-Creative development, therefore, comprises the fostering of ways in which children use their imaginations for representation and interpretation. Imagi-nation seems to encompass 'predicting', 'projecting' and 'considering possi-bilities', in the expressive and creative arts. The SCAA perspective reflects approaches developed by others (Edwards, 1990), which emphasize feelings and the creative arts. In contrast, Feldman et al. (1994) argue that the notion of 'possibility' is fundamental to creativity and is not simply relevant in the arts but across all the domains of human endeavour. Indeed, 'possibility thinking' is cross-curricular.
-it could be regarded as, in part, a counter-movement to what Bruce (1994: 197) calls the 'erosion of adults valuing children's free-flow play in complex industrial societies'.
-The SCAA's characterization of creative develop-ment reflects three of these, namely:
recapitulation theory: play reflecting culture - based on the work of Stanley Hall, 1884-1924.
practice theory: play as preparation for adult life - based on the work of, among others, Bruner (1983). This theory of play often becomes adult dominated, turning into 'guided play', 'structured play', etc.
cognitive development theories: play as the basis of learning rules, systems and knowledge - based on the work of Piaget from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s in particular (emphasizing the role of practical experi- mentation of individual children in intellectual growth), Bruner from the 1960s onward (emphasizing the social element in play as helping to introduce intellectual challenges which replicate adult life), and Vygot- sky (emphasizing the idea of play as helping to introduce the boundary between what is known and not yet known, and the potential for nego- tiating understanding with others, including adults); this latter has been developed by more recent theorists such as Wood and Atfield (1996).
-creative dev a political issue w/ new right (??? need to read about more)
-Creative development as a break with the 'New Right' It can be argued that play, encompassed within 'creative development', is a political issue (Anning, 1994; Wood and Atfield, 1996), in that it has been marginalized within 'New Right' conceptions of curriculum and learning in the early years and its 'language of the marketplace' (Wood and Atfield, 1996:14). However, the codification of creative development as a desirable learn-ing outcome represents a break with New Right conceptions of the curricu-lum. Instead, I would argue that it represents a welcome endorsement of existing early years practice which values the potential of play to enable chil-dren's self-actualization.
-Creative development as self-actualization, psychosynthetic and creative cognition
-Creative development, involving the physical expression of feelings and cognition, with its scope for imagination and free-flow exploration, draws on both hemispheres of the brain (the left emphasizing logic, language, mathematical representations, sequencing, linearity and the right spatial manipulations, form and pattern, the imagination, rhythm and musical appreciation, intu-ition, images) (cf. Brierley, 1987; Zdenek, 1985)
-
## [**Design** principles for **children's** technology](http://www.hci.usask.ca/publications/2005/HCI_TR_2005_02_Design.pdf)
When a designer wants to make an interface for children they go in with the mindset of making it kid-friendly. But what does kid-friendly mean? To most it results in more colors or cute buttons or arbitrary design principles that work best for adults. This paper was written as a first attempt to bring together children’s interface design principles. The catalogueu is important because children should not be treated or seen as mini adults, they are children with different ways of communicating, competing tasks, and learning. The design principles are categorized under cognitive, physical, and social/emotional development, each containing sub categories which include rules, methods, and examples.
