Research Article Development of the Indigenous Child-Initiated Pretend Play Assessment: Selection of play materials and administration Alma Dender 1 and Karen Stagnitti 2 1 School of Occupational Therapy and Social Work, Curtin University of Technology, Western Australia, and 2 Occupational Science and Therapy Program, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia Background / aim: There is a need for culturally appro- priate assessments for Australian Indigenous children. This article reports the selection of culturally appropriate and gender-neutral play materials, and changes in admin- istration identified to develop further the Indigenous Child-Initiated Pretend Play Assessment (I-ChIPPA). Method: Twenty-three typically developing children aged four to six years from the Pilbara region in Western Aus- tralia participated in the study. Children were presented with four sets of play materials and frequency counts were recorded for each time the child used one of the play mate- rials in a pretend play action. Twelve of the 23 children came to play in pairs. Results: Both boys and girls used the Pilbara toy set including the dark coloured dolls and Pilbara region ani- mals, more frequently than the standardised play materials from the Child-Initiated Pretend Play Assessment (ChIPPA). Conclusion: This study reports the first steps in the development of the I-ChIPPA. Future development will include the refinement of the administration and scoring with pairs of children, and then validity testing the assess- ment. KEY WORDS Indigenous, pretend play, symbolic play, toy. Introduction The way in which children’s occupations and develop- ment are viewed forms the constructs upon which assess- ment is based (Law, Baum & Dunn, 2005). The presumptions of the significance of Indigenous children’s play are primarily because of Indigenous children’s play being viewed within a non-Indigenous frame of reference. This frame of reference has led to the belief that Indige- nous children will benefit from play groups, play pro- grammes and play interventions, which replicate those provided for non-Indigenous children, and that literacy, and cognitive and social skills, will develop as a conse- quence leading to school success. Where this does not occur, children may be referred to occupational therapists who, in most situations, are armed with a Western theory base and without culturally appropriate assessment tools (Gray & McPherson, 2005; Iwama, 2006). Occupational therapists are aware of the shortcomings of using inap- propriate cultural assessments for Indigenous children and this has caused therapists to question the reliability and validity of currently used assessments, and the cul- tural appropriateness of the existing assessment tools for Australian Indigenous children (Nelson, Allison & Cop- ley, 2007; Thorley & Lim, 2010). This article reports on the first study in the development of a culturally appropriate play assessment for Australian Indigenous children. The terms Indigenous and Aboriginal, according to Dudgeon, Garvey and Pickett (2000) are often used syn- onymously, yet have different meanings to the people themselves. The word Indigenous is a generic term refer- ring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and their cultures. The term Aboriginal refers to those who are Australian mainland Aboriginal peoples who identify with, and are identified by Aboriginal communities as being Aboriginal (Dudgeon, Garvey & Pickett). In this article, the term Indigenous is used as the participants were not identified as being either Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people. Developing a culturally appropriate Indigenous assess- ment of play is significant for two main reasons. The first Alma Dender BAppSci (OT); Senior Lecturer. Karen Stag- nitti PhD, BOccThy; Associate Professor. Correspondence: Alma Dender, Senior Lecturer, School of Occupational Therapy and Social Work, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia. Email: a.dender@curtin.edu.au Accepted for publication 22 September 2010.  C 2010 The Authors Australian Occupational Therapy Journal  C 2010 Australian Association of Occupational Therapists Australian Occupational Therapy Journal (2011) 58, 34–42 doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2010.00905.x Australian Occupational Therapy Journal