In early mathematics, play can often be positioned as the opposite of teaching, something that sits alongside learning rather than at its core. Practitioners can feel pulled between two competing ideas. Should children be playing, or should they be learning? This is a false choice.
Recently, I was re-reading an article by Douglas Clements and Julie Sarama. It’s from 2017, but it still feels very relevant, and the tensions between ‘instruction’ and ‘play’ are more present than ever. If you haven’t read it, I would recommend having a look (Play, Mathematics, and False Dichotomies – DREME). They highlight that the debate between play and academics is a false dichotomy. Children should, of course, play, but they should also learn, and crucially, they should learn through play (Clements and Sarama, cited in DREME). Bringing together free play and intentional teaching, and engaging children with mathematical ideas in playful ways, creates the conditions for strong learning to develop.
In England, this sits within statutory guidance. The Early Years Foundation Stage makes clear that “play is essential for children’s development, building their confidence as they learn to explore, relate to others, and set their own goals.”
The conversation therefore needs to move beyond whether play belongs in early mathematics, and towards how it is shaped. As Bradbury and Hare (2025) highlight, play has increasingly been repositioned within policy as something to be justified or measured, rather than understood as central to pedagogy.
Play is not one thing
A common challenge in this debate is that “play” is treated as a single approach. In practice, it spans a range of experiences shaped by different levels of child choice, adult guidance and intention.
At one end, children engage in open-ended exploration. At another, adults introduce new ideas through structured teaching. Between these sit guided play, games, routines and shared experiences. Each contributes something different to learning.
Difficulties arise when these are separated too sharply. Play becomes something that happens around the edges, while teaching becomes increasingly formal and procedural. Over time, experiences can become disconnected from meaning.
Seeing play as part of a wider design for learning allows these elements to work together rather than in opposition.
Why this matters in mathematics
Mathematics is often where this separation is most visible.
In an effort to make learning clear and measurable, early maths can quickly centre on counting, recording and completing tasks. Children may become fluent in saying numbers or following steps, while still finding it difficult to make sense of quantity or relationships.
Mathematical thinking develops through noticing, comparing, combining and testing ideas. These processes rely on active engagement, social interaction and repeated exploration, all strongly associated with playful learning (Zosh et al., 2017).
Within everyday play, there are rich opportunities to mathematise, to notice and draw out the mathematical ideas already present. Children line objects up to compare them, recognise quantities without counting, and explore different ways numbers can be composed. These moments reflect substantial mathematical thinking, particularly when attention is drawn to the underlying structure.
For example, a child filling and pouring water or sand may notice that one container fills quickly while another takes longer. An adult sitting alongside might observe, “That one filled up quickly… I wonder which one holds more?” In that moment, attention is drawn to capacity and comparison without shifting the experience away from play.
This does not require constant questioning or interruption. It can emerge through adults noticing what children are doing, engaging with their interests, and joining play alongside them. Narrating actions, introducing precise vocabulary, and wondering aloud can gently draw out the mathematics without disrupting the flow of play.
When learning becomes overly formal, opportunities for this kind of thinking can become limited, reducing the chances for children to develop a deep and connected understanding of number.
The pressure on play
Despite strong evidence and its place within statutory guidance, play continues to be challenged within early education.
Alongside wider policy pressures, there are also practical constraints that shape what is possible in classrooms. Timetables are often tightly structured, with multiple transitions across a session. In this context, creating the conditions for sustained, focused play becomes increasingly difficult.
Deep play relies on time. It develops when children become absorbed in their activity, revisit ideas and maintain attention over a period. These are the moments where thinking deepens, where children begin to notice patterns, test ideas and make connections.
Frequent interruptions can disrupt this process. Moving children on just as they become engaged, or asking them to tidy away and transition to the next activity, can limit opportunities for sustained exploration. Over time, this reduces the depth of engagement that supports meaningful learning, particularly in mathematics where understanding develops through repeated and varied encounters.
This places an important responsibility on how timetables are designed. Maximising uninterrupted periods of play, and carefully considering when direct teaching takes place, can support children to engage more deeply with their learning. Structuring sessions so that teaching frames longer periods of exploration helps maintain both clarity and depth.
Rethinking the role of play in mathematics
A different perspective begins by recognising the role that carefully designed experiences play in shaping learning.
Structure, intention and attention to key ideas allow children to engage deeply with mathematics. Opportunities to explore, revisit and discuss ideas support understanding over time. Variation across different types of activity provides both breadth and depth.
Through this lens, play becomes part of a coherent approach to teaching and learning.
A way forward
Strengthening early mathematics requires careful thought about the experiences offered to children.
This includes recognising the range of approaches that contribute to learning, supporting adults to develop both mathematical and pedagogical understanding, and creating environments that encourage exploration while making important ideas visible.
In the early years, children build mathematical understanding through interaction, experience and reflection. Well-designed playful experiences support this process, enabling children to engage with number, structure and relationships in meaningful ways.
What matters is how these experiences are designed, and whether they give children the time and space to think, explore and make sense of mathematics.
References
- Bradbury, A., & Hare, M. (2025). Play, Policy and Power: A report reviewing literature: Early Childhood Education in England.
- Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (as cited in DREME). Play, Mathematics, and False Dichotomies.
- Department for Education (2021). Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage.
- Jensen, H., Hirsh-Pasek, K., et al. (2019); Weisberg, D. S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., et al. (2013, 2016); Zosh, J. M., et al. (2017, 2018).
- Van Oers, B. (2013). Is it play? Towards a reconceptualisation of role play from an activity theory perspective.
- Zosh, J. M., Hopkins, E. J., Jensen, H., et al. (2017). Learning through play: A review of the evidence