Situaciones de inclusión/exclusión mediante el juego en Educación Primaria

ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations Situaciones de inclusión/exclusión mediante el juego en Educación Primaria VALERIA VAREA School of Education. University of New England. Armidale, New South Wales. Australia [email protected] ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3572-4976 SITHEMBILE NDHLOVU School of Education. University of New England. Armidale, New South Wales. Australia [email protected] Recibido: 21-11-16. Aceptado: 16-02-17 Cómo citar / Citation: Varea, V., & Ndhlovu, S. (2017). Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations. Ágora para la Educación Física y el Deporte 19(2-3), 158- 176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24197/aefd.2-3.2017.158-176 Abstract. The purpose of this study was to explore how primary school children include or exclude their peers in play. Two primary schools in Armidale, New South Wales, Australia, participated in this project. Observations and interactional interviews were used to collect data, and a content analysis approach was used for data analysis. Results suggest that participants employed various strategies to exclude some of their peers from play. It was also established that exclusion may be utilised for purposes of establishing or maintaining friendships among children. Findings of this study have implications on the strategies adopted by adults seeking to promote inclusion in children’s play. Keywords: Primary school children; play; games; exclusion/inclusion. Resumen. El propósito de este estudio fue explorar el modo en que los niños de la escuela primaria incluyen o excluyen a otros niños en situaciones de juego. Dos escuelas primarias de la localidad de Armidale, New South Wales, Australia, participaron en este proyecto. Observaciones y entrevistas interactivas fueron utilizadas para la recolección de datos, los cuales fueron sometidos a un análisis de contenido. Los resultados sugieren que los participantes emplearon diversas estrategias para excluir a algunos de sus compañeros de juego. También se descubrió que la exclusión puede ser utilizada para mantener o establecer nuevas amistades entre los niños. De los resultados de esta investigación se extraen conclusiones relativas a las estrategias que pueden utilizar los adultos que traten de promover la inclusión de los niños mediante el juego. Palabras clave: niños de educación primaria; jugar; juegos; exclusión/inclusión. Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations 159 ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 INTRODUCTION Cole-Hamilton, Harrop, and Street (2002) describe play as a ‘freely chosen, personally directed, [and] intrinsically motivated behaviour that actively engages the child’ (p. 7). This depicts play as something that children and young people do when they follow their own ideas and interests, in their own way and for their own reasons (Howard & McInnes, 2013). Schools however, are adult directed environments where children do not have much choice on what kind of play equipment is available for them to play with, or when and where they play. Play is a voluntary activity and it is never imposed by physical necessity or moral duty (Huizinga, 1950). Children believe adults restrain play opportunities and that play that should be spontaneous and unrestrained (Glenn, Knight, Holt, & Spence, 2012). Adult involvement in children’s school play interferes with the nature of play (Cole-Hamilton et al., 2002; Huizinga, 1950). It is therefore essential that adults’ involvement in designing and organisation of play in primary schools ensures that children’s feelings of choice and control in play are preserved. Children’s play may be considered as text that provides insights into the transactions that take place in playgrounds during recess, with potential to lead to the inclusion and exclusion of some children in play situations. This study starts from the premise that there are important peer social relations during play at school recess (Blatchford, Baines, & Pellegrini, 2003) and that close observation of everyday activities on playgrounds can reveal something about how children include or exclude their peers in games and play. Playground culture is expressed through ‘performances’ that children engage in and that what happens in the playground is essential to understand peer culture (Sutton-Smith, 1982). Therefore, there is plenty of room to learn about children’s ways of engaging in inclusion and exclusion by studying their performances in school playgrounds. The main performance in school playgrounds, particularly in the case of primary school children, concerns games and play (Blatchford et al, 2003). It can, therefore, be said that while there are various other sites where children’s play and games may be observed, the playground provides a rich source of information for children’s play behaviours. This study explores children’s playground experiences particularly with regards to inclusion or exclusion during games and play. Two primary school playgrounds in Armidale, New South Wales (NSW), 160 Valeria Varea and Sithembile Ndhlovu ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 Australia, were the focus of the investigation. This paper first discusses the concepts of inclusion and diversity. It then describes how games may act as situations of exclusion for children. After that, the methods used for this investigation are outlined. Finally, the main results are presented and discussed, followed by a final conclusion. 1. INCLUSIVITY AND AFFIRMING DIVERSITY Today, Australia is a non-homogenous mix of cultures and ethnicity. Australian schools include students from diverse backgrounds, for instance, students who speak English as second language (ESL), students from refugee families, students with behaviour or learning support needs and others. Statistics show that 45% of Australians were born, or have at least one parent born, overseas, have immigrated from another country (more than 200 countries are represented), speak at least one other language (almost 300 different languages, including 50 indigenous languages, are represented), and as a result, identify with diverse religious practices, language and customs (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009). Further, in 2009, there were an estimated 292,600 children with disability attending school in Australia. These children were aged between five and twenty years and represented 8.3% (approximately one in twelve) of all Australian children attending school in this age group (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2009). The above statistics are an indication that most Australian schools include students from diverse backgrounds and students with varying support needs. It is important that children in these schools are able to mix and enjoy play, learn about differences, conflict resolution and peaceful coexistence (Aldridge & Ala’l, 2013). All students, regardless of their age, gender, backgrounds and physical abilities, should feel that they are acknowledged and valued. 2. EXCLUSION IN CHILDREN’S GAMES A number of studies have been conducted on the segregation of specific groups of children by their peers in games and play (see, for example, Blatchford, 1999; Clark & Paechter, 2007; Epstein, Kehily, Ghaill, & Redman, 2001; Fanger, Frankel, & Hazen, 2012). Children use various techniques to exclude their peers from play. These may include mitigated exclusion (exclusion disguised by ‘valid’ reasons), unmitigated exclusion Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations 161 ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 (direct exclusion), ignoring (when the excluder/s do/es not respond to a peer initiating interaction), planned exclusion (when children make plans beforehand to exclude) and partial inclusion (when a child appears to include another in play but gives them a trivial or less important role) (Fanger et al., 2012). However, exclusion is often a vital instrument for consolidating play communities and friendships (Blatchford, 1999). Peer exclusion is used in this study to refer to different situations in which one peer intentionally tries to prevent another from engaging in a social interaction (Blatchford, 1999). In a school situation where children have to play at designated times and at designated spaces and, where they have to share the play space with their peers, exclusion can take the form of social aggression. Huizinga (1950) states that ‘play promotes “social groupings” which tend to stress their difference from the common world by disguise or other means’ (p. 13). This further stresses the point that it is to be expected that children sometimes exclude their peers in play. Play provides a strong foundation for social groupings and, once these are established, it can be difficult for some others to enter these groups and become part of them. Children form permanent groups with time and they come together for all their games and the games they played usually set them apart as an entity different to those outside the group (Blatchford, 1999). While the ‘freedom’ in the nature of play as described by Huizinga (1950) implies that children feel free to choose what to play, how to play and allows for free peer interaction, it is from within this ‘freedom’ that exclusions emerge, given that freedom in play implies that the children are free to act on the belief that they are not obligated to play with anyone that they do not wish to play with. Following Huizinga’s description of play, it is no longer play if children are obligated to play with individuals they do not choose to play with. Choice is essential in all aspects of play engagement, and Huizinga (1950) reveals that there is a close association between play, choice and freedom. As Marrero (1996) pointed out, adults are often aware of the many social, emotional and cognitive developments that can be realised through inclusive play; children however, do not play to obtain any of the aforementioned benefits, they do so for the enjoyment of play per se (Huizinga, 1950). Following this, it can be concluded that some children may be excluded from play situations if their peers felt that their participation may take away from the pleasure of play, which may result in feelings of exclusion in some children. Therefore, there is a 162 Valeria Varea and Sithembile Ndhlovu ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 problematic contradiction between the nature of play and adults’ expectations on children’s interactional patterns during play. It is often anticipated that children include peers who wish to be included in play, yet the very nature of play and games calls for exclusion of some peers. Despite the expectations on children to be inclusive of others in play, it is believed that they still do exclude and they adopt various ways to do so. Therefore, this study explores how some children go against adult expectations of them to be inclusive of their peers during school recess. 3. METHODS Participants and settings Two schools in Armidale, NSW, Australia, participated in the study. Letters were sent to the school principals explaining the project and seeking permission to collect data at their schools. Ethics clearance was sought and obtained from both the university and the State Education and Research Applications Process (SERAP) committee. Data were collected specifically from two school playgrounds in Armidale: Oak Grove School and Grandview School. Oak Grove School has an enrolment of approximately 600 children, including 76 aboriginal students and 90 students with a background other than English. Grandview Primary Schools has an enrolment of approximately 200 children, 44% of them identify as aboriginal and 14% of the students have ESL. There are children from 12 different nationalities at Grandview Primary School. For confidentiality reasons, all names used in the study for both, children and schools, are pseudonyms. Data were collected twice a day for 20 days at each school. Oak Grove School had two recess periods, typically 20 minutes at midmorning, and one hour in the afternoon. Grandview School had three recess periods: the first recess was at quarter past eleven to quarter to twelve, followed by a short break at quarter past one to half past one, and the last break was at half past two to three o’clock. There were however a few days when data could only be collected during one of the play sessions as a result of wet weather when children stayed inside classroom. There are school rules governing activity in some parts of the play spaces at both schools that participated in this project. Data were collected using observation and unstructured interactive interviews methods; this is explained in the following section. Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations 163 ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 Observations Observation was the main method of data collection for this project. Baker (2006) explains observation as involving systematic recording of observable phenomena or behaviour in a particular setting. Further, Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007) assert that observation offers the researcher the opportunity to collect ‘live’ data from social situations. It allows the researcher direct access to the subject of interest rather than relying on second hand accounts. As the researchers were mainly interested in the play spaces and children’s play activities, observation was considered most appropriate as it allowed for gathering non-verbal information and behaviour. Through observation it was possible to capture what the children actually did in the observed playground sites, rather than what they said they did (Cohen et al., 2007; O’Leary, 2005). Richards and Morse (2007) point out that observational strategies allow the researcher to gain insight into what is taken for granted in a situation and to find out what is really happening by way of listening and watching. Similarly, Robinson (1982) states that what people do may differ from what they say they do, and observation provides a reality check. Through observations, it was possible to obtain an understanding of playground environments and daily playground activities that may have been accepted, expected or gone unnoticed and taken for granted by the participating schools and the children who attend at these schools (Cooper & Schindler, 2001). Playgrounds were divided into sections to allow the researchers to concentrate observation on one part of the playground at a time. The division of playgrounds into observation sections was based according to the activities took part in various playground spaces. Oak Grove School playground was divided into four sections and each section was observed for approximately 15 minutes each day for twenty days. Grandview School playground offered a much smaller area for children to play in and for that reason it was divided into two sections. Each play section at Grandview School was observed for approximately 15 minutes during the first break. Detailed field notes were organised according to the date data were collected and were entered under play area headings. Each page was numbered. This allowed the researchers to give any piece of data taken from the notebooks a retrieval code permitting quick location of the detailed notes that were associated with a given ‘retrieval tag’ during the data analysis process (Lankshear & Knobel, 2004). While still mostly engaging in 164 Valeria Varea and Sithembile Ndhlovu ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 observations, the researchers interacted with the participants and conducted short unstructured interactive interviews in relation to observed playground occurrences. Short unstructured interviews that took no longer than 15 minutes were undertaken with some of the children and are explained below. Unstructured interactive interviews Unstructured interviews were used to gather data from participants, particularly to seek clarification and to confirm some observations. Cohen et al. (2007) point out that in unstructured interactive interviews ‘questions emerge from the immediate context and are asked in the natural course of things; there is no predetermination of question topic or wording’ (p. 353). The researchers approached children for interviews in situations where a behaviour of interest was displayed, for example, where unoccupied behaviour was noted during play time or where a child or children seemed to engage in the same activity for a number of days. Cohen et al. (2007) identify the strength of unstructured conversational interviews to be that they ‘increase the salience and relevance of questions; interviews are built on and emerge from observations; the interview can be matched to individuals and circumstances’ (p. 354). Unstructured interactive interviews allowed the participants to tell their story with very little interruption by the authors, as it was essential for the researchers to understand playground occurrences from the children’s perspective. Richards and Morse (2007) point out that this type of interview is most suited for studies where the researcher is looking to understand from the subjects what it is that matters. Through interviews the researchers were able to determine whether issues identified during observation mattered to the children or not, and how the play may affect younger students, older students, boys, girls, new-comers to the school, children with disability, etc. Probes and questions were unplanned; they arose from observation and the context of the interview (Richards & Morse, 2007). Interviews were audiorecorded, then transcribed verbatim and analysed manually. In the next section, the data analysis process is explained. Data analysis Transcripts from interviews and observation field notes were analysed manually using a content analysis approach (Saldaña, 2009). Content Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations 165 ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 analysis describes a family of analytic approaches ranging from impressionistic, intuitive and interpretive analyses to systematic, strict textual analyses (Rosengren, 1981). Research using qualitative content analysis focuses on the characteristics of language as communication with attention to the content or contextual meaning of the text (McTavish & Pirro, 1990). Therefore, a content analysis approach was used for this research to include meanings of the content. Two cycles of coding were conducted. To codify is to organise things in a systematic order, to make them part of a system or classification (Saldaña, 2009). According to Grbich (2007), codifying allows data to be ‘segregated, grouped, regrouped and relinked in order to consolidate meaning and explanation’ (p. 21). Open coding was conducted in the first instance and the amount of data coded ranged from a few words to full sentences. Open coding involves an exploration of the data and experimenting with codes, while breaking down and categorising the data (Ezzy, 2002). For example, “play” was coded in the open coding process. For the second cycle of coding, an axial coding took place. Saldaña (2009) suggests that axial coding is appropriate for studies with a wide range of data forms, such as this one. Axial coding is ‘a set of procedures whereby data are put back together in new ways after open coding, by making connections between categories’ (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 96). This stage involves the exploration of codes and the relationships between them (Ezzy, 2002). During axial coding we began to ask the question ‘What does this comment mean?’ For example, ‘play as inclusive’ was coded during this second cycle. In this project, several core categories were selected, however, this paper focuses on the data linked mainly under the core categories ‘play’, ‘games’, ‘inclusion’ and ‘exclusion’. Specifically, the paper describes the themes that were constructed from the dominant discourses that were evident in the participants’ comments and in the observation field notes. Data from observations are presented directly quoted from field notes throughout this paper. Interview data are presented as direct quotes from the audio tapes. The most representative excerpts of field notes and quotes for the most significant themes are presented in the next sections. 166 Valeria Varea and Sithembile Ndhlovu ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 4. AGE DIFFERENCES IN PLAY The children in Year 3 to 6 played a game of bull-rush1 together. The game showed potential to bring children of various ages together. The following was observed: The game of bull-rush involves over 20 children in Year 3 to 6. They all seem to be interacting at the same level and very much absorbed in the game, chasing and catching so much that age divisions do not seem to matter during the game. Children have been observed to take a break when needed and go back into the game without anyone even noticing. There is a winner at the end of the game making the game very competitive. (Date: 25 August 2015. Grandview School) This observation was confirmed by one of the children who took part in the game of bull-rush, she said: ‘I like this game because everybody is free to play, it doesn’t matter if you are not in the same year with the other players, you just join in’ (girl in Year 3, Grandview School). According to this girl’s quote, a game ‘free to play’ is considered in this specific situation as a game that everyone is invited to play, rather than as ‘free play’ as proposed in Huzinga’s (1955) above-mentioned definition of play. Pre-existing relationships among the children seemed to not matter in the game of ‘bull-rush’. Although children of various ages participated in bull-rush, younger children in transition to Year 2 did not join in this game. This group of children were observed to withdraw to the corner of the play area characterised by many trees; some of them went to play on the fixed play equipment when this game was being played. The children stated various reasons for their lack of participation in the game, such as: ‘I don’t like to play with big people’ (girl in kindergarten, Grandview School). Similarly, Michelle stated: ‘I think it’s a game for Year 3, 4, 5, and 6, me and my friends don’t like it, and they run too fast they’d just catch you’ (Year 1, Grandview School). It became apparent, therefore, that physical competence in the fast paced game of bull-rush was thought of as a barrier to participation by the younger children, as evidenced by some of the children’s dismissive attitudes towards the game. Lack of knowledge of the game rules was also cited as a barrier for younger students to mix with older students in the game of bull-rush. For 1 Game in which children have to run across the oval without being tagged by those that are in. Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations 173 ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 among the children at both schools and data reveal this was mainly due to spatial organisation. There was also some gender segregation within play spaces. The results of this study have important implications on the approaches adopted by adults seeking to promote inclusion in children’s play and games. Understanding of the essence of play will most likely lead to intervention strategies that acknowledge children’s choices and freedom in play yet promoting respect and empathy among children without making them feel like they are breaking societal rules. It is also essential to instill skills among children for dealing with exclusion because it is part of play. Therefore, these approaches may have the potential to promote openness among primary school children. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] (1994) encourages schools to be accommodative of the needs of all of the children who attend their school and to ensure their right to engage in play and to interact with others of their choice; and further, that children’s exercised choice in what they do is respected. It is therefore essential that schools engage in constant evaluation of their play spaces, identify barriers to children’s full participation in play and work towards removing them. This is particularly important, as according to Blatchford et al. (2003), the development of successful social relations with peers is essential for children’s adjustment to school, and the playground is the main site for everyday encounters that reflect and support these relations. REFERENCES Aldridge, J. & Ala’l, K. (2013). Assessing students’ views of school climate: Developing and validating What’s Happening In This School? (WHITS) questionnaire. Improving schools, 16(1), 47–66. doi: 10.1177/1365480212473680 Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2009). Disability, Aging and Careers, Summary of Findings: 2011-2012 (cat. no. 4430.0). Retrieved the 10-10-2015 from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats Baker, L. M. (2006). Observation: A complex method. Library Trends, 55, 171– 189. 174 Valeria Varea and Sithembile Ndhlovu ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 Blatchford, P. (1996). “We did more then”: Changes in Pupils’ Perceptions of Breaktime (Recess) from 7-16 Years. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 11(1), 14–24. Blatchford, P. (1999). Friendships at school. The role of breaktimes Education 3- 13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 27(1), 60–66. Blatchford, P., Baines, E., & Pellegrini, A. (2003). The social context of school playground games: Sex and ethnic differences and change over time after entry to junior high school. British journal of Developmental Psychology, 21(4), 481–505. doi: 10.1348/026151003322535183 Clark, S. & Paechter, C. (2007). Why can’t girls play football? Gender dynamics and the playground. Sport, Education and Society, 12(3), 261–276. doi: 10.1080/13573320701464085 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison. K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge. Cole-Hamilton, I., Harrop, A., & Street, C. (2002). The value of children’s play and play provision: A systematic review of literature. New Policy Institute. Retrieved 10-10-15 from www.researchgate.net.publication Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). Population flows: Immigration aspects 2007- 08, Migration and Visa Policy Division. Department of immigration and citizenship. Retrieved 10-10-15 from www.abs.gov.au/ausstats Cooper, D. C. & Schindler, P. S. (2001). Business Research Methods (seventh edition). New York: McGraw-Hill. Drabick, D. A. & Baugh, D. (2010). A community-based approach to preventing youth violence: What can we learn from the playground? Progress in Community Health Partnerships, 4(3), 189–196. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2010.0002 Epstein, D., Kehily, M., Ghaill, M. M., & Redman, P. (2001). Boys and girls come out to play: Making masculinities and femininities in school playgrounds. Men and Masculinities, 4(2), 158–172. doi: 10.1177/1097184X01004002004 Ezzy, D. (2002). Qualitative Analysis. Practice and Innovation. Crows Nest: Allen and Unwin. Primary school games and play as inclusive/exclusive situations 175 ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 Fanger, S. M., Frankel, A. L., & Hazen, N. (2012). Peer exclusion in pre-school children’s play: Naturalistic observations in a playground setting. Merrill- Palmer Quarterly, 58(2), 224–254. Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Glenn M. N., Knight, C. J., Holt, N. L., & Spence, J. C. (2012). Meanings of play among children. Childhood, 20(2), 185–199. doi: 10.1177/0907568212454751 Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Grey, P. & Feldman, J. (1997). Patterns of age mixing and gender mixing among children and adolescents at an ungraded democratic school. Merrilli-Plamer Quarterly, 43(1), 67–86. Howard, J. & McInnes, K. (2013). The essence of play. A practice companion for professionals working with children and young people. New York: Routledge. Huizinga, J. (1950). Homo ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston: Beacon Press. Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2004). A handbook for teacher research: From design to implementation. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Lewis, T. E., & Phillipsen, L. C. (1998). Interactions on an elementary school playground: Variations by age, gender, race, group size, and playground area. Child Study Journal, 28(4), 309–321. Marrero, A. (1996). Trabajo, Juego y Vocación, las antinomias de la Educación Física en Uruguay. Montevideo: Fundación de la Cultura Universitaria. McTavish, D. & Pirro, E. (1990). Contextual content analysis. Quality and Quantity, 24, 245–265. Nabors, L., Willoughby, S. L., & MacMenamin, S. (2001). Promoting inclusion for young children with special needs on playgrounds. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disability, 13(2), 179–190. O’Leary, Z. (2005). Researching real world problems: A guide to methods of inquiry. London: Sage. 176 Valeria Varea and Sithembile Ndhlovu ÁGORA PARA LA EDUCACIÓN FÍSICA Y EL DEPORTE, 19(2-3), mayo-diciembre, 2017, 158-176 EISSN: 1989-7200 Richards, L. & Morse, J. (2007). Making data. In Readme first for a user’s guide to qualitative methods (pp. 109–131). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Robinson, B. (1982). Tutoring by Telephone: A Handbook. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Saldaña, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage. Rosengren, K. (1981). Advances in Scandinavia content analysis: An introduction. In K. Rosengren (Ed.), Advances in content analysis (pp. 9– 19). Beverly Hills: Sage. Sutton-Smith, B. (1982). A performance theory of peer relations. In K. M. Borman (Ed.), The social life of children in a changing society (pp. 65–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Paris: UNESCO. Yantzi, N. M., Young, N. L., & Mckeever, P. (2010). The suitability of school playgrounds for physically disabled children. Children’s Geographies, 8(1), 65–78. doi: 10.1080/14733281003650984