 (1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.77

Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 11 (3), 201–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7

Vella-Brodrick, D. A., & Gilowska, K. (2022). Effects of nature (greenspace) on cognitive functioning in school children and adolescents: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review , 34 (3), 1217–1254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09658-5

Waters, J., & Maynard, T. (2010). What’s so interesting outside? A study of child-initiated interaction with teachers in the natural outdoor environment. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal , 18 (4), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2010.525939

White, R. (2012). A sociocultural investigation of the efficacy of outdoor education to improve learner engagement. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties , 17 (1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2012.652422

Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage.

Zosh, J. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Hopkins, E. J., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Neale, D., Solis, S. L., & Whitebread, D. (2018). Accessing the inaccessible: Redefining play as a spectrum. Frontiers in Psychology , 9 , 1124. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2018.01124/BIBTEX

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank teachers and families at the Arlitt Child and Family Research and Education Center, Cincinnati Nature Center, Clermont Child Focus, Cincinnati Union Bethel for their participation and support.

This study was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation award 1516191, STEM in the Playscape: Building Knowledge for Educational Practice .

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

Yuchang Yuan, Heidi Kloos, Rhonda Brown & Victoria Carr

University of Missouri – St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuchang Yuan .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Yuan, Y., Zeng, W., Kloos, H. et al. Preschool Engineering Play on Nature Playscapes. Early Childhood Educ J (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-024-01743-4

Download citation

Accepted : 03 August 2024

Published : 17 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-024-01743-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Early childhood education
• Engineering play
• Nature playscape
• Loose parts
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Announcements
• About AOSIS

South African Journal of Childhood Education

• Editorial Team
• Submission Procedures
• Submission Guidelines
• Submit and Track Manuscript
• Publication fees
• Make a payment
• Journal Information
• Journal Policies
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Reviewer Guidelines
• Article RSS
• Support Enquiry (Login required)
• Aosis Newsletter

Open Journal Systems

Original research - special collection: interrogating coloniality in south african primary schools, huge investments, poor outcomes: the impact of violence and trauma on learning, about the author(s).

Background:  South Africa’s primary school education system receives significant funding annually from public and private sources. Despite this, learners still grossly underperform. This means that learning interventions aimed at improving learning outcomes have been relatively unimpactful in primary schools. As such, it is crucial that we investigate why academic interventions have been relatively unable to turn the tide on poor academic performance.

Aim:  Although there are many reasons that limit the successful realisation of academic interventions in primary schools, this article argues that the problem is partly because of violence and trauma that result from the polyvictimisation of children. Children are exposed to and deal with historical, epistemic and interpersonal violence, making it difficult to learn.

Setting:  The article focusses on teaching and learning experiences in South African public primary schools.

Methods:  This critical analysis uses various sources, including programme evaluations and academic literature, to demonstrate how centring the psychosocial well-being of children in teaching and learning interventions is foundational to their efficacy and ultimate success.

Results:  By centring the learners’ psychological position, academic interventions would be more efficient in realising their objectives. It may also curtail financial wastage.

Conclusion:  The psychosocial well-being of learners cannot be disregarded in learning interventions. Children who are traumatised are not capable of reaching their full academic potential.

Contribution:  This article contributes to the debates that advocate for the psychosocial support of primary school learners in South Africa as a conduit for improving learner outcomes.

Sustainable Development Goal

Crossref citations.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get specific, domain-collection newsletters detailing the latest CPD courses, scholarly research and call-for-papers in your field.

South African Journal of Childhood Education    |    ISSN: 2223-7674 (PRINT)    |    ISSN: 2223-7682 (ONLINE)

ISSN: 2223-7682

Transforming the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses.

Información en español

Celebrating 75 Years! Learn More >>

• Health Topics
• Brochures and Fact Sheets
• Help for Mental Illnesses
• Clinical Trials

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: What You Need to Know

• Download PDF

What is ADHD?

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a developmental disorder marked by persistent symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. Some people mostly have symptoms of inattention. Others mostly have symptoms of hyperactivity and impulsivity. Some people have both types of symptoms.

Symptoms begin in childhood and can interfere with daily life, including social relationships and school or work performance. ADHD is well-known among children and teens, but many adults also have the disorder. Effective treatments are available to manage symptoms.

What are the symptoms of ADHD?

People with ADHD may experience an ongoing pattern of:

• Inattention : Difficulty paying attention
• Hyperactivity : Showing too much energy or moving and talking too much
• Impulsivity : Acting without thinking or having difficulty with self-control

Signs of inattention can include frequent difficulty with :

• Paying attention to details, leading to careless mistakes at school, work, or during other activities
• Concentrating on tasks or activities, for instance, while having conversations, taking tests, completing assignments, or reading papers
• Listening when spoken to directly
• Following instructions or finishing tasks at school, work, or home
• Organizing tasks and activities, managing time, and meeting deadlines
• Completing tasks that require sustained attention, such as homework, large projects, and complicated forms
• Losing things, such as backpacks, books, keys, wallets, and phones
• Getting easily distracted by unrelated thoughts or stimuli
• Forgetting about daily activities, such as chores, errands, and events, or other important things, like assignments, appointments, and phone calls

Signs of hyperactivity and impulsivity can include often :

• Fidgeting, tapping hands or feet, or squirming while seated
• Moving around when expected to remain seated, such as in the classroom or office, or feeling restless in these situations
• Running, climbing, or moving around at times when it is not appropriate
• Being constantly “on the go” and acting as if driven by a motor
• Being unable to quietly play or take part in hobbies and activities
• Talking excessively
• Answering questions before they are fully asked or finishing other people’s sentences
• Struggling to wait or be patient, such as when playing a game or waiting in line
• Interrupting or intruding on others, for example, in conversations, games, or meetings

What causes ADHD?

Researchers are not sure what causes ADHD, although many studies suggest that genes play a large role. Like many other disorders, ADHD probably results from a combination of factors.

In addition to genetics, researchers are looking at differences in brain development and neurobiology among people with ADHD compared to those without the disorder. They are also studying environmental factors that might increase the risk of developing ADHD, including brain injuries, nutrition, and social environments.

How is ADHD diagnosed?

Based on their specific symptoms, a person can be diagnosed with one of three types of ADHD:

• Inattentive : Mostly symptoms of inattention but not hyperactivity or impulsivity
• Hyperactive-impulsive : Mostly symptoms of hyperactivity and impulsivity but not inattention
• Combined : Symptoms of both inattention and hyperactivity and impulsivity

ADHD symptoms must begin in childhood (before age 12). Symptoms often continue into the teen years and adulthood. The criterion for a diagnosis differs slightly based on age. 

• Children up to 16 years must show at least six symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity, or both.
• Adults and youth over 16 years must show at least five symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity, or both.

To be diagnosed with ADHD, a person’s symptoms must also:

• Occur for at least 6 months
• Be present in two or more settings (for example, at home, at work, in school, or with friends)
• Interfere with or impair social, school, or work functioning

Stress, sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, and other physical conditions or illnesses can cause similar symptoms to those of ADHD. A health care provider needs to do a thorough evaluation to determine the cause of symptoms, make a diagnosis, and identify effective treatments.

Primary care providers sometimes diagnose and treat ADHD, or they may refer the person to a mental health professional. During an evaluation, a provider usually:

• Examines the person’s mental health and medical history, including their mood and past or current health conditions.
• Looks at the person’s current or, if an adult, childhood behavior and school experiences. To obtain this information, the provider may ask for permission to talk with family, friends, partners, teachers, and others who know the person well and have seen them in different settings to learn about behaviors and experiences at home, school, or elsewhere.
• Uses standardized behavior rating scales or ADHD symptom checklists to determine whether the person meets the criteria for a diagnosis of ADHD.
• Administers psychological tests that look at cognitive skills, such as working memory, executive functioning (abilities such as planning and decision-making), visual and spatial abilities, or reasoning. Such tests can help identify psychological or cognitive (thinking-related) strengths and challenges and identify or rule out possible learning disabilities.

Does ADHD look the same in everyone?

Anyone can have ADHD. However, boys and men tend to display more hyperactive and impulsive symptoms, while girls and women are more likely to be diagnosed with inattentive ADHD.

ADHD can also be diagnosed at any age, although symptoms must have begun in childhood (before age 12). Adults with ADHD often have a history of problems with school, work, and relationships.

ADHD symptoms may change as a person gets older.

• Children show hyperactivity and impulsivity as the most common symptoms. As academic and social demands increase, symptoms of inattention often become more prominent and begin to interfere with academic performance and peer relationships.
• Adolescents usually show less hyperactivity and may appear as restless or fidgeting. Symptoms of inattention and impulsivity typically continue and may cause academic, organizational, or relationship challenges. Teens with ADHD are more likely to engage in impulsive, risky behaviors, such as substance use and unsafe sexual activity.
• Adults, including older adults , can show inattention, restlessness, and impulsivity, although, in some people, those symptoms become less severe and less impairing. They may also be irritable, have a low tolerance for frustration and stress, or experience frequent or intense mood changes.

Some adults may not have been diagnosed with ADHD when younger because their teachers or family did not recognize the disorder, they had a mild form of the disorder, or they managed well until experiencing the demands of adulthood. But it is never too late to seek a diagnosis and treatment for ADHD and other mental health conditions that may co-occur with it. Effective treatment can make day-to-day life easier for people with ADHD and their families.

How is ADHD treated?

Although there is no cure for ADHD, current treatments may help reduce symptoms and improve functioning. Common treatments for ADHD are medication, psychotherapy, and other behavioral interventions. For children, treatment often includes parent education and school-based programs.

Researchers are studying new treatments for people with ADHD, such as cognitive training and neurofeedback. These options are usually explored only after medication and psychotherapy have already been tried. For many people, treatment involves a combination of elements.

Stimulants are the most common type of medication used to treat ADHD, and research shows them to be highly effective. They work by increasing levels of brain chemicals involved in thinking and attention.

Like all medications, stimulants can have side effects and must be prescribed and monitored by a health care provider. Tell the provider about other medications you or your child are taking. Medications for common health problems, such as diabetes, anxiety, and depression, can interact with stimulants, in which case, a provider can suggest other medication options.

Health care providers sometimes prescribe nonstimulant medications like antidepressants to treat ADHD. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved these medications specifically for ADHD. Sometimes, a person must try several different medications or dosages before finding the one that works for them.

Learn more about  stimulants and other mental health medications . You can learn more about specific medications, including the latest approvals, side effects, warnings, and patient information, on the  FDA website  .

Psychotherapy and behavioral interventions

Psychological interventions for ADHD can take many forms and be combined with medication and other elements for parents, families, and teachers. Adding therapy to an ADHD treatment plan can help some people better cope with daily challenges, gain confidence, or manage impulsive and risky behaviors.

Therapy is especially helpful if ADHD co-occurs with other mental disorders, such as anxiety, depression, conduct problems, or substance use disorders. Learn about  other mental disorders .

Several psychosocial interventions have been shown to help manage symptoms and improve functioning.

• Behavioral therapy  helps a person change their behavior. It might involve practical assistance, such as organizing tasks or completing schoolwork, learning social skills, or monitoring one’s behavior.
• Cognitive behavioral therapy  helps a person become aware of attention and concentration challenges and work on skills to improve focus and organization and complete daily tasks (for instance, by breaking large tasks into smaller, more manageable steps).
• Family and marital therapy  helps family members learn to handle disruptive behaviors, encourage behavior changes, and improve interactions with children and partners.

Some people find it helpful to get support from a professional life coach or ADHD coach who can teach them skills to improve daily functioning.

Learn more about  psychotherapy .

Parent education and support

Therapy for children and teens requires parents to play an active role. Treatment sessions with the child alone are more likely to be effective for treating symptoms of anxiety or depression that may co-occur with ADHD than for managing core symptoms of the disorder.

Mental health professionals can educate parents about the disorder and how it affects a family. They also can help parents develop new skills, attitudes, and ways of relating to their child. Examples include parenting skills training, stress management techniques for parents, and support groups that help parents and families connect with others who have similar concerns.

School-based programs

Many children and teens with ADHD benefit from school-based behavioral interventions and academic accommodations. Interventions include behavior management plans or classroom-taught organizational and study skills. Accommodations include preferential seating in the classroom, reduced classwork, and extended time on tests and exams. Schools may provide accommodations through what is called a 504 Plan or, for children who qualify for special education services, an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). 

Learn more about special education services and the  Individuals with Disabilities Education Act  .

Cognitive training

Cognitive training approaches involve repeatedly using a program or activity over several weeks to improve specific functions, such as memory or attention. Exercises are tailored to the person’s ongoing performance.

Cognitive training is shown to modestly improve the tasks being practiced. For instance, research shows the training can help memory, attention, inhibition, planning, and cognitive flexibility in people with ADHD. However, these improvements don’t usually translate to changes in core ADHD symptoms of impulsivity and hyperactivity.

Neurofeedback

Neurofeedback is a noninvasive technique in which an electronic device monitors and records a person’s brain activity, providing them with immediate feedback to support self-regulation. The device measures brain activity through such means as EEG or fMRI scans and feeds the information back to the person, usually in the form of a computer screen or visual cue. Through this feedback, people learn to self-regulate their brain activity to directly alter the associated behavior. The assumption is that, with repeated, real-time information, people can change their internal brain activity, with observable effects on behavior and cognition.

For people with ADHD, neurofeedback is used to train and improve specific cognitive functions. Although it is shown to help reduce some ADHD symptoms, the effects of neurofeedback remain lower than those seen from medication and psychotherapy. Additional research is needed to refine the treatment and determine for whom it works and under what conditions.

Complementary health approaches

Some people may explore complementary health approaches to manage symptoms of ADHD. These can include natural products, vitamins and supplements, diet changes, and acupuncture. Others find it helpful to make lifestyle changes, like adding more physical exercise to their daily schedule.

Unlike psychotherapy and medication that are scientifically shown to improve ADHD symptoms, complementary health approaches generally have not been found to treat ADHD effectively and do not qualify as evidence-supported interventions.

Find more information from the  National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health  . 

How can I find help?

If you’re unsure of where to get help, a health care provider is a good place to start. They can refer you to a qualified mental health professional, such as a psychologist, psychiatrist, or clinical social worker, who can help figure out the next steps. Find tips for talking with a health care provider about your or your child’s mental health.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)  has information about ADHD symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment, as well as additional resources for families and providers.

You can learn more about getting help on the NIMH website. You can also learn about finding support  and locating mental health services  in your area on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) website.

How can I help myself?

Medication and therapy are the most effective treatments for ADHD. Other strategies may also help manage symptoms.

• Get regular exercise, especially when feeling hyperactive or restless.
• Eat regular, healthy meals.
• Get plenty of sleep. Try to turn off screens at least 1 hour before bedtime and get between 7–9 hours of sleep every night.
• Stick to a consistent routine.
• Work on time management and organization. Prioritize time-sensitive tasks and write down assignments, messages, appointments, reminders, and important thoughts.
• Take short breaks during tasks that require sustained attention to help maintain focus and prevent burnout. Break large tasks into smaller, more manageable steps.
• Connect with people and maintain relationships. Schedule activities with friends, particularly supportive people who understand your challenges with ADHD.
• Take medications as directed. Avoid alcohol, tobacco, and drugs not prescribed for you.

How can I help my child?

• Be patient, flexible, and understanding. ADHD can be frustrating both for people who have it and the people in their lives. ADHD may make it hard for your child to perform certain tasks or behaviors. Some children may need to use different strategies to help them succeed.
• Use clear, simple, direct language to explain rules and expectations. Reward behaviors that meet these expectations with positive reinforcement. Provide consistent praise or rewards for acting in a desired way.
• Offer practical help, such as on tasks like cleaning and organizing, or simply be present and engaged while your child works, which can give them a sense of accountability and motivation and help them stay focused and on track.
• Provide opportunities to explore different activities and interests. Help your child discover their unique talents and build confidence in their abilities.

What are clinical trials and why are they important?

Clinical trials are research studies that look at ways to prevent, detect, or treat diseases and conditions. These studies help show whether a treatment is safe and effective in people. Some people join clinical trials to help doctors and researchers learn more about a disease and improve health care. Other people, such as those with health conditions, join to try treatments that aren’t widely available.

NIMH supports clinical trials across the United States. Talk to a health care provider about clinical trials and whether one is right for you. Learn more about participating in clinical trials .

For more information

Learn more about mental health disorders and topics . For information about various health topics, visit the National Library of Medicine’s MedlinePlus   .

The information in this publication is in the public domain and may be reused or copied without permission. However, you may not reuse or copy images. Please cite the National Institute of Mental Health as the source. Read our copyright policy to learn more about our guidelines for reusing NIMH content.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health NIH Publication No. 24-MH-8300 Revised 2024