Play: An Underrated Tool of Learning?
By: Curtis Kelly
Animals play. That is how they learn basic life skills. Dogs chase each other to simulate hunting. Birds play with twigs to learn how to pry bugs out of holes. Octopuses blow jets of water at floating bottles to learn how to move things in their environment (Borell, 2009). Play builds intelligence, which explains why “biologists have found that the more intelligent an animal is, and the more time it takes to mature into adulthood, the more it plays” (Mardell et al., 2024, p. 39). Play is needed to build that intelligence.
So, children play. That is how they learn physical, and especially, social skills. Play fosters empathy and cooperation. That is probably why, according to Dr. Rachel Hannam, people who have a lifetime of criminal behavior tend to have had a lot less play as children (2025). Naturally, teachers of children take advantage of their natural propensity to play, as do caregivers, psychologists, and medical specialists.
But what about play for adolescents and adults? Sometimes, adults are given specialized training through play. Flight simulators are used in pilot training, case studies are employed to teach business strategies, and patient roleplay simulations are set up to educate physicians. And in the language classroom? We do roleplaying, on occasion ‘playfully,’ and we throw in quizzes, competitions, and games, though we tend to use them either as an unfun way to review the target language, or as a fun “extra” after the real study is done. Play is not a big thing for us. No surprise. Most physical and social skills have already been learned by maturity, so play is not our goal. Teaching language is.
I wonder, though, if we are underrating play as a language teaching tool. Is it more than just a review tool or extra? Some learning experts at Harvard think it is. Mardell and his colleagues wrote “using play as a strategy for learning—asking “What if” in order to explore, adapt, and create—is vital in addressing complex local and global issues” (2023, p. 7). Their book, A Pedagogy of Play, states that rather than play being used as an extra, it should be the central pedagogy, especially for children.
Neuroscience supports play as well. In fact, a large network in the brain is dedicated to what might be called play. It is a built-in simulator designed to consider “what ifs” and it is constantly playing with ideas. It is called the default mode network because it is so important, it automatically goes into action anytime your brain is not saddled with other tasks. In other words, daydreaming is the default! That makes sense if you think of daydreams as being practice for living: daydreams are usually simulations of possible reasons behind, and possible responses to, important situations (“I’ll give her flowers tonight and then ask her”), or fantasizing about situations that someday just might be, at least from the brain’s unrealistic perspective (“I’m not driving down a country road, I’m in Le Mans!”).
Simulating, playing, daydreaming are ways your brain builds and strengthens neural pathways dedicated to dealing with important scenarios, so that you are not caught flat if they are really encountered. The related action and response routines are strengthened by increasing the number of synapses, thereby adding permanence, and by neural myelination thereby adding firing speed. The brain also pulls in another tool to aid learning: dopamine. If you have fun, your brain releases dopamine to strengthen whatever was learned (including any related language) by making you feel reward, making you want more, and causing new synapses to form. Play, then, leads to deep learning.
Another way we can look at the value of play and simulation is related to a relatively new concept in neuroscience called cognitive control. It represents the extremely difficult task your brain constantly faces: turning knowledge and goals into behavior (Badre, 2024). The “knowing” does not automatically prescribe the “doing.” From the brain’s perspective, doing is extremely complex and must be learned. Play augments routines that can later be accessed for the doing.
In short, play is important, and maybe we should be doing more of it in the language classroom.1
1However, a warning is due in relation to competitive games. Risk to self-esteem requires careful consideration.
I admit. I have a personal stake in this idea. It is one I have been wrestling with for over thirty years. You see, I was a terrible language student and made little progress with the traditional approaches. Then later, in some cosmic joke, becoming a language teacher myself, I found that the standard PPP approach (present, practice, perform) tended to be a bust in my classes as well. Sure, it worked with those 10% who were “serious” about language learning, but I rejected the idea that the other 90% were “not serious.” “Disillusioned” might be a better term, since teacher-centered methods don’t work for every student. And why should they? Listening and repeating, memorizing lists of words, doing grammar drills, not being active, are just not brain friendly activities.
So, I have always leaned towards more humanistic methods in my language teaching, methods involving sharing, exploring, stories, and of course, play. The peak of my journey away from the traditional came thirty years ago, when I decided English study should be fun instead of painful. I decided that if my young adults could learn the same way they played, it would be the perfect approach. And how do young adults play? Look at their chosen media, full of monsters, killers, space wars and the unimaginable. So, I took a small piece of that and wrote a textbook lodged in the world of the young and play. It was called the Snoop Detective School Conversation Book. Language learners in that course, detective trainees, had to solve crimes given to them as information gaps. Student A might see photos taken before a murder, and Student B after, and by exchanging information they could find the killer.
What fun! Students loved it. I loved it. But maybe a pedagogy based completely on play was a bit ahead of its time in an age where psychometric language tests dominated our field. To tell the truth, I was rather embarrassed about my book too. Language teachers in Japan tend to be somber and serious. Play is taboo. So, I generally kept my book a secret and since it was put out by a very small publisher, Linguaphone Japan, the book disappeared when the company did.
But still, in my gut, I felt there was something valuable in that seemingly “childish” approach and quietly kept using these mysteries in class. Then, many years later, I met some TBLT experts who agreed that I was on to something. One was the brilliant Yuichi Suzuki, and he suggested we make a newer and better version of the book. We did, and Abax, a company in Japan, agreed to publish it. I’m proud to say that a few days ago, after eight years of work with Yuichi, it went on the market.
I am no longer embarrassed by this language textbook devoted to fun. I have learned the powerful brain science behind play–deeper learning, embodied cognition, cognitive control. A pedagogy of play for language teaching makes a lot of sense. Take a look at this info gap for instance, and imagine how students could really get into it. But also imagine what kind of language it will generate and the learning it will cause.
Before the crime
After the crime
Students must use existing resources to generate their own language in controlled language areas: appearances, clothes, and furniture. They are comparing, synthesizing, drawing conclusions, and more. They are working out a strategy of interaction, including the all-important negotiation of meaning: confirming, clarifying, disagreeing, turn-taking, etc. Most importantly, they are experiencing multiple Ahas and Wows, the sign of dopamine release. Out in the real world, they probably won’t ever have to solve a crime, but they will still need these vital skills of planning, collaboration, and interaction.
So, what was once embarrassing to me is now my proudest achievement.
References
Badre, D. (2024). Cognitive control. Annual Review of Psychology, 76.
Borell, B. (Feb. 27, 2009). Are octopuses smart? Scientific American https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-octopuses-smart/
Kelly, C., Suzuki, Y. (2025) The Snoop Detective School: Interactive tasks for English learners, Abax ELT Publishing. https://www.abax.co.jp/product/233
Mardell, B., Ryan, J., Krechevsky, M., Baker, M., Schulz, T. S., and Liu-Constant, Y. (2023). A pedagogy of play: Supporting playful learning in classrooms and schools. Cambridge, MA: Project Zero.
Hannam, R. (Feb. 27, 2025) ABC Radio National and ABC Listen on Facebook Reels. https://www.facebook.com/reel/1686739395522012
Curtis Kelly is professor emeritus of Kansai University, brain studies advocate, speaker and writer. That might sound impressive, but really, it’s all play.