School Playground Design

The playground design process is complex and many issues must be considered in order to build a quality multipurpose playground. The planning and design process is discussed in this paper, as well as who is included in the planning process. Recommendations are made for the consideration of accessibility for students with disabilities, how to incorporate equipment that is developmentally appropriate, and what factors must be considered when aiming to present learning opportunities for all children through the playground area. The article concludes with a brief review of the existing research on playground safety and offers recommendations for creating and maintaining a safe playground structure and environment.

Keywords Accessibility; Age Appropriate Playgrounds; Americans with Disabilities Act; Boundless Playgrounds; High Play Value; Physical Skills; Playground Design; Playground Safety; Public Schools; School Facility Design; United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (USCPSC)

Overview

To the average community members, school playgrounds may not appear to have been designed based on the consideration of several important and critical factors. However, issues such as age of children, developmental stage of children, learning goals of the playground structure, accessibility, play value, the surrounding area, safety, and many others must all be considered when planning and designing school playgrounds. The playground design process is complex and these issues must be considered in order to build a quality multipurpose playground.

The Planning Committee

School playgrounds are often multipurpose play areas not only for the school but also for the community at large (Gibbs, 2000). This shared use indicates that school playgrounds may be funded from a number of sources including school district funds, individual school funds, contributions from the community, and/or donations from parents (Gibbs, 2000). When funds for a playground are from a variety of sources it is important to include the benefactors and the users of the facility in the design process. Inclusion of children (the users) in the design process allows them to experience a sense of ownership of the playground and its development, but more importantly their involvement can provide unique perspectives and insight (Gibbs, 2000). With proper planning, the playground design process can be incorporated into the school curriculum as it may help children to enhance and apply their knowledge and skills in the academic areas of math, art, language, and local history (Gibbs, 2000). Determining who will be involved in the design process is only a small facet of the overall planning and design process.

Incorporating Developmental Learning Opportunities into Playgrounds

School playgrounds are an important component of a school and community's outdoor resources. These play environments serve as areas for fun-focused recess and relaxation or as a component of physical education programming. The facility should offer all children with opportunities to develop physically, emotionally, socially and intellectually (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). Playgrounds that have high play value offer children multiple opportunities to develop their physical, emotional, social, and intellectual skills (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). The playground area should serve as a venue for children to develop physical skills such as running, jumping, balance, climbing, and eye-hand coordination (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). The emotional domain can be developed through playground activities that allow children the freedom of creative expression (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). The social development of children may occur through playground play as children are faced with situations where they have to learn to share, cooperate, and seek mutual goals (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). Lastly, intellectual development is highlighted by the development of problem-solving skills and divergent thinking abilities (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000).

While playground designers often consider how a particular structure or design will enhance these different learning experiences for able children, many play environments have not been planned in a manner that also provides students with disabilities opportunities for growth and development in the physical, emotional, social and intellectual domains. Playground planners and designers should consider the question "what is the purpose of the play experience?" (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000, p. 36). With this in mind, playground designers should be focused on developing an environment that provides meaningful and purposeful play opportunities for children of all abilities as opposed to only focusing on creating a play space that is minimally accessible and safe. Playground design should focus on the promotion of children's gross motor skills, eye-hand coordination, and movement as these are elements of play that all children can learn from engaging in.

The development of physical skills is somewhat inherent in the playground environment; however physical skill development can be enhanced through careful consideration of included playground elements. In order to incorporate emotional development into play structures, the playground design should provide all children with a sense of excitement, satisfaction, or pleasure by creating playgrounds that are stimulating, complex, and novel (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). Playgrounds must provide challenges for children at all levels of abilities (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). These challenges should be attainable in order to fuel the child's desire to strive for the next level or challenge so that children experience success and accomplishment (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000). To foster the development of social goals, playground elements should be designed so that at any given time or location in the play area all children have the opportunity to interact. This focus on constant interaction can foster inclusion and cooperation in the children (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000).

Applications

Designing for Accessibility

The design and development of playgrounds is not limited to the incorporation of learning opportunities for children to develop physically, socially, emotionally, intellectually. Accessibility of the playground is also an important part of the design and development process.

Children with disabilities are usually delayed or underdeveloped in their physical size, muscular strength and motor movement, therefore these factors along with the guidelines of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) must be considered when designing playgrounds. The ADA guidelines require playgrounds to have 50% of the elevated areas accessible to children with disabilities and 25% of elevated elements must be wheelchair accessible (Roberts, 2005). These guidelines present minimal accessibility to children in wheelchairs as these children are required to abandon their wheelchairs in order to fully participate in the playground elements (Roberts, 2005). Ideally, playgrounds should be created so that children with disabilities can play alongside their non-disabled peers.

Boundless Playgrounds

These types of playgrounds are called boundless playgrounds and this type of playground seeks to surpass the ADA's minimum guidelines (Roberts, 2005). For example, the designers of boundless playgrounds aim to have 70% of the playground equipment accessible to children in wheelchairs without having to abandon his/her equipment (e.g., elevated sand boxes for wheelchair bound children) (Roberts, 2005). Another accommodation that can be made for children with disabilities is for those with hearing or vision disabilities. Playgrounds may be designed to include areas that are bright in color and respond audibly when children step, jump, or roll on the area (Roberts, 2005). These examples are only a small sample of the disabilities that can be accommodated for when designing playgrounds.

Sayers Menear, Smith and Lanier (2006) have set forth suggested steps that should guide the development of multipurpose and inclusive playground design. They recommend first that a review of the literature on the use of playgrounds for children with disabilities be conducted to determine what suggestions and design features are recommended for children with disabilities. Currently, the existing literature indicates that when playgrounds are designed to meet the needs of all children, those with disabilities will gain developmental benefits similar to their non-disabled peers (Sayers Menear, Smith, & Lanier, 2006). The second guideline is the identification of the specific needs of children with disabilities or autism (Sayers Menear, Smith, & Lanier, 2006). This guideline emphasizes the need for consideration of the special needs and development issues that children with disabilities have. That information can be used when considering the specific elements and design of the playground that would meet these needs (e.g., visual organization, defined boundaries, elevated sandboxes) (Sayers Menear, Smith, & Lanier, 2006).

The third suggested guideline focuses on the multipurpose aspect of the playground design as it is the identification of the goals and curricula of the school's physical education program. By looking at the physical education program and determining what elements of the curriculum may be addressed through the inclusion of special elements in the playground area, the playground may be used for physical education (Sayers Menear, Smith, & Lanier, 2006). Typically these programmatic needs include the improvement of muscular strength and endurance, flexibility, coordination, balance, locomotor skills and social skills (Sayers Menear, Smith, & Lanier, 2006).

The fourth suggestion is the labeling of a playground designer and creator who is willing to build a one-of-a-kind product that will be appropriate for every child’s individual needs.

important to gain feedback from school personnel about the proposed designs as feedback from a variety of personnel can offer a wide range of feedback from a variety of specialized areas (e.g., special education, different grade/developmental levels, gifted education) (Sayers Menear, Smith, & Lanier, 2006). Accessibility for students with disabilities should be of the utmost concern when developing playgrounds; however it is also important to consider the developmental appropriateness of a playground and its many features.

As mentioned previously, multipurpose playgrounds aim to serve a wide age range of children. This presents challenges to playground design in that playgrounds must provide developmentally and age appropriate elements for the children to choose from. Age appropriate playgrounds are accessible, safe, stimulating and present children learning opportunities that are appropriate for the developmental level of the population that the play space is targeting (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). Designing developmentally appropriate playgrounds is important to the playground having high play value, which indicates that a child has the opportunity to develop physically, emotionally, socially, and intellectually (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). The play value of a playground environment decreases when the play environment does not provide age-appropriate equipment or presents safety risks to the children (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

This concern and need for developmentally appropriate playgrounds has become the foundation of a strong movement in the United States toward the creation of separate playing areas for 2-5 year-olds and 5-12 year-olds (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). This safety movement, which includes safety advocates, researchers and educators, emphasizes that 2-5 year-olds have differing physical and mental needs and restraints than the older children, while the older children are larger in size, strength, and perceptual abilities that allow them to make better choices/decisions about their safety (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). While the age brackets break the children up based on several key factors, there are still differences in children's height, weight, neuromuscular coordination, and muscular strength and endurance amongst children within the same age bracket for children with and without disabilities. Due to these differences that are pervasive across and within age groups, it is imperative that playgrounds are designed with developmental considerations as a priority for all children as developmental age is more important than birth age (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

Design Recommendations

Bowers and Gabbard (2000) have set forth design recommendations that focus on developmentally appropriate design. These recommendations include:

• Playgrounds should be designed so that children of all developmental ages and varying abilities as well as with special impairments are able to access and use the playground safely while maintaining high play value to students of all ages.

• Playgrounds should be designed so that children are able to move throughout the apparatus safely and vigorously on stationary elements. Moving forces (e.g., seesaw, merry-go-round) can be dangerous for preschool aged children because they do not have the reaction time or coordination to act quickly or to make decisions related to their safety.

• Playgrounds should not include animal figure swings, multiple occupancy swings, trapeze bars, and other similar equipment should not be used in playgrounds designed for any age.

• A source of drinking water and shade should be proximal or included in the playground design.

• Signs that explicitly describe what ages each area of the playground are designed for should be made visible for supervising adults.

• Equipment should be placed in a manner so that the designed patterns of movement do not create possible collision situations.

• Any playground elements that involve inclinations (e.g., ramps, climbing nets, inclines) should be less than 45 degrees due to limited muscular strength and balance of preschool children.

• Playgrounds should be designed to so that there are opportunities for the children to have a variety and selection of opportunities in order to minimize wait time.

• Due to weak upper body strength and neuromuscular coordination, playgrounds designed for pre-school aged children should not include sliding poles and free standing arch climbers.

• The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (USCPSC) recommends that the following elements are inappropriate for 2-5 year-olds: chain of cable walks, “arch climbers, free standing climbing equipment with flexible components, fulcrum seesaws, log rolls, long spiral slides, overhead rings, parallel bars, swinging gates, track rides, and vertical sliding poles” (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000, p. 24).

Playground Safety

It is imperative that when designing a school playground safety is a priority consideration that should pervade all decisions that are made throughout the process. Safety must be considered throughout the entire process for the play structures and the surrounding areas (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). A review of the existing playground safety research by Bowers and Gabbard (2000) indicated that the most common injuries on the playground are those related to climbing; 60-70% of emergency room visits from the playground are a result of falling and 30% of these are with children under four. More specifically, these accidents mostly occur on the horizontal ladder; an element that poses many challenges for smaller children. In this example, in order for the horizontal ladder to be more developmentally and age appropriate, the grip size of the bars, spacing between rungs, the distance to fall, and underlying surface must be considered when looking to increase safety (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). With these findings in mind, it is also important to consider what surface children will fall on and from how high will they fall (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (USCPSC) has set forth safety guidelines for equipment that is raised off of the ground (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). For equipment that is 30 inches above the ground, there should be a 29 inch guardrail for preschool aged children and a 38 inch guardrail for school age children (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). The type of ground surface is important as it should include rubber-like safety mats or foot deep mulch, wood chips or sand/pea gravel (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). The ground surface should extend at least six feet beyond all equipment in all directions. Also, multi-level designs may be used so that children have the opportunity to climb, but without more than one foot between levels thus decreasing the distance to fall (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

Other than climbing and falls, securing the perimeter is important for the safety of the children. The 1999 National Playground Safety Survey indicated that 10% of playgrounds did not have a fence and did not have sufficient distance between playground equipment (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). The survey also indicated that 59% of playgrounds were designed for children 2-12 years old, only 41% of school playgrounds had separate areas for different age groups, and only 9% of these playgrounds had signage indicating which area was for which age group (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

Other safety hazards that need to be considered include 'S' hooks on swings causing entanglement (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). Designers should check all apparatus for points where children may be crushed or pinched, as well as 3.5-9 inch openings that may be entrapment hazards (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000). Finally, regular maintenance must be completed. The playground should be inspected regularly for loose or worn hardware, exposed footings, scattered debris, chipped paint, and missing or damaged parts (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

School playground design is a complex process that requires designers to take into consideration numerous factors. Designers must carefully select those individuals/groups who will be involved in the planning process. The designers must then establish the goals that they wish to accomplish through the playground space and to then develop a play area that can meet these goals while also being developmentally appropriate, safe, and accessible for all children.

Terms & Concepts

Accessibility: indicates that children of all developmental ages and varying abilities as well as with special impairments are able to travel to and use the playground safely while maintaining high play value to students of all ages (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

Age Appropriate Playgrounds: playgrounds that are accessible, safe, stimulating and present children learning opportunities that are appropriate for the developmental level of the population that the play space is targeting (Bowers & Gabbard, 2000).

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): "guidelines for accessibility to places of public accommodation and commercial facilities by individuals with disabilities. These guidelines are to be applied during the design, construction, and alteration of such buildings and facilities to the extent required by regulations issued by Federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990" (United State Department of Justice, 1994).

Boundless Playgrounds: play areas that surpass the ADA's minimum guidelines by creating play environments where children with disabilities can play alongside their non-disabled peers

High Play Value: describes a facility that provides multiple opportunities for children to develop physical emotional, social, and intellectual skills.

Physical Skills: playgrounds provide learning opportunities for children to develop the physical skills of running, jumping, balance, climbing, and eye-hand coordination (Hudson, Thompson, & Mack, 2000).

United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (USCPSC): government organization "charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from more than 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction" (U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 2007).

Bibliography

Bowers, L. & Gabbard, C. (2000). Risk factor two: Age-appropriate design of safe playgrounds. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 71 , 23-25.

Gibbs, C.J. (2000). Elementary school design. School Planning & Management, 39 , 54-55.

Hudson, S., Thompson, D., & Mack, M. (2000). Planning playgrounds for children of all abilities. School Planning & Management, 39 , 35-40.

King, P., & Howard, J. (2010). Understanding children's free play at home, in school and at the After School Club: A preliminary investigation into play types, social grouping and perceived control. Psychology of Education Review, 34, 32-41. Retrieved December 10, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=49314267&site=ehost-live

Little, H., & Eager, D. (2010). Risk, challenge and safety: implications for play quality and playground design.European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18, 497-513. Retrieved December 10 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=55815854&site=ehost-live

Little, H., Wyver, S., & Gibson, F. (2011). The influence of play context and adult attitudes on young children's physical risk-taking during outdoor play. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, , 113-131. Retrieved December 10 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=59529877&site=ehost-live

Roberts, R. (2005). Boundaries need not apply. Parks & Recreation, 40 , 49-52. Retrieved December 6, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier, http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=17958292&site=ehost-live

Sayers Menear, K., Smith, S.C., & Lanier, S. (2006). A multipurpose fitness playground for individuals with autism: Ideals for design and use. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 77 , 20-25.

United States Consumer Product Safety Commission. (1997). CPSC Overview. Retrieved December 6, 2007, from website http://www.cpsc.gov/about/about.html

United States Department of Justice. (1994). ADA standards for accessible design. Retrieved December 6, 2007, from http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/stdspdf.htm

Suggested Reading

American Society for Testing and Materials. (1998). Specification F1487-98: Standard consumer safety performance specification for playground equipment for public use. West Conshocken, PA: Author.

Frost, J.L., Brown, P.S., Sutterby, J.A., & Thronton, C.D. (2004). The developmental benefits of playgrounds. Olney, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs. Washington DC: Author.

Thompson, D. & Hudson, S. (1996). National action plan for the prevention of playground injuries. Cedar Falls, IA: National Program for Playground Safety.

Thompson, D., Hudson, S. & Bowers, L. (2002). Play areas and the ADA: Providing access and opportunities for all children. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 73 , 37-41.

United States Consumer Product Safety Commission. (1997). Handbook for public playground safety. Washington DC: Author.