By Ruth Lue-Quee
I did not set out to become a campaigner.
As a former deputy headteacher, educational consultant and mum, I have long understood the value of play-based learning. I knew the research, I had seen children thrive through active and developmentally appropriate practice and I had spent years advocating for approaches that reflect how young children actually learn. But like so many issues in education, this one became even more poignant when it became personal.
When my own son approached the transition from Reception into Key Stage 1, I could see the cliff edge coming. I could see the move from an environment where play, exploration, talk and hands-on learning are understood as central, into a system that too often expects children to prove themselves through increasing formalisation before many of them are developmentally ready. That was the moment this stopped being a professional concern and became a personal mission.
That mission became the Play is Learning Campaign.
My position is this: play and continuous provision should be statutory in Key Stage 1 in England. Not because this is a romantic or nostalgic view of childhood, but because it is the clearest way to create consistency, confidence and protection for developmentally appropriate practice in schools.
Too often, we hear that schools can already use professional judgement to embed play-rich pedagogy in KS1. In theory, that is true. In practice, professional judgement only works when the wider system gives schools the clarity, confidence and support to use it. At the moment, that support is inconsistent. As a result, developmentally appropriate practice exists in some schools because leaders are informed, courageous and committed, while in others it is marginalised or lost altogether. That is not a system. That is a postcode lottery.
For a country that claims to value evidence, this should trouble us.
The case for play-based learning is not weak or underdeveloped. It is supported by decades of evidence and backed internationally by organisations including the UN, UNICEF and UNESCO. We know that play supports language development, problem-solving, self-regulation, social interaction, physical development, creativity, cognition and learning and wellbeing. We know that young children do not separate learning neatly into academic and non-academic boxes. We know that they learn through doing, talking, testing, imagining, moving and making sense of the world in relationship with others.
And yet England remains the outlier in the UK, with play-based pedagogy not protected statutorily beyond the Early Years.
That matters not only symbolically, but practically. It sends a message about what is valued. It shapes accountability cultures. It influences what leaders feel able to prioritise. And it leaves too many teachers trying to reconcile what they know about child development with what the system appears to reward.
It is welcome that last week’s DfE guidance has shone a light on transition into Reception as a crucial phase in its own right. But that only makes it harder to ignore the equally important transition that follows: from Reception into Year 1, where too many children still encounter a cliff edge away from the continuity and play-rich practice that supports them best.
The wider picture only strengthens the case for change. If only 62% of pupils are meeting the expected standard in Key Stage 2 reading, writing and maths, then nearly 4 in 10 are not. At the same time, concerns around children’s mental health and wellbeing continue to rise. These are not statistics we should accept passively. They should prompt us to ask harder questions about whether our system is genuinely designed around children’s developmental needs, or whether too many children are being required to adapt to structures that do not fit them well enough.
This is why I reject the false choice between play and standards. Play-based learning is not about reducing ambition. It is about making ambition more achievable, more inclusive and more child centred. It is about pedagogy that supports children to build the foundations on which later attainment depends.
What has given me hope is that this argument is increasingly landing beyond the early years sector. Our campaign petition passed 100,000 signatures and ultimately reached 106,082. The resulting Westminster Hall debate on 26 January 2026 was a major milestone, not simply because it gave the issue visibility, but because it placed it firmly on the public and parliamentary record. There was strong cross-party interest, recognition of the Reception-to-Year-1 transition, and growing acknowledgement that pedagogy in KS1 must reflect developmental stage rather than ignore it.
Speaking at the APPG on Play was another pivotal moment. It reinforced for me that this is not a niche issue, and it must stop being treated as one. The Downing Street petition hand-in also mattered because it showed seriousness of intent: this was not just digital momentum, but a visible, organised and constructive campaign bringing together parents, teachers and supporters.
Since then, the work has continued. I met with the Minister for School Standards in February, and the engagement was constructive. There were positive signals around further dialogue, including a roundtable and the importance of practitioner involvement in the next stakeholder phase of curriculum review. That matters, because one of the campaign’s immediate asks is not to reopen everything from scratch, but to ensure that KS1 practitioners and experts are meaningfully involved in what comes next, and that final curriculum outputs are accompanied by a clear pedagogical line for schools.
In other words, if government says play is not off the agenda, that must now mean something in reality.
For members of Early Education, none of this will be new in principle. You have long championed quality early childhood education, professional voice and developmentally appropriate practice. But I would argue that this moment demands renewed clarity and collective resolve. We cannot allow play to be spoken about as enrichment, soft provision or an optional extra for children who have ‘finished’ their work. Nor can we allow the transition into KS1 to continue undermining what children have gained in Reception.
Play is not the opposite of learning. It is not the enemy of rigour. It is not a retreat from standards.
It is, quite simply, the most powerful way young children learn.
And until our education system reflects that fully, I will keep campaigning and keep spreading the message that Play is Learning.
Ruth Lue-Quee Aka My Mummy Teacher, is the founder of the Play is Learning Campaign, MMT Play and an Education Consultant.
