Traditional Games and Learning
By María Regina Öfele <[email protected]>
South America Representative of Austrian Institute for Research in Play and Games, Argentina

Before analyzing the traditional concept of play, we should start by approaching play, with all the difficulties involved in this issue and its definitions. We all have a somehow complete idea of play, we could even try to approach them, based either on our personal experiences in childhood, youth and adult life, or on any readings on the subject. This phenomenon is so inherent to man, that all of us have had some experience, however minimum, even though, in most cases -at least in childhood- more than minimum. When we ask somebody about play, he/she immediately goes back to a different time and space, remembers a series of positive and even negative experiences. There is no man without play or play without man. The characteristics of the games we have played may be different, have different degrees of intensity, belong to different developmental stages, but we can still find common elements, beyond our culture. Play is a dimension which carries man away to a different world, with other rules, where our individual essence becomes evident, without any masks, where everything -or almost everything- is possible; it is a dream that has become true, everything changes according to our wishes and man goes deep inside himself.

Many theoreticians, representatives of the most varied disciplines, have tried to define play and have, therefore, found limitations when trying to define in a few words a human dimension which is almost impossible to embrace. Thus, we may find psychological, pedagogic, philosophic, biologic, historic, anthropologic standings, among others. In each of them we will find a new view of play, though still partial. In connection with this, Buland writes, “The concept of play, as the object of scientific research must not be defined, it should remain a pre-scientific concept” (Buland, 1996). And further on he continues, “The question on the essence of play takes us to a shortcut, in contrast, it would be much more enriching to group games together and ask about their similarities.”(Buland, 1996)
Despite this, we may still find common points which may appear in almost all the expressions related to play. We might somehow summarize play as a phenomenon/an activity carried out in a time and space different from that of daily  life, which has its own set of rules and is developed in an “as if” form. Another relevant aspect is freedom, understood as an activity “freely” accepted, freedom in terms of the player deciding whether to play or not, and choosing the topic and materials of the play. The “as if” form as well as the freedom have been objected by more modern researchers. To that respect, different researchers express that, while the child is playing and in his/her play he/she has turned real objects into fantasy objects, the latter “are” these other objects with real meaning for the child.
As regards freedom in play, in one of his latest research works (Buland, 1997) Buland develops a complete analysis of this issue, where among other things, he objects the freedom to decide whether to participate in a game or not, a fact which other authors take for granted. After carrying out a thorough analysis, this author proposes to classify games according to the moments of freedom opened in the game, responding to the question “Where does the freedom of the player exactly reside?” 

Anyway, beyond these objections posed by some authors, the different definitions of play agree with the aforementioned aspects. Thus, we can say that play is a part of our reality and in depth they are, in turn, something different. Play has no degree of attachment nor the tidings of our serious life. Play is freer, more temporary, open in themselves. Play is the uncertain limit of our reality. Play joins reality and possibility. It is an intermediate area of man, in which new realities are created and old realities may fade away. Play is a driving force for man’s growth, in the material as well as spiritual aspects. Play is not restricted to a particular type. It appears much more in all human activities: from the play of thinking through some frolicking before an action, to a playful behavior in serious situations of life (Fritz, 1992). Lavega says, “In this complex universe of relationships and sociocultural manifestations, play shall be understood as a reality that, despite their insignificance, gratuity and spontaneity, appears as a mirror that reveals its protagonists. The individual, when he/she really plays, that is to say, when he/she participates in a game with a set of rules, forgetting all about the rest of “rational” and “serious” activities which are part of his/her more formal daily life, usually shows him/herself as he/she is, without any masks or artificial costumes, peculiar of other more “serious” settings. The language of play is universal and, in turn,  singular for each geography and historic age, showing all the time the combination of ontogenesis and philogenesis related to play, since if each individual is able to “invent” or improvise an original adventure related to play it is based on the evolutionary grounds  of all that generated by the collective mankind he belongs to.” (Lavega Burgués, 1996)

Differences are also based on the point of view taken to analyze play related phenomenon. Thus, for example, from the anthropologic point of view” play is an activity in which well-established collective cosmovisions are projected, and they also refer to other possible worlds as to that symbolic, expressive and imaginary”, as Dupey says in her recent publication (Dupey, 1998). Thus, the evolutive psychology sees play as a part of the child’s development that become evident in different forms of expressions. To psychoanalysis, play is an intermediate stage between consciousness and unconsciousness, between the principle of reality and the principle of pleasure. Pedagogy sees play as an instrument to transmit concepts, values, various kinds of knowledge. To phenomenology, play is an original phenomenon, emphasizing the free condition of the goal of play. These are some examples of the different points of view we can find when analyzing play.

The oldest theories with some authors, such as Spencer, Lazarus, Groos, etc. also account for the importance play has had in the past, becoming the object of study for many researchers.

But historic research work on play and toys still shows more the significance of this phenomenon to man, society and culture. Elements related to play, games and toys from very old times, even before Christ, have been found. These are elements which represented different symbols and the importance to man at said times. Thus, for example, game boards have been found in kings’ graves in Ur around 2500 BC (Glonnegger, 1996). The fact of having found several games in important personalities’ graves, for instance, means what they had given the dead as entertainment and amusement for their journey. (Glonnegger, 1996). In various studies and historic analyses, we can see the different dimensions and degrees of sociocultural importance play, games (and toys) have gone through, as well as the various manifestations and expressions related to play at each time, from the old age to date.

The importance of play and games in different social groups and times is such, that even some games have even been forbidden by the ruling authorities. Thus, for instance, in Vienna, Austria, in the year 1764 a ban was published for all kinds of gambling with no exception, games behind closed doors and games after 9:00 p.m., and gambling (Institute for Research and Education in Play and Games], 1995). Another example is the Ban of all games of chance and side bets in the Viceroyalty of Peru during the XVII century, where games were prohibited to everybody without exception (Dupey, 1998). The Middle Ages was in fact characterized by a boom of games of chance, and, therefore, the bans became more noticeable at that time, though not exclusively. Anyway, if we are dealing with bans on games, we should not only look back to the past. At present, and especially in educational institutions, there are also bans on games, and not precisely of gambling. While, on one hand, the positive qualities of play and games are praised, especially those of children’s play and games, on the other, we will find a series of forbidden games. To that respect, Pavía, who researches on popular games in school courtyards in the south of Argentina, writes, “... many teachers we have inquired say that in their schools ‘there are no forbidden games’. They do accept that there are restrictions on certain activities, generally based on safety or hygiene grounds. However, their students often recite confidently, the list of games forbidden at school. The only and fundamental difference is that to the children, those forbidden are, undoubtedly, games, while to the teachers, those forbidden are precisely so because, in their view, they are not games. ‘In my school -textual- there are no forbidden games and those forbidden are not games” (Pavía, 1994).

Nevertheless, there have been other games that, even if they were played for money, in contrast to the above mentioned prohibitions, were recommended by doctors, for example, as is the case of the game of billiards. Bauer, in his research work about W.A. Mozart quotes to that respect, “The game of billiards was also, already in the seventeenth century, an ideal combination of a body game and a concentration game” (...) “As a body game it is suitable (...) to give the body a little movement and a multiple activity, extension, muscular work, due to walking, standing up and sitting down often” (Bauer, 1996).

The importance of play, games and toys is also linked to nature, since many games were played at certain times of the year and not others, for instance in winter and spring time, in order to act on or influence certain natural phenomena by means of games. One can mention, for instance the game of spinning a top to secure a good harvest, dolls which stand for feminine fertility given to girls with that purpose. Other games were closely connected with divinity and had high symbolic contents (ball games, for instance) in which, by putting into practice certain expressions related to games, certain moves or hands, they tried to influence or please the gods, and, therefore, these games where closely linked to rituals (Öfele, 1999).
 
We may then conclude, after this tracking, and beyond the theoretical standing play is approached, that this is a phenomenon inherent to human beings, which “accompanies” them throughout their lives. There is no man without play, nor is there play without man. The phenomenon of playing has been occurring from primitive man times to present, occasionally adopting different modes, but it has always been devoted significant space and time, as proven by many documents and discoveries found in our times.  

Play and Learning

Many authors have already written on the relation between play and learning, from Old Times to present. Relating to that, we can quote Plato, who, in The Law already analyzes the importance of children’s play to build up perfect citizens, especially in terms of respect to the rules of the game. Different theories on play and learning have been set forth, granting different grades of significance to the link between these two aspects. Consequently, many theories have started to include play in the formal educational field, confining it to a more systematized and organized framework.

In turn, different trends in play and didactic toys have arisen seeking to target play to pedagogical and learning purposes, something which has also been objected by many authors, especially those advocates of goal-free play, since when play or toys are used for a specific purpose, such activities can no longer be considered as play. 
But if we consider free play in itself, which comes up spontaneously in a group of people, such play a child or a group of children freely choose, organize and recreate, by directing and, thus, setting their own course, we can discover a wide range of learning ways.

Play is one of human beings’ first languages. A little child wanders around his/her environment creating and inventing games, connecting him/herself to the world by means of expressions related to play. Through play they communicate with each other, with people around them and with the environment. As they grow older, their games become more complex and their scope of knowledge is extended, too. Hetzer (1978) so states when he refers to play as the main contents of children’s lives in certain developmental stages. 

“For the player (and for play) everything is possible: every single thing may be a number of things. For a child, anything he/she wants comes true. Play is the kingdom of imagination, where nothing is impossible. Everything is possible. It is the acknowledgment of the unlimited dimension of man and the world.” (Sepúlveda Llanos, 1999). Play is a spell, a representation of that Different, a prediction of what is to come, a denial of the burden of reality (Rahner, 1990) and, in this context we may, therefore, infer a multiplicity of resulting transformations, which enrich children and men, in general; transformations which become a learning process in practice.

There are still a lot of preconceived ideas and prejudice regarding play in the adult world, for play is only deemed significant as a pastime, valid for certain age groups (children, and not much further), or on certain uncommon occasions providing a special environment, such as a party. But on too many occasions, beyond permission to play as adults may grant, play is not deemed as a learning activity for participants -players-, beyond the fact that play be considered a serious activity. The so called “didactic” games may be an exception, where the specific learning activity is somehow “disguised” in a more play-related environment, and it adopts a “pedagogic” purpose, not always reaching the expected results.

As to the relation between play and learning, three basic standings can be observed in some authors (Walter, 1993) who discuss the link between both phenomena: 
1) Play and learning as consistent processes, where play always leads to learning, and, therefore, there is no play without learning. This is Einsiedler’s standing.
2) Play and learning are structurally different. In playing we play but do not learn, as stated by Piaget and Berlyne.
3) Play is accompanied by learning when the conditions for true play exist, as set forth by Röhrs and Sutton-Smith.

However, despite the differences among these three standings, we cannot deny that in playing we always learn something, although this is not clear for the player.
In play, above all, there is the pleasure of playing. In play, children learn, first of all, to play. They learn agility, behavioral patterns, techniques, improvisations, social systems required by different kinds of play and games. They adapt themselves to a way of life that is essential for mankind and for strengthening man within the limits of a system, which help him to maintain spaces of freedom and happiness in a world that cares about performance and the steady pursuance of goals not always reachable. (Flitner, 1986)  In play the child combines action and thought, and, through play he/she feels satisfaction and success. Play touches on all aspects of life; through play, children learn to live (Westland and Knight, 1982).
In play the child learns the game itself, its operation, its more or less complex rules. In play the child learns how to establish playing communication with others and relate from player to player differently. There are a number of learning possibilities through free and spontaneous play, this depends on the type of game, the group taking part, etc. Here it is important to highlight that in this kind of game, chosen by the child or group, there is no previous goal other than the mere fact of playing. All other goals one could interpret, observe or deduce from the outside, are accessory, and not set by children at all. This learning through play is “intrinsic” to the play and player him/herself.

Let us see an example: two girls A (5 years old) and B (7 years old) (who do not know each other) come to a square. At the beginning, each plays by herself, A has brought a bucket, a shovel and other shapes to play in the sand, which she is not using at the moment, as she is swinging. B comes closer and asks her mother to play with those elements. Then A leaves the swing and starts playing with her sand toys, too. They begin to play and plan a treasure hunt game. B directs A all the time, stating where they are going to play, which path to follow, what changes to introduce in the game. B welcomes A’s suggestions and participation, but she still clearly leads the game (which A does not object). After a while, another girl approaches them: C (7 years old) and requests permission to join the game, which is granted. The game carries on, but some friction arises between B and C, and A remains B’s ally. B tries to lead the group’s game, which she does not always manage to do, though, she succeeds at having A faithful to her for some time, but not C. After playing the three of them for a while, B clearly tells C, “You are not the boss, I am”. Then, after a while B isolates herself and C continues playing with A, who becomes C’s ally. Then B tries to get involved in some occasions, but she does not always succeed. Finally B leaves the square with her mother (at her mother’s request, regardless of the play situation). B does not wish to said good-bye to A and C, as she is angry with the other two players, but finally –at her mother’s request- she says good-bye.

From this scene we can conclude there are several learning processes in A, B and C. B’s may be the most evident, since, after this experience she learned she cannot always be the leader in a playing group, and that sometimes she will have to give way to other children.

On many occasions we can also observe how children incorporate other children’s concepts and modes either words, behavioral patterns, forms of playing, ways to relate to other children, etc. On occasions they adopt these changes, not on others when they find them useless.

It is worth showing the richness of these spontaneous groups gathering children of different ages. The exchange in such cases is much more intense, and so is the learning process. Due to different maturity levels children learn other things, concepts, modes, etc. than in a group where all children are the same age and have a similar maturity level.

Play favors real exchange of ideas, it creates a need for teamwork. From the intellectual point of view, cooperation builds up a critical spirit, objectivity and discourse analysis.  From the moral point of view, cooperation leads to an autonomous moral grounded in the common-good awareness and acceptance of universal laws which, preserve freedom and individual development and secure the community’s true progress.(Radrizzani Goñi, and González, 1987).

If we observe a child who is approximately one and a half year old, his/her play will show successive stages: an initial approach to the new object, successive manipulations until he/she gets acquainted with it, and then we will be able to see how the child plays with the object in different ways. We are then facing a true learning process, that no outsider has proposed, nor the child as main participant. 
Children can incorporate wide and varied learning by playing. Depending on the game, naturally, some aspects will develop more than others either the social, motive or affective-emotional aspects. Psycho-hygienic value of play is also worth mentioning, as a means for the child to solve traumatic and conflicting situations, thus widening his/her own personal experience (Mogel, 1994).

Play, as a free and spontaneous expression of children, involves an external and internal movement, it unleashes a series of different transformations resulting in enrichment. The more possibilities of play children have the wider the learning. 

Traditional Games and Learning

With the expression “traditional games” we define such games passed on from generation to generation, transmitted from grandparents to parents, parents to children, maintaining their essence in spite of certain changes. These games are transmitted orally, which, among other factors, accounts for their strength, as set forth by Kishimoto. (Kishimoto, 1994). These games are found in a number of generations, with the same rules and purpose (Trautmann, 1997). Their most outstanding feature is being anonymous, as their author cannot be identified, even though the origin of many of them is estimated, the author him/herself remains unknown. They are universal, their traces can be found all over the world, in some cases arising simultaneously in completely different places. These games contain the peoples’ cultural features, and they transmit lifestyles,  cosmovisions, beliefs and legends, as also stated by Lavega Burgués (Lavega Burgués, 1995).  It can be said that within children’s games -and, additionally, in traditional children’s games- lies an entire cosmos (Richman Beresin, 1995). This increases even more when we study traditional games more deeply, and discover the symbolic load prevailing  in all of them, acting as a benchmark for another set of values, beyond mere entertainment.

Therefore, when studying traditional games we should not take a superficial look, for each is immensely rich inside. It is important to save their environment they were and are played in the past and at present, respectively, in order to save the set of cultural values these games transmit. Taking a deeper look into these games will enable us to discover important historic and cultural aspects of our own roots. This is also applicable to toys (or traditional toys) since, as stated by Retter, “the history of toys is part of man’s history of culture” (Retter, 1979).

When tracing the origins of these games we can also see how each of them appears in combination with cultural elements of that time, generally with magic, religious contents, related to the gods, which evidence that these games were not (and are not) merely an amusement. “The origin of games is contemporary to the origin of societies. In old times, instead of being children’s property, they constituted the magician’s or wizard’s personal property, and as they used games for religious purposes, the gods were attributed their invention and first use. Rejected by priests for their practice, instead of fading, they changed their destination and set out in a new direction. (...) Then they were relegated as men’s games, later, as women’s, and finally, as children’s.” (Plath, 1998). Retter, in his thorough research work on play and toys, quotes different authors who state that even in the earliest stages of man’s cultural development, his cultural expressions -including toys- were not for religious purposes only, but also they have always been at the service of games and amusement. Thus, he concludes, the theory that the function of toys had appeared at the beginning in connection with religious cults seems to be one of the sources of toys (Retter, 1979). This refers to how significant play, and in this case, traditional games, were to mankind in the past, not only for children, but also, and in some particular cases, for adults.

Traditional games are a kind of spontaneous, free play, where, above all, there is the pleasure of playing. Their only goal is to obtain pleasure and to meet children’s need for play. They can also be roughly described with the following characteristics:
? they are played by children just for the pleasure of playing. Children themselves decide when, where and how they are played;
? they satisfy children’s basic necessities;
? they have negotiable rules which are easy to understand, remember and obey;
? they do not require much expensive material;
? they are easy to share;
? they can be played any time, anywhere

One of the most remarkable points is that these games meet children’s basic needs. First, and foremost, the pleasure of play and the need for it. “Traditional games are advised as a facet -even among children of big cities- to meet fundamental needs and offer forms of social learning within a wide scope.” (Trautmann, 1995). 

But, which learning can result from traditional games? First and foremost, I repeat once again, there is the pleasure of playing and learning how to play. Because in order to take part in games as players we must have learned how to play, which involves being able to keep oneself playing at the same level as the rest. This learning grows gradually as from the child’s birth, where at the beginning of the development he/she is unfit to participate in a group game, for instance.
Rules are another important aspect in the learning. All children willing to participate in these games must stick to the rules agreed upon, as well as to any change they wish to introduce. This implies that, since most of these games are group-like, there must be consent among them, so that nobody can prevail over the rest too easily. Even though each game has its own pre-established set of rules, there may be different versions that must be previously agreed upon or else the same game may be played differently. Therefore they will have to choose, previously, which version they wish to play. This somehow involves that children learn to coexist in the group, accept the rules and reach different agreements, and this is also a remarkable exercise of freedom: they choose whether to participate or not, in one way or another, to share a game with other children, to submit to certain conditions or to stay out of the game- at their own choice.

For such purpose, they need to implement certain important aspects necessary for an optimal learning: they analyze different possibilities, elaborate strategies, design and build different plans and forms of playing. This leads to an important social learning, in terms of living together with a group of children that may be similar or different from each other and where, in turn, children of different ages may participate. This also involves different attitudes towards activities.

Many of these games are accompanied by chants, rhymes or other verbal expressions, which also favors language development in children, who will adapt themselves to said expressions. Different versions can be found, by area, country, etc., sometimes resulting in interesting cultural interchanges. This aspect is very peculiar of these games, for, on one hand they are present in all cultures, and on the other, their names and ways of playing vary by area and country. This leads to the fact that, in places where different cultures coexist, as it so happens in many countries or, for instance, in some big cities and neighborhoods of certain cities, playing groups become precisely multicultural. Then, there is interchange and enrichment in that respect, depending on the version each child may bring into the group.

The learning of rhythm is closely related to language in traditional games, in the form of chants, rhymes, ways of telling, etc. Such rhythm is not only verbal, but, on occasions, it is also accompanied by harmonious body movements. 

Against this background, learning and motive development is another distinctive aspect of a number of these games, based on movement, which involve a clear learning and result in body control, movement inhibition, speed control, in some cases, coordination between eyes and hands, and between eyes and feet, epicritic motivity in skills games (De Lanuza, 1989).

In some of these games, especially those related to stories, myths and legends, children build up their fantasy from characters and situations that are different from daily life, but which may transferred by previous re-elaboration.
All these games are transmitted through generations, as above mentioned, from grandparents to parents, parents to children. This leads to a significant generation communication, which means learning to respect adults, taking into account that, when children learn that their grandparents, parents and other ancestors already played those games, their relationship becomes much closer, for -through games- they put themselves at the same “language” level; there is a common issue, which is, above all, well known by children.

Beyond all possible learning from the above games, we may analyze some concrete examples, where we specify some other points. To each of the following games we add a brief historic and folklore explanation, where their richness from the cultural point of view stands out.

If we take, for instance, the tag, which originated in the old right of persecuted criminals to take refuge in churches, crying “to church I appeal” when they entered the temple, and could only be taken out with a special license issued by ecclesiastic authorities (Plath, 1998). Tag offers different variations for playing, and even new possibilities can be invented, thus, for example, there is the poisonous tag, sitting tag, wall tag, frozen tag (Öfele, 1998).

Learning: development of protopathic motivity by running in a large space; adequate movement inhibition upon stopping to touch another player; or when he/she is touched and must adopt a special posture; acceptance of rules that involve an important adaptive change when he/she is touched and becomes part of the chasing group, that is to say, good adjustment to sudden changes, social cooperation to “save” the participants that have been touched.

As for ball games, the oldest games found among the old Egyptians and Chinese, closely related to cult and also considered as an eminently cosmic game in the Old Europe (Öfele, 1998), we can play a number of games and create others, either in small or large teams of children. Here, there is a wide range of choices, even more, we take into account different materials (cloth, paper, rubber, leather, plastic) and sizes- to make or buy a ball. 

Learning: coordination between eyes and hands; and between eyes and feet, depending if the ball is thrown with hands or feet, rhythmical coordination with partners in some games, for instance, throwing several balls simultaneously, motivity, attention and concentration development in order to follow the ball path  and keep it, if necessary, social cooperation, since in a group ball game -whatever the game- the player will have to share the ball with others and not withhold it constantly.

The spinning top, full of symbolism to which different magic characteristics were attributed, is a toy and a game with several possibilities. Hopi indians forbade this game to boys and girls during summer storms, for they feared that by playing, the children could ruin the harvest by attracting the spirits of the wind with their spinning tops. In India, on the contrary, in an area where it seldom rained, this magic energy from the spinning top was used positively, spinning tops were put to dance, since their humming, which sounded like remote thunder, would attract the rain. In Malaysia, on the other hand, it was only allowed to play in spring, when the land was sowed (Holler, 1989). The spinning top may have different designs, with spikes of various lengths, and the cones can also be different, flat, with or without a rope. Several games can be played with a spinning top, according to the model and number of participants, even sketching journeys and maps for the spinning tops. Tournaments are organized in Malaysia between teams integrated by adults, with detailed rules.

Learning: coordination between eyes and hands, attention and concentration to follow the spinning-top path and pick it up at the right time, measurement and spatial orientation rudiments to throw it in a limited space.
There are several interpretations of the game of hopscotch, but in some cases they are related. Rodrigo Caro says that this game was present in Rome, and Mrs. de Gomme believes that the blurred lines of the old hopscotch sketches can be seen in the old Roman forum. There is also information about the presence of this game in the old Greece. Mrs. de Gomme thinks that the hopscotch could represent the soul’s journey from earth to heaven, going through several intermediate stages. But since authors such as Rodrigo de Caro consider that games already existed before Christianity, current versions of games are the result of a form adapted by Christianity, and their most remote origin is closely related to labyrinth myths (Menéndez, 1963). Even if the basic diagram of the hopscotch always remains, there are some variants. Basically, it is always a rectangle divided by 9 to 16 boxes, with a semicircle on top (called Heaven or Paradise), which is the ultimate goal of all players. But there is also the circular hopscotch or snake, so named after its shape.

Learning: motive coordination and movement inhibition, equilibrium to keep standing on one foot for some time, coordination between eyes and hand to throw the stone and cause it to fall in the corresponding square, sequence rudiments to carry on with the game correctly, spatial orientation and speed measurement, metric rudiments to organize the design of the game. 

The marbles game, according to some studies, originated in the post Neolithic ages. Marbles have been found in children’s tombs in the Nile area. They were also found in diggings from the time of caverns. There are many different ways of playing. In some cases there are holes where marbles must be introduced, in others, triangles or circles are drawn on the floor and each player tries to take the opponent’s marbles out of the field, and each player may win or lose all the marbles (hoping to get them back in another match).

Learning: epicritic motivity, coordination between eyes and hands; a great deal of accuracy is required in these two aspects because marbles are taken very precisely with three fingers, and, in most games, marbles are aimed at a certain point, spatial location, tolerance of a certain frustration level, since at the end of the game the player may loose all his/her marbles, and perhaps win them back next time; metric rudiments to organize some games. 

Skipping was already an agility practice recommended by the Greek physician Hippocrates (460-377 a. C.).  

The game consists in a rather long rope which two girls spin at each end. The rest jump over and under it. They are generally accompanied by chants. There are several variants: “snake”, different spinning speeds, it can also be played individually.

Learning: general motivity, body rhythm, since if we miss the jumping pace we will be out of the game, coordination and equilibrium, movement inhibition to stop jumping, different spinning speeds, body control of different speeds.  
Hide and seek: in Ancient Greece it was known as “escape”. The fact of seeking a hidden, secret place is somehow attractive, a child intention related to play and love. It is played in groups or in couples, in daylight or in the dark (dark room, where most of the group hides away, and one must find the rest, previously counting up to a certain number to give them time to hide). 
 
Learning: numerical and sequential rudiments, mental ability to choose hiding places not easy to find, movement inhibition and, on occasions, equilibrium to stay at the hiding place for some reasonable time, spatial orientation, temporal anticipation considering that upon the end of the counting, all the rest must already be hidden, imagination to hide and search unexpected places.

These games serve as examples, evidencing the multiple possible learning that occurs in children, spontaneously and freely. In that respect, a Costa Rican psycho-pedagogist posed an interesting standing: she states that there is an almost direct relation between traditional games and learning to write, alleging that the problems children can manifest in that respect are rooted  -at least, partially- in leaving traditional games behind. Her standing is mainly based on the development of epicritic motivity, which is especially favored by some traditional games (Minsky Acosta, 1996).  

The learning mentioned above is inherent to play and naturally results from the playing process itself. Children do not choose these games because of certain learning process, but for the pleasure of playing itself. It is important to highlight the free and spontaneous nature of traditional games, which cannot, therefore, be applied for pedagogical purposes. But the possibility to assign a space within the institutional field to the free expression of these games remains open, thus permitting the recreation of a series of values, which would otherwise be in danger of disappearing.

Lic. María Regina Öfele

References:

Buland, R. (1996). Hacia los fundamentos de una investigación de juego. Definiciones-Sistematización-Metodología. In HOMO LUDENS, el hombre que juega 1. Instituto para la Investigación y Pedagogía del Juego-Sede Sudamérica- [Institute for Research and Education in Play and Games- South American Branch], Buenos Aires. p. 74
Buland, R. (1997). Die Einteilung der Spiele nach ihren Freiheitsaspekten. In HOMO LUDENS VII.  Verlag Emil Katzbichler, München – Salzburg.
De Lanuza, E.y Perez, C., Ferrando,V.(1980). El juego popular aplicado a la educación.  Editorial Cincel Kapelusz.
Dupey, A., (1998). Los secretos del juguete. Instituto Nacional de Antropología. [National Anthropology Institute]. Buenos Aires, p.9.
Flitner, A.(1986). Spielen Lernen. Praxis und Deutung in der Grundschule. Piper &Co. Verlag, München.
Fritz, J., (1992). Spiele als Spiegel ihrer Zeit.  Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, Mainz.
Glonnegger, E. (1996). Los clásicos juegos de mesa.In HOMO LUDENS, el hombre que juega 1, Instituto para la Investigación y Pedagogía del juego-Sede Sudamérica-, [Institute for Research and Education in Play and Games- South America Branch]  Buenos Aires.
Hetzer, H. (1978). El juego y los juguetes. Editorial Kapelusz. Buenos Aires.
Holler, R., (1989).  Kreisel.  Hugendubel, München.
Kishimoto, T. (1994). O jogo e a educacao infantil. Livraria Pioneira Editora. Sao Paulo.
Lavega Burgués, P., (1996).El juego popular/tradicional y su lógica externa.  Aproximación al conocimiento de su interacción con el entorno. Lecture in the First International Congress of Traditional Fights and Games. Puerto del Rosario-Fuenteventura, Spain
Lavega, P., (1995). En Trigo, Eugenia: El juego tradicional en el curriculum de educación física.  AULA, number  44.
Menéndez, E., (1963). Aproximaciones al estudio de un juego: la rayuela (Análisis etnológico). En Cuadernos del Instituto Nacional de Antropología No. 4, Buenos Aires.
Minsky Acosta, L. (1996).  Hijos desarrollo. In La Nación, Sunday Magazine. Costa Rica.
Mogel, H. (1994). Psychologie des Kinderspiels.  Sprirger-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.
Öfele, M., (1998).  Los juegos tradicionales en la escuela. First part, in Educación Inicial Magazine.  La Obra Publishing House. Year 13 No. 119, Buenos Aires.
Öfele, M., (1999). El juego tradicional y sus proyecciones pedagógicas. In Juegos Tradicionales y su Valor Educativo. Chilean Catholic University, School of Philosophy - de Esthetics Institute. Aisthesis Colllection, Santiago, Chile.
Pavía, V. y otros, (1994). Juegos que vienen de antes. Editorial Humanitas. Buenos Aires, p.36.
Plath, O., (1998). Origen y folclor de los juegos en Chile. Grijalbo, Santiago, Chile, p.11.
Radrizzani Goñi, A. y González, A. (1987). El niño y el juego. Las operaciones infralógicas espaciales y el juego reglado. Ediciones Nueva Visión, Buenos Aires.
Rahner, H. (1990). Der spielende Mensch. Johannes Verlag Einsiedeln, Freiburg.
Retter, H., (1979).  Spielzeug.  Beltz Verlag, Weinheim und Basel, p. 53.
Richman Beresin, A.(1995). Double Dutch and double cameras. In: Sutton-Smith (editor)  Children’s folklore. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York.
Sepúlveda Llanos, F., (1999). El juego y sus proyecciones estéticas. En: Juegos Tradicionales y su Valor Educativo. Chilean Catholic University, School of Philosophy - Aesthetics Institute  Aisthesis Collection, Santiago, Chile, p. 55.
Trautmann, T. (1997). Alte Spiele (wieder) entdecken – eine Hoffnung für die Pädagogik? In: Renner, E. (Hrsg.) Spiele der Kinder. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim.
Walter, G. (1993): Spiel und Spielpraxis in der Grundschule.  Auer Verlag, Donauwörth.
Westland, C. y Knight, J. (1982).  Playing living learning. A worldwide perspective on children’s opportunities to play. Venture Publishing, Inc., USA