Carte PDF Outdoor

International Perspectives on
Early Childhood Education and Development 34
Liv Torunn Grindheim

Hanne Værum Sørensen
Angela Rekers Editors
Outdoor Learning
and Play
Pedagogical Practices and Childrenʹs
Cultural Formation
International Perspectives on Early Childhood
Education and Development
Volume 34
Series Editors
Marilyn Fleer, Monash University, Frankston, Australia
Ingrid Pramling Samuelsson, Gothenburg University, Göteborg, Sweden
Editorial Board Members

Jane Bone, Monash University, Frankston, Australia
Anne Edwards, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Mariane Hedegaard, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Eva Johansson, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
Rebeca Mejía Arauz, ITESO, Jalisco, Mexico
Cecilia Wallerstedt, Gothenburg University, Göteborg, Sweden
Liang Li , Monash University, Frankston, Australia
Early childhood education in many countries has been built upon a strong tradition
of a materially rich and active play-based pedagogy and environment. Yet what has
become visible within the profession, is essentially a Western view of childhood
preschool education and school education.
It is timely that a series of books be published which present a broader view of
early childhood education. This series seeks to provide an international perspective
on early childhood education. In particular, the books published in this series will:
• Examine how learning is organized across a range of cultures, particularly
Indigenous communities
• Make visible a range of ways in which early childhood pedagogy is framed and
enacted across countries, including the majority poor countries
• Critique how particular forms of knowledge are constructed in curriculum within
and across countries
• Explore policy imperatives which shape and have shaped how early childhood
education is enacted across countries
• Examine how early childhood education is researched locally and globally
• Examine the theoretical informants driving pedagogy and practice, and seek to
find alternative perspectives from those that dominate many Western heritage
countries
• Critique assessment practices and consider a broader set of ways of measuring
children’s learning
• Examine concept formation from within the context of country-specific peda-
gogy and learning outcomes
The series will cover theoretical works, evidence-based pedagogical research,
and international research studies. The series will also cover a broad range of
countries, including poor majority countries. Classical areas of interest, such as
play, the images of childhood, and family studies will also be examined. However
the focus will be critical and international (not Western-centric).
Please contact Astrid Noordermeer at [email protected] to
submit a book proposal for the series.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/7601

Hanne Værum Sørensen • Angela Rekers
Editors
Outdoor Learning and Play

Pedagogical Practices and Children’s Cultural
Formation
Editors
Liv Torunn Grindheim Hanne Værum Sørensen
KINDknow Kindergarten Knowledge VIA University College
Centre for Systemic Research on Aarhus, Denmark
Diversity and Sustainable Futures
Western Norway University of Applied
Sciences
Bergen, Norway
Angela Rekers
Institute of Education and Humanities
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
Carmarthen, UK
ISSN 2468-8746 ISSN 2468-8754 (electronic)

International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development
ISBN 978-3-030-72594-5 ISBN 978-3-030-72595-2 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72595-2
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2021. This book is an open access publication.
Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit
to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if
changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons
license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book’s
Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the
permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Foreword
It is a unique experience to find a book of such a great timing. When the authors and
editors of the book started their work, little did they know how the world would
change and how their commitment to the topic of outdoor learning and play could
be read as a response to an unexpected critical event. Suddenly, in 2020, the
COVID-19 virus caused a myriad of changes to children’s and teachers’ lives all
over the world. The pandemic is a crisis for today’s children: the event and the
responses to it may follow them for the rest of their lives, from their early learning
to their social skills and bodily and mental health. It is our responsibility, as adults,
to disprove the hypothesis that they will see themselves as a lost generation, whose
lives will forever fall in the shadow of a global pandemic.
We know that transmission is higher in densely-packed indoor spaces, and the
danger is ever-present in educational settings because children may become carriers
who transmit the virus to the most vulnerable members of society, such as their
grandparents, and children and adults with underlying diseases. Living in isolation
under quarantine may have some serious consequences – delaying children’s cogni-
tive, emotional, social and gross motor development. Disadvantaged children will
probably pay the greatest price, as resources like indoor space, gardens and trans-
port to outdoor spaces will vary between families. We all need the discussions in
this book to remind and inspire us when planning and policy is developed in the
early childhood educational field in the future.
During crises and difficult times, notice must be taken to maintain Article 31 of
the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). This article
states the specific right of all children to rest and leisure, to engage in play and rec-
reational activities appropriate to their age, and to participate freely in cultural life
and the arts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been demonstrated that access
to playgrounds, parks, open green spaces and landscapes has had an enormous posi-
tive impact on those with the opportunity to spend time in them in small cohorts and
in fresh air. The unavailability of such places could be damaging for children and
families.
People need to meet others, even in difficult times and crises, and doing so in
smaller groups seems to be the way to go. Therefore, urban planning and areas for
v
vi Foreword
children in kindergartens and schools must consider universal access to green

spaces, open landscapes and outdoor ‘garden rooms’ in every neighbourhood.
Parks, playgrounds and other green areas provide people with the much-needed
opportunity to escape household confinement and enjoy the positive effects of green
spaces on their health and well-being, to holistic education, and to create childhood
memories.
This book offers a unique set of articles that set out a cultural-historical approach
to outdoor learning and play. It can be read as an alternative to a ‘sheet, pencil and
paper’ skills-centred approach to early learning and play. An approach where liter-
acy and numeracy are associated with indoor desk work, even for very young chil-
dren, seems to have increased worldwide over the years, and we need books like this
one to set out alternative narratives of valuable early childhood theorising and prac-
tices more in line with sustainable goals and holistic development approaches.
Rewarding it is, therefore, to read a book in which literacy and numeracy are not
ignored as such, but rather included in a broader holistic view of child development.
With wonderful case studies and interesting results, the authors create new knowl-
edge, vivid images and inspiration for pedagogical practices where cultural forma-
tional ideas and design also have a place. The authors also kindly remind us about
critical situations for children such as air pollution. Despite knowledge of the out-
doors as a beneficial site for young children’s education, the status of outdoor activi-
ties varies in and within different cultures for different reasons. With the increasing
awareness caused by the pandemic, policymakers and educators have, with this
book, got additional food for thought, planning, and acting upon outdoor spaces for
children. In dense neighbourhoods, decrease in air pollution is an urgent requisite to
reduce health concerns, while both for urban and rural areas, the outdoor learning
and play will give richness and prosperity to children.
The book makes it possible to see more clearly how early years education is not
only culturally and historically conditioned, but also conditioned by the availability
of nature and outdoor landscapes. The interests in this book highlight the relations
and possibilities between humans and their environment, and place-based play and
learning. It contributes to my understanding of how humans interact, play, and learn
within outdoor spaces and on local places, and how both cultural and natural condi-
tions constitute the content of kindergarten activity. The ideas and manifestations
inspire me to think about the possibilities and richness to be found in outdoor educa-
tion. When children are given access to diverse landscapes, biodiversity and various
sensory and bodily experiences, we can hope they also acquire attention, curiosity
and care for their relations and environment, and thereby build bodies and minds
that can cope in current and future crises.
Director of KINDknow Research Centre, Elin Eriksen Ødegaard

Western Norway University of Applied Sciences,
Bergen, Norway
Acknowledgments
Funded by Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

We acknowledge support from The Research Council of Norway; Kindergarten
Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable Futures
(KINDknow) (project code 275575); Western Norway University of Applied
Sciences; VIA University College, Denmark; and The University of Wales Trinity
Saint David.
vii
Contents
1 Outdoors and Nature in Pedagogical Practices

and in Cultural Historical Theory�� 1
Liv Torunn Grindheim, Hanne Værum Sørensen,
and Angela Rekers
2 Toddlers’ Outdoor Play, Imagination and Cultural Formation�� 23
Avis Ridgway, Gloria Quiñones, and Liang Li
3 Providing Outdoor Experiences for Infants and Toddlers:
Pedagogical Possibilities and Challenges from a Brazilian
Early Childhood Education Centre Case Study �� 43
Natália Meireles Santos da Costa, Maria Clotilde Rossetti-Ferreira,
and Ana Maria de Araujo Mello
4 Princesses (Don’t) Run in the Mud: Tracing the Child’s
Perspective in Parental Perceptions of Cultural Formation
Through Outdoor Activities in Norwegian ECEs �� 61
Alicja R. Sadownik
5 Children’s Play and Social Relations in Nature
and Kindergarten Playgrounds: Examples from Norway �� 79
6 Utilisation and Design of Kindergarten Outdoor Space
and the Outdoor Activities: A Case Study of Kindergartens
in Bergen, Norway and Anji in China�� 95
Wanqiu Meng and Min He
7 Time Regulation as Institutional Condition for Children’s
Outdoor Play and Cultural Formation in Kindergarten �� 111
Åsta Birkeland and Hanne Værum Sørensen
ix
x Contents
8 Exploring the Taken-for-Granted Advantage of Outdoor Play

in Norwegian Early Childhood Education�� 129
9 ‘All of the Wild’: Cultural Formation in Wales
Through Outdoor Play at Forest School�� 145
Angela Rekers and Jane Waters-Davies
10 E-STEM in Everyday Life: How Families Develop
a Caring Motive Orientation Towards the Environment �� 161
Sylvia Christine Almeida and Marilyn Fleer
11 Curious Curiosity – Reflections on How Early
Childhood Lecturers Perceive Children’s Curiosity�� 183
Marianne Presthus Heggen and Anne Myklebust Lynngård
About the Contributors
Sylvia Christine Almeida is a senior lecturer in environmental, sustainability and

science education in the Faculty of Education at Monash University with strong

global teaching experiences across India, Africa, USA and the Middle East. Her
research interests include working with young children, educators, leaders and poli-
cymakers to understand their perceptions of environmental and sustainability edu-
cation. Her research aims to foreground alternative, non-dominant worldviews in
shaping environmental and sustainability education and their impact in shaping
future discourses to mitigate policy practice gaps. She has numerous publications
including two books on teacher education in environmental and sustainability edu-
cation focusing on India and Australia.
Åsta Birkeland is a professor in early childhood education at Western Norway

University of Applied Sciences (Bergen, Norway). She received her PhD in interdis-
ciplinary childhood studies from the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology (NTNU), Trondheim. Her research interests have focused on conditions
for children’s exploration and cultural formation in an international perspective,
teachers’ cultural formation and professional development in international partner-
ship programmes, and early childhood education for sustainability (ECEfS). Her
work has been published in journals such as the Journal of European Early
Childhood Education and Care Research, Research in Comparative and
International Education, Policy Futures in Education, Cultural Psychology and
Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science.
Natália Meireles Santos da Costa is a psychologist and a PhD student at the

University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto Campus, Brazil. She is a researcher at the
Brazilian Centre on Human Development and Early Childhood Education
(CINDEDI). Her work focuses on locomotor socio-perceptual development of
under-two infants and toddlers taking place in relational everyday settings, mainly
in collective educational contexts.
xi
xii About the Contributors
Marilyn Fleer is an Australian Research Council laureate professor and holds the

foundation chair of Early Childhood Education and Development at Monash

University, Australia. She was awarded the 2018 Kathleen Fitzpatrick Laureate
Fellowship, is a former president of the International Society of Cultural-historical
Activity Research (ISCAR), and holds the positions of: honorary research fellow in
the Department of Education, University of Oxford, second professor in the
KINDknow Centre at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, and honor-
ary professor at the Danish School of Education, Denmark. She was presented with
the 2019 Ashley Goldsworthy Award for outstanding leadership in university-
business collaboration.
Liv Torunn Grindheim is a professor of early childhood pedagogy at the

Kindergarten Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable

Futures, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. She received her PhD in
social studies of childhood from the Norwegian Centre for Child Research,
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway. Her research interests
are play, conditions for children’s exploration, cultural formation, children as citi-
zens and sustainability in ECE. Her research has been published in journals such as
Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood and European Early Childhood Education
Research Journal. She has also published chapters in scientific anthologies by
Springer and Brill.
Min He is an associate professor of early childhood education at East China Normal

University (Shanghai, China). She received her PhD in educational principle from
the Education Department at East China Normal University (Shanghai, China). Her
research has focused on early childhood education principle, early childhood educa-
tion curriculum, young children’s science learning and 0–3 year old children’s nurs-
ery and education. Her work has been published in journals such as Integrative
Psychological and Behavioral Science, Journal of European Early Childhood
Education Research, Chinese Early Childhood Education Journal, Shanghai
Nursery and Education Journal and so on. She is involved in some international
research cooperation with Nordic countries, as well as projects sponsored by
Shanghai Education Committee. She was also working as a professional counsellor
on Early Childhood Education for the Chinese office of Save the Child.
Marianne Presthus Heggen, PhD, is a professor at Western Norway University of

Applied Sciences, Norway. She has a PhD in ecology from the University of Bergen.
She teaches early childhood teacher education on topics in natural sciences, outdoor
learning, environmental issues and education for sustainability. Her research foci
are on education for sustainability and environmental education in early childhood,
with particular interest on children’s reflections and contributions within these. She
leads the work package “Being and becoming eco-citizens” at KINDknow –
Kindergarten Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable
Futures. She works to keep her research close to the children, and has published
several articles on early childhood education.
About the Contributors xiii
Liang Li is a senior lecturer in early childhood education in the Faculty of

Education, Monash University. Her research focuses on cultural-historical studies,

infant-toddler’s education and care, children’s play and pedagogy, family studies,
teacher education, visual methodology, and STEM education in play-based con-
texts. She has recently been involved in the early childhood care and development
evaluation program in China, Vietnam and Nepal. Dr Li publishes widely in inter-
national journals such as Learning, Culture and Social Interactions, Early Years,
and International Journal of Early Years Education and collaborative books.
Anne Myklebust Lynngård is an associate professor at Western Norway University

of Applied Sciences, Norway, and has a background in ecology. She is an experi-

enced teacher in early childhood teacher education on topics in natural sciences and
outdoor learning. Her research foci are on how pre-schools are working with natural
science in nature, and she has an interest in harvesting and farming activities as
learning activities. She is part of the work package “Being and becoming eco-
citizens” at KINDknow – Kindergarten Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research
on Diversity and Sustainable Futures.
Ana Maria de Araujo Mello is a psychologist. She has obtained her master’s

degree and PhD from the University of São Paulo (Ribeirão Preto – USP) and con-
ducted her postdoc at the Centre Universitaire Experice of Université Sorbonne-
Paris Cité/Paris 13. She has worked in day-care centres and pre-schools since 1979
and as director and supervisor since 1983. Ana was one of the founding co-workers
and directors of the Daycare Carochinha USP/RP. She has worked at the Application
School of the University of São Paulo. She was a co-founder of the Brazilian Centre
on Human Development and Early Childhood Education (CINDEDI) at the FFCL-
USP/Ribeirão Preto. Ana is a member of the Brazilian National Campaign for the
Right to Education.
Wanqiu Meng is an assistant lecturer in preschool education Faculty at Shanghai

Normal University TIANHUA College (Shanghai, China). She received her mas-
ter's degree in preschool education from East China Normal University. Wanqiu is a
PhD candidate in service at Northern Arizona University. Her research has focused
on outdoor play, drama in education and psychological development of disadvan-
taged children. Wanqiu has been to Norway for academic exchange, participated in
some international research work with scholars from Norway, Denmark and
Luxembourg. She was one of authors of the book Social Ecology of a Chinese
Kindergarten: Where Culture Grows (Switzerland: Springer, 2020)
Elin Eriksen Ødegaard is professor and director of KINDknow – Kindergarten

Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable Futures – at

Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. She is also visiting professor at
UIT – The Arctic University of Norway. She defended her doctoral thesis in 2007 at
the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. Since then, she has published extensively on
children’s exploration and cultural formation, play and collaborative narrative
xiv About the Contributors
meaning-making and “‘becoming”. Her research embraces global and local per-
spectives and teachers’ pedagogies and changing practices. Within these areas, she
supervises PhD students. She received research grants from Research Council
Norway (RCN) (2007, 2009–2014, 2018–2023), was supported by Nordic Council
of Ministries (2015, 2016, 2017). Her latest book publications are: Hedegaard,
M. & Ødegaard, E.E (eds) (2020). Exploration and cultural formation. Dordrecht:
Springer and Ødegaard, E.E & Borgen, J. S. (eds) (2021): Childhood Cultures in
Transformation – 30 years with UNCRC in Action Towards Sustainability, Brill-
Sense Publication/Brill open.
Gloria Quiñones is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Education at Monash

University, Australia. Gloria’s research focuses on studying affect, emotions, play

and pedagogy and visual methodologies in early childhood. Recent research has
focused on infant and toddler educators' affective pedagogies and educators’ and
children’s emotional well-being.
Angela Rekers, PhD, is a lecturer in health, social and childhood studies at Neath

Port Talbot Colleges Group, Wales. Angela holds an MSc in environmental educa-
tion for sustainability and has worked in the field of experiential and outdoor learn-
ing for 20 years. Her research interests include education for social and ecological
justice, multimodal literacies, inclusive participation and inclusive research
methodologies.
Avis Ridgway, PhD, is an adjunct research associate in the Faculty of Education at

Monash University, Australia. Avis writes, edits and publishes nationally and inter-
nationally. Her recent collaborative publications (Springer International) include
Peer Play and Relationships in Early Childhood 2020. In Video Journal of Education
and Pedagogy, she published an article titled “Video Capture of symbolic activity in
toddler initiated play 2019”. Avis’ research takes a cultural-historical approach
using visual narrative methodology to focus on peer play, infant-toddlers educators
and family relationships in early childhood practice pedagogies.
Maria Clotilde Rossetti-Ferreira has graduated in philosophy, has specialization

in clinical psychology, obtained a PhD in psychology from the University of London

and has completed her postdoc at the Institute of Child Health, London, and
Laboratoire de PsychoBiologie de l’Enfant, Paris. She is emeritus professor at the
University of São Paulo, Brazil. Maria is a founding member of the Brazilian Centre
on Human Development and Early Childhood Education (CINDEDI). Her research
has focused on the development of affectionate relationships, insertion of babies
into day care, babies’ interactions, promotion of quality in ECECs, adoption and
foster care. She has published several papers, books, and chapters and produced a
series of videos on early child education and adoption and foster care.
About the Contributors xv
Alicja Renata Sadownik, PhD, is associate professor at the Western Norway

University of Applied Sciences (Bergen, Norway). She received her PhD in social
sciences from the University of Gdansk (Poland). Since the last 6 years, her research
focuses on childhood(s), early childhood education settings and parental coopera-
tion in the context of migration and socio-cultural diversity. Her works has been
published in journals such as European Early Childhood Education Research
Journal and Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood SAGE Journal, among oth-
ers. She is also one of the editors of Parental Involvement in ECE around the World
(London: Routledge 2021) and Young Children in the World and Their Rights 30
Years with the UNCRC (Springer 2021).
Hanne Værum Sørensen is an associate professor at VIA University College,

Aarhus. She holds an MA in child psychology and a BA in social education. Her

research interests focus on conditions for children’s outdoor playtime, children’s
explorative activities and children’s readiness for school. She is an experienced
teacher in early childhood teacher education in Denmark since 2001, and in Norway,
where she has 4 years of experience from doing research and teaching within the
area of ECE education. Hanne has published articles in Danish, Nordic and interna-
tional journals as well as book chapters in Danish, English and Norwegian.
Jane Waters-Davies is associate professor and applied research lead (education) at

the Institute of Education and Humanities, University of Wales Trinity Saint David.
She received her PhD in 2011 from the University of Swansea, UK. Jane’s research
interests lie in early childhood education, pedagogical framing, and young chil-
dren’s agency, voice and experience of outdoor spaces. Her work is published in
journals such as Early Years, Wales Journal of Education, European Early Childhood
Education Research Journal, Professional Development in Education and Asia-
Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, among others. She was
co-editor of the book Exploring outdoor play in the early years (McGraw-Hill,
2014) and has written many chapters for edited collections including the theoretical
chapter concerning affordance theory for the SAGE Handbook of Outdoor Play and
Learning (SAGE, 2017).
Chapter 1
Outdoors and Nature in Pedagogical
Practices and in Cultural Historical
Theory
Liv Torunn Grindheim , Hanne Værum Sørensen , and Angela Rekers
Abstract Despite the increasing awareness of the outdoors as a beneficial site for
young children’s education, the status of outdoor activities varies in and within dif-
ferent cultures. Aiming to broaden and challenge presupposed understandings of
education and care in the outdoors, we consider the empirical findings from all the
chapters in this volume in order to identify a range of conditions for cultural forma-
tion in outdoor practices both within and between different cultures. Building on
Mariane Hedegaard’s approach to cultural historical theory and Ødegaard and
Krüger’s approach to cultural formation, our analysis is performed by identifying
conflicts and alignments between the values and motive orientations of the individ-
ual and those interpreted from the contextual conditions and demands of institutions
and society, particularly in relation to the perception of nature. In doing so, we
depict how culture and nature are interrelated from a socio-cultural perspective, and
argue that perceptions of nature shaped by institutions and society play a significant
role creating conditions for cultural formation. The opportunity for play, learning
and cultural formation in nature appears rich within all the represented cultural
spaces described in this volume, although whether these opportunities are supported
consistently within wider mainstream culture is regarded as an area of tension in
some chapters. Based upon our analysis, we suggest that both pedagogical practices
L. T. Grindheim (*)
KINDknow Kindergarten Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and
Sustainable Futures, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
H. V. Sørensen
VIA University College, Aarhus, Denmark
e-mail: [email protected]
A. Rekers
Institute of Education and Humanities, University of Wales Trinity Saint David,
Carmarthen, UK
© The Author(s) 2021 1

L. T. Grindheim et al. (eds.), Outdoor Learning and Play,
International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development 34,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72595-2_1
2 L. T. Grindheim et al.
and cultural historical theory need to take the outdoors and nature into consideration
when emphasising pedagogical practices for children’s play, learning and cultural
formation.
Keywords Cultural formation · Cultural- historical theory · Early childhood

education and care · Outdoors · Nature
1.1 Introduction
The status of outdoor activities in educational practices like Early Childhood

Education and Care (ECEC) varies within and between cultures and countries; in
some, outdoor activities are highly emphasised, whereas in others, outdoor activi-
ties have limited importance and/or fewer opportunities are provided. In Scandinavian
countries, for example, outdoor activities are central to the everyday lives of young
children and are promoted across the institutions of the home, ECEC and nature
kindergartens as important for children’s health, well-being, learning and develop-
ment (Aasen, Grindheim, & Waters, 2009; Sandseter & Kennair, 2011; Sørensen,
2013). In countries such as China, however, which has high levels of pollution,
children are not encouraged to be outdoors for lengthy periods (Birkeland &
Sørensen, 2021). We aim to broaden and challenge existing understandings of out-
door provision by presenting this collection of research on the outdoor environment
as an arena for cultural formation through outdoor and environmental education
activities. The content of this chapter is, therefore, structured around the research
question: What conditions for cultural formation through outdoor and environmen-
tal education activities can be traced in practices both within and between different
cultures?
We build on a cultural historical approach, understanding children’s activity as
embedded in the culture of which children are a part; thus, play in outdoor spaces or
activities using natural materials is also seen as cultivated. The elaborated knowl-
edge from the chapters draws upon empirical examples from Australian, Chinese,
Brazilian, Welsh, Norwegian and Polish cultures. The main aim is to identify a
variety of possibilities or obstacles that the outdoor context represents as a condition
of children’s activity, thereby contributing to broadening the understanding of edu-
cational politics and educational practices in ECEC. Our analysis depicts that both
possibilities and obstacles point to more than the outdoor environment itself.
Individuals as well as institutions, presented here as teachers, parents or grandpar-
ents, ECEC settings as well as the institutional values embodied in the training of
educators, are shaped by cultural values, expectations and demands. Thus, they have
the potential to create possibilities and opportunities for children’s development in
outdoor spaces or to constrain possibilities. We, therefore, surface how cultural for-
mation shapes perceptions of nature and subsequent opportunities for young chil-
dren’s development in the outdoors.
1 Outdoors and Nature in Pedagogical Practices and in Cultural Historical Theory 3
1.2 Theoretical Approach
Our theoretical and epistemic framework begins with Vygotsky’s (2016) and
Hedegaard’s (2009, 2020) understandings of children as active agents at the core of
learning and cultural formation. Children’s learning and cultural formation is seen
as contextualised, situated, mediated and embedded in their given cultural context.
Children’s development is seen as dynamic, in dialectical reciprocity with societal
conditions (Hedegaard, 2009). Hedegaard (2020) argues that if researchers only
study children’s development by considering ‘a fixed sequence of developmental
stages’, it is difficult to capture ‘the diversity that is connected with cultural tradi-
tions in different societal institutions’ (p. 2). Hedegaard and other researchers
employing cultural historical perspectives have criticized research approaches that
study child development without consideration of the individual as a participant in
dialectical life contexts, thereby neglecting the cultural-historical conditions for
children’s development. Hedegaard (2009) argues that ‘demands for a scientific
approach have led to several one-dimensional conceptions of development, where
the focus has been on the development of different psychological functions and
competencies’ (p. 64) with little regard for the participation of the child in activity
settings shaped by cultural content. In line with sociologists and anthropologists
(Corsaro, 1997; James, Jenks, & Prout, 1998; Rogoff, 2003), Hedegaard empha-
sizes the need to study children localized in time and space, and to take participants’
values and motivations into consideration. Hedegaard (2020) asserts that it is the
dialectical relationship between societal and institutional (cultural) values, expecta-
tions and demands and the child’s developing motive orientation that contributes to
the child’s development within and across institutions in everyday activities and
routines called activity settings.
Similarly, Ødegaard and Krüger’s (2012) concept of cultural formation is under-
stood to be an ‘ever present and continuous process’ (p. 21). Ødegaard and Krüger
(2012) present cultural formation as a descriptive concept that portrays the acts of
humans in relation to the conditions in their given culture. Both the process (act)
and the result of being a part of the activity are embedded in the process of cultural
formation. The individual appropriates, negotiates and challenges cultural forma-
tion, thus both shaping and being shaped by institutional values and demands.
Employing a cultural historical perspective on children’s development and cultural
formation in activities, this anthology seeks to expand upon the cultural-historical
tradition of studying children in classroom and home activities to consider chil-
dren’s cultural formation in outdoor spaces or in sustainability practices. In line
with Vygotskian theory and Winther-Lindqvist (2019), the authors in this volume
see children’s development as the result of a complicated interplay between the
agentic child and their environment, which, we argue, includes the socio-material
affordances provided both in- and out-of-doors in early childhood provision
(Rekers-Power, 2020).
The arena for cultural formation in this anthology is predominantly the outdoor
environment, which ranges from urban spaces to woodlands to gardens outside the
home. These areas vary in forms and conditions for cultural formation in and within
cultures and countries. We, therefore, take into account that even if children have
access to outdoor activities, how, where and in what forms this may be accessed,
differs. In addition to cultural – and subcultural – differences, the situation, the arte-
facts involved, the relations among the participants and the institutional values and
demands also influence children’s outdoor play. Thus, children’s activities are cul-
turally and situationally constructed, and children are both co-constructers and re-
constructers when exploring their social, cultural and material environments.
1.3 Methodological Approach
To trace conditions for cultural formation within and between different cultures
presented in this volume, we present analysis of the activities and findings presented
in each chapter to consider cultural formation as an always present, ongoing pro-
cess, involving both non-human and human actors. We build our analysis on
Hedegaard’s (2009) model for analysing the interconnection between children’s
activities/routines (activity settings) and the values, expectations, demands and
motive orientations at the personal, institutional and societal perspectives, as illus-
trated in Fig. 1.1. This interconnectivity provides the basis for cultural formation.
The natural world or outdoor environment is not an explicit part of Hedegaard’s
model. Since the context for the activities in this book focus upon use of the out-
doors or education about the outdoors, we elaborate her model by including the
perception of nature as an overall contextual perspective in line with culture, as
illustrated in Fig. 1.2.
Fig. 1.1 Illustration of the relations between society-practice and persons with cultural traditions
and activity settings as mediating links. (Redesigned from Hedegaard, 2009, p. 73)
Fig. 1.2 Illustration of the relations between children as active agents and participants in different
societies and institutions in dialectic relations with nature and culture
In line with cultural historical theory to date, Hedegaard does not formulate
explicitly how non-human nature is perceived as part of her person-institution-
society model (Fig. 1.1). Therefore, we see an opportunity for drawing out the
socio-material interactions as well as the sociocultural intentions in early childhood
practices that focus on nature or those that take place outdoors. In this chapter, we
begin by surfacing conceptualisation of nature as embedded in all three perspectives
of Hedegaard’s original model. From the individual perspective, we regard humans
as biologically as well as culturally constructed. From the institutional perspective,
valuing nature is in the pedagogical or family practices with traditions for and pri-
oritizing of outdoor activities and environmental education. From a societal per-
spective, we consider values that assert the positive influence of nature and outdoor
activities on children’s health, wellbeing, learning and development, as well as
belief systems that regard nature as dangerous or dirty, not for girls, or not suitable
for schoolchildren. These contradictions surface tensions and conflicts between the
expectations for teachers to take children outdoors for play and demands about chil-
dren’s safety, learning and development that are embedded in the given culture.
The elaborated model (Fig. 1.2) frames our analysis. We look for conflict and
alignments between the values, motives and competences of the individuals and the
contextual conditions and demands in the perspectives of persons, institutions,
society to include the perception of nature as a condition for cultural formation

(Grindheim, 2020). These conflicts or alignments surface the conditions for cultural
formation arising from the activities that are presented in each chapter in this book.
Thus, assertions from all the chapters form a part of the analysis in this chapter. The
ways the involved participants deal with these conflicts or alignments are under-
stood as ways of exploring and interpreting the individual’s motive orientations
together with conditions and demands in their institutional, societal, cultural and
natural context.
1.4 Analysis and the Depicted Conditions
We consider each chapter, in order to trace conditions for children’s cultural forma-
tion through outdoor activities within and between different cultures. We commence
with the chapters that focus on babies and toddlers and the chapters concerning
children from 3 to 6 years old in early childhood education and care settings. We
then discuss those chapters that focus on children involved in family activities, and
end our analysis with the chapters that consider early childhood teacher training and
education. These chapters highlight the dynamic interplay between individual, insti-
tutional and societal values, expectations and demands that shape children’s play,
learning and cultural formation in outdoor activities.
1.4.1 T
oddlers’ Outdoor Play, Imagination
and Cultural Formation
In Chap. 2, Ridgway, Quiñones and Li investigate the activity of three toddlers

engaging with the material and social affordances of the activity settings: playing
hide and seek, imaginative engagements around a fairy door in a three, finding and
imitating a snail, and doing tai-chi. In this chapter, the children are viewed as explor-
ers and active participants in their cultural formation, while exploring and engaging
with their family relations and family heritages, their local cultural and natural
spaces. The authors trace social and material conditions by discussing the adults’
involvement and values, societal influences such as the parks and backyards them-
selves, and the human and non-human materials encountered by the children.
In the personal perspective there appears to be an alignment between the child’s
motives and competences and the conditions and demands of the activity setting, as
each child appropriates the conditions created by the family activities in which they
participate. The children’s embodied motivations and participation are supported
and valued by their parents’ and their grandparents’ warm understanding and posi-
tive attitude. In the institutional perspective, here represented by home/family, the
support from parents and grandparents creates conditions in which the motives of
the children to be exploratory, playful, and imaginative co-collaborators may be

seen as aligning with their parents and grandparents’ motive orientation and ideas
of what is important for their future life.
Similarly, in the societal perspective these motive orientations appear to be in
alignment with those of the wider society in which they live, through which condi-
tions for their participation has been shaped. For instance, the public parks encour-
age the practice of tai chi and also provide foliage for imaginative interactions and
explorations around the fairy door in the tree. Also, the societal values may be seen
in the neighborhoods in which the families live, enabling the children to explore the
family garden and home renovation project in the semi-rural community. The per-
ception of nature, as interpreted in the individual, institution and societal perspec-
tives, is visible in the supportive social and material affordances of in the cultivated
spaces of parks, and family- and community gardens. These spaces offer natural
affordances of the grassy tussock, mulberries and insects, in addition to those oppor-
tunities that are more cultivated. In these outdoor activity settings, which are shaped
by the natural, societal and familial conditions, the development of children’s imag-
inative and exploratory play is encouraged.
1.4.2 P
roviding Outdoor Experiences for Infants and Toddlers:
Pedagogical Possibilities and Challenges
from a Brazilian Early Education Center Case Study
In Chap. 3, Costa, Rossetti-Ferreira and Mello investigate babies and toddlers’

activities in an ECEC institution in Brazil, located on a former farm on the outskirts
of a city in São Paulo. The authors discuss outdoor activity in both the outdoor
spaces that are attached to the child-care complex, providing possibilities to move
between the indoors and outdoors, and the wider outdoor areas a short distance from
the building. The authors consider these spaces, some of which provide opportunity
for the children to move autonomously from the indoors to the outdoors, in terms of
socio-spatial practices (Rutanen, 2012). The empirical material and its analysis find
few conflicts in the personal and institutional perspectives.
In the personal perspective, there appear to be alignments between children’s
motives and competences and the teacher’s providing of conditions and demands,
demonstrated by the teachers providing play materials and spatial access to outdoor
spaces. Also, the staff were directing the infants’ attention toward nature and the
outdoor affordances for exploration in alignments to children’s increasing walking
onset and motor development, which provided an expanded range of opportunities
for the children than the indoors on its own could provide. There also appear to be
alignments between the parents’ motives and competences for taking care and being
involved with their child outdoors and the conditions and the demands represented
by the daily routines and spaces for one-to one interactions between a parent and a
child. As parents’ use of the outdoors increased, so was their own relationship with
nature enhanced.
In the institutional perspective, there appear to be alignments between motives

among the staff and parents in this study that support access to embodied explora-
tion and access to nature, demonstrated by the way the ECEC institution organises
their daily practices involving children and parents to engage physically and sen-
sory with the outdoors. This is presented as a contrast to many ECEC providers who
are driven by demands for adult-centred provision with a focus on cognitive devel-
opment, thus devaluing such outdoor provision.
Similarly, the perspective of society and the perception of nature as valued by the
individuals and the institution are in conflict. The conditions and motivations traced
from Brazil’s intense industrial and urban sprawl, and the inequity in income that
condition the upper class to colonize the few green areas available, form a conflict-
ing contrast to motivations and conditions for young children’s access to outdoor
spaces. Although there is an expressed intention for outdoor activity in general, the
lack of funding for infrastructure and maintenance limits the ability of ECEC insti-
tutions to provide quality outdoor experiences. Thus, young children’s rights, moti-
vations for bodily explorations and access to outdoor areas seem in conflict with
political agendas.
Children are identified as active participants in their everyday life, through bodily
interrelations with the staff, their parents, the artefacts, projects and nature that pro-
vide opportunities for a range of activities to emerge in alignment with their increas-
ing skills. Thus, Costa, Rossetti-Ferreira and Mello point to how adults can be
supportive of children’s initiative and engagement in outdoor environments. From
the alignments and conflicts presented above, the socio-material opportunities cre-
ated by the childcare setting and staff provide crucial conditions for the outdoors as
an arena for cultural formation in this example.
1.4.3 P
rincesses (Don’t) Run in the Mud. Tracing Child’s
Perspectives in Parental Perception of Cultural
Formation Through Outdoor Activities
in Norwegian ECEC S
In Chap. 4, Sadownik investigates children’s outdoor activities in ECEC1 as a condi-

tion for children’s cultural gender formation that may challenge parental values and
cultural heteronormativity. The activity settings described in this chapter take place
in a Norwegian ECEC and are discussed by Polish parents that are immigrants in
Norway. In personal perspectives, the values and motives of the Polish parents rep-
resent both gender-traditional perspectives and gender-liberal perspectives, although
their former societal perspectives are more closely aligned with a gender-traditional
approach; these tensions are surfaced in the interviews. Thus, in considering the
institutional perspectives, there seems to be a conflict between the values of
ECEC institutions in Norway are for children from 1 to 6 years old.

1
gender-traditional homes, and the values, motives, conditions and demands to pro-
mote equity among genders in Norwegian ECEC institutions. The values of the
gender-traditional parents were, therefore, in conflict with the institutional values
and expectations, as well as with their children’s and the ECEC staff perspectives.
So, too, did these parents consider cultural formation to be the sole responsibility
for the adults, thus negating the motive orientation of the children themselves. This
authoritarian view about upbringing presents a challenge to one of the fathers with
gender-traditional expectations who eventually is able to consider the perspective of
his daughter as a future companion on camping trips in the wilderness, something
he himself enjoys. Subsequently, there is a conflict between the father’s perception
of his culture’s gender-traditional demands and his personal motivations for spend-
ing more interesting time with his daughter: he admits he would rather go camping
with her than go shopping. This surfaces a conflict between the father’s motive ori-
entations for his daughter’s future and the daughter’s own motive orientation for
being a ‘wild’, nontraditional-gendered girl.
Sadownik suggests that looking at outdoor activities involving specific persons
(the father and his daughter) in a specific activity (outdoor activities), brings the
personal perspectives to the fore, and surfaces (perhaps conflicting) value positions.
This impacts upon the individual’s interpretation of institutional demands for out-
door activity involvement which is non-gendered, as well as coming closer the
child’s perspectives. This exemplify how children develop across institutions and
that moments of conflict help us to interpret the child’s perspective. We also inter-
pret the perception of nature as a strong actor for challenging traditional under-
standing of gender. The outdoors is more accepted as arena for cultivating
masculinity by the gender-traditional parents; yet, the outdoors is considered an
arena for gender equity in the Norwegian contemporary approach. Thus, the use of
the outdoors in ECEC informs the conditions for cultural formation that challenge
heteronormativity.
Children’s perspectives are considered as actively challenging their parent’s het-
eronormative views; simultaneously, ECEC and cultural values and motivations are
important conditions for children’s subjectivity. Cultural formation is mapped as a
process of intersubjectivity. Both personal perspectives and institutional perspec-
tives relating to outdoor activities are highlighted as conditions for challenging het-
eronormativity in cooperation with parents in ECEC.
1.4.4 C
hildren’s Play and Social Relations in Nature
and Kindergarten Playground: Examples from Norway
In Chap. 5, Sørensen investigates the conditions and demands for one 4-year-old
child’s interactions with peers, during outdoor play in the fenced playground and
outdoor play in nature. In personal perspectives, the child’s values and motives are
to join in and play with peers in both the playground and the natural environment – a
less cultivated space. In institutional perspectives the child’s motivation is in line
with the condition that the teacher-child ratio is higher in nature compared to the
playground, thus teachers are better able to observe and interact if a child is strug-
gling to join in with peers. Although the teachers may be equally motivated and
engaged whether they supervise a larger group/number of children on the play-
ground or in a natural environment, the conditions in natural environment allowed
the teachers to join into children’s play and activity. Similarly, this chapter’s find-
ings demonstrated that the developmental goals for outdoor playtime on playground
differ from the goals in nature. On the playground, the goals were geared towards
independent play in larger groups and becoming accustomed to outdoor life, rather
than experiencing risky play and teacher involvement in conversations with the chil-
dren, as observed in the more natural setting.
In the societal perspective, the adult motivation and involvement with the chil-
dren in the nature setting particularly align with the societal expectations for out-
door activities in nature that stimulate nature connection, since attachment to nature
is considered a cultural phenomenon in Norway. This cultural phenomenon is in
alignment with this ECEC’s institutional profile that obligated them to spend the
major part of their day outdoors, either in nature or in the playground. In the percep-
tion of nature, the conditions of the natural environment are shown to be more open,
in terms of space, weather and the natural elements. These conditions are valued
within the individual, institutional, societal perspectives; and, the perception of
nature aligns with the child’s motivations and competences.
Sørensen outlines how the conditions and demands in the nature setting formed
the possibility for the involved child to create an imaginative play scenario that
included more children who wanted to join in with his imaginative scenario.
Children’s involvement in imaginative, explorative play and adult engagement in
children’s play align with the teacher’s motivations both in the playground and in
the nature-setting, but this motivation faces more conflicts when confronted with the
conditions and demands in the playground. The child’s experiences in the play-
ground and in nature are compared in order to demonstrate how the child’s efforts
to be involved in play on the playground fail; however, the conditions of the nature
setting, which include more actively engaged teaching staff as well as natural mate-
rials, provided enhanced opportunities for the child to be more successful in his
attempts to be an active agent in peer play, learning and cultural formation.
1.4.5 U
tilisation and Design of Kindergarten Outdoor Spaces
and Outdoor Activities
In Chap. 6, He and Meng outline and discuss children’s outdoor activities using dif-
ferent terrains and materials situated in kindergartens, in Bergen, Norway and in
Anji, China. This chapter points to terrain and material for play, as well as societal
and cultural differences in relation to education for young children that form
conditions for children’s cultural formation. These conditions are surfaced and dis-
cussed by comparing and contrasting the two kindergartens.
Contrasts are found in the individual perspectives. Teachers in Anji mainly
observe and do not direct or interfere with children while they are in the outdoors.
Instead, children’s learning is emphasized by collective, teacher-initiated reflections
after outdoor play, designed to build upon children’s existing competencies and sup-
port further concept development; these reflections highlight alignments with chil-
dren’s motivations and competences. In Bergen, the teachers stress situated
engagement with individual children while in the outdoors and in doing so, seem to
focus on what the children ‘already know’, rather than trying to achieve further
outcomes or objectives.
In the institutional perspectives, there are differences in terrain and materials in
the Anji Play setting and the Bergen setting. The Anji Play setting’s outdoor arena
is artificially designed to represent the multiple features of less cultivated natural
spaces, thus demonstrating a motive orientation to recreate the affordances of more
wild spaces in less urban areas. Additionally, many objects have been introduced by
the adults for play materials, more in line with adventure playgrounds, whereas in
Bergen, natural elements like stones, hills and sticks are the most important
resources for play. Therefore, there is the institutional condition in Bergen of using
what is already in the outdoor environment and travelling from the setting to explore
new outdoor spaces. However, in the Anji Play example, the adults in the setting are
creating conditions for children’s play outdoor by bringing in materials for
exploration.
Another difference between the kindergartens in the institutional perspective is
the ways in which teachers in Anji stresses social motives, reflections, learning and
interaction in the collective, while the teachers in Bergen pursue individual compe-
tences and motivations. These differences reflect the societal perspectives in the two
cultures. While societal perspectives in Bergen are shaped by a cultural heritage of
individual competencies in outdoor spaces, these competencies are not necessarily
valued by Chinese culture. Certainly, the authors assert that Anji Play is transform-
ing the nature of children’s outdoor experiences in society, enabling these indepen-
dent competencies to flourish on a physical level. However, the societal motive
orientation for collective pursuit still underlies Anji Play provision.
In perception of nature we might say that although the human influences on
resources are less visible in the Norwegian kindergarten than the Anji Play setting,
both settings support children’s exploratory play outdoors with multiple features
that invite exploration and risky play and support holistic development. Certainly, in
the Norwegian kindergarten, perceptions of nature as a cultural value can be traced
to valuing the terrain in its unmodified state, whether in urban areas or in the moun-
tains that surround Bergen. In the Anji kindergarten, teaching staff ‘recreate’ natural
features thus reinforcing the boundaries to remain inside the kindergarten grounds;
in the Bergen kindergarten, children are taken beyond the kindergarten grounds to
explore what terrain is available in the locality.
In both kindergartens, children are valued as active exploring participants in their
cultural formation. Also, the outdoor environment as a site for children’s play,
learning and cultural formations is valued in both kindergartens. The chapter exem-
plifies and maps the integration of culture, heritage, institutions and nature in chil-
dren’s outdoor play in ECEC.
1.4.6 C
hildren’s Outdoor Play Activities in Kindergartens
in China and in Norway
In Chap. 7, Birkeland and Sørensen outline and discuss children’s outdoor activities
in early childhood education institutions (kindergartens) in China and Norway for
children from 3 to 6 years old, with focus on time regulation as an institutional con-
dition for cultural formation and outdoor exploration. In personal perspectives the
authors outline how children and teachers in both kindergartens are motivated to
spend time outside. The time regulations form conditions and demands for
Norwegian children to learn to dress up independently and in accordance to the
temperature and weather, in order to meet both teachers and children’s motivation
to stay outside for a longer time. For Chinese children, time regulations of two short
periods for outdoor play, such as following music signals, form conditions and
demands for a collectively and efficiency transition from inside to outside and vice
versa. In institutional perspectives there seems to be alignments in institutional con-
ditions and demands both in the tight schedule in the Chinese kindergarten and the
more open time schedule in Norwegian kindergartens, and motives for spending
time outside and competences for meeting these demands. In societal perspectives
it is depicted that the time schedules in both countries are shaped due to cultural and
societal values and traditions; in Norway, outdoor activity as an established tradition
serves as a reason for the emphasis on more time spent outside, while valuing out-
door education is a more recent approach to education in China. The lack of con-
flicts may be explained as both children and the teachers in the study have developed
alignment to the routines, conditions and demands in their institutions and their
society. In contrast, in the perception of nature we trace conflicts between children’s
and teacher’s motives for outdoor education and the natural conditions like many
cold, rainy days in Norway and days with high degree of air pollution in China.
Children are identified as active participants in their socialization, adapting their
institutional and cultural conditions and demands. Time regulating is depicted as an
important condition for outdoor activities, as well as being conditioned in line with
cultural heritage. By looking at two different cultures’ approaches to regulating
time – that can easily be taken for granted – time regulation is depicted as a major
condition for shaping practices in both cultures. The perception of nature seems to
be the perspective that disturbs well-prepared didactical practices. From this we
suggest that nature can represent an opportunity for exploring unexpected ways of
doing outdoor activities, such as bringing nature activities indoors.
1.4.7 E
xploring and Discussing the Taken for Granted
Advantage of Outdoor Play in Norway
In Chap. 8, Grindheim investigates how outdoor activities are taken for granted in
Nordic contexts. Her analysis is based upon videotaped activities of children’s out-
door play, interviews with teachers, political documents, and earlier research. In the
personal perspective, there seems to be a conflict between the teacher’s beliefs
about all the benefits of outdoor play and their statements about the need for the
present, educated, conscious and well-trained teacher in outdoor activities. In the
institutional perspective, three conflicts occur. First, a conflict is highlighted
between valuing educational activities in nature compared to the valuing of institu-
tional activities undertaken indoors. Secondly, a conflict arises between the teach-
ers’ valuing of children as peer groups independent of adult interference, and an
emphasis on the dependency between generations. Thirdly, a conflict is surfaced
between teachers’ ‘taken for granted’ values and motivations for outdoor activities
and the demands for more administrative tasks. In the societal perspective, a con-
flict occurs between expectations of specific, measurable learning outcomes from
parents and politicians and the ‘taken-for-granted’ cultural values for more unstruc-
tured outdoors activities. In the perceptions of nature, two conflicts occur. The first
is a conflict between perceiving nature as inherently innocent or good and perceiv-
ing nature as dangerous. The second is a conflict between considering nature as
valuable in itself as opposed to valuing nature as a tool for meeting human needs.
Children as active participants in outdoor activities seems to be valued in all
perspectives. The traced conflicts depict conditions and demands impacting upon
provision, such as the limited number of qualified teachers, the economic aspects of
education asking for early interventions for structured, teacher-led learning activi-
ties with explicit academic aims, and increasing administrative tasks for teachers.
Although all these conditions and demands are influencing teacher’s choices for
their didactical practices, the author points to the ‘taken for granted’ approach to
nature as an important condition to challenge. Taken for granted approaches can
neither be improved nor cultivated if not identified and conceptualised in relation to
practice. This chapter, therefore, contributes to starting a process of improving and
cultivating didactical practices for outdoor activities.
1.4.8 ‘All the Wild’ in Wales
In Chap. 9, Rekers and Waters investigate children’s playful activity in muddy pud-
dles at Forest School, a programme for children’s outdoor activity in the United
Kingdom. Forest School is often delivered in addition to a more traditional, pre-
dominantly indoor approach to early childhood care and education, on setting prem-
ises or in local woodland spaces. In this chapter, Forest School is set within a local
woodland away from the primary school setting of the reception year (ages 4–5)
class. The tensions Rekers and Waters surface are first highlighted by the conflicts
in personal perspectives that seem to occur between the children and teacher. The
children’s motives and competencies for social, exploratory muddy play include
wading, splashing and throwing; this conflicts with the classroom teacher’s percep-
tion of their water play as ‘too wild’ and her interpretation of this play as lacking
self-regulation and social competences. Rekers and Waters argue that these conflicts
may be attributed to the teacher’s lack of confidence in and understanding of play’s
capacity for learning skills, such as self-regulation. The teacher’s perspective has
also been shaped by societal demands for self-regulation as an indicator of school
readiness.
Thus, a conflict in institutional perspective can be traced from the way children’s
explorative muddy play is met by their teacher’s disapproval to the expectations and
demands of the early years curriculum. This curriculum, the Foundation Phase
Framework, is intended to shift pedagogical practice from one based on achieve-
ment of specific curriculum outcomes to one that requires a play-based approach, in
which outdoor play is expressly valued. However, play, whether adult- or child-
initiated, is still shaped by institutional expectations for measurable competences
that are applied to children’s activity, whether in- or out-of-doors.
In societal perspective, we trace the conflict in Wales between motives and val-
ues for children’s rights to participation, well-being and meaningful achievement,
and the demand for the Foundation Phase Framework to contribute to reducing the
attainment gap between disadvantaged children and more advantaged children in
Welsh society. In the perception of nature, we see that playing in nature, to a certain
extent, appears as a shared value and a motivation for the children, Forest School
and the Foundation Phase, and for society at large since nature is seen as a suitable
arena for education for the involved children. On the other hand, the cultural
demands and conditions for having a good life are closely connected to government
policy for education to unify a diverse population towards communal goal of civic
engagement, opportunity and responsibility; these conditions influence perceptions
of learners’ existing competences and future achievement. The ‘wild’ socio-material
affordances of the muddy puddle, appropriated by the children, creates tensions in
how adults perceive the formation of self-regulated children.
We suggest that playing in the muddy puddle involves children as active partici-
pants in their cultural formation, while exploring peer-relations, play, verbal and
non-verbal communication, interactions with their teachers and the nature. We trace
conditions of peer interactions, teachers’ professional confidence and training
opportunities in outdoor play, and the multifactorial and contradicting expectations
of and for schools in relation to children’s developmental outcomes. In addition,
nature offers the combinations of mud, dirt and water that form conditions for ‘wild’
play in communities of peers. Being met with discontent of their teacher from
school when playing in an explorative way during the ‘forest school class’ can be
problematic for children’s cultural formation, and, as we interpret it, not in accor-
dance with the purpose of inviting the children into the forest in order that they may
have exploratory, experiential education in nature, as an alternative or supplement
to the classroom.
1.4.9 E
-STEM in Everyday Life: How Families Develop
a Caring Motive Orientation Towards the Environment
In Chap. 10, Almeida and Fleer investigate children’s participation in everyday rou-
tines in the home and across their outdoor communities in order to better understand
how E-STEM (Environmental –Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics)
learning in everyday practice positively contributes to the caring of the environ-
ment. Almeida and Fleer point to everyday activities and routines like walks, cook-
ing, Skype conversations and digital searches, and building and gardening with
extended family. They also point to agentic practices like creating cloth bags at
home to support children’s interests in reducing use of plastic bags. In addition, they
highlight organised and planned educational interventions such as experiments and
educational visits off-site. In personal perspectives children’s motivations are in
alignment with involved family members with a demand for promoting sustainabil-
ity by E-STEM learning. Almeida and Fleer point to conditions in adult-child inter-
action to support learning of E-STEM concepts as performed both by direct and
indirect adult-child instructions, implicit and explicit E-STEM experiences concep-
tualized both by everyday concepts and STEM concepts.
In the institutional perspectives represented by family as an institution, chil-
dren’s motivations for a range of different activities are conditioned very differ-
ently – by everyday routines, agentic practices and organised activities to support
abstract learning. In societal perspectives children’s motivation are met with condi-
tions and demands for cultural formation toward caring for their environment. The
perception of nature as an important arena to approach sustainability is traced from
the emphasize of experiences in the outdoor environment during everyday walks
and excursions where children are building experimental understanding of nature
and E-STEM concepts, the local biodiversity, weather, the water cycle, rainbows,
lava and volcanos. We suggest that nature is perceived as a condition for children’s
motivations that again are cultivated and in alignment with parents, siblings and the
extended family motivations.
Children are identified as active participants in experiencing E-STEM related
activities and concepts in intergenerational family practices. There are no conflicts
to trace between children’s motivations and competences and their family’s condi-
tions and demands. The conditions provided by families’ everyday routines serve as
experiences for further activities and investigations for supporting children’s
E-STEM learning. Thus, the understanding of cultural formation seems to be expe-
riences embedded in familial everyday practices, and thereby form a complement to
traditional understanding of teaching as classroom practice. Such everyday prac-
tices in the home, close to children’s motivations and perspectives, demonstrate how
an alignment in home and early childhood care settings forms conditions to chil-
dren’s cultural formation, in which sustainability is valued.
1.4.10 C
urious Curiosity – Reflections on How ECTE
Lecturers Perceive Children’s Curiosity
In Chap. 11, Heggen and Lynngård focus on the perspectives of higher education
lecturers who deliver teacher training. They see the conditions of teacher training as
important for pedagogical, outdoor practices in ECEC, since teachers gain their
competences from their own education. This training and teachers’ competencies,
therefore, impact on content and methods in ECEC. In personal perspectives all the
interviewed lecturers valued both curiosity and wonder, although they did not make
clear distinctions between the two. The lecturers were more likely to express an
understanding of curiosity as bodily expression, rather than oral expressions like
questions. All the lecturers agreed that children are born curious; however, they also
agreed that ECEC teachers need to stimulate curiosity as an important condition and
demand in ECEC. They argue that outdoor spaces provide enhanced teaching con-
ditions for both sensory and intellectual exploration, as well as expanding the role
of the teacher to also be curious and to be a conversation partner. Spaces for curios-
ity as conditions for children’s play, learning and cultural formation are described as
rich, variated, and nature is described here as such an environment. Conditions for
curiosity are also shaped by opportunities for children to exercise curiosity together
with other children.
In institutional perspective the lecturers’ values and motivation for developing
curiosity and wonder seemingly contrasts with conditions like the mandatory read-
ing literature for ECEC teacher students, in which theories about curiosity are
poorly covered. Lynngård and Heggen found that the ways in which curiosity is
understood by the lecturers differs among the disciplines. Yet, the lecturers high-
lighted the importance of nurturing curiosity in the teacher training students them-
selves and finding ways of lecturing in order to stimulate the teacher trainees’ own
curiosity. The perception of nature is traced from the authors concerns about teach-
er’s ability to recognize and support children’s curiosity, since curiosity is under-
stood to be an important condition for children’s outdoor learning, play and cultural
formation. The authors, therefore, investigate how curiosity is understood by lectur-
ers from different disciplines.
This chapter highlights lecturers’ understanding of children as important con-
tributors in outdoor play, learning and cultural formation. The authors assert that
conditions for this to happen include education for trainee teachers that provides
knowledge and theories about these phenomena, and understanding the didactical
ways to stimulate children’s curiosity. Curiosity is understood to be both a value and
a motivation, and as a condition and a demand in both ECEC institutions and in
ECEC teacher education. However, Lynngård and Heggen demonstrate how there
are tensions between the valuing of curiosity and the conditions for learning about
or experiencing curiosity in ECEC teacher education.
1.4.11 Conditions for Cultural Formations in the Ten Chapters
From the analysis we trace conditions for cultural formation in outdoor activities in
personal perspectives as children motivations, participation, exploration, curiosity
in relation to the motive orientations of peers as well as teachers, parents and grand-
parents. Children’s experiences in outdoor activities can form conditions for chal-
lenging adult expectations, such as parental heteronormativity in Chap. 4. We also
find conditions for cultural formation in teacher’s personal and professional motiva-
tions for curiosity and involvement, for collective or individual reflections and
learning, and in their professional confidence and in professional development
opportunities. Similarly, the motive orientations of parents, grandparents and
extended family creates conditions for children’s learning, play and cultural
formation.
In institutional perspectives we trace the conditions whereby such personal moti-
vations meet societal values and are expressed in material and symbolic artefacts,
such as a fairy tale door in a tree, terrain and substances, loose parts and low struc-
tured materials, tai-chi, accessible areas where toddlers can move between indoor
and outdoor spaces, diverse spatial arrangements and time regulations. In this per-
spective, however, lies the multifaceted and contradictory expectations for ECEC
teachers to provide particular conditions for children’s development. Expectations
and demands on professionals in terms of achievement outcomes, qualifications,
ratios, interventions for structured, teacher-led, learning activities with explicit aca-
demic aims and goals for ‘school readiness’, and increasing administrative tasks
combined with financial strain shape the conditions for adult interactions with chil-
dren and the children’s development. In addition, early childhood teacher education
and continuing professional development is an important condition for teachers’
understanding of curiosity and exploration and how to scaffold these in their daily
outdoor practices. Also, everyday life in families is asserted to be valuable as an
institution for children’s cultural formation and learning.
In perspective of society we trace the social and material conditions, such as
public parks, local woodlands, foliage, family gardens, home renovations and living
in a semi-rural community which provide access to nature, or the contradictions,
such as conditions like politics forwarding intense industrial and urban sprawl that
limit inclusive access to nature. Cultural values and motivations for concepts such
as sustainability, children’s democratic rights and gender equity are also important
conditions for children’s development and cultural formation in the outdoors, along
with the intent and content of teacher training. In addition, societal value systems
regarding outdoor education as good, necessary or not of interest, form cultural
conditions for children’s outdoor activities.
In perceptions of nature we trace conditions regarding embodied movement and
play in conjunction with natural materials, elements, substances and creatures e.g.,
mud, dirt, water, stones and sticks, as well as snails, mulberries, grass, rain, wind,
and pollution. Playing in nature is also asserted to be a formative condition for less
gender-specific play, more involvement from teachers, more inclusive play between
peers and in the neighborhood, and increased opportunities for sustainability

education.
1.5 P
erceptions of Nature as an Arena
for Cultural Formations
We see that the perception of nature as an arena for cultural formation differs within
and between the presented cultures as depicted in the examples described in this
volume. Individual, institutional and societal perceptions of nature, as well as the
opportunities afforded by natural materials and spaces themselves, all contribute to
children’s cultural formation in outdoor activity. Different cultures place different
value on children’s outdoor exploration; these societal framings shape how children
interact with nature with early childhood education and care.
The outdoor environment or nature in the activities presented from Australia in
two of the chapters, demonstrates how these particular children’s experiences are in
alignment with family expectations. The children’s motivations align with the fam-
ily values and demands, regarding conditions for imaginative and explorative play
and E-STEM experiences and learning. This lack of conflict creates a harmonious
situation of development, which is also in alignment with practices at school. In
Brazil, the perception of outdoor and nature as important for young children’s cul-
tural formation are pointed to, but rarely implemented, apart from in ECEC educa-
tion. Babies and toddlers often have limited access to move both indoors, outdoors
and in nature, in their domestic practices. The perception of nature as a gendered
arena for cultural formation in conflict with their daughter’s enjoyment of playing
in nature, is depicted as a possibility for challenging Polish parent’s gender-
normative values and expectations in a Norwegian ECEC context.
The perception of nature in China as polluted air, and in Norway as cold and wet,
seems to be a perspective that causes conflicts in both countries in relation to insti-
tutional practices of time regulation and cultural formation in outdoor activity. The
perception of nature is also evident in how the terrain and material in kindergartens
is viewed by practitioners. Although both Bergen and Anji kindergartens consider
nature and outdoor play as important, their respective cultural understandings of
nature impact on both outdoor materials for play and the outdoor terrain for play. In
Wales, outdoor education is seen as arena with the potential to provide opportunities
for disadvantaged urban children; yet, opportunities can be constrained by the
demands for certain ways of behaving. Expectations for behaviour can be in conflict
with the ‘wildness’ afforded by muddy puddles. This conflict demonstrates tensions
for professionals in the Foundation Phase, in which understandings of play’s poten-
tial for meeting learning and developmental outcomes is challenged by often con-
flicting demands on teachers. The perception of nature as an important arena for
children’s curiosity highlighted conflicts raised for lecturers in Norwegian ECEC
teacher education programs in relation to theorising and conceptualising curiosity

and ways of performing curiosity in their teaching. Also, the often ‘taken for
granted’ understanding of nature as an advantage for children’s cultural formation
in Norway, on one hand, is a condition that can limit the quality of outdoor educa-
tion and, on the other hand, provides valuable conditions for building social rela-
tions among children beyond the outdoor playground.
When categorizing the different perspectives, the societal perspective and the
perception of nature often seems to be connected and overlapping. Natural influ-
ences on cultural formation are apparent in the activities that are undertaken in
ECEC, in relation to in materials for creative activities, in literature, affordances for
risky play and so on. In the same way, cultural influences are apparent in the outdoor
environment; in parks, playgrounds and woodlands or the grounds of the education/
care setting, children’s activities are shaped by cultural expectations. Therefore, the
content and setting of the play are shaped by both cultural activities and the natural
surroundings as indicated in Fig. 1.2.
Due to the overlapping and connecting parts of culture and nature in early child-
hood education, we conclude that perceptions of nature play a significant role in
creating conditions for cultural formation. The opportunity for play, learning and
cultural formation may be seen to be richer in nature in and within all the repre-
sented cultures in this volume. On the other hand, the societal and institutional
emphasis on school readiness and defined aims for education highlight the problem
of educators planning from the children’s perspective, leading to conflicts between
intentions and practice. These overall findings indicate that politics and educational
practices in ECEC should recognize the outdoor environment as an important arena
for cultural formation, which is not necessarily out of alignment with societal
demands and values. Indeed, in light of global climate crisis, the consideration of
nature as a vital arena for cultural formation is essential. Widening cultural-historical
and cultural formation theories to not only include, but focus upon, perceptions of
nature as an everyday agent in children’s development is a vital step forward for
research and pedagogical practice.
1.6 Summing Up
The analysis underlines how all the perspectives are intertwined; the activities
undertaken in ECEC institutions can be traced to cultural heritage and traditions as
well as to personal intent. These are identified in this volume by surfacing activities
across and within cultural contexts. Additionally, in some chapters, researchers
undertook their studies in cultural contexts different to their own, which also sur-
faces new understandings of cultural formation. For instance, Birkeland and
Sørensen, both Scandinavian, considered how time regulations condition outdoor
play in Norwegian and Chinese kindergarten. Similarly, in chapter four, He and
Meng, both Chinese researchers, have studied the differences in performance and
material in outdoor play in China and Norway. Investigating more than a single
cultural context reveals that the same aims can be obtained by different conditions.
Outdoor education is presented as a relevant arena for education in all the chap-
ters. This supports the aim of the book to explore children’s cultural formation in
outdoor activity settings across different cultures. Although the use of the outdoors
is considered by many theorists to be a Scandinavian approach, its importance for
cultural formation specific to and across different cultures is demonstrated in these
chapters.
By sampling and analysing all the chapters, we can also see that children are
active participants in cultural formation. Due to our theoretical frame and epistemo-
logical approach, the children’s active participation in their own and others’ play,
learning and cultural formation becomes evident. Children both align with the cul-
tural heritage reified in educational institutions and families, and participate in ways
that surface new or perhaps unexpected ways of meeting the affordances of both the
natural and cultural spaces. Indeed, the elements of nature that are considered ‘non-
controllable’, such as mud or weather, interrupt didactical practices, thus challeng-
ing that which is ‘taken for granted’. In exploring these challenges and conflicts,
practitioners and policymakers may be better able to understand how outdoor expe-
riences provide cultural formation that allows for a decentralization of the relation-
ships around the adult’s proposal, and an integration of human and non-human nature.
References
Aasen, W., Grindheim, L. T., & Waters, J. (2009). The outdoor environment as a site for children’s
participation, meaning-making and democratic learning: Examples from Norwegian kindergar-
tens. Education, 3–13, 37(1), 5–13.
Birkeland, Å., & Sørensen, H.V. (2021). Time regulation as institutional condition for children’s
outdoor play and cultural formation in kindergarten. In L. T. Grindheim, H. V. Sørensen and
A. Rekers (Eds). Outdoor learning and play. Pedagogical practice and children’s cultural for-
mation. Springer.
Corsaro, W. (1997). The sociology of childhood. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Grindheim, L. T. (2020). Conflict analysis: A methodology for exploring children’s cultural for-
mation in early childhood education. In M. Hedegaard & E. E. Ødegaard (Eds.), Children’s
exploration and cultural formation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Hedegaard, M. (2009). Children’s development from a cultural–historical approach: Children’s
activity in everyday local settings as foundation for their development. Mind, Culture, and
Activity, 16(1), 64–82.
Hedegaard, M. (2020). Children’s perspectives and institutional practices as keys in a whole-
ness approach to children’s social situations of development. Learning, Culture and Social
Interaction, 26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.04.008
James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Ødegaard, E. E., & Krüger, T. (2012). Studier av barnehagen som danningsarena. In E. E. Ødegaard
(Ed.), Barnehagen som danningsarena (pp. 19–47). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
Rekers-Power, A. (2020). Exploring young children’s participation and motive orientation in
the classroom and at forest school. Doctoral thesis, University of Wales Trinity Saint David.
https://repository.uwtsd.ac.uk/1410/
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Rutanen, N. (2012). Socio-spatial practices in a Finnish daycare group for one-to three-year-olds.
Early Years, 32(2), 201–214.
Sandseter, E. B. H., & Kennair, L. E. O. (2011). Children’s risky play from an evolutionary per-
spective: The anti-phobic effects of thrilling experiences. Evolutionary Psychology, 9(2),
257–284. 147470491100900212.
Sørensen, H. V. (2013). Børns fysiske aktivitet i børnehaver [Children’s physical activities in kin-
dergarten]. PhD-thesis, Systime, Aarhus.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2016). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet Psychology,
5(3), 6–18.
Winther-Lindqvist, D. (2019). Becoming a school child: A positive developmental crisis. In
M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Children’s transitions in everyday life and institutions
(pp. 47–70). London: Bloomsbury.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate
credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and
indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
the copyright holder.
Chapter 2
Toddlers’ Outdoor Play, Imagination
Avis Ridgway, Gloria Quiñones, and Liang Li
Abstract Discussion on toddlers’ outdoor play practices in various cultural spaces

is rare in literature. In Australia, toddlers’ physical development and well-being is
promoted but less attention is given to cultural nuances of outdoor play. We ask the
question: How does outdoor play impact on toddlers’ imagination and cultural for-
mation? Conducted in three Australian long day care (LDC) sites, an ethically
approved project “Studying babies and toddlers: Cultural worlds and transitory
relationships” examines the process of three Australian toddlers’ outdoor encul-
turation. The concepts of imagination and play from Vygotsky’s cultural-historical
theory are drawn upon in relation to Hedegaard’s institutional practices model, to
link contextual relations between society, community and family. Cultural forma-
tion processes in toddlers’ outdoor play, we argue, are more completely understood
when daily life across home and local community is acknowledged. Data findings
illustrate complexity of movement and experimentations in cultural conditions,
where different spaces hold possibilities for imaginative transformations in tod-
dler’s play. Implications suggest toddlers’ imaginative and culturally responsive
outdoor play aligns with availability of interested adult/peers, shared family and
community values, and varied local spaces. In this way, affective and dynamic out-
door interactions imbue cultural formation of toddler’s play and imagination with
local personal meaning.
Keywords Toddlers · Outdoor play · Imagination · Cultural formation
A. Ridgway (*) · G. Quiñones · L. Li

Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

24 A. Ridgway et al.
2.1 Introduction
…no development – that of the child included – in the condition of modern civilized society
can be reduced merely to the development of natural inborn processes and the morphologi-
cal changes conditioned by the same: it includes, moreover, that social change of civilized
forms and methods which help the child in adapting itself to the conditions of the surround-
ing civilized community. (Luria, 1994, pp. 46–56)
The aim of this chapter is to consider how the child changes socially and trans-
forms according to the surrounding community; specifically the local outdoor envi-
ronment, the home, and the local community. The social changes referred to by
Luria (1994) include interactions and relationships occuring with family members.
These socially interactive changes bring unique qualities to the morphological
changes, embodied by toddlers in our study. These changes happen when toddlers
use their bodies and relationships with others, to imaginatively transform them-
selves and the adults they relate to.
The focus of the chapter is on exploring and imagining the outdoor social envi-
ronment that surrounds three Australian toddlers; two in Australia and one visiting
China. A recent trend in research of outdoor spaces and outdoor environments sug-
gests that these are dynamic places which afford many learning opportunities for
children’s (toddlers) exploration (Little, Elliot, & Wyver, 2017; Mackey, 2017).
Such outdoor learning opportunities offer toddlers a chance for connecting with
adults in relation to place, and for deep engagement with the beyond human-world
(Robertson, Chan, & Fong, 2018). The outdoor environment and dimensions of
place are also critical in relation to the quality of toddler’s play explorations
(Jeavons, 2017). Parents and teachers are most important for engaging in supportive
and respectful conversations with toddlers and the decisions they make about the
natural world, where a consideration of the cultural context is vital (Mackey, 2017).
Therefore, we argue, that in studying outdoor play and the imaginative social envi-
ronment in which toddlers engage, consideration of cultural formation in their natu-
ral worlds, is highly relevant (Mackey, 2017).
The purpose of this chapter is to contribute to understanding how cultural forma-
tion involves many perspectives and dimensions of toddlers’ imagination in outdoor
play activities. Outdoor play interactions have an affective and temporal reference
point for new considerations of the processes of toddlers’ cultural formation in out-
door play.
This chapter is situated in a multicultural societal context, and involves three
families living in Australia, who draw on different cultural histories and practices.
The term multicultural societal context in Australia refers to the notion that citizens
have multiple cultural backgrounds. We find that the most recent Australian Census
data (2017) shows nearly half Australians (49%) were born overseas or one or both
parents had been born overseas. This highlights the rich cultural diversity of
Australian Society, recognized as central to national identity. Australian Children’s
Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA) (2019, p. 1–3) guides national
quality standards with statements that support the positive experiences for very
2 Toddlers’ Outdoor Play, Imagination and Cultural Formation 25
young children being in the natural outdoor environment. Learning and develop-
ment are promoted in statements like: “early opportunities to engage in natural
outdoor play” (2019, p. 2) can support toddlers’ sense of belonging to the world,
and be foundational to their exploratory interests and sensory experiences.
We argue in this chapter, that Australian and Chinese traditions of outdoor life
may be used as a basis for exploring the question: how does outdoor play impact on
toddlers’ imagination and cultural formation?
2.2 Theoretical Grounding
A number of cultural-historical researchers have studied and questioned children’s

worlds and their everyday lives shared with others (Aronsson, Hedegaard, Hojholt,
& Ulvik, 2018). In particular, Hedegaard (2018) suggests young children actively
contribute to their learning through participation in different institutional practices
across home and daycare settings. Young children not only contribute to their fami-
lies’ everyday activities, but families also have traditions that relate to their particu-
lar society (Hedegaard, 2018). While Hedegaard’s (2018) argument suggests that
traditions can also bring demands, tensions and conflicts, we notice that when tod-
dlers explore their environment, this also leads to what is referred to as motive ori-
entations that are directed towards an aspect of everyday life. Motives influence a
person’s action (Kravtsov & Kravtsova, 2014) and in toddlers, the dynamic aspects
of their active play are culturally embodied in their learning (Sikder, 2017). In very
young children, Trevarthen (2011) emphasizes that family values and intuitive abili-
ties are present from birth. Vadeboncoeur, Perone, and Panina-Beard (2016) locate
the expression of active play practices and the values that support them, within a
young child’s everyday social conditions. In this chapter, we examine how three
toddlers actively express their bodily transformations through innate impulses, intu-
itions, imaginative choices and aesthetic inclinations, in outdoor play.
The social environment is a source of development for the young child’s learning
(Veresov, 2017). The social environment, both indoors and out, is the toddler’s
social world. The relations that occur in the social environment are a point for start-
ing to think about the toddler’s social situation of development (Edwards, Fleer, &
Bottcher, 2019). The social situation of development was an important concept for
Vygotsky’s theory as it foregrounded both the young child’s cultural and institu-
tional context and lived experience in their social environment (Fleer & Hedegaard,
2010; Hedegaard, 2019).
2.2.1 Socio-cultural Experience
The social environment has a unity of personal and environmental characteristics

that give rise to awareness or consciousness (e.g. Veresov, 2017). Therefore, the
social situation of development includes the sociocultural environment that brings
qualitative changes in the toddler through their awareness and interpretation. We
argue that this is represented in the toddlers’ outdoor environment and forms part of
family culture and community settings.
Parker-Rees (2017) proposes that researchers think more about how 2 year olds,
(the age of the participating toddlers) are “encouraged and enabled to participate in
social communities” (p. 1). He introduces the notion of ‘minding’ as being more
than the conventional meaning of, for example, caring. He brings focus to the shared
attention and intention in the toddler’s daily interactions with others. In particular,
the way toddlers negotiate meaning is considered to flow backwards and forwards.
In this ebb and flow of the toddler’s meanings and interests with others, there grows
an understanding of the group. Similarly, the feeling of togetherness is achieved
when the toddler is in concert with others as a “collective subject” (Kravtsov &
Kravtsova, 2014, p. 46). Therefore, it is important to know more about how toddlers
interact with others and negotiate their ideas in outdoor activity.
2.2.2 Imagined and Embodied Transformations
Much of the toddler’s sociocultural environment is formed creatively and with

imagination that is considered central to cultural continuity and change
(Vadeboncoeur et al., 2016). Imagination weaves past memories and experiences
with what is imagined possible for the future, therefore enabling young children to
act in their current environment (Vadeboncoeur et al., 2016). Imagination is essen-
tial for human activity and gives rise to creative expressions, contributing to cultural
transformation of the individual. Culture also involves experiences, artefacts and
narratives that enable young children to collectively imagine with others
(Vadeboncoeur et al., 2016).
Vygotsky (1966) explains that young children’s play “is imagination in action”
(p. 3) and there exists a dual affective plane that embodies the child’s own ideas,
feelings and actions. The imaginary actions of the play situation affect them, and
through that, they make their meanings. Extending this idea, the toddlers’ affective
actions trigger imaginative responses as they find ways to embody, coordinate and
respond to new and imagined social situations (Quiñones, Li, & Ridgway, 2017,
p. 176).
In the situation of giving sensitive support to a toddler in a playful event, a parent
for example, can bring together interpretation and personal imagining that reflects
the special kind of responsive reciprocity that unifies external activity into internal
thinking. This process becomes embodied in consequent responses for toddlers
(Ridgway, Quiñones, & Li, 2017). Parents or grandparents usually have specialized
cultural knowledge present in their natural locations; therefore, toddlers and fami-
lies can realize cultural learning through shared actions (Ridgway et al., 2017).
The next section provides an account using visual methodology to illuminate
stories that capture toddlers’ outdoor play in different sociocultural environments
that show impact on their imagination.
2.3 Method: Visual Narrative Methodology
Research data from a project “Studying babies and toddlers: Cultural worlds and
transitory relationships” (Li, Quiñones, & Ridgway, 2016) undertaken in an
Australian setting, is used in this chapter to elaborate enculturation processes
embodied in toddlers’ outdoor play participation. The project studied babies and
toddlers relating to their world in the first 3 years of life and explored how these first
relations with the world are important for learning and for understanding their
perspectives.
The three researchers were in a socially unique position methodologically to
undertake this research. Each researcher came from a different cultural background,
yet had shared time, visual methods and theoretical thinking together. Rich discus-
sions on play, family life and pedagogical practices accompanied by frequent shar-
ing of video clips, enabled multiple interpretations from differing perspectives.
Trust and collegiality characterized the researchers’ interactions and their shared
intentions grew.
Visual narrative methodology uses images paired with home video transcripts
and rich descriptions of play (Ridgway, Li, & Quiñones, 2016), to capture toddlers’
outdoor play in a variety of local spaces. Data illustrate the complexity of movement
and explorative experimentation in outdoor spaces within different cultural condi-
tions. The outdoor spaces all hold possibilities for imaginative transformations
through toddlers’ play actions. Importantly, such spaces embrace available social
interaction for toddlers.
In the case examples, toddlers’ relations to their outdoor environments involve
change and transformation, which in turn, motivate their new activity and new
learning. Data of toddlers’ interactions with their social environment, generated
through use of video and still images were recorded by the research team and
included 1.5 h of interview data with each family. When reviewed in collaboration
by the research team, these data illuminated the toddlers’ active explorations of
local spaces and their orientation towards imaginative and expressive embodiment
of what they noticed closely in new outdoor places.
The Australian toddlers aged 20-months to 2 years came from different cultural
backgrounds. Their families were visited at home and interviewed there with one or
more family members present. They were video observed at home and in routine
outdoor play with family members present. Families shared their toddlers’ experi-
ences that included participation in neighborhood walks, community parkland play,
playground activity and exploration of a home garden. Outdoor cultural experiences

in the toddlers’ daily routines usually occurred within proximity of adult or peer
support, in family, home and community contexts. Adult and/or peer presence
extended the conversations initiated or prompted toddlers’ explorative activity, re-
activity and responses to outdoor experiences.
The following three vignettes from our research data, illustrate the different cul-
tural contexts of the participating Australian toddlers. To contextualize these activi-
ties meaningfully, the research reported is based on spontaneous family and
community activity data, collected by research team in daily life naturalistic set-
tings. The research team observed that when the toddlers’ daily activity was
anchored in locally situated outdoor spaces, each toddler became embodied and
wholly oriented to the immediate world being experienced. The three participating
toddlers’ stories are interwoven in this chapter.
2.4 Story One: Toddler Luci (2 Years Old)
Luci is an Australian born toddler whose parents and grandparents were also born
in Australia. Her family home although close to the city, is located opposite com-
munity parkland and playgrounds familiar to her. This local parkland offers two
enclosed playgrounds specially designed, with one for toddlers and the other for
older children. The choice of where to play however is made spontaneously by tod-
dler and adult and can depend on whether or not there are other children in the
particular playground. All ages use both playgrounds. Grandparents also bring tod-
dlers there.
Winding pathways and grassy plantings in both playground spaces invite explo-
ration both off and on the gravel pathways and areas covered by tanbark (Fig. 2.1).
Both playgrounds, internally defined with surrounding grassy tussocks and low-
growing flowering plants, are used for hiding games and insect searches. The
Fig. 2.1 Hide and seek in

grassy tussock with
grandpa
playgrounds comply with council regulation fencing and there are contained areas
(Fig. 2.2) surrounded by grassy treed areas for active running, dancing and ball play.
The parkland located around the two playgrounds has a central barbeque area. This
area encourages community and family gatherings and is frequently used for bar-
beques and picnics. These outdoor facilities adjoin a walking track that leads to a
community garden. Luci’s mother has a plot in the community garden where local
families share collectively grown vegetables and herbs, and harvest from estab-
lished fruit trees. This is a long-held community tradition of providing allocated
food growing spaces for families who live in the area. The community garden is
well fenced (Fig. 2.3).
Luci sees a ripe mulberry in the garden (Fig. 2.4). She stretches up to reach the
ripe fruit. With the mulberry’s purple colour already on her fingers and around her
mouth, she expresses with her whole physical being, a look of joyful anticipation of
further taste rewards that mulberry fruit can bring.
Curiosity is a driving force and evident in toddlers. One morning Luci noticed
that something new had appeared in the park opposite her home. A familiar play-
ground tree had been transformed with a little door and a sign that read Fairy Door.
Luci’s hands clasped together reflecting delight and excitement. A huge smile lit up
her small face (Fig. 2.5). In order to explore further she climbed up to the seat that
surrounded the tree for a closer look. The tiny construction attached to the tree now
included a small door, entrance garden with flowers and a Fairy Door sign above it.
Luci’s response is visible in her animated stance and gestures. The surprise,
excitement and the sheer magic of this moment, was transformative for Luci and
her family.
Fig. 2.2 Enclosed
playground
Fig. 2.3 Community
garden
Fig. 2.4 Luci picked a

mulberry
Over the next days and weeks, further additions continued to transform the imag-
ined yet real tiny fairyland community. It began a life of its own in the community
park space. One day Luci brought a torch to shine on this growing Fairy Door
world, to shed light on the tiny details (Fig. 2.6). Small blue rocks had appeared as
pavers in the little fairy garden yard and a miniature mushroom was placed in there.
Each day Luci’s wonderment unfolded in the magical ongoing changes that created
further curiosity and anticipation. The fairy world was real for her. The park tree and
its platform now had a new purpose and new meaning for Luci. It transformed how
Fig. 2.5 Luci noticed a

fairy door
Fig. 2.6 Torch to see fairy

door transformation
she played and her imagination. From the process of physically climbing onto the
platform and walking around the tree, she reworked the physicality of this, and with
her new experiences, entered a conceptual, abstracted and culturally imaginative
fairy world. The intriguing fairy door tree brought new surprises, as over time, com-
munity users of the park added little blue paving stones and a miniature toadstool to
the fairy door garden. Luci shone her torch to look closely at the fairy door and its
changing garden (Fig. 2.6).
The design of the fairy door space and its carefully constructed placement in an
area known to local children, gives rise to the notion of magical and imaginative
learning spaces that transform and nurture young children’s imagination and who
might provide them. The community caring and minding that Parker-Rees (2017)
refers to is exemplified here. The impact of this community experience is culturally
embodied in Luci’s expressions and her whole personal demeanor.
2.5 Story Two: Silvia (2 Years Old)
Silvia was born in Australia into a Mexican immigrant family. Silvia’s home is
located in a semi-rural community in Australia. Local places for experimentation
and exploration are the home environment with a growing garden. The outdoors is
an environment that offers Silvia freedom of movement and experimentation with
the land. Silvia participates with her family in the garden and visits the community
park, cemetery and train station. The family garden is expansive, as her parents have
undergone a recent renovation in their family home. On these days, they focus on
taking out weeds, moving materials. Silvia explores the garden alongside her dad
and mum, while singing, moving about and finding insects. Silvia is curious and
imagines how insects move and in particular, she imagines the physical embodi-
ment of snail movements.
The following case example shows the toddler’s daily activities anchored in fam-
ily life. In the case example, the daily activity shows toddler embodiment and imag-
inative expressions and experiences with garden snails. The outside garden offers
many possibilities for exploration and over time, it became part of the family’s
values. Silvia spends considerable time outdoors, and is able to experience and
observe first-hand the family home physical changes in the outdoor garden. Dad
comments, “I spend a lot of time outside with her… a lot of things we’ve been
through with the renovation and all that… But Silvia I think, I don’t know, she’s
learning with us how too… she knows the – daddy’s materials… She understands…
and she brings her own child tools” (Father’s interview).
The following example takes place in the afternoon. Silvia has already played in
the park with her mum and now they join dad who is working outside in the garden.
Silvia was playing outside while her dad was pulling weeds from the outdoor
patio tiles.
Silvia said in excitement (Fig. 2.7): a boing!
Fig. 2.7 Silvia and dad on patio pulling weeds and placing swing in tree
Fig. 2.8 Silvia took a

closer look at the snail
Dad: a boing?
Mum said to dad and then to Silvia: Yes, a boing’s that is how she calls the swing.
Just like the one in the park Silvia!
Dad continued placing the swing and said, I think this branch is strong; we can
place it here.
Silvia explored the space and dad continued to place the swing. While this hap-
pens, Silvia continued singing and looked at the patio tiles as she picked weeds. She
stopped for a moment, she looked at the floor, and she found a snail.
Silvia looked at the snail closely (Fig. 2.8) and asked her mum: what is it, what
is it? There is much silence and contemplation, when her mother did not answer.
She was trying to think what it was. They both looked at the snail.
Fig. 2.9 Silvia moves like a snail
Fig. 2.10 Silvia moves like a snail and says hello to the snail
Silvia narrated very slowly to her mum: she moves, she moves, she moves her tail
and then physically and imaginatively, Silvia embodied the snail’s movements
(Fig. 2.9).
Silvia’s embodied movements were as if she was being the snail (Fig. 2.9).
Silvia: She moves her tail, she moves her tail.
Mum looked surprised at the unexpected embodiment, laughed and smiled saying:
oh darling! Silvia smiled back. Silvia looked at her mum with excitement and
pointed to the snail.
Mum: She moves the tail, the snail. How does the snail move?
Silvia moved again shaking her bump. She extended her movements by showing
how the snail walked.
Silvia extended her movements and paid attention to her feet, moving them closer
together (Fig. 2.10).
Mum: You move your tail like the snail!
Silvia to mum: yes!

Silvia now related and talked to the snail: hello! Then she sang a song. She looked
at what her dad was doing. Mum and dad’s discussions related to the recycled
windows that dad was moving. Silvia’s mum and dad joined with Silvia in sing-
ing: where is mum, where is dad, here he is, here she is? Where is dad? There he
is? Where is the moon? Here is the moon?
Outdoor play and exploration were present in Silvia’s everyday life. Silvia imag-
ined and related to the snail and related to her parent’s everyday interest of being in
the family’s expansive garden. Silvia’s cultural formation involved being with her
family exploring outdoors, showing cultural interest in materials and being curious
towards creatures that surrounded her family home. Contemplating and observing
the snail were important moments for Silvia. Silvia’s mother’s silence and surprise
about Silvia’s snail embodiment was present when mother says, Oh darling! rather
than providing a response to Silvia, she asserts that she moves like a snail.
2.6 Story Three: El (2.7 Years Old)
El was born in Australia from a Chinese immigrant family. El travels to China to

visit his grandparents once a year during a family holiday. On his second visit to
China, when El was 2 years and 7 months old, he visited his grandparents for
2 weeks. He became very interested and curious about grandpa’s daily Tai Chi play.
His grandparents live in a small community with four high apartment buildings, in
a capital city in Northeast China.
The people living in the community have a regular exercise time every day after
dinner. Grandpa routinely played Tai Chi. El went to the community playground
with grandpa every day after dinner. Grandpa started playing Tai Chi when particu-
lar background music came through an MP3 device.
El asked with much curiosity, Grandpa: What are you doing? <外公, 你在做什么?>.
Grandpa said, Tai Chi. It is very good for our body and health. <太极, 对我们
的身体非常好>.
El observed closely and saw how grandpa moved his body.
Then El started to initiate his own movements by following the musical rhythms and
responding to grandpa’s movement (Fig. 2.11).
Figure 2.11 shows El’s slow movement and his happiness in the shared moment.
With a smile, he follows Grandpa’s actions and said to his Mum: Mum, Look at me!
<妈妈, 看我!> Then El kept moving with continued curiosity (Fig. 2.12) and
amazement (Fig. 2.13) at the Tai Chi movements. Figure 2.14 showed El’s aesthetic
feelings of grace that guided him to explore his own movement with confidence.
El’s mum responded with a smile, Very good movement! <你做的好棒哦!> El
enjoyed every movement with Chinese music and sounds in the environment. Many
people from the community walked around after dinner.
Fig. 2.11 El embodies and

imagines Tai Chi
movements
Fig. 2.12 El’s curiosity
Tai Chi is one representative of Chinese traditional culture, which “appears to

have its roots in systems of exercise and self-defence designed over the centuries to
prevent illness of body and mind…for a method of living in harmony with the vari-
ous overwhelmingly powerful forces in the world” (Kauz, 1974, pp. 10–11). In
recent years, playing Tai Chi is a very popular practice for older people in China,
who participate in groups in the community park or playground. It is often observed
early in the morning or later in the afternoon, as part of Chinese people’s everyday
life. Young children experience and explore community play with the older genera-
tion in the park. For El, it was his first time to observe and perform Tai Chi. His
Fig. 2.13 El’s amazement
Fig. 2.14 The aesthetic

feeling of grace
grandpa explained to him that ‘Tai Chi is very good exercise in Chinese culture to
support our health and well-being’. El told the story of his feeling about exercising
with Tai Chi; a story, which can be perceived by his grandpa through the responsive
performance, embodied actions and shared expressions, creatively imagined by El.
The playground with traditional Chinese decoration harmonised with the exer-
cise of Tai Chi, which represents the Chinese culture. This influences young toddler
El’s sense of belonging and understanding of his heritage cultural knowledge trans-
formed in his imaginative embodied actions.
2.7 Discussion
Insightful stories of everyday experiences (Jornet & Steier, 2015) help the research-
ers emphasize and analyze practical examples of toddler relations with different
outdoor environments. Toddler’s cultural, aesthetic, ephemeral, imaginative and
embodied transformations, are the focus of our discussion. In this chapter, the
child’s outdoor world making is first introduced from the toddlers’ perspectives
including activities that characterize their choices, and their embodiment in varied
cultural routines and contexts. In the three stories, we discover the toddlers’ access
to diverse outdoor spaces: Australian (Luci; Figs. 2.4 and 2.5) and Chinese (El;
Fig. 2.11) community playgrounds, city community garden (Luci; Figs. 2.3 and
2.11) and family garden (Silvia; Fig. 2.7). All these shared places and moments with
family offer potential affordances and opportunities for cultural formation, embod-
ied imagination and learning. Cultural formation is achieved through children’s
exploration with adults together in the family practices. As explorers, three toddlers
make meanings of their surroundings under the support of the adults, while they
also achieve their cultural identity and learning.
2.7.1 Cultural Formation in Toddlers’ Outdoor Environment
Hedegaard (2018) suggests that early participation relates to the children’s world
making which is explicitly anchored in daily life. Hedegaard notes how traditions
bring demands to children and lead to creation of motive orientations that are aspects
of everyday life. Toddler’s motives as interests, are created with the family interest
of their particular familial outdoor culture. The three toddlers’ daily lives are wholly
embraced within the cultural characteristics of family, home and community life. As
Trevarthen (2017) proposed, “they (toddlers) are motivated to explore life in a com-
munity that will cultivate artificial cultural habits.” (p. 201).
Taking into account the toddler’s perspectives, as explorers, each of the three
toddlers made meaningful understanding of their family traditions which formed
part of their cultural formation in outdoor environments. Luci explored and played
in the community playground and garden (Figs. 2.1, 2.5 and 2.6). Silvia’s everyday
world consisted of being curious to learn about creatures and materials and explor-
ing with her family the garden surrounded by recycled materials for the house. She
explored the garden (Figs. 2.7 and 2.8) with family, making imaginative transforma-
tions e.g. her embodiment of the snail (Figs. 2.9 and 2.10). El’s interest in his family
culture and Tai Chi for body and mind, imaginatively and joyfully embodied the
movements (Figs. 2.12, 2.13 and 2.14) that he learns are good for health and well-
being in the Chinese community.
In cultural-historical accounts of learning, mediated activity, driven by a child’s
curiosity in spaces of interest, is what Bligh and Crook (2017) refer to as Learning
Spaces. The toddlers’ playful and companionable family activities, characterized by
choice and family relationships can take in the animate and non-animate, proceed
over time and space, include human and non–human elements, and involve aesthet-
ics and memory. Adding to cultural-historical theory with a dialectical contextual-
ization of space, place, and temporality, a perspective that uses a ‘critical ecological
ontology for inquiry’ (Payne, 2017, p. 122), may bring further understanding of
how the cultural contexts of the three toddlers’ embodied engagement in outdoor
activity, can bring wholeness of meaning to their everyday lives. Luci’s imagined
fairy world in the local parkland, Silvia’s home life curiosity where she notices the
non-human life of a snail on the outdoor tiles, and El’s engagement, in grandfather’s
embodied actions and cultural movements of Tai Chi, all illustrate how cultural
knowledge is imaginatively transformed in outdoor play. Three toddlers’ explora-
tion of community life confirmed that, “the development of shared cultural knowl-
edge gives objects and actions social or moral values as well as practical or aesthetic
ones” (Trevarthen, 2017, p. 202). The three toddlers’ cultural formation included
family traditions where curiosity and embodied imagination were present.
2.7.2 F
amily Members’ Encouragement of Toddler’s
Imaginative Transformations Through Active
Exploration in Outdoor Environments
The outdoor environment is a sociocultural place where toddler’s culture and lived
experiences are explored and formed in the social world outdoors (Fleer &
Hedegaard, 2010; Veresov, 2017; Vygotsky, 1998). We argue that the outdoor envi-
ronment provides an active space for toddlers to express their own imaginary indi-
vidual transformations. In toddlers’ imaginary choices, aesthetics and impulses are
present. They are often created with family members who can encourage their tod-
dler’s active outdoor explorations.
Family members can collectively imagine with the toddlers. Movements, imagi-
nary actions and embodiment are creative expressions that contribute to the tod-
dlers’ individual transformations in outdoor environments. For Luci, the enclosed
playground provides space for active exploration of the outdoors where she imag-
ines hiding herself from grandpa in the grassy tussocks. Luci is also curious about
the Fairy Door in her playground where she imagines playing in a fairy world.
Silvia learnt that her mum keenly observes and contemplates her imaginary choices
of embodiment of a snail. Silvia’s mum showed her surprise and acknowledgement
of the snail movements, as embodied imagination that allowed Silvia to imagine
what it feels like to be a snail. Similarly, El was curious noticing the musical
rhythms, embodied actions and movements of Tai Chi with his grandfather with his
mother commenting on his good movements. As Parker-Rees (2017) suggests in the
context of toddlers’ participation, enabling and encouragement are important in
social communities.
We extend and show through case examples, that curious noticing by toddlers
requires an attentive gaze in order to transform their everyday world and further
conceptualize and embody imaginary transformation. For example, we noticed
Luci’s active imagination of fairies living in a local tree (Figs. 2.5 and 2.6) and
Silvia’s imaginary embodied movement of snails, greeting the snail in the family
garden (Fig. 2.10) and El’s embodiment of Tai Chi moves (Figs. 2.11, 2.12, 2.13 and
2.14) that bring health and well-being into the toddler’s life. All examples are illus-
trative of the sociocultural nature of outdoor environments because each story
involved family members’ active encouragement in exploration of the outdoor envi-
ronment with the curious and imaginative toddlers.
The sociocultural outdoor environment enables children to imagine and act in
their local environment. It offers them a place to enjoy interactive moments. Toddlers
not only live their everyday lives with interested family members but they also
imagine what is essential for their own interest and activity. As Vadeboncoeur et al.
(2016) suggest this gives rise to individual creative expression and cultural transfor-
mation. The three toddlers joyfully, enthusiastically and with appreciation of their
outdoor environment, give us an opportunity to reflect on cultural formation. As
adults, we notice their embodied imagination, evident in the example of Silvia’s
mother who stays in silence and contemplation, absorbed by the moment, yet still
able to encourage Silvia to move like a snail. The responsive movements between
El and his grandpa encouraged El to experience shared joy, and thereby transform
how he experiences himself and how people might interact with others in differ-
ent ways.
2.8 Conclusion
This chapter sought to determine how outdoor environments impacted on toddlers’

embodied multi-cultural imagination and cultural formation in play. It was found
that each outdoor play environment afforded the toddlers’ imaginative exploration,
which plays a vital role in their cultural formation. The three toddlers engaged in
imaginative interactions, initially with fairy door land (Luci), then snail movement
(Silvia), and lastly Tai Chi practice (El). The three toddlers also explored their local
communities and engaged in the local outdoor environment with nature when, for
instance, Luci went on an imaginary adventure in parkland, Silvia explored the fam-
ily garden and El engaged with a cultural inquiry in a community space when he
visited China. This study concluded that outdoor play in the community offered a
pedagogical tool to support toddlers’ exploration of their culture and importantly,
that their play was also supported by the presence of adults in culturally bound local
environments.
Implications are that the development of toddlers’ imaginative, culturally respon-
sive outdoor play, aligns with availability of interested adult/peers, shared family
interests and community values, that occur in varied local spaces. Affective and
dynamic outdoor interactions imbued the cultural formation of toddler’s play and
imagination with local personal meaning. Having access to diverse outdoor spaces,
therefore offers potential opportunities for toddlers’ personal expression, imagina-
tion and cultural learning.
Acknowledgements We wish to thank all participating families and toddlers. Ethical approval
was granted by Monash University (CF14/2789 – 2014001543: Studying Babies and Toddlers:
Cultural Worlds and Transitory Relationships), and the Department of Education and Early
Childhood Development (Project ID 2014_002500).
References
ACECQA. (2019). The Australian children’s education and care quality authority, national quality
framework. Retrieved from: https://www.acecqa.gov.au/
Aronsson, K., Hedegaard, M., Hojholt, C., & Ulvik, O. S. (2018). Rethinking development.
Situated studies of children’s perspectives. In M. Hedegaard, K. Aronsson, C. Hojholt, &
O. S. Ulvik (Eds.), Children, childhood, and everyday life children’s perspectives (2nd ed.,
pp. 1–16). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Bligh, B., & Crook, C. (2017). Learning spaces. In E. Duval, M. Sharples, & R. Sutherland (Eds.),
Technology enhanced learning (pp. 69–87). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Edwards, A., Fleer, M., & Bottcher, L. (Eds.). (2019). Cultural historical approaches to study-
ing learning and development: Societal, institutional and personal perspectives. Singapore,
Singapore: Springer.
Fleer, M., & Hedegaard, M. (2010). Children’s development as participation in everyday practices
across different institutions. Mind, Culture and Activity, 17(2), 149–168.
Hedegaard, M. (2018). Children’s creative modeling of conflict resolutions in everyday life.
Family life as a site of learning and development. In M. Hedegaard, K. Aronsson, C. Hojholt,
& O. S. Ulvik (Eds.), Children, childhood, and everyday life children’s perspectives (2nd ed.,
pp. 17–36). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Hedegaard, M. (2019). Children’s perspectives and institutional practices as keys in a wholeness
approach to children’s social situations of development. In A. Edwards, M. Fleer, & L. Bottcher
(Eds.), Cultural-historical approaches to studying learning and development: Societal, institu-
tional and personal perspectives (pp. 23–41). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Jeavons, M. (2017). Planning outdoor learning environments. In H. Little, S. Elliot, & S. Wyver
(Eds.), Outdoor learning environments. Spaces for exploration, discovery and risk-taking in
the early years (pp. 99–119). Sydney, NSW: Allen and Unwin.
Jornet, A., & Steier, R. (2015). The matter of space: Bodily performances and the emergence of
boundary objects during multidisciplinary design meetings. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 22(2),
129–151.
Kauz, H. (1974). Tai Chi handbook: Exercise, meditation and self-defense. New York: Doubleday.
Kravtsov, G. G., & Kravtsova, E. E. (2014). The projective method as the basis of continuous
education. In A. Blunden (Ed.), Collaborative projects: An interdisciplinary study (pp. 41–58).
Boston: Brill.
Li, L., Quiñones, G., & Ridgway, A. (2016). Noisy neighbours: A construction of collective knowl-
edge in toddlers’ shared play space. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(4), 64–71.
Little, H., Elliot, S., & Wyver, S. (2017). Why do outdoor play and learning matter? In H. Little,
S. Elliot, & S. Wyver (Eds.), Outdoor learning environments. Spaces for exploration, discovery
and risk-taking in the early years (pp. 1–18). Sydney, NSW: Allen and Unwin.
Luria, A. (1994). The problem of the cultural behaviour of the child. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner
(Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 46–56). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Mackey, G. (2017). Strengthening children’s agency in outdoor learning environments. In H. Little,

Parker-Rees, R. (2017). The minding of two-year –olds. In J. Georgeson & V. Campbell-Barr
(Eds.), Places for two year olds in the early years (pp. 8–22). London: Routledge.
Payne, P. (2017). A post-critical ecophenomenology from ‘a critical ecological ontology for
inquiry’. In M. Fleer & B. van Oers (Eds.), International handbook of early childhood
(pp. 117–162). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Quiñones, G., Li, L., & Ridgway, A. (2017). Transitory moments as “affective moments of action”
in toddler play. In L. Li, G. Quiñones, & A. Ridgway (Eds.), Studying babies and toddlers.
Relationships in cultural contexts (pp. 175–192). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Ridgway, A., Li, L., & Quiñones, G. (2016). Visual narrative methodology in educational research
with babies: Triadic play in babies’ room. Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 1(1), 1–18.
Ridgway, A., Quiñones, G., & Li, L. (2017). Examining the dynamics of infant reciprocity and
affective fatherhood. In L. Li, G. Quiñones, & A. Ridgway (Eds.), Studying babies and tod-
dlers. Relationships in cultural contexts (pp. 137–156). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Robertson, J., Chan, M., & Fong, K. (2018). Birds and babies. A meeting of species. In H. Little,
Sikder, S. (2017). Relations of dynamic aspects of motives in infant-toddlers’ play: Enhance Small
Science learning experience. In L. Li, G. Quiñones, & A. Ridgway (Eds.), Studying babies
and toddlers, relationships in cultural contexts (pp. 193–206). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Trevarthen, C. (2011). What young children give to their learning, making education work to sus-
tain a community and its culture. European Early Childhood Research Journal, 19(2), 173–193.
Trevarthen, C. (2017). Play with infants: The impulse for human storytelling. In T. Bruce,
P. Hakkarainen, & M. Bredikyte (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of early child-
hood play (pp. 198–215). London: Routledge.
Vadeboncoeur, J. A., Perone, A., & Panina-Beard, N. (2016). Creativity as a practice of freedom:
Imaginative play, moral imagination, and the production of culture. In V. P. Glaveanu (Ed.),
Palgrave studies in creativity and culture (pp. 285–305). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Veresov, N. (2017). The concept of Perezhivanie in cultural-historical theory: Content and con-
texts. In M. Fleer, F. González Rey, & N. Veresov (Eds.), Perezhivanie, emotions and subjectiv-
ity: Advancing Vygotsky’s legacy (pp. 47–70). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Voprosy
Psikhologii, 12(6), 62–76.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Child Psychology) (Vol. 5).
New York: Plenum Press.
Chapter 3
Providing Outdoor Experiences for Infants
and Toddlers: Pedagogical Possibilities
and Challenges from a Brazilian Early
Childhood Education Centre Case Study
Natália Meireles Santos da Costa, Maria Clotilde Rossetti-Ferreira,

and Ana Maria de Araujo Mello
Abstract Intense urbanization process in Brazil and Latin America has increas-
ingly limited young children, since birth, to access outdoor spaces, especially green
areas. Moreover, as conceptions of babies in domestic care support confinement
practices, apprehending infants’ constitutive specificities as being intertwined with
broader socio-cultural contexts requires further investigation. Notwithstanding the
challenges, Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) institutions can be prom-
ising places to provide babies with daily contacts and appropriation of external
areas amid an expanded collective experience. This chapter tackles the process of
insertion and appropriation of outdoor spaces for infants and toddlers. We bring a
case study from a Brazilian daycare centre with planned multiple outdoor environ-
ments, diversified spatial arrangements and natural elements. The empirical mate-
rial, referring to the transition year of a group of under-twos, includes monthly
recordings of everyday routine, interviews, field notes, institutional documents. We
describe and analyze various outdoor spaces and socio-spatial practices of the day-
care centre based on the cultural-historical perspective of the Network of Meanings.
In the first semester, environments organized in semi-open areas connected to closed
spaces were more frequently used. Whereas mainly in the second semester, given
walking onset and greater motor resourcefulness, the going and appropriation of
green areas unfolded as a gradual process not short of struggles. Substantial plan-
ning, projects and educational situations put forward by multiple social actors
within a multidisciplinary approach modulated alternation of spaces and facilitated
exchanges with peers, older children and adults – including family members.
N. M. S. da Costa (*) · M. C. Rossetti-Ferreira · A. M. d. A. Mello

CINDEDI (Centre for Research on Human Development and Early Childhood Education),
University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

44 N. M. S. Costa et al.
Keywords Outdoor environment · ECEC · Infant-toddler · Socio-spatial

experiences
3.1 U
rbanization in Latin America and Children’s Access
to Outdoors
Brazil is a tropical country of continental dimensions, being the largest in Latin

America and occupying nearly half of South America. It has an extensive coastal
area and spans several climatic zones and biomes. The total population is estimated
at 211.755.692 inhabitants (IBGE, 2019) that are heterogeneously distributed across
26 states and the federal district. The Southeast region comprises 42% of the popu-
lation and is composed of four states, among which São Paulo stands out as the most
populous (45,919,049 inhabitants), most demographically dense (166.23 inhabit-
ants/km2) and most urbanized one.
Following Latin America’s historical trend, Brazil underwent intense industrial
and urban sprawl, starting mainly from the 40s/50s (Rossetti-Ferreira, Ramon, &
Barreto, 2002). Currently, 89% of the population lives in urban areas where medium
and large cities prevail, and constructions and vehicle traffic are prioritized in the
urban scenery, hindering social life in open areas and contact with the natural land-
scape (Montero, García, & Francesa, 2017).
In this panorama, the population struggles with unequal opportunities of access
to green areas and high-quality public spaces in their daily lives, as these are distrib-
uted irregularly in cities and mostly concentrated in upper-class zones. Also, in the
logic of the real estate market, gardens and green areas are usually restricted to resi-
dencies and private properties, where people of higher income enjoy exclusive use
of them (Montero et al., 2017). Therefore, the issue of access to external spaces
tackles the historical challenges of structural socio-economic inequality.
As participants of a socio-historical matrix (Rossetti-Ferreira, Amorim, & Silva,
2007), the present scenario affects the (in)accessibility of children to external areas
and nature (Dowdell, Gray, & Malone, 2011), so that despite all environmental and
climatic wealth and nature-related cultural heritage, younger generations in Brazil
experience ever declining time outdoors. In the case of babies, their absence
becomes socially naturalized. Due to crystalized adult-centred socio-cultural, con-
cepts and confinement practices “privatize” infants to the domestic environment and
shuns them away from mainstream research and public policy agendas (Silva &
Neves, 2020). Henceforth, not only practices intensify children’s confinement,
especially those under the age of two, but also the field lacks investigations that
discuss outdoor provision for this age group (Kemp & Josephidou, 2020; Kernan &
Devine, 2010; Tiriba & Barros, 2018). Moreover, infants’ social life becomes
restricted to child-specific “islands” (Kernan & Devine, 2010), such as homes, lei-
sure centres or even institutions, where spatial clusters and “relational asepsis” may
separate children from the outdoors and everyday life in society.
3 Providing Outdoor Experiences for Infants and Toddlers: Pedagogical Possibilities… 45
Nonetheless, as “the context is (…) a constituent component of the very fabric of

development” (Andenæs, 2011, p. 51), due to their collective and educationally-
intentional nature, Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) settings and their
socio-spatial practices stand out as promising research sites. Such contexts unveil
the social world of children and the many personal, political and social issues related
to childhood, such as values, rules, symbols of culture and ideology present in the
subtlety of everyday life (Rutanen, 2012). Hence, ECEC centres, notably those
articulated with public stances, hold the remarkable potential to foster children’
cultural formation and identity as integrated to a social group, a territory and an
ecosystem by promoting connection with the local community and articulating
spaces as networks within an expanded coexistence (Kernan & Devine, 2010).
However, even ECEC settings may fall short of outdoor provision due to a series
of structural challenges. In Brazil, despite the historical endeavour of constructing
national legislation and guidelines that legitimize the importance of outdoor spaces
(Brasil & COEDI, 2006; Tiriba & Barros, 2018), a significant portion of ECEC
units suffer from precarious infrastructure and maintenance, being unable to offer
natural and open-air environments of quality. Moreover, these spaces are devalued
in pedagogical practice and overshadowed by the adult-centric schooling and cogni-
tive learning model, which: separates thinking from the body; channels practices,
routines and institutional time according to this logic; favours children’s confine-
ment; and, narrows down access to external spaces mostly to moments of recreation,
purposeless leisure, or transitional breaks (Tiriba & Barros, 2018).
3.2 Research Question and Objective
Therefore, a starting point lies in promoting opportunities for action in safe, insti-
gating and children-orientated spaces, notably gregarious and natural ones in our
view. Thus, in this chapter we pose as our research question, how can outdoor spaces
be afforded by infants and toddlers (under-twos) within pedagogical conceptions,
practices and contexts? More specifically, how, when and which outdoor spaces
could babies access, occupy and participate in their everyday experiences in collec-
tive educational settings, and how does pedagogical practice constrain the process?
Specifically, as our aim in this chapter, we seek to investigate the possibilities of
access, occupation and participation of under-two babies in outdoor spaces within
the pedagogical work of a Brazilian ECEC centre. To this end, we will discuss how
these elements constrain infants` and toddlers experiences and appropriation of dif-
ferent spaces. This leads us to our theoretical approach.
Network of meanings, educational space and the autonomous embodied baby.

The perspective of the Network of Meanings (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2007) is a

theoretical methodological tool that has been constituted from a historical dialogue
between theory, research and praxis originally from developmental studies of young
children in early childhood education settings. Based on cultural-historical authors
such as Vygotsky, Wallon, Valsiner and Bakhtin, we conceptualize development as
a process temporally (co)constructed by active people in specific scenarios that are
culturally and socially situated.
Such conceptualization causes the researcher’s focus to shift from the individual
viewpoint to people and groups in interaction, their interdependence, synergy, nego-
tiations, conflicts, and mutual constitution. The phenomena are observed through
the lens of a processual view in naturalistic contexts, with attention to the persis-
tence and/or transformation of elements that, jointly, contribute to reconstructing
developmental trajectories within an ecological reality. This foregrounds the inti-
mate and reciprocal constitution between person and context through the experi-
ences that unfold (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2007; Vygotsky, 1934, 2010).
In this person-context intertwining, the environment is apprehended and appro-
priated differently according to children’s specific developmental condition and
their sensory, motor, perceptual and symbolic organizations (Carvalho, Pedrosa, &
Rossetti-Ferreira, 2012; Vygotsky, 1934, 2010) that become materialized in the
concreteness of the society-nature relationship inserted a socio-historical matrix.
Therefore, the environment is not the same at all ages, and it affords differing moti-
vations, affective states, developmental stages and socio-cultural materiality for
children. As the child’s experience constitutes an inseparable unity with the mean-
ings that are elaborated in the process, while children change throughout their
development, the environment acquires new meanings according to their experi-
ences and interpretations attributed socially, affecting and constituting dialectically
the person-context unity (Vygostky, 1934; Vygotsky, 2010).
In view of the person-context unity, when it comes to ECEC contexts, the concep-
tualization and role of space becomes central. We define space as a curricular ele-
ment, often referred to as the “third educator”, which, in addition to its physical
delimitation, is the place where life happens (Forneiro, 1998). For children, space is
what they experience, feel and do within its contours, where meanings emerge and
constitute the experiences that are unveiled there. Though space and environment
may be used equivalently, here they are conceptually distinct. The physical space
relates to the places where educational situations are developed, whereas the environ-
ment comprises the various objects, shapes, colours, aromas and people that inhabit
and relate within the delimitation of the physical structure, as an inseparable whole.
Therefore, the environment is dynamic, lively, and embraces all these pulsating
elements, constituting four interrelated dimensions: physical space – refers to con-
crete and organizational aspects; temporal – refers to the times and rhythms of use,
including historical time, routine, and contrasting individual pacing; functional –
refers to the mode and purpose of use; and, relational – refers to the people, circum-
stances, possible interactions and norms of use (Forneiro, 1998). In the triple logic
of space – environment – place, the environment is the locus of experience, where
the mediating adult, who knows and presents the objects of culture, brings the child
closer to a place (Moreira, 2013).
As free movement and the autonomy of the child are starting points to this end,
we should consider infants’ developmental specificities, their organization and
competence for social life, their possibilities for action and apprehension of the
world according to what they can perceive and do with their bodies and their ability
to affect and be affected by the others. Seeking to integrate these elements, we work
with the notion of “embodiment” which is an instance of inseparable complemen-
tarity between the physical concreteness of the body and its experiences through
active engagement with the world and others (Overton, 2008). In a dialogical rela-
tionship, the body signifies and is signified, expressed through tonicity, postures,
gestures, movements of approaching or distancing, among other actions (Amorim
& Rossetti-Ferreira, 2008) that allow the baby to play different roles and connect in
an intercorporeal relationship.
As a rapidly-changing process, infants` relationship with the environment
through embodiment changes drastically in a matter of months. In the first two years
of life, it is estimated that their height doubles, the bodyweight nearly quadruples
and the circumference of the head increases by about a third (Adolph, 2008).
Mobility gradually develops along with postural progression from the supine posi-
tion until upright posture alongside the development of expanded gestures and
movements that require increased balance, coordination, strength and speed. All
these elements entail key transformations of perceptual-bodily possibilities and
strategies, as well as the meanings attributed to infants, the places where they are
taken to, how they are positioned, and how, in turn, they may embrace or conflict
these (pro)positions (Amorim & Rossetti-Ferreira, 2008).
These aspects draw attention to the practitioners` challenge of preparing environ-
ments in their functional, spatial, temporal and interactional dimensions (Forneiro,
1998) so that infants may act, express themselves, dialogue with various social
actors and thus exercise their fundamental rights of participating in society (Coutinho
& Vieira, 2020). In counterpoint, we as researchers and scientific toolmakers
(Holzman & Newman, 1993) must take an active role in our relationship with the
researched events and subjects, by building and making use of epistemological and
methodological constructs that will amplify infants` action and standpoint. In our
immersion in this effort, there are constant “zooming in” and “zooming out” ana-
lytical movements, in which epistemological premises channel elements and inter-
pretations to the observed events (Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2007) that may stand out
as “figure”, while others remain in the “background” as a network formation, always
as a selection from a greater whole. Given these issues, we then present the con-
struction of our methodological outline.
3.4 Methodology
We bring a qualitative case study (Rey, 2020; Yin, 2009) of a government-funded

daycare centre in a medium-sized city in the state of São Paulo. The local Ethics
Committee authorized the research, a partnership was established with the institu-
tion, and the participants granted their consent. Our unit of analysis (Matusov, 2007)
in this chapter was the pedagogical situations in outdoor spaces developed through-
out the year.
The study followed the first year of full-time attendance of a group of infants and
toddlers, internally subdivided into two groups according to age. Throughout the
first semester, both remained in the nursery module, but given the difference in
development, the group of toddlers was moved to a different sector from the second
semester onwards. Henceforth, our records shall focus mainly on the younger group,
comprising six infants (3 boys and 3 girls, initial age from 7 months to 12 months).
The follow-up was monthly and longitudinal, throughout the school year, accord-
ing to the Brazilian calendar. Observational material comprises naturalistic observa-
tions, video recordings and field notes that sought to accompany moments of routine
(sleep, food, bath, exchange), moments of play, and moments of interaction through-
out the period of stay. For the present work, we selected only the material related to
the presence of infants in outdoor spaces.
In addition to this material, the daycare centre generously granted us images
from its own collection along with class reports, written by the teachers, to further
detail the pedagogical actions regarding the use of outdoors. Finally, we collected
informal accounts from the teachers and prominent people involved in the history of
conceiving and constructing the centre, so that the previously mentioned records
contemplated the pedagogical intentionality intertwined with the practices.
From the triangulation of this material, we identified all the records that pre-
sented the infant group in outdoor spaces and organized them chronologically to
investigate whether their use occurred in everyday life, and if, over time, additional
spaces were included in the group’s routine. In our analysis, we initially present the
centre and its outdoor spatial configuration. Next, by organizing such records and
reports temporally and thematically, we developed pedagogical narratives (Coutinho
& Vieira, 2020) seeking to apprehend which outdoor spaces were most commonly
accessed routinely, what were the possibilities of using these spaces beyond teach-
ers` routine practice and whether/which new outdoor spaces were introduced over
time. Henceforth, we will proceed to the presentation of the case and discuss our
findings.
3.5 Results and Discussion
Our case study is of a publicly funded daycare centre that was built in a farm of
8000 m2, in the outskirts of town. The original building functioned as a silkworms
rearing house, which was later transformed into the Rural School Group, and finally
into a daycare centre. This educational space, therefore, was surrounded by large
outdoor areas, abounding with grass, fruit trees and allowing broad contact
with nature.
In the centre’s historical process, spatial conception and structuring received
influence from the pedagogy of authors such as Anísio Teixeira, Celéstin Freinet
and Daniel Élkonin, who based on scientific progress of children’s psychology from
Solarium II
Parking lot
(outside)
hallway
Outdoor
Solarium
III
Sleeping
Eating room
room
Playroom
Changing
room
Balcony
Glass
Solarium I
Fig. 3.1 Visual representation of the nursery complex
their time, advocated for greater freedom and autonomy for children. Also, relying
on studies of environmental psychology, child development and education (Rossetti-
Ferreira, Oliveira, Campos-de-Carvalho, & Amorim, 2010) institutional training
oriented teachers’ practice of (re)creating barriers and spatial geometry that could
facilitate children’s visual access of objects and same-age peers and foster greater
participation, autonomy and spontaneous grouping. The centre was organized in
sectors according to age groups and purpose and here we will focus on the external
spaces that were intended for babies, notably those attached to the nursery complex
and the wider outdoors.
The nursery complex, illustrated in Fig. 3.1, was composed of a variety of inter-
nal and external spaces, some equipped for care routine (bathing, eating, sleeping)
and others structured for moments of interaction and play. The inner playroom had
a seamless and unrestricted access to a balcony, providing outdoor-indoor connect-
edness (Kernan & Devine, 2010), and had intermediate access to the other boundar-
ied outdoor spaces (Kernan & Devine, ibid) attached to the nursery complex,
requiring passage through indoor spaces, with midway obstruction of baby gates on
the doors. There was also a large solarium, which was accessed via a ramp attached
to the balcony of the main hall, also obstructed by a short gate. As part of the peda-
gogical strategies, these attached external spaces were daily used in rotation and
other spaces were gradually introduced into the babies’ routine, though some should
require more or less planning ahead.
There was a vast diversity of open spaces in the wider outdoors, a part composed
by a complex of concrete areas and other part with several spaces in the green areas
such as plazas, tables, houses, sand tanks, etc. Although groups more commonly
used certain areas according to their age group and development conditions, the
daycare centre sought to promote the occupation and participation of everyone in
the different spaces. For this, teachers and a technical team (with pedagogical coor-
dinators, psychologist, nutrition and nursing technician) engaged in recurrent plan-
ning and sought to integrate proposals more particularly focused on infants, their
skills, challenges and needs.
In terms of socio-spatial practices (Rutanen, 2012), we observed that not all out-
door areas were accessed equally from the start. During the first semester, the
infants’ group would mostly be limited to the nusery’s attached spaces (indoor-
outdoor connectedness and boundaried outdoor spaces). We also observed that the
centre created opportunities for these and wider spaces to be accessed on alternative
periods, where more adults could be present. Finally, that children’s developed
recurrent going to wider outdoor areas upon cruising and walking onset, which hap-
pened mainly in the second semester.
Therefore, we organize narratives of these practices in a temporal logic within
the following strands of analysis: “attached outdoor spaces as part of everyday life”,
“projects, workshops and the diversification of spaces” and “paving the way for the
wider (green and concrete) areas”. In each of these strands, we discuss the possibil-
ity of infants’ access, the pedagogical propositions developed, and the infants’
actions regarding these propositions, seeking to discuss how the intertwining of
these elements constitute infants’ cultural formation within the outdoors (Hedegaard
& Ødegaard, 2020; Rossetti-Ferreira et al., 2007). Therefore, we shall proceed to
these strands of analysis.
3.5.1 Attached Outdoor Spaces as Part of Everyday Life
We observed that, from day-one, the nursery’s attached outdoor spaces were
accessed on a daily basis. Because temporality is one of the dimensions of the envi-
ronment (Forneiro, 1998) that alters the needs of children in this age group, the
morning and afternoon periods had different temporal-spatial arrangements. The
more structured outdoor spatial organizations were planned for moments of arrival,
after lunch, after the afternoon nap and before departure.
In these moments, as a way of demarcating space and structuring an environ-
ment, the teachers spread out mats and large toys (e.g. activity centres, learning
walkers, etc.) on the floor and hung objects (e.g. rattles, cloths, etc.) on the fences,
within the children’s reach. We interpreted this situation as an intentional invitation
for babies to remain outside, as we identified several records in which they gathered
in groups in that area and gradually stayed for a longer time, demonstrating increas-
ing initiative to direct themselves and remain there. Also, the adult’s practice of
heading and staying outside were references of spatial orientation for babies and
facilitated the formation of groups and fostered sustained engagement and sharing
of attention/actions in educational situations (Campos-de-Carvalho, 2004; Musatti,
Mayer, Pettenati, & Picchio, 2017) Over time, we observed that the babies started to
head outside autonomously more often, independently of the adult being pres-
ent or not.
Besides the spatial organization previously described, teachers often (re)posi-
tioned the gates’ barriers and recreated spatial geometry, since many of the passages
from one space to another had support for fitting mobile grids, We observed that
these spatial (re)arrangements (Campos-de-Carvalho, 2004) invited infants to
experience and explore the same place differently and redirect their attention to
specific features of space possibly unnoticed in their regular everyday use. For
example, when teachers left the entry gate open and obstructed the corridor towards
the solarium with a detachable gate, the ramp, usually a simple hallway, was trans-
formed into a speeding “driveway” for car toys by children.
We also identified infants experiencing and appropriating the multiplicity of spa-
tial dimensions (Forneiro, 1998) in everyday situations such as: contemplatng and
interacting with the landscape and elements of nature nearby (e.g. wind, birds, trees,
grass); playing with water using outdoor showers, basins and dolls (differing from
the stationary posture and temporal configuration of bath routine); manipulating
fluid matter, and getting dirty without restriction. Regarding the fences: toddlers
threw objects beyond the gate and fence, or even tried handling the lock; cruising
infants leaned on the fence and walked throughout its contours; and, infants had
close or distal interaction with older children and adults who went by the corridors.
Therefore, we observed that access to external spaces was guaranteed from the
beginning, became diversified over time and was legitimatized as pedagogical locus
of infants’ autonomy. Temporal-spatial arrays and the permanence of the adult were
important elements to channel the direction and permanence of the babies. Also,
practitioners had high concerns of carrying out the process gradually, respecting
infants’ habituation, rhythm and initiative so that they had physical and emotional
security to explore such places. Finally, visual openness and postural accessibility
through affordances (Gibson, 1979) (e.g. low gates and fences that afforded cruising
support) fostered infants expansive and independent movement, whilst allowed
extended contact with people and outer surroundings that composed a wider ecosys-
tem, beyond the aseptic and adult-centric reference in a room.
Moreover, through the interrelationship of elements such as permeability/poros-
ity, demarcation/flexibility, versatility/stability, and openness/containment con-
strained different ways of infants inserting themselves in attached outdoor spaces
and integrating them into daily life as environments of exploration, discovery, and
communication with the nursery’s surroundings and community.
With greater habituation of babies to open-air environments, teachers began to
conduct more structured actions in the nursery’s attached outdoors and the wider
areas, notably those which were more difficult to access on a daily basis. This
occurred mainly from the proposal for projects and workshops, which shall be our
following topic.
3.5.2 Projects, Workshops and the Diversification of Spaces
This ECEC unit conceived its relationship with families as a partnership and sought
to establish a joint work in promoting the children’s development and well-being.
As a result, in addition to the practices regularly developed by the teachers, the
centre promoted a series of educational situations, which were coordinated by dif-
ferent actors and often included families, notably through workshops and
integrative projects (Barbosa & Horn, 2009). We observed that most of these situa-
tions occurred in outdoor spaces.
Due to the proximity to parents’ workplace, family members were invited to visit
the centre during lunch hours and stay with their children during this period every
day. Although this proposal initially sought to handle work shifts and favour a more
gradual transition for full-time babies, visiting hours throughout the history of the
daycare became a significant moment of integration between families and the centre
community. During the visits parents often took infants to the green areas. On that
occasion, they were able to have one-to-one interactions and meet more directly
infants’ individual interests by diversifying their access to spaces that would be dif-
ficult during group time, for requiring bodily handling and more individualized
supervision (e.g. being pushed on the swing, exploring the playhouses, being car-
ried in the lap to see the animals).
We also identified this diversification of access occurring in structured moments
organized with parents. The reports mention musical recitals in the park plaza, chil-
dren’s birthday celebrations or craft workshops in the solariums or even at tables in
the park, picnics and outdoor storytelling. Moreover, off-hours commemorative
events also provided opportunities for families to circulate through the centre and
enjoy their wider outdoor spaces in another setting. Hence, children were presented
to and experienced a diversity of cultural arrays in the outdoors by having the neces-
sary support to participate, express themselves and act on their interests, despite
their momentary physical limitations. This all becomes fundamental in the process
of transforming space in an environment, and children being invited to transform it
into a place by active participation (Moreira, 2013).
Moreover, such elements proved to be potent incentives for children and their
parents to experience a daily period outside with their children in a way that the
experience could also be pleasant for adults, which according to Tiriba and Barros
(2018) is an important step in the process of constituting experiences in the out-
doors. Therefore, such opportunities also allowed parents, who are also part of this
confinement ecosystem, to experience pleasant day-to-day moments with their chil-
dren and come to value these types of space more.
In some of these visiting moments, the nursery’s technical team held a series of
sensorial workshops in which they presented sensory challenges to infants that
could be freely manipulated and explored. The centre followed a plan for when and
which substances would be (re)offered. These included wet and dry foods, such as
cornmeal, sago, flour, objects in contrasting temperatures, fabrics of various tex-
tures, etc. It was a practice that allowed infants to experience the different sensa-
tions aroused by these elements, to help them to get used to being dirty, or even
make their peers dirty. These expansive gestures, such as scattering, spilling and
pinching gestures, were often newly experienced by babies by repeating several
cycles of the same actions, which Henri Wallon, conceptualized as acquisition play,
where the child observes using the full body, as if it were all eyes and all ears
(Wallon, p. 76, 1981) (Fig. 3.2).
This was an important moment to prepare babies for the parks, where they would
play with sand, mud, leaves, feel the texture of the grass and the dirt. For this reason,
Fig. 3.2 Photos from the sensorial workshops
the teachers were attentive to the children’s reactions, especially those of discom-
fort, monitoring if the discomfort persisted or not in following sessions. Moreover,
this was an opportunity for parents to experience this way of playing with their
children and encourage them to explore, or even comfort their refusals and possible
difficulties.
Thus, in the flow of occupation of outdoor spaces, the next step was to take chil-
dren to wider outdoors in a more autonomous manner. This process occurred mainly
in the second semester and will be discussed in the next topic.
3.5.3 P
aving the Way for the Wider (Green and Concrete)
Outdoor Areas
The centre had two complexes of wider outdoors, each at opposite ends of the unit’s
grounds. The area closest to the lunch room was of concrete floor and comprised
covered areas (e.g. semi-open patios and corridors), as well as open areas (e.g.
sports court, areas with showers). The area closest to the large solarium/entrance
ramp, on the other hand, gave access to the wider green areas, which were struc-
tured in delimited spaces such as plazas, sand tanks, various types of playhouses,
bird coops, playgrounds etc. According to the teacher’s report and mapping of the
records, the younger group most recurrent trips to these places started to take place
in the second semester. At this time, only the younger group had remained in the
nursery and all babies had developed independent mobility with differing onsets
(crawling, cruising and walking).
The key teacher tells us that these moments were challenging, required planning
in advance, and eventually demanded help from an aid. Some babies needed to be
carried/physically assisted, occasionally a child expressed discomfort or needed to
return to the room (e.g. diaper accident) and there was a concern that babies did not
disperse. Regarding weather events, because of the hot weather subject to
mosquitoes-borne diseases, parents collectively provided sunscreen and repellent
for children’s daily use. Moreover, the maintenance of these spaces was costly and
complex, requiring regular insect removal, gardening work, animal care, hygiene of
toys and sand tanks, among other aspects.
However, notwithstanding the various challenges and requirements, the use of
outdoor spaces was rooted and valued in the centre’s pedagogical premise and prac-
tices. Access to the outdoors was embedded as fundamental rights of children
(MEC, Brazil, 1995, 2009), that included the “right to movement in wide spaces”
and “the right to contact with nature”. These notions were historically built within
intersectoral work and training of teachers and staff, so the centre could foster joint
effort to help children make use and develop abilities that would allow them to exer-
cise these rights. To demonstrate how access to the wider cemented and green areas
took place, we selected two vignettes that will be discussed shortly.
The first vignette refers to the fifth month of attendance, in which the children’s
age varied between 12 months and 17 months and illustrates their going to the patio
in the wider cemented outdoors. On that day, five of the babies were present
(Fig. 3.3).
Inside the room, the teacher is near a small gate that interconnects the lunch area to an
external corridor. Babies gather around her, some standing, some in crawling position. After
the teacher puts on her shoes, she exclaims “let’s go for a walk!” and immediately one of
the babies heads towards a high wooden niche where his shoes are. He tiptoes on his feet
trying to grab them, but is unable to reach his shoes. A few moments later, the teacher heads
outside, and the babies (crawlers, novice and experienced walkers) follow her in line. The
teacher goes down the corridor and turns left. At this turning point, a wider and more visu-
ally complex spatial field opens up for the babies (e.g, crossing corridors, access to doors
and patios from other rooms and people circulating). With the exception of a walking baby
who follows the teacher, all the other four interrupt their traveling and stay sit when they
reach this point. The teacher kneels facing them, smiles and calls out “come, let’s play!”.
Fig. 3.3 The group heading to the patio

One of the babies goes out on a crawling bout towards the teacher. The remaining babies
stay in crawling position, gazing at the teacher and apparently struggling to move forward.
Some employees around encourage the infants verbally and offer support for cruising, help-
ing them stand and move forward. It takes nearly three minutes for all the babies to reach
the teacher. When the group is complete, the teacher spreads out a rug on the floor and
provides a box of toys for the children to play.
We highlight some points from this vignette. First, we observed that when group-
ing close to the little gate with the teacher and even reproducing cultural gestures
through immediate and deferred imitation (Werebe & Nadel-Brulfert, 1986), such
as fetching the shoe, babies are able to anticipate the moment to leave and show
signs of appropriation. A second point is that the difference in locomotor acquisi-
tions integrates and constrains perception-action mechanisms in babies who move
differently (Gibson, 1988). According to Kretch, Franchak & Adolph (Kretch,
Franchak, & Adolph, 2014), walking babies have their visual flow and movement
more easily targeted ahead, while crawling babies have their visual field more
directed to the floor and need to sit and scan the environment to reach targets. This
might be one of the reasons why at the corridor’s turning point crawling infants
struggle more to move forward, in contrast to the walking toddler.
Hence, the postural and locomotor aspects are central when considering the pos-
sibilities of infant’s movement and displacement in wider outdoor space. This
doesn’t imply that babies were left to their devices. As they were able to take steps
with cruising, their displacement was facilitated by receiving postural support from
adults. Finally, not only the teacher, but other staff members were engaged in guid-
ing babies to the patio, where they could be visible, perceptible while they could
also see and perceive others.
The second vignette refers to the eighth month of attendance, with the children
(who are now toddlers) ages ranging from 15 months to 21 months. On this day,
there were six toddlers present (Fig. 3.4).
Fig. 3.4 The group heading to the sand tank in the green area
The scene starts when the group of children, the main teacher and an auxiliary are moving
from the semi-open corridor to the open green areas. All children can walk independently.
There is a marked path on the ground that starts at the covered area and seamlessly extends
to the park. Just upon entering the park, there is a broad and low stairway to facilitate small
steps, but even so the toddlers struggle. In one scene, three stumble and fall at the same time
(without getting hurt), placing their hands on the floor to absorb impact. One of the toddlers
climbs up the remaining steps in this position (legs extended, torso bent forward and hands
on the floor, also called “bear crawling”). The teacher and assistant reach out their hand and
help the children who have to walk the remaining steps. Upon arriving at the park, the chil-
dren begin to follow the paved path that passes by one of the play houses. The teacher and
assistant, however, go right across the grass, heading towards the sand tank, and call the
children. They say “sand, we’re heading to the sand”. Some toddlers follow them immedi-
ately, but others need to be called more insistently or led by hand. When everyone reaches
the sand tank, the adults hand over buckets, water and sand tools. There is a scene in which
one of the babies tries different ways of putting the sand into the bucket, first with the sieve,
then with pinching hand gestures, and after looking around, says “pá.pá” (the word in
Portuguese for shovel, which resembles one of the initial babbling babies’ utterances).
Shortly afterwards, the assistant hands over a shovel, which the baby uses to throw sand into
the bucket.
In the excerpt, the marked path helped children to orient themselves, but the
stairs and moving away from the path were challenges along the way. Apprehending
the route and learning to walk either through a delimited path or open space with
greater autonomy and confidence are embodied educational situations. Besides
motricity issues, spatial and time use diverged between adults and children, in a way
that infants and toddlers’ processing and action time, both in gesture and in lan-
guage, conflicted with the adult.
Due to such a distinction, times and directions needed to be (re)negotiated,
requiring changes of rhythm, transmutation of space (Gobbi, Leite, & Pito, 2019)
and re-arrangement of locomotor aims. Within a structured proposal, such as play-
ing in the sand, cultural artefacts instrumentalized the children’s actions in their
contact with reality, allowing them to experience different textures, dry or wet, and
to explore different modes of handling. When transferring the sand to the bucket, for
instance, by testing varied hand movements and experimenting with tools, children
indicate a rudimentary apprehension of everyday concepts and learning through
acquisition games (Wallon, 1981).
In view of the analyzes discussed, we will move on to the final considerations.
3.6 Final Considerations
Infants and toddlers face the challenge of having their access and participation to
outdoor spaces denied or hindered, which permeate historical confinement prac-
tices, with cribs, containment devices, small rooms and nowadays, even restraining
through media devices (Kopp, 2011). Allied to these issues, urban structuring,
socio-economic inequalities and conceptions of care and education that favor con-
finement and adult-centric models perpetuate those practices. Despite the
challenges, collective spaces, such as early childhood education units, have the
great potential to ressignify those issues and actively contribute to their cultural
formation on such matter.
Through the case, we identified that the structuring of spaces reflects expecta-
tions and meanings about what is desired in the pedagogical process. When practi-
tioners intervene in space, by prior organization, by routine insertion, by physical
demarcation, and by stimulus to the independent action of the child, they can offer
children a safe and stimulating environment that provides experiences and gradual
appropriation. In doing so, children can “activate the different modes of interaction
with others and the environment depending on the situations they encounter and
according to the means available in their behavioral repertoire and the goals they
seek” (Wallon, 1942).
As “it takes a village to raise a child”, the case also reveals the potential of
including different actors in the daycare centre when planning actions and accom-
panying children in their moments in outdoor spaces. The possibility of bringing
families into the centre and watching their children interacting with the outdoor
environment on a daily basis contributes to the adult having a more qualified and
attentive look to the way the child acts, its capacities and its challenges. The propos-
als for workshops and projects help to diversify the access and use of spaces, and
contribute to the socialization and integration process of both children and families
at the institution.
Finally, the infants’ developmental resources constrain the way they are inserted
and navigate through outdoor spaces. The possibility of adjoining areas closer to the
rooms used by babies can facilitate their daily exposure to the outdoors and to ven-
ture into actions specifically provided by such places, in a more gradual and safe
way. Also, the complexity of trips to wider outdoors, notably green areas, should be
possibly considered as a pedagogical practice in itself, taking into account the dif-
ferences in children’s times and skills, with a distinction between those crawling,
cruising and walking infants/toddlers.
Therefore, in agreement with Dowdell et al. (2011), we argue that access and
exposure to nature and outdoor gregarious spaces allow babies and young children
to exercise their rights and learn about the world with hands-on experience without
needing adult-centered explanations, constituting their cultural formation
(Hedegaard & Ødegaard, 2020) as participants in both local and wider territories.
Hence, confinement practices and centralization of the relationships around the
adult’s proposal are more easily dissolved in the outdoors, and even upon develop-
mental limitations, adults can be supportive of children’s initiative and activeness.
In a triple protagonism, the child eager to learn and act is affected by the environ-
ment, and the teacher, who knows the cultural object, presents and draws the child
closer towards it (Oliveira et al., 2012). To this end, it is essential to provide possi-
bilities of access and occupation to reframe conceptions, practices and even policies
related to babies and young children.
References
Adolph, K. E. (2008). Learning to move. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(3),
213–218.
Amorim, K., & Rossetti-Ferreira, M. C. (2008). Corporeidade, significação e o primeiro ano de
vida. Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia, 60(1), 67–81.
Andenæs, A. (2011). Chains of care: Organising the everyday life of young children attending day
care. Nordic Psychology, 63(2), 49.
Barbosa, M. C. S., & Horn, M. D. G. S. (2009). Projetos pedagógicos na educação infantil. Porto
Alegre, Brazil: Artmed.
Brasil, M., & Coedi, S. (2006). Parâmetros nacionais de qualidade para a educação infantil.
Brasília, Brazil: MEC/SEB.
Campos-de-Carvalho, M. (2004). Use of space by children in day care centers. Revista de Etologia,
6(1), 41–48.
Carvalho, A. M., Pedrosa, M. I., & Rossetti-Ferreira, M. C. (2012). Aprendendo com a criança de
zero a seis anos (1st ed.). São Paulo, Brazil: Cortez.
Coutinho, A. S., & Vieira, D. M. (2020). Uma perspectiva para acompanhar o processo dos bebês
de conquista da autonomia na creche. Revista Interinstitucional Artes de Educar, 6(2), 602–626.
Dowdell, K., Gray, T., & Malone, K. (2011). Nature and its influence on children’s outdoor play.
Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 15(2), 24–35.
Forneiro, L. I. (1998). A organização dos espaços na educação infantil. In M. A. Zabalza (Ed.),
Qualidade em educação infantil (B. A. Neves, Trans.). Porto Alegre, Brazil: Artmed.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, USA: Houghton
Mifflin.
Gibson, E. J. (1988). Exploratory behavior in the development of perceiving, acting, and the
acquiring of knowledge. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 1–42.
Gobbi, Leite, & Pito. (2019). Sociologia urbana e os bebês: (im)pertinentes, ou a silenciosa
insurgência em crianças pequenas. Estudos de bebês e diálogos com a sociologia (1st ed.pp.
493–517). São Carlos, Brazil: Pedro & João Editores.
Hedegaard, M., & Ødegaard, E. E. (2020). Introduction to children’s exploration and cultural for-
mation. In M. Hedegaard & E. E. Ødegaard (Eds.), Children’s exploration and cultural forma-
tion (1st ed., pp. 1–10). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Holzman, L., & Newman, F. D. (1993). Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary scientist. London: Routledge.
IBGE – Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2019). Available in: https://cidades.ibge.
gov.br/brasil/panorama
Kemp, N., & Josephidou, J. (2020). Where are the babies? Engaging the under twos with the out-
doors. Canterbury, United Kingdom: The Froebel Trust.
Kernan, M., & Devine, D. (2010). Being confined within? Constructions of the good childhood
and outdoor play in early childhood education and care settings in Ireland. Children & Society,
24(5), 371–385.
Kopp, C. B. (2011). Development in the early years: Socialization, motor development, and con-
sciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 165–187.
Kretch, K. S., Franchak, J. M., & Adolph, K. E. (2014). Crawling and walking infants see the
world differently. Child Development, 85(4), 1503–1518.
Matusov, E. (2007). In search ofthe appropriate’unit of analysis for sociocultural research. Culture
& Psychology, 13(3), 307–333.
Montero, L., García, J., & Francesa, C. R. (2017). Panorama multidimensional del desarrollo
urbano en América Latina y el Caribe. Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe
(CEPAL). Published by the United Nations Organization. Available in: https://repositorio.
cepal.org/handle/11362/41974
Moreira, A. R. C. P. (2013). Os bebês e os espaços da creche: um estudo de caso/intervenção.
Revista de Educação Pública, 22(49/1), 305–325.
Musatti, T., Mayer, S., Pettenati, P., & Picchio, M. (2017). Toddlers’ participation in joint activi-
ties with peers in nido. In E. J. White & C. Dalli (Eds.), Under-three year olds in policy and
practice (pp. 73–86). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Oliveira, Z. R. D., Maranhão, D., Abbud, I., Zurawski, M. P., Ferreira, M. V., & Augusto,
S. O. (2012). Planejar práticas pedagógicas: princípios e critérios. In Z. M. R. Oliveira,
D. Maranhão, I. Abbud, M. P. Zurawski, M. V. Ferreira, & S. O. Augusto (Eds.), O trabalho do
professor na Educação Infantil (1st ed., pp. 37–56). Biruta.
Overton, W. F. (2008). Embodiment from a relational perspective. Developmental perspec-
tives on embodiment and consciousness. In W. Overton, U. Mueller & J. L. Newman (Eds.)
Developmental perspectives on embodiment and consciousness (pp.1–18). New York, USA:
Taylor & Francis Group.
Rey, F. G. (2020). Methodological and epistemological demands in advancing the study of subjec-
tivity from a cultural-historical standpoint. Culture & Psychology, 26(3), 562–577.
Rossetti-Ferreira, M. C., Amorim, K. S., & Silva, A. P. S. (2007). Network of meanings: A
theoretical-methodological perspective for the investigation of human developmental pro-
cesses. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociocultural psychology
(1st ed., pp. 277–290). Cambridge, UK: The Cambridge University Press.
Rossetti-Ferreira, M. C., Oliveira, Z. M. R., Campos-de-Carvalho, M., & Amorim, K. S. (2010).
Peer relations in Brazilian daycare centres: A new focus for early childhood education. In
M. Kernan & E. Singer (Eds.), Peer relationships in early childhood education and care (1st
ed., pp. 88–101). London: Routledge.
Rossetti-Ferreira, M. C., Ramon, F., & Barreto, A. R. (2002). Improving early child care and edu-
cation in developing countries. In L. Backman & C. V. Hofsten (Eds.), Psychology at the turn
of the millennium (2nd ed., pp. 101–132). Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press.
Rutanen, N. (2012). Socio-spatial practices in a Finnish daycare group for one-to three-year-olds.
Early Years, 32(2), 201–214.
Silva, E. D. B. T., & Neves, V. F. A. (2020). Os estudos sobre a educação de bebês no Brasil.
Educação Unisinos, 24(1), 1–19.
Tiriba, L., & Barros, M. I. A. (2018). Desemparedamento da infância: A escola como lugar de
encontro com a natureza (2nd ed.). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Alana.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2010). A questão do meio na pedologia (The problem of the environment)
(M. P. Vinha, Trans.). Psicologia USP, 21(4).
Wallon, H. (1942). De l’acte à la pensée:essai de psychologie comparée. Flammarion.
Wallon, H. (1981). O jogo. In A evolução psicologia da criança (pp. 75–79). Lisboa, Portugal:
Estampa.
Werebe, M. J. G., & Nadel-Brulfert, J. (1986). Henri Wallon. São Paulo, Brazil: Ática.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). London: Sage.
Chapter 4
Princesses (Don’t) Run in the Mud:
Tracing the Child’s Perspective in Parental
Perceptions of Cultural Formation
Through Outdoor Activities in Norwegian
ECEs
Alicja R. Sadownik
Abstract By examining Polish parents’ perceptions of outdoor activities in

Norwegian Early Childhood Education (ECE), this chapter discusses how focusing
on the child’s perspective can change and challenge parental gender-related value
positions, thereby changing perceptions of the cultural formation taking place
through outdoor activities. The empirical data on the basis of which this question is
answered are comprised of group interviews with 30 Polish migrant parents (18
mothers and 12 fathers) whose children were in Norwegian ECEs. The applied theo-
retical toolkit of a cultural historical wholeness approach (Hedegaard M, Mind Cult
Act 19:127–138, 2012) enables the description of (parental) experiences of cultural
formation through outdoor activities as anchored in the value positions established
within and across involved societies. It also allows us to grasp those moments when
the focus on the child’s perspective in outdoor activities challenges parental value
positions and cultural traditions of heteronormativity. The concluding remarks point
to the importance of enhancing both the child’s perspective and the specific plane of
interpersonal interactions in ECE collaborations with parents and caregivers.
Keywords Outdoor activities · Cultural formation · Child perspective · Gender

performance · Parental collaboration
A. R. Sadownik (*)
Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway

62 A. R. Sadownik
4.1 Introduction
Apart from their other tasks, Norwegian ECEs are expected to “work in close co-
operation and agreement with the parents” (UDIR, 2017, p. 29), and these parents
may sometimes represent other value positions and thereby have different perspec-
tives on various institutional practices as well as the cultural formation that takes
place through them.
This chapter examines Polish parents’ perceptions of outdoor activities in
Norwegian ECEs and their children’s cultural formation taking place through these
outdoor activities. This creates a foundation to discuss how a focus on the child’s
perspective on the process of cultural formation through outdoor activities can
change or challenge parental perceptions of these activities, thus challenging the
silent assumptions regarding heteronormativity present in the institutional lives of
modern Western societies. The chapter first presents the cultural historical whole-
ness approach as a framework that enables the researcher to (a) anchor the process
of cultural formation in sociocultural and institutional foundations, (b) link the per-
ceptions of certain institutional practices with value positions and (c) spot those
moments in reflections on outdoor activities from the child’s perspective that chal-
lenge traditional parental gender values and/or heteronormativity. Next, explana-
tions of cultural formation, heteronormativity, and aspects related to gender in
Poland are presented. The chapter then presents the research project, including its
methodology, a presentation of the participants, and the results. These findings form
the final basis for the discussion, which focuses on the possibility of challenging
conservative gender attitudes as well as heteronormativity in general by including
the child’s perspective on cultural formation through outdoor activities.
4.2 T
he Cultural Historical Wholeness Approach
The cultural historical wholeness approach describes the child/individual as always

operating in a particular context. Hedegaard (2012) divides the context into
three planes:
• A formal societal plane that reflects historically evolved traditions in a society
that are formalized into laws and regulations as conditions for the existence of an
institution (in the model depicted as cultural traditions in a society for different
institutions, reflecting different value positions).
• A general institutional plane that reflects informal conventional traditions and
demands (i.e., related to school and home), taking form as practices (in the model
depicted as, respectively, home, school, and day care practice).
4 Princesses (Don’t) Run in the Mud: Tracing the Child’s Perspective in Parental… 63
• A specific plane that reflects the shared activity settings of persons in a specific
institution (i.e., a specific home or a specific school, depicted as activity settings
in the model). (Hedegaard, 2012, pp. 129–130)
All three planes are inseparable when trying to understand the child’s develop-
ment or social situation. By social situation, Hedegaard (2012) understands “the
person’s relation via motives and competences to different activity settings” (p. 130).
The motives occur in relation to the realised demands and result in certain activities
that can lead the child to grow certain competences, which are again the basis for
further motives, activities and thereby development.
Behind certain institutional practices and their demands lie particular cultural
traditions with their value positions. Cultural traditions and value positions may dif-
fer across societies as well as within a society. This means that the social situation
of the child also includes the child’s relation to the value positions and cultural tradi-
tions that lie behind the institutions in which the child is participating.
The model (Fig. 4.1) illustrates the three planes on which the child’s develop-
ment takes place. Moreover, it includes the value positions that mediate the plane of
cultural traditions and institutions, as well as the motives and competences that
mediate individuals’ social situations (their relation to various activity settings). The
human being develops by acting in response to experienced demands created by
Fig. 4.1 A model of children’s activity settings in different institutions. (Source: Hedegaard,
2012, p.130)
64 A. R. Sadownik
others, institutional practices, and/or sets of values and meanings presented in insti-
tutional practices and lying behind institutional settings. Activity in response to
experienced demands can, however, include resistance—and thereby the occurrence
of activity that differs from that expected by the institution.
Vygotsky states the following:
Experience is a unity, in which, in indivisible form, on the one hand the environment, that
which is being experienced, is presented—the experience of everything relates to some-
thing existing outside the person—and, on the other hand, how I experience it, that is, all of
the special features of personality and all the special features of the environment are present
in experience. (1934, pp. 97–98)
This dialectical character of an activity, which includes both the cultural traditions
and demands imposed on the child, but also the child’s own responses to these tradi-
tions and demands as a result of their own motives and competences, makes it pos-
sible to relate the categories of social situation and activity to the concept of cultural
formation.
4.3 Cultural Formation
Cultural formation, also called becoming and, in Norwegian policy documents,

formative development (UDIR, 2017), is a concept developed to embrace the dia-
lectical character of the experience joining together the outside physical and cul-
tural world with the internal processing of the experienced content (Ødegaard,
2016). Ødegaard and White (2016), in describing the historical development of the
concept of Bildung/danning/becoming, present as critical the dialectical relation-
ship between the culture, represented by the community, older generations and
educational institutions, and the individuals actively involved in the social institu-
tions. This allows us to see cultural formation as both the culture shaping individu-
als (when an individual is framed and formed by demands anchored in the values
and meanings existing in the culture) and as individuals negotiating their own
subjectivity (creating their own selves in dialogue with the imposed cultural
values).
The Norwegian Framework Plan for Kindergartens: Content and Tasks (UDIR,
2017) relates formative development to the facilitation of a “probing and inquisitive
approach to the world” (UDIR, 2017, p. 1). On the one hand, this promotes the shar-
ing of values and norms. On the other hand, it endorses the strengthening of “coura-
geous, independent and responsible participation” and the valuing of “individual
expressions and actions” (UDIR, 2017, p. 21).
The dual nature of danning fits the cultural historical wholeness approach, where
becoming’s first dimension relates to the individual being introduced to the particu-
lar demands of interpersonal, institutional and sociocultural expectations. The sec-
ond, self-creating, dimension relates to the individual developing various motives
and activities in response to the experienced demands. (Re)acting in response to the
various demands in a dialogical involvement with them constitutes the process of

formative development. This suggests that the concept of cultural formation particu-
larly activates the specific plane (Hedegaard, 2012, p. 130), as it explains how cul-
turally anchored meanings and values are lived and negotiated in institutional
practices by interacting individuals who exchange and challenge each other’s values
and meanings through their own activities.
In this chapter, the everyday practice of ECE institutions is narrowed to their
outdoor activities and the children’s cultural formation taking place through them.
The focus of the research is on individual (parental) perceptions of outdoor activi-
ties in Norwegian ECEs, as well as the cultural formation through outdoor activities
in which children participate. As parental perceptions are shaped by parents’ cul-
tural traditions and value positions connected to gender, as well as their capability
to acknowledge the child’s perspective, the process of experiencing their children’s
cultural formation taking place through outdoor activities links the plane of cultural
traditions and value positions with the specific plane of interpersonal relationships
(for Hedegaard’s model, see Fig. 4.1). The significant institutional context in this
case is the ECE setting and home’s perception of it.
What is interesting in the parental perceptions presented below is that not of all
them include the child’s perspective on the process of cultural formation.
4.4 The Child’s and Children’s Perspectives
Following Sylvia's (2010) conceptualisation, I understand the child’s perspective as

directing
adult’s attention towards an understanding of children’s perceptions, experiences, and
actions in the world. Thus, child perspectives are created by adults who are seeking, delib-
erately and as realistically as possible, to reconstruct children’s perspectives, for example
through scientific concepts concerning children’s understanding of their world and their
actions. (Sylva, 2010, p. vi)
However, no matter how sympathetic the adults are and how close to the children
they get, they will always end up generating adult objectifications of the children’s
experiences. Nevertheless, the effort taken seems to matter, as it can be distin-
guished from parental perceptions of, for example, ECE outdoor activities. The
children’s perspectives are here understood as representing
children’s experiences, perceptions, and understanding in their life-world. In contrast to the
child perspectives, the focus here is on the child as subject in his or her own world, the
child’s own phenomenology. This is what adults attempt to understand through their child
perspective, for example in attempts at child-focused interpretations of children’s inten-
tional acts and statements. (Sylva, 2010, p. vi)
This perspective will be applied to outdoor activities in the ECE setting in this
chapter.
66 A. R. Sadownik
4.5 G
ender Equality: A Value Position Occurring Across
Countries and Societies (Poland and Norway)
Today, gender equality is a fundamental value position (EEAS, 2018) imposed on

various cultures and societies operating in the European geographical area.
Norwegian ECE is required by its steering documents to “promote equity and equal-
ity irrespective of gender, functional ability, sexual orientation, gender identity … .
Kindergartens shall combat all forms of discrimination and promote compassion”
(UDIR, 2017, p. 10). Outdoor activities, then, apart from being rooted in long-
standing Norwegian outdoor life traditions, are activities based
on the principle of equality and antidiscrimination and help to ensure that the children are
able to experience and create an egalitarian society. Everyone shall have the same opportu-
nities to be seen, heard and encouraged to participate in a shared activities in kindergarten.
(UDIR, 2017, p. 10)
To make this happen, the staff has to act according to value positions connected to
gender, which requires reflection and change. The Framework Plan for Kindergartens
articulates expressly that the staff “must reflect on their own attitudes in order to
best convey and promote equity and equality” (UDIR, 2017, p. 10).
ECE settings can however not expect such gender related values and attitudes
from the parents, representing diverse cultural and/or national origins. In Poland,
although it is formally a member of the EU, mainstream values in relation to gender
consider traditional and separate social paths for two biological sexes to be the right
paths. Women are expected to be feminine in terms of physical appearance (ideally
beautiful and delicate) and choice of jobs (ideally connected to education, care and
service as well as household work, with the main responsibility of caring for their
own children) (Gal & Klingman, 2000; Graff, 2008). The expectations for men
demand physical strength, a great career or a well-paid job, more spare time, and
economic rather than care- or housework-related duties in terms of family life. In
Poland, gender-related values seem to correlate with level of education and age: the
older and the less educated are more likely to value traditional positions connected
to gender. This also means that the younger and more educated that people are, the
higher the probability that they will have a more liberated attitude to gender roles
(ISSP Research Group, 2016). However, this liberation is less likely if there is
involvement with certain religious movements presenting traditional gender norms
as correct (European Parliament, 2011). This correlation, detected in complex and
representative statistical studies (ISSP Research Group, 2016), is the reason why
this study presents detailed information on the parental level of education in the
presentation of the research participants.
4.6 T
he Heteronormative Matrix: Background
to (Traditional) Gender Dualism
Within gender and queer theory, however, both prescribing certain social trajecto-
ries to certain sexes and dividing human beings into boys and girls (or men and
women) are criticised (Barker, 2016; Butler, 1990; Jagose, 1997; Sullivan, 2003).
Labelling certain people as men or women, which is accompanied by certain blue or
pink products and practices (e.g., at the birth clinic and in the case of many chil-
dren’s products), is recognised by Butler (1990) as a sign of heteronormativity,
which she sees as the uncritically assumed obviosity of heterosexuality. Butler
describes the heteronormative matrix as a lingual pre-structure dividing human
beings into two complementary types: boys and girls. On the one hand, this excludes
people with an unclear biological sex from the natural order of things (Butler, 1990),
while, on the other, it normalises heterosexuality. The norm of heterosexuality is
thus what lies beneath the expectations for feminine females and masculine men
(Butler, 1990). This suggests that Butler relates tensions between conceptualisa-
tions of gender in modern societies to the pre-assumption of heterosexuality that
follows the foster’s and human being’s life, from the different types of talk used by
parents when talking to the pregnant belly with a boy or girl inside to the limited
trajectories of social careers as a result of gender.
Being socialised within the heteronormative matrix may result in specific under-
standings of how gender may be performed as two distinct opposites, as represented
by a great part of Polish society (ISSP Research Group, 2016). These traditional
gender-related norms may also result in social anxiety and moral panic (Jawor,
2014) when experiencing and/or witnessing unusual or untraditional gender perfor-
mances, as these put the natural order of things in danger (Kopciewicz, 2005).
When it comes to the possibility of gender-liberated behaviours or unusual gen-
der performances, the children’s literature seems to allow more. However, this
relates mostly to girls. The earlier heroines of children’s books such as Pippi
Longstocking (Lindgren, 1977) and Ronia the Robber’s Daughter (Lindgren, 1983)
are familiar in the ECE field as well as among (Polish) parents. This gender freedom
is less visible in the case of boys. This is possibly mirrored in the institutional reality
of many ECEs. In Tømmervåg (2017), the case of a boy who wanted to wear the
colour pink is described. He wanted his outdoor overalls, underwear, clothes, rain
gear and boots to be pink. The parents bought him everything in purple, and the
kindergarten staff thought that this was a great solution (Tømmervåg, 2017, p. 3).
This exemplifies the ways in which girls may enjoy greater acceptance of diverse
gender enactments, while the gentle and soft boy who wears pink or a dress still
worries ECE staff, parents and perhaps the wider society.
68 A. R. Sadownik
4.7 Methodology
The research data used in this article were gathered through a study based on a
research question relating to Polish parents’ perceptions of Norwegian ECE. The
study was conducted among Polish migrant parents in Norway. Altogether, 30 par-
ents (18 mothers and 12 fathers) whose children had been in Norwegian ECECs
participated in interviews between October 2014 and April 2015. The participants
were invited to individual one-time interviews, but as the subject of Norwegian
childcare turned out to be so engaging, they asked to meet and discuss the subject
with other Polish parents, preferably more than once. I followed up on this request,
dividing the parents into six groups of five and meeting each of them six times dur-
ing the same period of time.
As there was someone in each group who was not comfortable with the conversa-
tions being recorded, the quotations below were reconstructed and revised by the
research participants. In total, 231 pages of reconstructed group discussions were
generated in collaboration with the parental groups that participated in the study.
4.7.1 Content Analysis with a Focus on Outdoor Education
For the sake of this study, the research material was read and analysed based on the
category of outdoor activities. To do this, a qualitative content analysis (Mayring,
2010) was used. Qualitative content analysis involves systematising the empirical
material by looking at it through a certain category or category system. The starting
categories are filled with relevant parts of the research material, which are catego-
rised into subcategories of the empirical content. In the case of the analysis used in
this article, parental perceptions of outdoor activities was the starting category. This
was soon divided into two subcategories: positive and negative. However, a deeper
reading of the content showed that parental gender-related values and attitudes (e.g.,
gender-conservative or gender-liberal) and being the parent of a girl or a boy were
significant differentiating criteria. That is the reason for presenting the research
material on the basis of who is talking (gender-conservative parents of girls, gender-
liberal parents of girls, gender-conservative parents of boys and gender-liberal par-
ents of boys). The content of each group’s meanings is presented in a descriptive
way in the results part of the text. As the parental responses direct their focus to the
children’s perspectives to different degrees, reflections on this are included in the
presentation of the results as well as the discussion and conclusions.
Table 4.1 Overview of the background information of the participants. Source: own elaboration
Characteristic of the research participants Mothers Fathers Total
Vocational education 2 1 3
Technical secondary 3 4 7
Higher education 13 7 20
Declared conservative gender values 6 4 10
Declared liberal gender values 12 8 20
3–6 years in Norway 8 7 15
7 or more years in Norway 10 5 15
Total Mothers 18 Fathers 12 30
4.7.2 Research Participants
The research participants presented a rich array of educational backgrounds, with a

preponderance of highly educated mothers. The number of years that had passed
since their arrival in Norway was also very different. Nevertheless, they had gender-
related value positions that seemed to differentiate their perceptions of cultural for-
mation through outdoor activities in Norwegian ECECs, which is why these are
mentioned in Table 4.1.
4.7.3 Researcher
The researcher is herself a Polish migrant mother in Norway. During this project,
she had one child in a Norwegian kindergarten and was pregnant with another child.
Being a (pregnant) mother was experienced by the researcher as a trust-building
factor for the participants. Being in the same situation seemed to facilitate potential
participants’ involvement in the project.
4.7.4 Ethics
The interviews with the parents were conducted as part of a bigger research project:
Polish female migrants in Norway: A study of care deficit. This project is funded by
EEA grants and coordinated by Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin. The
project was undertaken in accordance with the General Guidelines for Research
Ethics (The Norwegian National Committees for Research Ethics, 2014). In the
case of the group interviews with the parents, all the research participants were
informed about the purpose of the study and the wider research project. In each
group, there was an individual who was suspicious of being recorded, so the discus-
sions were written down by the researcher and sent to the participants after each
interview had taken place. This was done to reconstruct certain utterances as soon
70 A. R. Sadownik
as possible following the interview. The written notes and reconstructions were ano-
nymised. The key list with the codes of the parents and their first names (not sur-
names) was presented to the parents in the form of a handout, which they gave back
during the same meeting. These handouts were shredded after the last reconstructed
transcript was made (May 2015). Participation in the interviews was voluntary, and
the participants were informed about the possibility of withdrawing at any stage of
the interviews.
4.8 Results
As seen in the empirical quotations below, the parents operate with a general con-
cept of outdoor activities; therefore, the presentation of the results starts with a list
of the outdoor activities that were detected across the whole research material.
These were as follows: whole-day trips, walking/hiking (also skiing and skating
depending on the quality of winter), climbing, preparing food and eating outdoors
(also in winter), carpeting, fishing, art-related activities performed outdoors, sleep-
ing outside, ball games, and visits to various natural/cultural landscapes in the
neighbourhood.
4.8.1 Gender-Traditional Parents of Boys
4.8.1.1 “ Manning the Boys Up”: Outdoor Activities

Safeguarding Heteronorm
Those parents who declared themselves to be gender-traditional and who were par-
ents of boys perceived the outdoor activities in the ECE as “good for the boys”
(Father 4, technical secondary education, 9 years in Norway). The benefits for boys
were understood in relation to the consideration that outdoor activities are good for
developing the masculine features of boys. However, when comparing the outdoor
activities in the Norwegian ECE to their own backgrounds in Poland, the parents
tended to comment that “it’s unusual how much time they spend outdoors” (Mother
3, vocational education, 4 years in Norway). Nevertheless, the outdoor activities
were generally perceived as good for “their boys” as they “man them up.”
It’s strange that they spend so much time outdoors, but maybe it’s good, actually. He [our
son] will at least not differ so much from his cousins in Poland … this gender is here over-
all, but I hope this outdoor staff will man him up, so that he is not like the … mayor of
Slupsk.1 (Mother 7, higher education, 6 years in Norway)
1
Referring to the first officially declared gay in Polish politics, who was elected to the mayoral
position of a little town: https://www.economist.com/europe/2018/09/20/
can-a-young-gay-mayor-change-poland
“Manning the boys up” was important for this group of parents, as it was seen as
preventing homosexuality in the future. In the quotation above, there is a direct
reference to the mayor of the Polish town Slupsk. Robert Biedron is internationally
known as the first gay mayor in Poland. Other parents did not refer to other well-
known gay people but rather described the outdoor activities as preventing the boys
from being “a sissy” (and other such formulations unmasking homophobic parental
attitudes rooted in a deeply internalised heteronormativity).
The outdoor activities thereby seemed to relieve the fear of “what if my boy ends
up gay?” What the parents did not appear to acknowledge was not only the child’s
agency in this process but also that the ECE staff mediated the outdoor activities to
the children. However, the sociocultural acceptance of homosexuality in Norwegian
society was both noticeable and worrying to them.
I’m worried when I think in what kind of society my son is growing up, with gays on every
level and a total acceptance for that. I hope that the harsh outdoor activities in the kinder-
garten will wake up his inner man and that he will not be influenced by the popular culture.
(Mother 1, secondary education, 7 years in Norway)
Even though the culture and society worried them, they did not mention the staff
who, from a sociocultural perspective, represent society in the children’s daily insti-
tutional life. They also did not seem to realise that the child was an actor or subject
who, operating in the borderline between home and the ECE setting, was in the
process of creating their self in dialogue with the encountered demands, expecta-
tions and value positions. This suggests that in these parents’ responses, the cultural
formation did not exist as a dialectical process but rather as a one-way influence on
children, who soak up all the content that was presented to them. These parents,
however, referred only to the content presented in the ECE setting, while the values
present at home were not mentioned as having any influence.
4.8.2 Gender-Liberal Parents of Boys
4.8.2.1 C
reating One’s Self in Respectful Dialogue with the Staff, Who
Impose Activities But Not Attitudes
In contrast, this group of parents was focused on how the kindergarten staff pre-
sented, explained and supported children in the outdoor activities. Equally impor-
tant were the children themselves, including their personalities, motives and
meanings. This suggests that in the utterances of these parents, the specific plane
(Hedegaard, 2012) of the persons involved in the activities was highlighted. The
parents of boys who were referred to as “more gentle” pointed to the importance of
the quality of interactions between the adult and the child in outdoor activities. The
parents of the “gentle boys” were very glad to hear and observe that the ECEC staff
did not force “their boys” to become “tough men” but that they showed respect and
helped the child to “be himself” in the process of the structured activity.
72 A. R. Sadownik
What we like is that our son is not being forced to be the “hard man.” He is rather delicate,
and I know that he is crying a lot on such a long trip when it’s raining or the hail falls, but I
also know that his feelings are recognised, that he hears that they understand his experience
and they show him ways to get warm again. This recognition of the child’s emotional reac-
tions is great here. (Mother 16, higher education, 7 years in Norway)
Directing the attention of the institution and its activities to the child’s perspective
had, according to this group of parents, other positive, long-term consequences.
4.8.2.2 O
utdoor Activities as Meeting the Child’s Interests
and Preventing “Drop-Out”
The other gender-liberal parents of boys pointed at outdoor activities as being in line
with their sons’ interests and thereby good. They said that they helped the boys to
know what they were good at, thereby building their self-esteem. This emphasis on
meeting the children’s interests could be interpreted as another way of parents
approaching the children’s perspectives on institutional activities.
What makes me so happy about the outdoor activities is that they are exactly what my son’s
like. I know him, and I know that he would have problems sitting and listening. In such a
case, he would only be told that he is doing something wrong: don’t run, sit down, don’t get
up and so on. And in a kindergarten with so much outdoor activity, he is not a problematic
naughty boy; he can be himself and learn that he can manage a lot of things. (Father 6,
higher education, 7 years in Norway)
These parents saw the outdoor activities—activities that matched the boys’ inter-
ests—as demands that the boys found easy to respond to as a result of their motives
and competences. Thereby, they were able to become more involved in the institu-
tional life in positive rather than just problematic ways. This suggests that the par-
ents perceived the outdoor activities as an institutional way of taking the children’s
perspective.
4.8.2.3 W
itnessing Girls as Equally Strong: Facilitating Gender Equality
in the Future
All the boys’ parents who declared themselves to be gender-liberal pointed to the
importance of the fact that “their boys” were witnessing girls participating in all
the—perceived as masculine—outdoor activities. That was described as good for
the development of gender-equal societies. Because of the normative content, in the
utterances below, the child’s perspective appeared not in terms of what the child
liked but in terms of what the child got access to. Watching peers of different gen-
ders performing the same outdoor activities was seen by this group of parents as
beneficial for their sons.
I’m so glad Piotr sees girls sawing wood, skiing and so on. (Father 6, higher education, 4
years in Norway)
This is what is necessary for the boys to see … so that it’s natural for them that we are
equal. I’m happy for my daughter-in-law—for the equal division of domestic work … if my
son decides to marry a woman [laughter]. (Mother 16, higher education, 7 years in Norway)
The last response offered a reflection on the heteronormativity that the mother was
aware of but did not want her son to feel forced to reproduce. She perceived, there-
fore, the outdoor activities as an arena that could be taken differently by individuals
regardless of gender. That was, in her eyes, beneficial for general equality between
genders not only in terms of equal division of domestic work but also in terms of
various life choices, including life-partner choice.
4.8.3 Gender-Traditional Parents of Girls
4.8.3.1 Outdoor Activities as a Tool of Normative Disaster
The gender-traditional parents of girls were aware that the kindergartens were struc-
tured to promote gender equality, but they saw the promotion of this, including
through outdoor activities, as a normative disaster. They seemed to be worried about
the values on which the upbringing of “their girls” was based in the ECEC setting,
including the kinds of effects this might have on their futures. Many of the conser-
vative parents mentioned the eventual possibility of returning to Poland to save their
daughters.
I’m afraid that she will lose her girlhood—and the possibility of being happy within the role
that women have in society … and that she will become a strange something girl–boy who
doesn’t know who she is … It’s against nature and not healthy. (Mother 3, secondary educa-
tion, 8 years in Norway)
This perception seemed to be rooted in heteronormative values, and it acknowl-

edged neither the staff, who could present the activities in different ways, nor the
children and their subjectivity during the process. The cultural formation through
outdoor activities was seen as a definitely one-way influence. The parental focus
was not directed to how the child might experience or respond to this; instead, it was
attached to the parent’s own fear of what the child might become (“a strange some-
thing”). Focusing on the unfulfilled heteronormative norm did not allow the parents
to recognise individuals who had a significant role in the child’s becoming.
4.8.3.2 I t’s Not for the Girls, But It’s Good for My Relationship

with My Daughter
Even though the parents representing traditional gender norms generally agreed on
the negative influence of outdoor activities on their daughters’ future gender perfor-
mance, some of the fathers revealed that they were happy that their daughters were
introduced to the outdoor activities. The reason primarily given was that they, the
74 A. R. Sadownik
fathers, also liked the outdoor activities very much. The vision of future outdoor
trips together with their daughters was much more tempting to the fathers than
accompanying them on typical girly activities. Moreover, sharing in an activity that
they both liked seemed to them to be a better base for building a relationship.
In the response below, a gender-traditional father approached the specific plane
(Hedegaard, 2012) of interpersonal interactions, realising that slipping from the
norm of the feminine female was in the long run better for both the daughter, him-
self and the relationship between them.
I agree that it’s maybe not for girls, all the wild stuff here … and the outdoors. It definitely
wasn’t for my little princess, as I imagined her before. But when I think about it, the more
I like it, because … I’m glad that instead of running around the shopping centres and beauty
salons with my teenage daughter, in the future, of course, I’ll be able to take her for a tent
trip, with a big chance that she’d really enjoy it. (Father 12, vocational education, 9 years
in Norway)
However, as in the utterances of other gender-traditional parents, neither the child’s

agency in cultural formation nor the home were mentioned as important value-
related contextual factors. The daughter appeared here in her future—outdoor enjoy-
ing—version, formed by the ECE setting. As this matched the father’s interests and
thus could strengthen the relationship between the two of them, the father was will-
ing to distance himself from the cultural gender norm (of keeping girls away from
outdoor activities). In other words, through looking at the outdoor activities through
the lens of an interpersonal plan, he challenged the necessity of implementing the
traditional gender norm in the case of his own child. It was also important that the
future “big chance that she’d really enjoy” the outdoor activities took as its point of
departure the fact that the girl already showed interest in these activities. This case
showed that the child’s perspective was taken into consideration when emancipating
oneself from traditional gender norms.
4.8.4 Gender-Liberated Parents of Girls
4.8.4.1 O
utdoor Activities as an Institutional Way of Meeting the Girls’
Diverse Interests
Pippi Longstocking appeared in the responses of gender-liberated parents, most

often as a descriptive and friendly label they put on their own daughters. When
Pippi Longstocking was mentioned by one parent during one of the interviews,
many others said, “yeah, my daughter is also a Pippi Longstocking” or “I also have
the honour to be a father of Pippi.” The label worked, on the one hand, as a recogni-
tion of the child’s perspective and a description of the daughter’s movement- and
outdoor-related interests, while, on the other hand, signalling parental approval of
the daughter’s process of overcoming the artificial borders that have traditionally
been put on girls (Graff, 2005). Moreover, the children’s perspectives and
experience of outdoor activities as well as other aspects of the ECE content were
highly valued and served as very basic criteria for discussing the ECE activities.
This is just so great, that she can be a girl in so many different ways here … and that she can
explore and choose herself what kind of girl she actually wants to be. I like that she can
explore, search, get dirty, but also be a princess and have fun with it. Especially because she
is rather a Pippi Longstocking type. (Mother 11, higher education, 12 years in Norway)
For the parents of those labelled Pippis, the outdoor activities offered by the kinder-
gartens were of crucial importance. They represented an institutional way of not
only taking the children’s interests seriously but also opening them up for diverse
performances of the female gender. The outdoor activities were, in this sense, an
institutional demand in which the daughters were supposed to get involved through
their motives and activities. However, the developed motives and activities were up
to the children. No particular child’s response to the educational offer was seen by
the parents as expected by the ECE staff. This indicates that the parents recognised
the ECE as facilitating the children’s cultural formation, with a focus on the chil-
dren’s self-creation through access to different kinds of content. When talking about
self-creation, the parents focused on the gender aspect; however, they were open to
very different ways of performing this, as both Pippi and Princess were welcome to
appear. As they generally saw their daughters as already emancipating from tradi-
tional gender norms by being Pippis, they also underlined the institutional openness
brought about by the outdoor offer, which allowed their daughters to respond with-
out disturbing the institutional order. “It’s important for me that she is not criticised
or in any way punished for being so ‘wild’ but that she gets an offer to which she
can respond by being herself” (Father 4, higher education, 4 years in Norway).
4.8.4.2 O
utdoor Activity and Interaction with Staff as Creating
Children’s Subjectivity
The staff’s openness to children’s experiences and dialogical engagement with the
institutional content were also noticed by the gender-liberated parents of girls who
did not possess outdoor interests and dispositions.
My daughter likes very much all the things that I as a feminist simply reject, but I allow her
to find her way. And this is what I like about the staff: that they know that my daughter
would rather stay inside and play being a princess, but the plan of the day is that everybody
goes out to run in the mud, and then they don’t expect that she will be happy about it. They
allow her to be unhappy by getting dirty, wet and cold. She is respected at the level of her
reactions to this. (Mother 17, higher education, 6 years in Norway)
This utterance shed light on another way of cultural formation taking place through
the outdoor activities, whereby the girl was allowed to dialogically engage in a rela-
tionship with the activity and the staff, creating herself as a subject resisting the
outdoor-life culture. She became involved with the institutional demands by devel-
oping stay-inside motives and resistance. The mother, who was able to take the
76 A. R. Sadownik
perspective of the child, allowed her daughter to do this, even if it contradicted value
positions that she chose herself as an adult woman.
4.9 Discussion
The results showed that the parental experience of the cultural formation taking
place through outdoor activities was framed by the parents’ value positions related
to gender as well as their ability to acknowledge the interpersonal plane and thereby
the child’s agency in the process of becoming. The liberal parents were more capa-
ble of including the child’s perspective as well as realising the complexity of the
interpersonal interactions directing in various ways both the processes of cultural
formation and the institutional life of the ECE setting. The traditional parents
seemed not to realise the institution’s specific plane (Hedegaard, 2012), nor did they
see their own children as subjects in ongoing cultural formation. This reflected how
they did not perceive cultural formation in the way that it is defined in this paper but
rather as a one-way stimulus (conflicting with their own values). Paradoxically, they
also did not recognise their own home-based and value-related influence on the
process.
This is why it was particularly interesting when a parent declaring traditional
values touched the specific plane of interacting individuals. This was a moment
when one-way influence transformed into cultural formation in which the child was
a subject. Father 12, when taking his daughter’s perspective, challenged his conser-
vative vision of her. Even though he limited the child’s perspective to what his
daughter liked and what “she with a big chance will enjoy,” this involved a transfor-
mation of his traditional norms with their potential consequences for his daughter’s
future life. Even if his response might be interpreted as having his own enjoyment
in focus (he liked outdoor activities very much), this showed that looking at outdoor
activities from the specific plane of interacting individuals could challenge his own
value positions and change his perception of institutional demands. Getting down to
the specific plane makes individuals important, thereby also making the children’s
perspectives significant.
Following the child’s individual needs and agency while in contact with a gen-
dered phenomenon such as outdoor activity allows the heteronormative matrix to be
challenged. Challenging and eventually overcoming the matrix is possible for chil-
dren because they are not yet completely programmed by it (Butler, 1990), and so
many actions not in line with the heteronormative gender division of activities are
likely to occur. However, taking the perspective of the child may also be about
allowing the child to follow the heteronormative matrix, even if this is against our
own gender values. That happened in the utterance of the feminist mother (Mother
17) who, by taking her daughter’s perspective, accepted her way of resisting the
outdoor artefacts and activities, even though the mother herself would have loved
her daughter to be a wild outdoor Pippi. Taking the child’s perspective allowed her
to see her own feminism as the result of a free individual choice, which again
enabled her to accept her daughter’s quite different choice.
4.10 Conclusions
Hedegaard (2012) claims that research focused on the sociocultural conditions of

children’s development should aim to improve the conditions of children’s develop-
ment. If we approach this objective through the results presented in this chapter, we
can point to the importance of enhancing the child’s perspective and the specific
plane of interpersonal interactions in ECE’s cooperation with parents.
The children’s perspectives were conceptualised by the interviewed parents as
the individual children’s preferences (activities they liked and enjoyed) and indi-
vidual features (e.g., delicate, sensitive, and not calm). However, they were also
perceived in terms of institutional adjustments involving the creation of activity
settings that demanded from the children motives and competences that were in line
with the children’s interests and personalities. The main conclusion of this paper in
terms of the research-based development of institutional practices is the importance
of ECE parental collaborations that not only extend our understanding of the child’s
perspective but also reflect on the ECE institutional context from this perspective.
These two aspects may become interesting starting points for early childhood
institutions and educators seeking to encourage dialogue with parents and caregiv-
ers to facilitate the transformation of parents’ values and agency in relation to the
cultural formation of the child as well as the development of the child as a self-
creating subject. Ideally, this dialogue between families and ECEs could form the
focus of participatory and action research in order to develop complex, yet appli-
cable and locally sensitive, knowledge.
References
Barker, M.-J. (2016). Queer: A graphic story. London: Icon Books.

Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
European External Action Service (EEAS). (2018). Gender equality: One of the fundamental
values of the EU. https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage_en/40929/
Gender%20Equality:%20one%20of%20the%20fundamental%20values%20of%20the%20EU
European Parliament. (2011). The policy on gender equality in Poland. http://www.europarl.
europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201107/20110725ATT24649/20110725ATT24649EN.pdf
Gal, S., & Klingman, G. (Eds.). (2000). Reproducing gender: Politics, publics, and everyday life
after socialism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Graff, A. (2005). Swiat bez kobiet. Plec w polskim zyciu publicznym. Warszawa, Poland:
Wydawnictwo W.A.B.
Graff, A. (2008). Rykoszetem. In Rzecz o plci, seksualnosci i narodzie. Warszawa, Poland:
Wydawnictwo W.A.B.
78 A. R. Sadownik
Hedegaard, M. (2012). Analyzing children’s learning and development in everyday settings from a
cultural–historical wholeness approach. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(2), 127–138.
ISSP Research Group. (2016). International social survey programme: Family and changing
gender roles IV. ISSP 2012. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5900 Data file Version 4.0.0,
https://doi.org/10.4232/1.12661
Jagose, A. (1997). Queer theory: An introduction. New York: NYU Press.
Jawor, A. (2014). Panika moralna wobec przemian w obrebie zycia rodzinnego we wspolczesnych
spoleczenstwach. Normy, dewiacje i kontrola spoleczna, 15, 128–143.
Kopciewicz, L. (2005). Kobiecosc, meskosc i przemoc symboliczna. Polsko-francuskie stadium
porownawcze. IMPULS.
Lindgren, A. (1977). Pippi Longstocking. New York: The Viking Press, Inc.. (First published in
the USA in 1950).
Lindgren, A. (1983). Ronia, the robber’s daughter. New York: Penguin Books. (First published in
Swedish in 1981).
Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), 1–10.
Ødegaard, E. E. (2016). Glocality in play: Efforts and dilemmas in changing the model of the
teacher for the Norwegian national framework for kindergartens. Policy Futures in Education,
14(1), 42–59.
Ødegaard, E. E., & White, E. J. (2016). Bildung: Potential and promise in early childhood edu-
cation. In M. Peters (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory. Singapore,
Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7
Sullivan, N. (2003). A critical introduction to queer theory. New York: NYU Press.
Sylva, K. (2010). Foreword. In D. Sommer, I. Pramling Samuelsson, & K. Hundeide (Eds.), Child
perspectives and children’s perspectives in theory and practice (pp. V–VIII). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3316-1
The Norwegian National Committees for Research Ethics. (2014). General guide-
lines for research ethnics. https://www.etikkom.no/en/ethical-guidelines-for-research/
general-guidelines-for-research-ethics/
Tømmervåg, M. (2017). Når gutter bryter den maskuline kjønns-normen [When boys break the
masculine gender norm]. Bachelor thesis, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.
UDIR. (2017). Framework plan for kindergartens: Contents and tasks. Norwegian Ministry
of Education and Research. https://www.udir.no/globalassets/filer/barnehage/rammeplan/
framework-plan-for-kindergartens2-2017.pdf
Vygotsky, L. S. (1934). Foundations of pedology [Osnovy pedologii]. 2d Moscow, Russia: Medical
Institute Press.
Chapter 5
Children’s Play and Social Relations
in Nature and Kindergarten Playgrounds:
Examples from Norway
Abstract In kindergarten, outdoor playtime is usually a break from more struc-

tured activities. It is leisure time and an opportunity for children to engage in free
play with friends. Previous research indicates that time spent outdoors facilitates
playful physical activity and that playing in nature inspires children’s creativity,
imaginations and play across age and gender. In short, play and social relations are
crucial for young children’s development and cultural formation. This study inves-
tigated children’s play activities during outdoor playtime in nature and on kinder-
garten playgrounds. Its empirical materials consisted of video observations of 12
four-year-old’s activities in nature and on a kindergarten playground and interviews
with two kindergarten teachers. One child, Benjamin was the primary focus, and
five more were also included. Two examples of one child’s social play in nature and
on the playground were analysed to illuminate the different conditions and chal-
lenges he encountered. The findings indicate that children’s play in nature tends to
be more creative and inclusive than that on kindergarten playgrounds, that kinder-
garten teachers participate more in children’s play in nature than on playgrounds
and that children are sensitive to and try to engage in what they view as a correct
form of discourse with their teachers. The author argues for further research on the
subject to learn more about children’s social relations, creativity and cultural forma-
tion during outdoor playtime in nature.
Keywords Children’s play activities · Kindergarten playground · Outdoor

playtime · Playgroups · Play spaces in nature · Social relations
H. V. Sørensen (*)

80 H. V. Sørensen
5.1 Introduction
Outdoor playtime is valued in the Nordic countries and internationally in Early

Childhood Education and Care institutions. The time outside is seen as a break from
more structured activities that occur inside. It is leisure time and an opportunity for
children to engage in free play with friends. Kindergartens and kindergarten teach-
ers are central to securing the conditions for children’s play in ECEC. Almost all
young children in the Nordic countries1 attend public or private kindergartens,
where they spend approximately 7.5 h a day. In the Norwegian Framework Plan for
the Content and Tasks of Kindergarten (2017), it is stated ‘play shall be a key focus
in kindergarten, and the inherent value of play shall be acknowledged. Kindergartens
shall make good provision for play, friendship and the children’s own culture’
(2017, p. 20). It goes on to say that ‘kindergartens shall inspire and make room for
different kinds of play both outdoors and indoors’ (p. 20).
These societal and political statements define play as important for children’s
development and cultural formation, and they oblige kindergartens to offer good
conditions for play. However, the plan does not contain precise descriptions of how
kindergartens should meet the obligations, though it is clear that children’s play
should be prioritised.
Kindergartens are societal institutions, each with a specific history and specific
social and physical conditions. Institutional history is reified through children’s par-
ticipation and social interactions in the available activities, which condition their
development and cultural formation (Bang, 2009). According to Barker and Wright
(1966, 1971 as cited in Bang, 2009), the concept of the human environment can be
summarised in three general dimensions: artefacts, social others and self. However,
the physical environment is important as well (Fjørtoft, 2001, 2004; Grahn,
Mårtensson, Lindblad, Nilsson, & Ekman, 1997). Social play is important for young
children, and outdoor play in nature or on playgrounds affords ideal opportunities
for it. Several years ago, Swedish landscape architect Grahn et al. (1997) studied
children’s activities and development in two kindergartens. Their results showed
how the conditions for children’s play were influencing their activities and their
development. Children showed better results in motor function (i.e., balance, agility
and strength), health and cognitive skills (i.e., concentration when conditions
allowed them to climb, run, build, tumble and hide and have space for their imagina-
tions, independence and social play in small and larger groups (Grahn et al., 1997,
p. 96–97). Additionally, they found that children who spend many hours outdoors in
all weather and in natural landscapes are better positioned for learning and develop-
ment than children who spend their outdoor playtime on a playground with limited
variations in terrain and equipment. In a natural landscape, where there is enough
space for children to find interesting spaces in which to play, their activities are
more imaginative and more varied, ranging from wild and noisy to calm and quiet.
1
According to Nordic Statistics, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Iceland, 97% of children from
three to five attend kindergarten, in Finland it is 70% (NOSOSKO, 2014).
5 Children’s Play and Social Relations in Nature and Kindergarten Playgrounds… 81
There were more disturbances and conflicts on kindergarten playgrounds than in

nature, which the researchers attributed to the limited amount of space. Norwegian
researchers Sandseter (2009, 2010) and Gurholt and Sanderud (2016) reached the
same conclusions, adding that children’s curiosity and engagement in explorative
activities and risky play enjoy better conditions in nature.
A recent study of 5-year-old children’s physical activity in 43 kindergartens in
Denmark showed that they engaged in more physical activity when they were out-
doors (Olesen, 2014) and another found that their play activities were more diverse
when teachers regularly participated and allowed the activities to be rough and wild
(Sørensen, 2013). In line with this, Sandseter (2009, 2010) found that it is important
for children’s well-being and development to include possibilities to engage in risky
play, such as climbing trees, in which falling is a risk, or playing in the wilderness,
in which getting lost is a risk. Ulset, Vitaro, Brendgen, Bekkhus, and Borge (2017)
examined the relations between children’s time spend outdoors and their cognitive
and behavioural development, finding that outdoortime in preschool supports chil-
dren’s development of attention skills and protects against attention problems and
hyperactivity symptoms.
Children in most Norwegian kindergartens spend 1–2 h a day outside on the
playground during the winter and more than 4 h in summer (Paulsen et al., 2012 as
quoted in Løndal & Fasting, 2016). Children in outdoor kindergartens spend more
time outdoor in general than children in other kinds of kindergarten do (Birkeland
& Sørensen, this volume, Ulset et al., 2017). Regular trips outside the kindergarten
area to other play places, such as forests or parks, provide children with opportuni-
ties for a variety of activities depending on the environment and its affordances
(Bang, 2009; Fasting, 2015).
In some European countries (e.g. Poland), parents expect and allow their boys to
go out and play in the dirt, but their girls are expected to play more quietly (Sadownik,
this volume). In the Anji province in China, outdoor play is encouraged (He, this
volume) more than it is in other regions (Birkeland & Sørensen, this volume),
though recognition of its relevance is growing. Playful outdoor physical activity is
a good opportunity for children to be with friends and have fun (Sandseter, 2009,
2010; Sørensen, 2013). Fantasy play and role play are also important ways of
acquiring competences and learning about one self and the social world (Fleer,
2012; Sørensen, 2017).
Just as physical environments shape children’s outdoor experiences, kindergar-
ten teachers and the pedagogical practice do as well. In a study on kindergarten
teachers’ interaction styles, Løndal and Greve (2015, p. 469) found three main
approaches to teachers’ involvement with children: a surveillance approach, an ini-
tiating and inspiring approach and a participating and interactional approach. The
surveillance style is often practiced when outdoor playground time is defined as
time for children’s undisturbed free play alone or with peers and supervised by one
or two kindergarten teachers. Earlier research (Sørensen, 2013, 2017) revealed that
most children spend their outdoor playtime engaged in play activities and having
fun with other children. Often, during outdoor playtime, kindergarten teachers’ take
coffee breaks in shifts and do practical work or have meetings with colleagues,
82 H. V. Sørensen
parents or other professionals, meaning that child-teacher ratios are often lower than
during the rest of the day. Additionally, kindergarten teachers interact more with
children in nature-based play spaces or in other spaces beyond the kindergarten
playground than they do on the playground, and therefore all children can be
expected to be included in playgroups and social activities when play is experienced
beyond the kindergarten (Sørensen, 2017). Based on this research, it is obvious that
there is a need for a fuller understanding of how different conditions, environments,
people, artefacts and pedagogical practices form the social situations for children’s
development during outdoor playtime.
This study focuses on a 4-year-old boy named Benjamin and his social situation
and cultural formation in outdoor playtime in kindergarten. It is not a study of his
individual development; rather, the aim was to investigate how different outdoor
play settings (i.e., nature and the kindergarten playground) afford different social
activities for children and to examine how their individual learning, development
and cultural formation take place through dialogical interplay with the environ-
ments, artefacts and other people. The research question is: how do play spaces in
nature create conditions for children’s play and social relations relative to those of
kindergarten playgrounds?
5.2 Theoretical Perspective on Play
The cultural historical theory of child development defines play as a purposeful and
meaningful activity for children and the leading form of activity for those of pre-
school age (Vygotsky, 1966); through play, children learn about themselves and the
world around them, and play frames their development and cultural formation.
Children learn about the social world and achieve important competences in their
interactions with kindergarten teachers and other children (Hedegaard, 2008). Play
is the leading source of development in children’s preschool years, and therefore,
the conditions for play are part of the conditions for children’s learning, develop-
ment and cultural formation in early childhood education (Vygotsky, 1966, 1978).
Several Nordic ECEC researchers have spoken in favour of young children’s right
to play in kindergarten and against school-like activities taking over that important
time or efforts to use play as a tool only for learning (Hedegaard, 2014, 2017;
Øksnes, 2017; Sommer, 2015, 2018, Tanggaard, 2015). They have also warned poli-
ticians and professionals against the consequences of restricting the time and space
for play by focusing on school activities because the outcome may be that children
are less likely to learn. As a way of protecting the conditions for children’s play in
kindergarten, Tanggaard (2015) suggested a focus on creativity in pedagogical and
didactical practice. According to Tanggaard, creativity is not only related to aes-
thetical or artistic activity; rather, children are creative when they actively and curi-
ously explore and investigate their environment, engage in fantasy and otherwise
use their imaginations.
5.3 C
hildren’s Learning, Development
The youngest children are dependent on caring social relations with their parents
(Stern, 1977, 1985), and from ages three to six, which is their preschool epoch,
interactions and social relations with peers are crucial to their well-being, learning
and development (Schaffer, 1999; Sommer, 2003, 2015). Creative, social and imag-
inary play are meaningful activities for the child and have positive effects on chil-
dren’s learning, development and cultural formation (Bozhovich, 2009; Fleer, 2009;
Schousboe, 2013; van Oers, 2013; Vygotsky, 1966). Nature and outdoor life have
positive influences on children’s development, including motor development as a
result of engaging in play and movement on varying terrain and physical and mental
health as a result of the fresh air and calm environments (Sandseter, 2009).
Additionally, nature and outdoor life positively influence cognitive development
because of the possibilities of exploring and learning about different phenomena in
nature, such as plants, animals and insects (Grahn et al., 1997; Ulset et al., 2017).
Additionally, children can discuss philosophical questions about life and death
(Lipponen, 2019) with engaged and available kindergarten teachers when, for
example, they see small creatures or dead animals.
Children’s motives in play are meaningful to them even if they may be unknown
to their teachers. In cultural-historical theory, a motive is more than an object that a
person desires; it is part of a culturally meaningful practice and is embedded in a
societal practice, such as kindergarten. A motive can emerge in play and can be a
wish to be with friends, have fun or engage in risky or imaginary play. Motives and
motivation are not properties of a person or factors that determine actions but are
representative of ‘a dynamic relation between person and practice’ (Hedegaard &
Chaiklin, 2005, as cited in Fleer, 2012, p. 91).
5.4 S
tudying children’s Outdoor Play Activities
and Social Relations
This study investigated children’s play activities and social relations during outdoor
playtime in order to understand how conditions differ in nature and on kindergarten
playgrounds and how these differences influence children’s play, social relations
and cultural formation. The case study was qualitative, and the data collection meth-
ods were video observations and interviews. In employing the interaction-based
observation method (Hedegaard, 2008; Sørensen, 2019), the researcher captured
children’s activities, physical movements and dialogue. The empirical materials
consisted of 4 h of video observations of the children’s activities in nature and on
the kindergarten playground with Julie and Sara during autumn 2015 and spring
2016. The use of a video camera allowed the researcher to focus on one or more
children and to interact with them without having to take notes. Ethical reflections
84 H. V. Sørensen
on the use of video observation in child research were necessary to respect of chil-
dren’s privacy (Sørensen, 2014). Three semi-structured interviews were conducted
with the kindergarten teachers responsible for the children to get insights into the
reflections and considerations behind the pedagogical practices related to outdoor
playtime, the teachers’ understandings of the social relations in children’s play-
groups and their thoughts about their involvement with children both in nature and
at the kindergarten (Flick, 2002).
5.4.1 The Kindergarten
This study took place at an outdoor kindergarten in a suburban area of Western

Norway. The kindergarten has 90 children from 1 to 6 years old divided into six
groups. The kindergarten’s pedagogical practice was based on traditional Norwegian
values that include a close connection to and passion for nature and an active out-
door lifestyle. Children spent most of their time outdoors. Three days a week, from
around 9:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., they went on tours to other play spaces, such as natu-
ral playgrounds, sports arenas and public parks. Before leaving for the tour every
morning, the children waited for everybody to be ready and played for a while on
the playground; before their parents arrived to take them home in the afternoon;
they spent time on the playground primarily engaged in self-initiated play but some-
times also in teacher-organised play activities. The remaining two days of the week
were spent at the kindergarten; most of the days were spent on the playground, and
meals were served outside unless it was very cold and rainy. When parents enrolled
their children in the outdoor kindergarten, they received information about its peda-
gogical practice and values. They were told that children were allowed to engage in
risky play (i.e., climbing trees and playing close to water or around a campfire).
They were also informed of the very likely possibility of children coming home
with dirty clothes.
The children and their teachers valued outdoor playtime, viewing it as a break
from indoor activities and a good possibility for free play. Additionally, it contrib-
uted to fulfilling the aims of the Framework Plan for the Content and Tasks of
Kindergarten (2017): ‘Kindergarten shall be a safe and challenging place in which
the children can experiment with different aspects of interaction, community and
friendship’ (p. 11) and ‘kindergarten shall be an arena for daily physical activity,
and it shall promote joy of movement and motor development in the children’
(p. 11).
5.4.2 Children
Benjamin is the focus child in the examples of social play, and his efforts to initiate
and participate in play with other children while in nature and on the playground
were analysed from his perspective. In social play situations, Anna, Laura, John,
Peter and Tom from the group of 12 four-year-old children were also included.
5.4.3 Kindergarten Teachers
Two kindergarten teachers, Julie and Sara, both had deep roots in the Norwegian
tradition of recognising outdoor life as important to cultural formation. They both
had several years of experience at the outdoor kindergarten.
5.4.4 The Empirical Material
The analyses of the video observations utilised Vygotsky’s theory of play and child
development (1966) and Hedegaard’s model (2008) for analysing children’s social
situation of development in which the personal, institutional and societal levels are
interrelated as the conditions for children’s everyday lives in kindergarten. In the
analyses, children’s play activities and social relations were examined in relation to
conditions in nature and on the playground. The interviews were analysed to reveal
the kindergarten teachers’ understandings of their societal responsibility for chil-
dren’s cultural formation, how Norwegian values and traditions were incorporated
into their pedagogical practice and how outdoor playtime was organised as part of
the pedagogical practice.
5.5 B
enjamin’s Play Activities and Participation
in Playgroups
Two examples of Benjamin’s play activities and his participation in playgroups in

nature and on the playground are presented here to illuminate how easily he estab-
lished shared imaginary play with Anna in nature but struggled to be included in
play on the playground first with Laura and then with John, Peter and Tom. The
analyses adopted Benjamin’s perspective to see how different conditions, environ-
ments and artefacts offered different possibilities for his play and inclusion. In the
first example, Benjamin and Anna found a challenging path in a small forest leading
to a fine spot they called The King’s Place for imaginary play, and some of the other
children came and joined their play. In the second example, Hey, don’t push me,
86 H. V. Sørensen
Benjamin and Laura were engaged in a social play activity on the playground until
Laura physically and verbally rejected Benjamin. After the rejection, Benjamin
made many attempts to find other playmates before he was accepted as a participant
in another group. The examples were chosen because Benjamin had an active role
in the social situation and took the initiative several times, but his social interactions
differed in the two play spaces, and the differences seemed to be related to the
conditions.
5.5.1 Example 1. The King’s Place
On this day in October, the 12 children and two teachers left the kindergarten and
walked to a public park with a small forest. Benjamin and Anna walked into the
wilderness through some tall grass and wild bushes. Benjamin and Anna climbed up
a big tree. They found themselves a place to sit, and Benjamin made sounds as if he
was shooting and flying. ‘Now we’re here,’ he said. I (the observer) asked them
where they were. Anna answered, ‘At school.’ Benjamin answered, ‘On Iceland’,
and he continued, ‘This spaceship…’ and then ‘I’m the king.’ Anna added, ‘I’m a
king too.’ ‘Yes’, said Benjamin, ‘we are kings of the entire world.’ Three other chil-
dren joined them in the tree. Benjamin pointed at me and said to Anna: ‘She’s a
baby.’ I answered with some baby sounds, giggling, and they both looked at me,
laughing. Benjamin made his spaceship send some meatballs2 in my direction.
When Benjamin and Anna were together in their adventurous play and mutually
positive interactions, they shared the intentions of playing an imaginary game in
nature and they interacted with the artefacts offered by the conditions. During their
dialogue, they created the King’s Place together, building on the environment and
each other’s ideas and fantasies in which almost anything was possible because the
environment and artefacts were open to their creative and fantastical interpretations.
They might not have shared the same inner imagining of The King’s Place, but they
did share the imaginary play. Additionally, through their playful interactions, they
created a common imagination in dialectic interplay with the environment; they cre-
ated their own social situation (Hedegaard, 2008).
During their play and social relation, they confirmed each other’s imaginations.
Their play and imaginations were verified by the other children’s interest and by an
adult, namely me, watching and filming them while I was smiling and joining in.
They could tell they had created something special, which had a positive effect on
their cultural formation.
2
I presume that Benjamin’s inspiration to shoot with meatballs stem from an animation movie for
children: Cloudy with a chance of meatballs. Sony Pictures Entertainment, 2009.
5.5.1.1 ‘What Does She Want to Hear From Us?’
Julie, one of the teachers, was also interested in the imaginary play at The King’s
Place, so she asked Anna and Benjamin what they were playing and what they were
doing in their play. Anna told her about the shortcut and explained that it was some
kind of a secret path through the wilderness, very challenging with tall grass and
wild bushes. Anna also told her about The King’s Place. Benjamin told her about
how safe this place was for them to play in, with branches to hold on to so they
would not fall.
Julie was close enough to see their play and wanted to show her interest in learn-
ing about it, and she asked them what they were doing. In their conversation with
her, Benjamin and Anna referred to two categories of risky play (Sandseter, 2009)3:
play with the risk of getting lost and play at heights. Using their imagination, the
children could feel the real risk of getting lost in the tall grass and wild bushes, even
though they were not so far away from the group. The path they took was more
exciting than the ordinary and easy path, and it was a good example of how nature
offers conditions for children’s exploration and imaginary play with their peers. To
assure Julie of how secure they were, Benjamin demonstrated that he was conscious
of the risk of playing at heights and had decided it would be safe enough for them.
It was interesting that Anna and Benjamin understood Julie’s question differently.
Anna told her about their exciting play, and Benjamin told her about the safety of
their play spot.
5.5.2 Example 2: ‘Hey, Don’t Push Me!’
The second example is from a morning on the kindergarten playground. Benjamin

was playing with Laura on the slide; they seemed to be enjoying themselves. Only
one kindergarten teacher, Sara was present on the playground. She was busy, both
supervising the playground and preparing a warm meal to cook on the fire and serve
the children at lunch.
Benjamin and Laura went down the slide side by side and climbed up together in
what seemed to be a positive relation with a common understanding of the activity.
The first conflict occurred when Laura pushed Benjamin so he went down alone and
she remained sitting at the top. Benjamin seemed unhappy about this; he had a sad
look on his face but did not say anything. He climbed back up and sat beside Laura
again. She pushed him down the slide one more time, and this time, with an
aggrieved voice, he shouted, ‘No!’ He climbed up again, and when he got to the top,
he told Laura, ‘Hey, don’t push me!’ He tried to continue the sliding activity, but
Laura kept pushing him away. Then Benjamin changed his play activity and began
3
In her research, Sandseter described six categories of risky play: 1) play at great heights, 2) play
at high speed, 3) play with harmful tools, 4) play near dangerous elements, 5) rough-and-tumble
play and 6) play where the children can get lost.
88 H. V. Sørensen
to run up the slide. He tried several times, variating the lengths of his strides but
without success. After having watched Benjamin’s efforts, Laura came down from
the top and tried to run up the slide. She took a long inlet and ran at full speed up the
slide until Benjamin slid into her. It was not clear whether Benjamin’s move was
deliberate or accidental. Laura said, ‘Don’t, Benjamin! Benjamin!’ with anger in
her voice, and she continued: ‘Now I’m leaving!’ She walked away from the slide,
and Benjamin followed her for a while before giving up.
Benjamin’s and Laura’s play and social situation changed from harmony to con-
flict, and then Laura left Benjamin. In my interpretation, Benjamin’s intention was
to be with Laura and play with her, and Laura’s intention was to see how Benjamin
would react to her quite repellent behaviour. Going down the slide and climbing
back up could have become boring after a while, which might have been why she
decided to push him. The teacher did not notice the conflict, and none of the chil-
dren alerted her.
After Laura left Benjamin, he tried to get into a playgroup with John, Peter and
Tom, who were playing with some small cars. ‘I’m going to the airport’, Peter said,
and the children discussed where the drive should begin and where they were driv-
ing. Benjamin stood beside John, with Tom and Peter nearby. John looked at the
three other boys and shouted, ‘Come on, Tom and Peter!’ Benjamin followed them.
John turned around, and in a quiet and friendly voice, he said, ‘We want to play by
ourselves for a little while, Benjamin.’ A few seconds later, John said to Benjamin:
‘Well, do you want to play by yourself? Do you want to play by yourself?’ I could
not hear Benjamin’s answer, but John said, ‘Then go away.’ John turned around and
said to Tom and Peter: ‘Benjamin wants to play alone.’
Trying to become a member of the other playgroup was not easy for Benjamin.
John seemed to be the leader, and he did not want Benjamin to join. Maybe he had
some negative experiences with Benjamin, or maybe he wanted to maintain his play
as it was. Tom and Peter did not seem to care; they did not actively invite or exclude
Benjamin. John only asked Tom and Peter to come with him. He changed his mes-
sage to Benjamin from ‘we want to play by ourselves’ to ‘Benjamin wants to play
alone’ in order to indicate that it was Benjamin’s decision not to play with them.
However, Benjamin did not give up. He was patient and persistent, and after a while,
he participated in the car play activity.
Laura later joined the car play, and she, Benjamin and Peter ran after the cars
driving down the hill. John sat on the ground, watching the cars go down the hill and
children returning them. Peter informed me, the observer: ‘We’re running a car
race.’ I tried to get more information, but they ignored me. After some time and
effort, Benjamin finally seemed to be included as a member of the playgroup.
The conditions on the playground were not so inspiring for imaginary play. The
slide was a piece of equipment that only allowed for going down or running up.
Sliding down was easy, but running up was not. Playing with the small cars became
a competition among the children. Based on my analysis and interpretations of this
video observation, I concluded that Benjamin intended to interact and play with
some other children on the playground. He wanted to be physically active, using his
body and exploring the possibilities the conditions offered. The relationship between
Benjamin and Laura seemed to be equal in the beginning, but after Laura rejected
Benjamin, he tried to establish their play relation again but did not succeed. Then he
tried to be included in the new playgroup by following their ideas and their way
around the playground to find a place to play. He compromised and let the other
children decide the content and actions of the activity, and after several attempts, he
managed to be included. Benjamin was alone and persistent in his efforts, not ask-
ing the teacher (or the observer) for help. In nature, the teacher was interacting with
Benjamin and Anna, but on the playground, she was busy and not involved in their
activities.
The examples are not representative of all children in outdoor kindergartens;
however, situations such as these are common. The examples illuminate the social
situations of a child who is a popular playmate when the conditions are open and
there is room for creative play and the interpretation of natural artefacts and envi-
ronment but who struggle to be accepted as member of a playgroup when the condi-
tions and artefacts are less open to fantasy and imagination.
Interviews with the teachers revealed that they enjoyed being in nature and shar-
ing their passion for outdoor life with the children. They valued experiences in
nature as more important for children’s cultural formation and future lives than
traditional indoor school activities, such as drawing, writing names and counting
numbers. When the teachers took the group to other play spaces outside the kinder-
garten, they appreciated having time to engage in play and other activities with the
children without the interferences of work and meetings. They also had time to talk
to the children about societal or scientific topics with the purpose of teaching them
and preparing them for the future. Due to safety, there were more kindergarten
teachers for the group of 12 children when they went beyond the playground, and
there were no meetings or other disturbances, so they had more time and better
opportunities to interact with the children and engage in their activities.
5.6 Discussion
‘In play a child is free. But this is an illusory freedom’ (Vygotsky, 1966, p. 10). The
findings in this study show how outdoor playtime on playgrounds can be a painful
arena for children striving to be accepted. Benjamin had to be very persistent to be
included in a playgroup on the playground with a teacher supervising but not inter-
vening. In nature, however, he was a popular playmate with fantastical ideas for
imaginary play, attracting other children to become member of his very open and
inclusive playgroup. These findings indicate that play spaces in nature offer better
conditions for creative and inclusive activities and that nature facilitates children’s
play outside their usual playgroups. Additionally, nature provides conditions for a
variety of play that contributes to children’s cultural formation. Sharing imaginings
and creative ideas in social relations facilitates new relations and friendships, which
is positive for children’s well-being, learning, development, cultural formation and
awareness of diversity.
90 H. V. Sørensen
Another finding is that the ways kindergarten teachers interact with children tend
to be more participatory in natural conditions, whereas on the playground, the
approach is more one of monitoring, as teachers need to supervise a larger area with
many children and be ready for an intervention if any of the children get into serious
trouble.
Play on playgrounds is valued as an opportunity for children to learn to get along
in larger groups without needing the close support of adults; they can handle smaller
problems by themselves and become more robust. In addition, kindergarten teachers
value the outdoor lifestyle and aim for children to become more accustomed to it,
though it can be difficult sometimes (i.e., when children are cold or tired but still
have to carry their backpacks and continue walking because the teachers expect the
experience to help them overcome larger problems or challenges later in life).
5.7 Conclusion
The aim of this study was to investigate how outdoor environments in nature and on
kindergarten playgrounds are associated with children’s social relations and imagi-
nary play. I examined how nature creates and affords better and more inclusive
conditions for children’s play and social relations and how their learning, develop-
ment and cultural formation takes place through dialogical interplay with environ-
ments, artefacts and other people.
By interpreting the empirical materials to find patterns in the situated complexi-
ties of the institutional practice (Hedegaard, 2008), I found different conditions for
children’s play activities and social relations in nature than on the kindergarten
playground, specifically in relation to their inclusion in playgroups. In nature, the
environment and artefacts are more open to children’s imaginations than the equip-
ment and artefacts of a kindergarten playground. The teachers have more time and
fewer tasks in nature, and they can be more involved and focused on children’s
activities and well-being.
Allowing children to engage in social play in nature tends to have positive all-
round effects on their development. They practice their movements, imitate others’
movements, plan how to master new challenges, learn to try more than once, find
that they are able to do what they intend and feel the success of overcoming new
challenges. Environments that can support children’s creativity and curiosity offer
possibilities for a variety of play activities. With enough well-educated kindergarten
teachers aware of how to relate to children in a respectful way and with warmth and
interest, children will experience better conditions for learning, development and
cultural formation.
This study’s empirical material illustrated how complicated it can be for a child
to participate in a playgroup on a playground compared to in nature. When strug-
gling to find somebody to play with, play is not a pleasure and is not free at all;
rather, it is an experience characterised by a conflict, rejection and compromise
when trying to adapt to a playgroup from a position of little or no power.
This study also revealed that children are quite sensitive to the demands of their
teachers and try to engage in what they view as a correct form of discourse while
demonstrating their awareness of different adults’ roles and functions. We saw how
at The King’s Place, Anna and Benjamin tried to adjust their comments to what they
expected Julie wanted to hear, while their dialogue with the researcher was more
playful.
Finally, based on findings of this study, an argument can be made in support of
giving young children time to play in nature with space for creative and meaningful
activities and with kindergarten teachers present because of the positive effect this
has on their social relations, cultural formation, learning and development. Because
play, social relations and friendship are so important in children’s lives, there is a
need for further research focusing on the conditions for play (Hangaard, Rasmussen,
& Øksnes, 2017) and the influence of play in their cultural formation, learning and
futures.
References
Bang, J. (2009). An environmental affordance perspective on the study of development – Artefacts,

social others, and self. In M. Fleer, J. Tudge, & M. Hedegaard (Eds.), Childhood Studies and the
Impact of Globalization: Policies and Practices at Global and Local Levels. World Yearbook of
Education. New York: Routledge.
Birkeland, Å., & Sørensen, H. V. (this volume). Time regulation as institutional condition for chil-
dren’s outdoor play and cultural formation in kindergarten. In L. T. Grindheim, H. V. Sørensen,
& A. Rekers (Eds.), Outdoor learning and play: Pedagogical practices and children’s cultural
formation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Bozhovich, L. I. (2009). The social situation of child development. Journal of Russian and East
European Psychology, 47(4), 59–86.
Fasting, M. L. (2015). Klatring i trær og hyttebygging: – om barns lek og lekesteder ute. Nordic
Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 10(6), 1–12.
Fjørtoft, I. (2001). The natural environment as a playground for children: The impact of outdoor
play activities in pre-primary schoolchildren. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2),
111–117.
Fjørtoft, I. (2004). Landscape as playscape: The effects of natural environments on children’s play
and motor development. Children, Youth and Environments, 14(2), 21–44.
Fleer, M. (2009). A cultural-historical perspective on play: Play as a leading activity across cultural
communities. In I. Pramling-Samuelsson & M. Fleer (Eds.), Play and learning in early child-
hood settings. New York: Springer.
Fleer, M. (2012). The development of motives in children’s play. In M. Hedegaard, A. Edwards, &
M. Fleer (Eds.), Motives in children’s development. Cambridge University Press.
Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research. Los Angeles: Sage.
Framework Plan. (2017). Framework Plan for the content and tasks of kindergartens. Oslo,
Norway: Minestry of Education and Research.
Grahn, P., Mårtensson, F., Lindblad, B., Nilsson, P., & Ekman, A. (1997). Ute på dagis. Alnarp,
Sweden: MOVIUM.
Gurholt, K. P., & Sanderud, J. R. (2016). Curious play: children’s exploration of nature. Journal of
Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 16(4), 318–329.
Hangaard Rasmussen, T., & Øksnes, M. (2017). Legeforskningens position og fremtid i Norden. In
M. Øksnes & T. Hangaard Rasmussen (Eds.), Lek. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm.
92 H. V. Sørensen
Hedegaard, M. (2008). Developing a dialectical approach to researching children’s development.

In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), with J. Bang and P. Hviid Studying children: A cultural-
historical approach. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Hedegaard, M. (2014). The significance of demands and motives across practices in children’s
learning and development: An analysis of learning in home and school. Learning, Culture, and
Activity, 3, 188–194.
Hedegaard, M. (2017). When daycare professionals’ values for transition to school do not align
with the educational demands from society and school: A practice developing research proj-
ect for daycare professionals’ support to children’s transition to school. In A. Edwards (Ed.),
A cultural-historical approach to collaboration (pp. 247–264). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Lipponen, L. 2019. Exploring compassion organizing in early childhood education. Paper presen-
tation at the CHACDOC-conference in Bergen.
Løndal, K., & Fasting, M. L. (2016). Magien i utetiden. In M. Øksnes & E. Sundsdal (Eds.),
Læring. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm.
Løndal, K., & Greve, A. (2015). Didactic approaches to child-managed play: Analyses of teach-
er’s interaction styles in kindergartens and after-school programmes in Norway. International
Journal of Early Childhood, 47, 461–479.
NOSOSKO. (2014). Social security in the Nordic countries. Copenhagen, Denmark: NOSOSCO.
Øksnes, M. (2017). “Play is very ordinary, yet very magical” interview with Wendy Russell. In
M. Øksnes & T. Hangaard Rasmussen (Eds.), Lek. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm.
Olesen, L. G. (2014). Correlates of objectively measured physical activity in Danish preschool
children. Odense, Denmark: The Odense Preschool Study (TOPS).
Sadownik, A. (this volume). Princesses (don’t) run in the mud. Tracing child’s perspectives in
parental perception of cultural formation through outdoor activities in Norwegian ECEs. In
L. T. Grindheim, H. V. Sørensen, & A. Rekers (Eds.), Outdoor learning and play: Pedagogical
practices and children’s cultural formation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Sandseter, E. B. H. (2009). Risky play and risk management in Norwegian preschools – A qualita-
tive observational study. Safety Science, 13(1), 1–12.
Sandseter, E. B. H. (2010). ‘It tickles in my tummy’: Understanding children’s risk-taking in play
through reversal theory. Journal of Early Childhood Research, Vol, 8(1), 67–88.
Schaffer, H. R. (1999). Social udvikling. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzel.
Schousboe, I. (2013). Cultural and historical influences of conceptions and uses of play. In
I. Schousboe & D. Winther-Lindqvist (Eds.), Children’s play and development. The Hague,
The Netherlands: Springer.
Sommer, D. (2003). Barndomspsykologi. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzel.
Sommer, D. (2015). Tidligt i skole eller legende læring? Evidensen om langtidsholdbar læring
og udvikling i daginstitutionen. In J. Klitmøller & D. Sommer (Eds.), Læring, dannelse og
udvikling. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzel.
Sommer, D. (2018). Tidlig start-pædagogik i den fremtidsparate daginstitution – et alternativ. In
D. Sommer & J. Klitmøller (Eds.), Fremtidsparat? Hinsides PISA – nordiske perspektiver på
uddannelse. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Sørensen, H. V. (2013). Børns fysiske aktivitet i børnehaver. PhD thesis, University of Southern
Denmark. (Children’s physical activity in kindergarten).
Sørensen, H. V. (2014). Ethics in researching young children’s play in preschool. In M. Fleer &
A. Ridgway (Eds). Visual methodologies and digital tools for researching with young children.
Springer.
Sørensen, H. V. (2017). Hvad foregår der på legepladsen? In M. Øksnes & T. Hangaard Rasmussen
(Eds.), Lek. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm.
Sørensen, H. V. (2019). Studying Children’s friendship activities ethically using the interaction
based observation method. In A. Edwards, M. Fleer, & L. Bøttcher (Eds.), Cultural-historical
approaches to studying learning and development. Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
Stern, D. (1977). The first relationship: Infant and mother. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Stern, D. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant. New York: Basic Books, Inc..
Tanggaard, L. (2015). At fremme børns kreativitet: fremtidens fordring. In J. Klitmøller &
D. Sommer (Eds.), Læring, dannelse og udvikling. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzel.
Ulset, V., Vitaro, F., Brendgen, M., Bekkhus, M., & Borge, A. I. H. (2017). Time spent outdoors
during preschool: Links with children’s cognitive and behavioral development. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 52, 69–80.
van Oers, B. (2013). An activity theory view on the development of playing. In I. Schousboe &
D. Winther-Lindqvist (Eds.), Children’s play and development. The Hague, The Netherlands:
Springer.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Voprosy
Psikhologii, 12(6), 62–76.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher processes. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Chapter 6
Utilisation and Design of Kindergarten
Outdoor Space and the Outdoor Activities:
A Case Study of Kindergartens in Bergen,
Norway and Anji in China
Wanqiu Meng and Min He
Abstract Compared with Norwegian kindergartens that emphasize how outdoor

activity benefits young children’s integrated development, Chinese kindergartens
reluctantly encourage children to go outside for long time. A county named Anji in
South China’s Zhejiang province has started to change this approach to outdoor
play. Kindergartens there provide outdoor equipment to support children’s outdoor
activities for longer periods of time. This approach is called Anji Play and has been
recommended by Chinese Ministry of Education for all of the country. It has also
attracted ECE experts overseas. In this chapter, we describe and analyse children’s
outdoor play in an Anji setting and in a Norwegian kindergarten from the perspec-
tive of the utilisation and design of kindergarten outdoor space. The study takes an
ethnographic approach. We collected photo observations, anecdotal recording and
interviews from one kindergarten in Bergen, Norway and one in Anji, China. The
observation results focusing on outdoor play in the two kindergartens were dis-
cussed with kindergarten teachers, principals, professors and college students from
China and Norway. Our aim was to interpret the core concepts, goals and concerns
of Norwegian and Anji play from multiple perspectives to understand children’s
cultural formation in the two cultural contexts. We found the cultural values and
traditions influence how outdoor play is performed and there are clear links between
culture and children’s cultural formation.
Keywords Kindergarten · Outdoor space · Outdoor play · Norway · Anji · Cultural

formation
W. Meng (*)
Preschool Education Faculty, Shanghai Normal University TIANHUA College,
Shanghai, China
M. He
Early Childhood Education Department, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

96 W. Meng and M. He
6.1 Introduction
The outdoors can be described as an open and constantly changing environment,

where it is possible to experience freedom, engage in gross motor development
through boisterous movements, and be in contact with natural elements (Maynard
& Waters, 2007). Compared with indoor play, children in the outdoors have more
autonomy and can enjoy enhanced space, time and self-chosen activities (Bento &
Dias, 2017). A kindergarten should provide children the best quality of education;
Mohidin, Ismail, and Ramli (2015) found that this could be achieved only if the
designer, as well as policymakers, are aware of the factors that promote a better
environment for these children. Especially in city centers, outdoor spaces that chil-
dren can use must be designed to meet needs for both children’s learning and play-
ful activity. In such designs, both natural and artificial elements must be used (Acar,
2014). Furthermore, Salı, Akyol, and Baran (2014) claimed that there should be
endeavors to provide necessary play equipment in playgrounds. Therefore, the
design and utilization of outdoor spaces of kindergarten should be taken seriously.
Nordic countries, especially Norway, emphasize outdoor play in kindergartens
for its benefits for children in health, cognition, social communication and other
development aspects (Wagner & Einarsdottir, 2006). Norwegian children spend a
significant amount of time in kindergarten outdoors, e.g., 70% in summer and 31%
in winter semester (Moser & Martinsen, 2010). Compared with Norwegian kinder-
garten’s promotion of outdoor activity for children’s integrated development,
Chinese kindergartens reluctantly encourage children to go outside for long periods
of time. However, Anji County has introduced outdoor equipment devised to sup-
port children’s outdoor activities for extended periods of time. It is called “Anji
Play” and is recommended by Chinese Ministry of Education for all of the country;
it has also attracted Early Childhood Education (ECE) experts from overseas.
Indeed, some kindergartens in the United States have purchased Anji kindergarten
outdoor equipment to trial. As researchers, we had the opportunity to undertake
fieldwork in Anji County and in the city of Bergen, in order to consider the similari-
ties and differences within the cultural formation of outdoor activities and use of
environment in both places.
This chapter, therefore, aims to surface the similarities and differences on kinder-
garten’s outdoor space utilisation and design between Anji and Bergen, identify
significant features of outdoor activities and explore children’s cultural formation
through outdoor activities in these spaces.
6.2 The Background
6.2.1 Anji and Bergen
Anji is a county under the jurisdiction of Huzhou City, Zhejiang Province, located
in the hinterland of the Yangtze River Delta with the Tianmu Mountain Range in the
southwestern part of the county. It is surrounded by mountains on three sides, with
6 Utilisation and Design of Kindergarten Outdoor Space and the Outdoor Activities… 97
a depression in the middle and a sprawling basin topography in the northeast. Anji
County administers eight towns, three townships and four streets and had a regis-
tered population of 466,100 in 2016. Rich in agricultural resources, with a large
number of excellent, new, special and agricultural products, such as bamboo shoots,
white tea, mountain vegetables, etc., Anji maintains a high social and economic
development level.
Bergen is Norway’s second largest city and the capital of Hordaland County. It is
also the largest city in western Norway with a registered population of 243,000 in
2017. It is situated on the steep fjord line on the west coast of Norway, leaning
against the harbor and seven hills. The warm winds of the Gulf Stream contribute to
Bergen’s reputation as a rainy city.
6.2.2 Anji Play: The Way to ‘True Play’
Anji Play is a comprehensive approach to early learning developed over the last
18 years by Ms. Cheng Xueqin, Anji County’s Superintendent of Public Early
Education and is practiced currently in 130 public kindergartens. It has revolution-
ized traditional Chinese kindergarten provision with its ethos: “Let the play light up
the child’s life”, which Cheng Xueqin and the other Anji educators call “True
Play1”. Its formation is based upon Ms. Cheng’s observations of what she describes
as three eras of play provision in preschools, from ‘no play’ to ‘false play’ to ‘true
play’, according to the official website about Anji play2.
Before 2000:‘No Play’ Era
Before 2000, the phenomenon of Early Childhood Education “Primary” was quite
common, especially in Chinese county towns and rural areas. Early Childhood
Education “Primary” refers to the preschool education that neglects the significance
of young children’s physical and mental development; instead, young children are
expected to learn the content of elementary school using the same approaches for
the elementary students (Yu, 2012). In this ‘no play era’, children were confined to
narrow and crowded rooms and were offered little chance to play.
2000–2008: ‘False Play’ Era
Children were encouraged to only play games mechanically according to the
themes, steps and roles formulated by teachers. Ms. Cheng observed that the chil-
dren’s enjoyment could be described as ‘false joy’, in which they appeared devoid
1
Anji educators insist that in the kindergartens of Anji, children lead their own play and self-
expression. Children chose what, where and with whom to play. According to the Anji teachers,
self-determination in play, ownership of discovery and learning in play and the time and freedom
to express complex intentions in play, is True Play.
2
The official website of Anji play introduced the formation process of Anji Play in detail. The
introduction of the three stages in this study are all taken from http://www.ajplaychina.com/Home/
Contents/detail.html?id=2939andkey=fazhanandkeywords=发展历程
of the pleasures encountered in discovery play. Therefore, she referred to this as

‘false play’.
2009-Present: ‘True Play’ Era
Characterized by the words “Love, Risk, Joy, Engagement, Reflection”, Anji Play is
synonymous with “True Play”, in which children have autonomy in their playful
activity. In such play, there is the potential to conduct in-depth, complex and lasting
exploration in spontaneous and autonomous play. With the support of the local gov-
ernment, the reform of children’s daily opportunities to include ‘True play’ is the
practice of preschool education promoted by all kindergartens in the county.
On the basis of the True Play, developed over 9 years of reflective practice, Anji
Play explores a set of Anji Play Curriculum which focus on children’s play experi-
ence and cover various forms of activities in kindergartens. At the individual level,
teachers voice that in previous eras, they felt deeply shackled by formalism and
utilitarianism, tired yet inefficient, resulting in job burnout; thus, Cheng (2019)
argues that the Anji approach not only allows children but also teachers to feel a
sense of happiness. At the institutional level, Anji approach is a new mode that takes
the reform of preschool education into the overall development plan of community
and rural areas (Li, 2019) . At the societal level, the documents issued by China have
absorbed the Western early education ideas and specific practices that pay attention
to the value of childhood. Although the Guidance for Kindergarten Education (trial
version) issued in 1989 clearly points to ‘Taking play as the basic activity, integrat-
ing education into various activities’,3 what kind of play to implement and how to
implement the play has been gradually explored over the years. Education in China
emphasises the cultivation of collectivism and the adaptation of children to social
norms and social organisational structure. Therefore, educational practice is shaped
by cultural norms, control and discipline that focus on collective cultural responsi-
bility. Anji Play, however, puts the preschool education ideological paradigm into
practice by emphasising play as the ‘basic activity’. Researchers such as Coffino
and Bailey (2019) point out that the Anji Play approach ‘is deeply resonant with
Western models of experiential learning’ (p. 4).
To a certain extent, Anji Play has absorbed Western democratic culture found in
Nordic countries’ approaches to early childhood. However, compared with the
Nordic countries, Anji emphasizes the education in the play and pays attention to
children’s reflection and learning. Combined with the local natural conditions,
redefinitions of the value of childhood and the rights of the child, Anji Play is a
revolutionary model that has changed the kindergarten culture.
3
Retrieved September April 1, 2020, from Ministry of Education, PRC, http://www.moe.gov.cn/
srcsite/A02/s5911/moe_621/201511/t20151119_220023.html
6.3 Cultural Relativism
Norwegian scholar Birkeland (2016) criticized the inclination to evaluate educa-

tional practice from a mono-cultural perspective in cross-cultural comparative stud-
ies. Cultural relativity is an undeniable fact and cultural relativism holds that the
outsiders should not use their own set of standards to measure the moral or social
institutions of other culture (Donnelly, 1984).
Focusing on culture is the historical choice of Comparative Education (CE),
which is also an important theme of contemporary CE study (Yang, 2017). After the
1970s, the qualitative research methods of comparative education quickly rose.
Comparative education scholars uphold cultural relativism, emphasized the value of
internal views, the importance of cultural models and the practice of education
(L. R. Yang, 2015, S. P. Yang, 2012). We take cultural relativism as our theoretical
framework aiming to go deep in different cultures to practice and experience, not
just to describe the surface of the phenomenon. To explore children’s cultural for-
mations through outdoor play, we need to overcome our own cultural prejudice and
be aware of bringing our own value orientation into the research process.
6.4 Method
The material presented in this chapter is from a comparative qualitative study in

which an ethnographic approach was taken. Our research method was influenced by
‘video-cued multi-vocal ethnography’ used by Tobin et al. (2009). Tobin and his
colleagues photographed the daily life of kindergartens in the three countries of the
United States, China, and Japan, and edited the video into a 20-min short film. The
researchers invited early childhood educators from three countries to discuss the
same video in order to trigger multi-party dialogues, explanations and arguments.
Tobin et al. (2009) use conceptualizations of culture as the main tool to explain
phenomena, pay attention to the interpretation of cultural insiders, and put the
culture-based classifications and concepts above objectivity. These explanations
and arguments may reveal the core concepts, goals and concerns of early childhood
education in a culture.
Inspired by Tobin, we collected photo observations, anecdotal recording and
interviews from one kindergarten in Bergen, Norway and one in Anji, China. The
observation results focusing on outdoor play in the two kindergartens were dis-
cussed with kindergarten teachers, principals, professors and college students from
China and Norway. Data were gathered in order to interpret the core concepts, goals
and concerns of Norwegian and Anji play from multiple perspectives so that we
could better understand children’s cultural formation in the two cultural contexts.
Table 6.1 Demographic information of the Anji kindergarten and Bergen kindergarten
Anji, China Bergen, Norway
Location Anji Bergen
Outdoor area of kindergarten 9100 square meters 936 square meters
Number of children 554 20
Age of children 3–6 years old 1–6 years old
Number of classes 18 1
Number of employees 65 5
The data include 10 field observations, 40 photos, 15 transcribed interviews, 7 meet-

ing minutes and 4 play sharing records4 of the Anji kindergarten.
The kindergarten in Anji is a garden-style, multi-functional kindergarten with
diverse ecological environment. It is a model kindergarten for kindergartens in
Zhejiang Province and an experimental base for education and scientific research of
Anji Play. The kindergarten in Bergen is a small-sized, family-style kindergarten.
The basic information of the two kindergartens is shown in Table 6.1.
The two kindergartens differ greatly in size, children’s ages and the teacher-child
ratio. The common feature and most important criterion for choosing these two
kindergartens was the fact that both kindergartens value outdoor play, allowing
opportunity for at least 2 h of outdoor play each day. However, each kindergarten
also has specific characteristics that we attribute to institutional perspectives of chil-
dren’s outdoor play.
We refer to Hedegaard’s (2009) model for analysis for interpreting the individual-
institutional-societal perspectives. Hedegaard proposed that children’s learning and
development through participation in institutionalised practice can be viewed from
all three perspectives.
6.5 U
tilisation and Design of Kindergarten Outdoor Space
from the Institutional Level
6.5.1 C
hallenge and Breakthrough: Kindergarten Return
to Nature
In the Anji kindergarten, children have at least 2 h of outdoor play every day. At
about nine o’clock in the morning, the outdoor space comes alive with hundreds of
children playing and talking with each other. Children climb up and down on the
barrels, boards and large cubes, which they are able to stack as they wish; play with
sand and water in the wide lawn, hillside and sand pool; and, paint on walls, ground,
even one obsolete car.
4
Play Sharing records is a fixed procedure of Anji, which will be described in detail in the follow-
ing text.
The terrain of the Anji kindergarten has been carefully and artificially designed;
venues of different materials afford different types of activities, including lawn,
sand, plastic floor, tile, marble and cobblestone. In addition to a variety of terrain
type, Anji kindergarten also builds a variety of uneven ground, such as slopes, slide-
ways, caves and gullies with a certain slope and height to provide the experience of
tilt, conversion, inertia, friction and balance brought by different slopes.
Rich in variety and quantity, the Anji kindergarten provided low-structured,
open-ended materials of all sizes, include both highly designed and found objects
whose size and variety invite children to engage in large-scale construction, design,
combination, recombination, revision, imagination and self-expression (Fig. 6.1).
Anji educators believe that play materials are the material basis of children’s play.
Providing sufficient materials with various playing methods can meet children’s
needs and further enhance children’s rights (Cheng, 2019). Based on different types
of materials and equipment, the outdoor space is divided into climbing area, sand
water area, construction area, swing area, rolling plastic barrel area, painting area
and role-playing area. At present, each class play in one area for one month, then
change to another area.
Water, sand and soil are also important resources for children’s outdoor play and
there are a variety of faucets. Children use water to play sand, draw, make canals,
play mud and clean themselves after playing. They work together to connect pipes
Fig. 6.1 Children challenge themselves by manipulating various materials. (Source: Author 2018)
to transport water and dig sand to make canals which were big projects that appeared
to endlessly fascinate the children.
Anji’s educators have consciously shifted from the traditional knowledge-based
and teacher-based orientations to the child-based orientation. Compared with the
Chinese traditional, flat playground covered with large outdoor equipment, highly-
structured toys and materials, Anji kindergarten matches the adult’s educational
intention with the children’s needs. Through changing the environment, materials
and time from the perspective of children, providing children with choices, Anji
kindergarten presented a new play state and promotes teachers’ continuous reflec-
tion and improvement.
6.5.2 Inheritance and Continuation: Kindergarten in Nature
At the Bergen kindergarten, after lunch, children will go outdoors for 2–3 h (except
‘camping day’ every Thursday when they are outdoors the whole day). Children
sometimes play on the grounds of the kindergarten, and sometimes go off-site to
nearby communities, forests, mountain, lakeside and other natural places. Due to
the small number of children, children seemingly merged into the natural
surroundings.
Norwegian teachers and experts believe that there is no need to provide so many
materials. One of the professors of Western Norway University of Applied Sciences
(HVL) pointed out that nature can provide rich materials and low-structural materi-
als can stimulate children’s imagination and creativity. As the principal said in inter-
view: ‘It’s the forest that never gets empty.’ Natural resources are the most important
source of learning (Fig. 6.2).
Inside of kindergarten grounds, the playground consists of varied terrain with
space to actively play. There are plum and apple trees in addition to berry bushes
and children can climb and explore the environment, using all the possibilities. The
ground of the Bergen kindergarten is an uneven and unmodified natural site and it
adjusts according to local terrain conditions. The principal of the Bergen
Fig. 6.2 Different kinds of natural elements in and out of the Bergen kindergarten. (Source:
Author 2018)
kindergarten stressed the importance of uneven and natural ground, which can help
children conduct themselves to be able to keep balance without falling. She further
pointed out that there are many mountains in Bergen, and children must learn how
to deal with uneven mountain roads.
Teachers not only make full use of natural and neighborhood sources near the
kindergarten, but also organize collective outdoor activities outside of the kinder-
garten, such as hiking the 7-Mountains (the seven mountains surrounding Bergen,
Norwegian name: De 7 Fjell), visiting Langegården (a local farm in Bergen) every
fall and spring and the skiing trip to Finse5 for 3 days in April.
We can clearly see that the Bergen kindergarten outdoor play focus on natural
elements, and most of the children’s outdoor activities interact with nature outside
of the kindergarten. As the Framework Plan for Kindergarten of Norway (2017,
p. 52) explicitly proposed that ‘kindergartens shall enable the children to appreciate
nature and have outdoor experiences that teach them to move around and spend time
in the outdoors during the different seasons.’ The Norwegian interviewees felt that
the kindergarten was preparation for life outside the kindergarten and the outdoor
life is education for sustainable development. By observing children’s outdoor play,
as researchers we felt that in Bergen, children are the children of nature, and human
beings are the children of nature.
6.5.3 S
imilarities and Differences of Kindergarten Outdoor
Environment from the Institutional and Societal Levels
The two kindergartens both reflect the growth of children in the outdoors. However,
the Anji and Bergen kindergartens are quite different in terms of utilisation and
design of kindergarten outdoor space. The Anji kindergarten provides a well-
designed outdoor space full of teachers’ pedagogical input, while the Bergen kin-
dergarten is more open and integrated with ecological and natural environment.
Although both are urban, the Bergen children have better access to off-site areas
with more diverse physical affordances and the Anji site has to re-create what is
naturally available for the Norwegian children in a relatively enclosed space. In
addition to population density of children and social security conditions, the differ-
ences of outdoor environment are largely influenced by cultural values of the insti-
tutional perspective.
Norwegians are strongly attached to nature (Borge, Nordhagen, & Lie, 2003).
Nature preschool has become popular in Scandinavian countries (Lysklett & Berger,
2017). A nationwide parental survey show forests are the most common outdoor
space in residential areas in Norway (Gundersen, Skar, O’Brien, Wold, & Follo,
2016). In survey responses, 97% of parents stated that their children have access to
5
Finse is an area in the Ulvik municipality of Hordaland, Norway. It is an ideal place for skiing and
snowboarding and 2.5 hours by train from Bergen.
forests within walking or cycling distance from home and when it comes to suit-
ability for play, 88% state that their children, in general, have good or very good
opportunities for play in nearby nature (Gundersen et al., 2016).
In China, the benefits of exploring nature for young children are being acknowl-
edged and expressed in policy and practice in recent years. Guideline for Learning
and Development of 3–6 Aged Children (Ministry of Education, 2012) suggests to
‘take children into contact with nature to stimulate their curiosity and investigation
desire (p. 43).’ However, modern Chinese society attaches great importance to the
development of cities. From the perspective of commercialisation, the kindergartens
in rural areas are relatively belittled. Modern kindergartens tend to be urbanised and
commercialised. Urbanisation has resulted in children in many cities being sepa-
rated from contact with nature, despite the many benefits that this can provide for
play and learning. Big gaps exist between needs and reality in natural playground
planning and design (Wang, Woolley, Tang, Liu, & Luo, 2018). Anji appropriated
the state of urbanisation under the leadership of Cheng Xueqin in the process of
China’s urbanisation. Through her own investigation, learning and personal experi-
ence, Cheng strived to return children to nature and develop various abilities through
activities in nature. Therefore, the cultural conditions for outdoor play in Anji Play
settings attempt to replicate some of the variety of features that may be found when
venturing off-site into more natural settings; yet, the resources that are provided are
more in keeping with an urban landscape, e.g., made from plastic and recycled
materials.
On the whole, the Bergen’s kindergarten is a kindergarten in nature. Children’s
outdoor play in natural situations occur naturally without teachers’ presupposition
or requirements, while the Anji kindergarten’s outdoor environment is still created
by adults for children. Although the children are allowed some choice in how they
use the materials provided, in China, teachers often hold a static and isolated view
of educational environment subconsciously (Huang, Zhao, & Jarrett, 2019).
Kindergartens often take ‘environment’ as a separate topic for research and imple-
mentation. Through carefully designing the environment to meet children’s various
needs and development, the Anji teachers expect children to accept and practice
their educational ideas and intentions, that is, problem-solving and deep learning.
6.6 L
earning and Reflection of Outdoor Play
from the Individual Level
Reflection of outdoor play is timetabled into the schedule for everyday activities in
the Anji kindergarten. It is a semi-formal teaching opportunity organised by teacher
and directed by children. There are three ways to reflect: (1) Reflection during play.
(2) Recording Play Stories. (3) Play Sharing. Observation of a 6-year-old boy
Playing Sharing in the Anji kindergarten illustrates how children are supported by
teachers, peers and the environment to reflect and express their play experiences.
Extract from Observation of Zhangxiao (anonymized) Playing Sharing

After playing with gyro toys in the construction area during outdoor play, the teacher organ-
ised the children to discuss and share with each other.
Zhangxiao: I feel that the lace-shaped gyro can beat your opponent away.
Teacher: Opponent? What are you playing today?
Zhangxiao: The Gyro Battle!
Teacher: The Gyro Battle, there are opponents, right? I have photographed it for you.
Let’s have a look (show the video). Is this?
Zhangxiao: Yes, that’s it.
Teacher: Oh, this big one is an arena.
Zhangxiao: I have a question, why my nut arena always tilted?
Teacher: Can you help him to solve it?
Amy: The screws are loose.
Teacher: She feels that the screw is loose.
Zhangxiao: But everything is normal. The screws in it haven’t loosened.
Teacher: He said that he checked every one of them. Maybe it was one of the reasons.
Who else knows why his arena is always tilted?
Luna: There must be someone who touches it very hard and it will tilt.
Teacher: What reason did Luna say just now?
Zhangxiao: She just said that someone must have touched it heavily, but we all touched
it lightly, sometimes we didn’t touch.
Teacher: Luna thinks that the reason why it collapsed might be that a very heavy exter-
nal force touched it, and it just fell unbalanced, right? But no one touched it. What is the
reason? Tom, what do you think?
Tom: It might be that the next thing is supported by only one foot.
The child, Zhangxiao’s, perspective. Zhangxiao and several other boys played
the game of “The Gyro Battle”. During play, Zhang Xiao found that the nut arena
they built always tilted. After returning to the classroom, Zhang Xiao record their
play stories by drawing (Fig. 6.3) and can’t wait to ask this question during Playing
Sharing. Other children combine their own experience to help him analyze the cause
of the problem. Around this issue, the children discussed in depth for about 20 min,
and many of them contributed their ideas. Finally, the teacher suggested that the
children can test these conjectures through practical operation in the afternoon.
The Kindergarten Teacher’s Perspective During outdoor play time, as a non-
participant observer, the teacher is always observing children with using her mobile
phone to take videos and photos. After returning to the classroom, she imports the
videos and photos into the TV in the classroom to play relevant videos and photos
in time for the whole class. When children share their play stories, the teacher can
help them sort out, analyze and summarize their experiences, and slightly promote
other children to actively think and participate in discussions.
The Pedagogue’s Perspective Anji educators recognize that reflection about the
experiences in plays has a critical role in translating experience to knowledge.
Metacognitive reflection allow children and adults to gain deeper insight into the
complexity of their thoughts, actions, learning and development, foster greater com-
plexity and challenge in play. In the kindergarten in Bergen, discussion and reflec-
tion is not a fixed time procedure, but a random and informal sharing exchange.
Fig. 6.3 Zhangxiao’s play story of “Why is the nut arena always tilted?” (Source: Author 2018)
Norwegian teachers see no need to organise regular, collective discussions; the indi-
vidual interests and motivations of children are more important, according to our
interview findings. A Nordic professor questioned the content and form of the
Playing Sharing activity,
‘Play contains multiple phenomena, children’s experience in the play is quite complicated,
may be contain multiple dimensions of society, emotion, creativity, and imagination. But
the discussion in the classroom is relatively simple. After returning to the classroom, it is
more like subject learning and cognitive discussion. There may be some children who are
not very interested in the aspects that teachers often pay attention to, such as architecture or
sandstone, which cannot be connected with their own experience’ (interview, 29
October 2018).
Anji kindergarten teachers also point out this problem with traditional Chinese
approaches to early childhood pedagogy at one staff-meeting (31 October, 2018).
They are now consciously cultivating the ability of teachers to organise discussion
and develop it into a comprehensive and cross-curricular discussion, including
health, language, society, science and art.
However, from the child’s perspective, it seems that Zhangxiao and the others
enjoy the in-depth conversation that they shared with the teacher. The conversation
lasted 20 min and the scientific concept development supported by the teacher plan-
ning the afternoon’s activities to inquire further was in response to the children’s
interests. This demonstrates the value of the Anji Play approach, which builds upon
children’s discovery, a characteristic of True Play.
6.7 S
ignificant Features of Cultural Formation
from the Three Levels
Through the comparison and analysis of Anji and Norwegian kindergartens, we

trace different core concepts, goals and concerns relating to children’s cultural for-
mation in relationship to all the three levels.
The Children’s Perspective Children in Anji kindergarten learn knowledge by
solving a series of interesting and challenging practical problems. Through “learn-
ing by doing”, children actually experience the operation process and find the con-
tent that they are interested in. The Play Sharing activities organized by teacher
focus on solving practical problems to improve children’s logical thinking and
problem-solving ability. In Bergen, the symbolic meaning of construction is consid-
ered important. Children’s activity is encouraged to be imaginative and creative, in
order that even practical activities support holistic development.
The Institutional Perspective The Anji kindergarten emphasizes pragmatism and

drawing out conceptual knowledge from play situations. By providing rich and
diverse materials focusing on building, manipulating and movement, children learn
to share, record, think and solve problems. The use of the play equipment that has
been created on the kindergarten grounds provides some stimulus for further learn-
ing when indoors. In contrast, the Bergen kindergarten appeared to pay more atten-
tion to the immediate links between the kindergarten and the world beyond the
kindergarten, specifically cultural and natural experiences based upon the built and
natural landscape within which the kindergarten already sits. There was an empha-
sis on aesthetic qualities, such as melodious music, the spiritual world and the
meaning that children give to the world around them.
The Societal Perspective Since the Opening of China, in 1987, Chinese society has
gradually addressed issues concerning poverty and has begun to attach importance
to vulnerable groups, especially children. The contemporary early childhood cur-
riculum in China can be seen as reflecting a hybrid of three cultural threads, tradi-
tional culture, communist culture, and Western culture (Zhu & Zhang, 2018). These
three cultures are in some ways contrary to each other. For example, Western societ-
ies can be called individualistic societies: advocating competition and individual
initiative, emphasizing the differences between people. Whereas the collectivist ori-
entation has been deeply entrenched in Chinese culture for thousand years, which
stresses the priority of group goals over individual goals and the importance of
cohesion within social groups (Pan, Wang, & Li, 2018.) This could be linked to
those principles of AnjiPlay, which have adopted Western ideals of democracy and
individual choices to demonstrate some of the conflicts.
Through the reform from‘False play’ era to‘True play’ era, AnjiPlay is challenging
some of the social pressures for collectivism, yet retain elements that support chil-
dren’s development alongside the ‘free play’. At the same time, the collective
discussion of Play Sharing and cooperative construction in outdoor play also reflect
collectivism that emphasises the interdependence of each individual. Therefore,
AnjiPlay is a breakthrough improvement due to the changes of Chinese society, influ-
enced by a hybrid of three cultural threads and reorientation of the value of childhood.
Nordic child centeredness and the Nordic welfare state are two cultural aspects
of Nordic countries (Kristjansson, 2006). Among the Nordic countries, Norway is a
typical modern welfare state. The Nordic welfare system gives adequate benefits for
children and families. Combined with a high living standard and a view of nature as
an arena for recreation and well-being, most people in the Nordic countries spend
an extensive amount of their spare time outdoors (Sandseter & Lysklett, 2018).
Across generations, the tradition of visiting nature areas and hiking in the moun-
tains or forest areas has been kept as a natural part of daily life (Borge et al., 2003).
This cultural heritage is also integrated into the education system as part of the basis
on which the content and practices of early childhood education and care (ECEC)
institutions are formed. The kindergarten values equality, inclusiveness and the
rights and status of children. Children are encouraged to experience the authenticity
of the natural life during the free outdoor play, develop awe and love for nature and
give meaning to the world through imaginary paths, dialogue with nature, and the
use of nature materials as symbols and props in play.
6.8 Conclusion
In general, the findings demonstrated that kindergarten is set within the natural
world in Norway and natural world is brought into the kindergarten in China. Also,
the Norwegian kindergarten traditionally pays attention to what children already
know, and the Chinese kindergarten tradition pays attention to what children do not
yet know.
There are obvious differences between the two kindergartens on the terrain types,
outdoor equipment, outdoor area and natural elements of outdoor space. Anji places
emphasis on the design of outdoor space and children’s skills using designed, recy-
cled, rustic and local materials while the Bergen kindergarten pays attention to the
utilisation of existing outdoor space, making full use of natural and neighborhood
sources in and outside of the kindergarten.
Differences in outdoor space also lead to differences in children’s outdoor play.
In Anji, children’s play varies according to different kinds of materials that teachers
bring to the space. The Norwegian kindergarten’s outdoor activities are seasonal
and the children’s activities vary according to different seasons based upon what
they find. Children can fully experience and explore the change of the nature in the
lake, forest, mountain, farm, etc.
Teachers of the two places also have different ideas on the outdoor learning
mode. Teachers of Anji mainly observe when in the outdoors rather than directing
or interfering with children’s play. They attach great importance to the reflection
and collective discussion after outdoor play and role model learning. Teachers in the
Bergen kindergarten stress engaging with children during the play itself and value
children’s individuality and individualized learning. They do not necessarily bring

the play scenarios back into the classroom for discussion and reflection.
The culture seems to shape how outdoor play is performed. Although, there are
many differences between cultures in outdoor space and educational concepts, both
of the outdoor spaces are interesting and different types of play can be created,
which provide children with different levels of challenge and meet the development
needs of children with different ages. Most of the outdoor play materials are low-
structured and have many affordances.
Finally, Bergen’s kindergarten education is situated within consensus and pro-
motion at the national level. Anji is only a partial breakthrough in a small area of
China. It is not the universal education mode in China, but an influential, innovative
play-based education on behalf of the direction of Chinese preschool education
reform. We believe this work can be inspiring not only to China and Norway, but
also for many other kindergarten teachers, stakeholders and researchers, wanting to
improve the quality of the pedagogical practice in ECE to provide conditions for
children’s learning, development and cultural formation.
References
Acar, H. (2014). Learning environments for children in outdoor spaces. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 141, 846–853.
Bento, G., & Dias, G. (2017). The importance of outdoor play for young children’s healthy devel-
opment. Porto Biomedical Journal, 2(5), 157–160.
Birkeland, A. (2016). Cross cultural comparative education – Fortifying preconceptions or trans-
formation of knowledge? Policy Futures in Education, 14(1), 77–91.
Borge, A. I. H., Nordhagen, R., & Lie, K. K. (2003). Children in the environment: Forest day-care
centers. The History of the Family, 8(4), 605–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hisfam.2003.04.001
Cheng, X. Q. (2019). Play, hands down and discover the child. Shanghai: East China Normal
University Press.
Coffino, J. R., & Bailey, C. (2019). The Anji play ecology of early learning. Childhood Education,
95(1), 3–9.
Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural relativism and universal human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 6(4),
400–419.
Gundersen, V., Skar, M., O’Brien, L., Wold, L. C., & Follo, G. (2016). Children and nearby nature:
A nationwide parental survey from Norway. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 17, 116–125.
Activity, 16(1), 64–82.
Huang, J., Zhao, Y. L., & Olga, S. J. (2019). A comparative study on the game space between
Chinese and American kindergartens. International and Comparative Education, 01, 92–99.
Kristjansson, B. (2006). The making of Nordic Childhooods. In J. Einarsdottir & J. T. Wagner
(Eds.), Nordic childhoods and early education. Philosophy, research, policy and practice in
Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden (pp. 13–17). Greenwich, CT: Information
Age Publishing.
Li, J. M. (2019). Learning from Anji and deepening reform. Preschool Education, 06, 10–13.
Lysklett, O. B., & Berger, H. W. (2017). What are the characteristics of nature preschools in
Norway, and how do they organize their daily activities? Journal of Adventure Education and
Outdoor Learning, 17(2), 1–13.
Maynard, T., & Waters, J. (2007). Learning in the outdoor environment: A missed opportunity?
Early Years and International Journal of Research and Development, 27(3), 255–265.
Ministry of Education (MOE). (2012). Guideline for learning and development of 3–6 aged chil-
dren [3–6岁儿童学习与发展指南]. Beijing, China: Capital Normal University Press.
Mohidin, H. H. B., Ismail, A. S., & Ramli, H. B. (2015). Effectiveness of kindergarten design in
Malaysia. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 202, 47–57.
Moser, T., & Martinsen, M. T. (2010). The outdoor environment in Norwegian kindergartens as
pedagogical space for toddlers’ play, learning and development. European Early Childhood
Education Research Journal, 18(4), 457–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2010.525931
Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017). Framework plan for Kindergartens.
Retrieved May 15, 2019, from https://www.udir.no/rammeplan
Pan, Y., Wang, X., & Li, L. (2018). Early childhood education and development in China.
In International handbook of early childhood education (pp. 599–622). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer.
Salı, G., Akyol, A. K., & Baran, G. (2014). An analysis of pre-school children’s perception
of schoolyard through their drawings. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116,
2105–2114.
Sandseter, E. B. H., & Lysklett, O. B. (2018). Outdoor education in the Nordic region. In
International handbook of early childhood education (pp. 889–906). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer.
Tobin, J., Hsueh, Y., & Karasawa, M. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan,
and the United States. Chicago, Ill: The University of Chicago Press.
Wagner, J. T., & Einarsdottir, J. (2006). Nordic ideals as reflected in Nordic childhoods and early
education. In J. Einarsdottir & J. T. Wagner (Eds.), Nordic childhoods and early education.
Philosophy, research, policy and practice in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden
(pp. 13–17). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Wang, X., Woolley, H., Tang, Y., Liu, H. Y., & Luo, Y. (2018). Young children’s and adults’ per-
ceptions of natural play spaces: A case study of Chengdu, Southwestern China. Cities, 72,
173–180.
Yang, L. R. (2015). A probe into methodological transformation of comparative education research
from the perspective of post-structuralism, Ph.D. thesis. Changchun, China: Northeast Normal
University.
Yang, M. Q. (2017). Cultural-based inquiry paradigm and its application in comparative education.
Educational Research, 38(01), 23–29.
Yang, S. P. (2012). A study on the paradigm of comparative education, Ph.D. thesis. Chongqing,
China: Xinan University.
Yu, Y. P. (2012). Find the root of “primary school” of kindergarten education. Liaoning Education,
18, 24–25.
Zhu, J., & Zhang, J. (2018). Review and reflection on the curriculum reform of early childhood
education in China. In International handbook of early childhood education (pp. 1173–1189).
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Chapter 7
Time Regulation as Institutional Condition
for Children’s Outdoor Play and Cultural
Formation in Kindergarten
Åsta Birkeland and Hanne Værum Sørensen
Abstract Time regulation is an important aspect of the everyday life in any kinder-
garten and has an impact on which activities are given priority. In this case study, the
outdoor playtime in one kindergarten in China and one in Norway is compared
based on the understanding that children’s cultural formation develops in a dialecti-
cal relationship between children’s interests and motives and societal, institutional,
and weather conditions. The aim of the article is to identify how time regulations
provide conditions for children’s play and cultural formation during outdoor play-
time. The research question is: How does institutional time regulation interplay with
the pedagogical practice and children’s activities in the outdoor playtime?
Employing a cultural-historical approach, drawing on Hedegaard’s concepts of
development and cultural formation as an individual, institutional and societal pro-
cess, the dialectical interplay between institutional time regulation and children’s
engagement in outdoor activities is the unit of analysis in this study. Our findings
indicate that the kindergarten teachers in the Chinese kindergarten as well as the
Norwegian kindergarten aim to adjust the pedagogical content and time schedule to
the traditions, values, and conditions in both countries. This chapter contributes to
knowledge about the interplay between institutional conditions and children’s activ-
ities and cultural formation in outdoor play.
Keywords Kindergarten · Outdoor play · Time regulation · Cultural formation ·

China · Norway
Å. Birkeland (*)
Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway
H. V. Sørensen

112 Å. Birkeland and H. V. Sørensen
7.1 Introduction
Outdoor play in kindergarten is a crucial part of everyday life in kindergartens glob-

ally, and is organized as a temporally and culturally re-occurring event in most
kindergartens1 (Bang, 2009; Birkeland, 2019). The importance of outdoor activities
in kindergartens has received increased concern and focus globally (Waller,
Ærleman-Hagser, & Sandseter, 2017).
Concern for children’s health and general well-being due to limited physical
activity have been major topics in prior research (Dowda, Pate, Trost, Almeida, &
Sirard, 2004; Dowda et al., 2011; Karlsson, 2012). Studies of outdoor play have
made inquiries into the quality of the design and equipment in outdoor playgrounds
by using the ECERS rating scale (Dowda et al., 2004, 2011; Hu, Marco, & Chen,
2015; Sørensen, 2013). Other studies have focused on the different purposes of
outdoor playtime such as risky play (Sandseter and Lysklett, 2017), exploration of
nature (Hammer & He, 2016), physical education and health effects (Brussoni,
Gibbons, & Gray, 2015; Liu & Tobin, 2018), and play in general (Sørensen, 2013;
Sørensen & Birkeland, 2020).
However, the conditions for outdoor play vary according to societal expectations
and demands, institutional practices, personal motivation by children and teachers
(Hedegaard, 2009), and weather conditions (Sørensen & Birkeland, 2020). This
article is based upon an understanding that children’s outdoor play develops in a
dialectical relation between these conditions.
Time regulation as such is not a neutral practice, but rather is value-laden, indi-
cating what focus is prioritized. How everyday life in kindergarten is structured is
an indication of the intentions and goals which have become more or less tacit
(Birkeland, 2019). The everyday structure and program have been neglected as a
focus for research on outdoor play, despite it being an important institutional condi-
tion for children’s outdoor play. This chapter investigates time regulations of chil-
dren’s activities in the outdoor playtime in one kindergarten in China and one in
Norway, thus obtaining insight into local practices (Flyvbjerg, 2011; Stake, 2005;
Yin, 2009) of outdoor play activities and nuancing the understandings of how the
outdoor playtime in kindergarten are conditioned of institutional, societal and cul-
tural differences. The aim of the chapter is to identify how time regulations of the
outdoor activities intersect with children’s engagement in outdoor play activities,
and thereby provide varied conditions for children’s play and cultural formation in
different institutions. The primary research question is therefore: How does institu-
tional time regulation interact with pedagogical practice and children’s activities in
outdoor playtime?
1
Kindergarten in some English-speaking countries, including the United States, refers to the first
year of elementary school. In this article kindergarten refers to programs in China and Norway that
are independent from the elementary school systems. In China, kindergartens (you’eryuan) pri-
marily provide early childhood education and care to children from 3 to 6 years old. In Norway,
kindergarten (barnehage) refers to institutions for children 1 to 6 years old. Throughout the article,
we use the term kindergarten to refer to similar programs in China and in Norway.
7 Time Regulation as Institutional Condition for Children’s Outdoor Play and Cultural… 113
Studying varieties of interplay between institutional conditions such as time

regulation and children’s engagement in play will contribute to understanding the
complexity of institutional practices and outdoor play activities. We have chosen
two kindergartens situated in different cultural contexts with different societal and
institutional expectations and demands and different climate and weather conditions
to illustrate varieties of interplay between time regulation and children’s activities.
Furthermore, we will analyse video observations of children’s and kindergarten
teachers’ transitions from indoor to outdoor activities and compare how institu-
tional time regulation in two different kindergartens interact with children’s engage-
ment in outdoor activities and play.
The dominant outdoor practices in Chinese kindergartens have favoured Guangbo
ticao, morning group exercises (Liu & Tobin, 2018) and physical education lessons
such as structured physical activities in which children mimic demonstrated gross
motor movements, over outdoor free play (Hu et al., 2015). Hu et al. emphasize that
the design of outdoor play space lacks diversity in the design of play areas. There is
a growing concern in China for how rapid urbanization is depriving children of
natural play areas. Researchers have also paid increased attention to this develop-
ment (Wang, Woolley, Tang, Liu, & Luo, 2018). The main concern for early child-
hood education (ECE) in China today is to give more time and space for child-initiated
play and unstructured activities in the outdoor playground (Wang et al., 2018).
The dominant practice in Norwegian kindergartens has been to give extensive
time for outdoor activities and to let children have access to natural environment and
outdoor play spaces (Moser & Martinsen, 2010). Kallestad and Ødegaard (2013)
illuminate that the activities in Norwegian kindergartens typically result from chil-
dren’s own initiatives, so also in the outdoor playtime. They explain this through the
concept of “free play” as child-initiated play, which is well embedded in Norwegian
kindergartens’ culture and tradition. However, the dialectic between time regula-
tion, institutional practices, and children’s outdoor play have been given less prior-
ity (Birkeland, 2019).
In the following sections, we will elaborate on the theoretical perspectives of our
study, and subsequently will describe the methodological and analyses approaches.
In the results section, we will present the general time schedule in the two kinder-
gartens, the time schedule for outdoor playtime, and the time regulation of transi-
tions between activities. The discussion section will consider how time regulation
provides conditions for play and cultural formation. Finally, we present the implica-
tions of our study.
7.2 Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework of this study is based upon a cultural-historical research

tradition, understanding children’s learning, development, and cultural formation as
a dialogical process between the child and the environment (Vygotsky 1966, 1998).
Leontiev (2005) argues that child development must be understood as more
complex than an unfolding of the child’s abilities and talents, and that it is not suf-
ficient to view the environment as a single factor contributing to the unfolding of the
child’s attributes. We need to understand children’s development from a wholeness
perspective; that is, as a dynamic and dialectical process between the person’s activ-
ities, intentions and motives, institutional traditions and practices, societal demands,
and material conditions (Hedegaard, 2009, 2012). From this perspective, children
are viewed as active agents interacting with their surroundings (Hedegaard, 2012;
Leontiev, 2005; Vygotsky, 1998).
Conditions for social situations are shaped at different levels (Hedegaard, 2008a,
2014) including the societal, institutional, and personal levels, and the dialectical
relations between these levels. An additional dimension was added in Sørensen and
Birkeland’s study (2020), which highlighted how climate, weather, and air quality
also provide conditions for pedagogical practice.
The societal perspective in Hedegaard’s (2012) model elaborates on the histori-
cally developed context of the society, in which traditions and values are developed
through generations and implemented in laws and policy documents. In Hedegaard’s
model of children’s activity settings in various institutions (2012), the societal per-
spective is depicted as cultural traditions in the multiple institutions of society,
which in this study refer to the different cultural historical value positions in China
and Norway.
Societal conditions for early childhood institutional practice include location and
housing, the kindergarten’s physical and economic conditions, and structures and
routines of the day based on the societal demands, as interpreted by the kindergarten
teachers and managers in cooperation with parents. These conditions influence the
social practices and activity settings in which the children may take part. Societal
conditions and political decisions also influence the education of the professionals
responsible for pedagogical practice at the institutional level of kindergartens.
Institutional practices in kindergarten create conditions for the activity settings
and children’s learning and development. These everyday practices should be
viewed as working towards connecting and fulfilling societal traditions, values, and
anticipations with personal motives, education, values, and ideas for the benefit of
children. Cultural ideas form in the interactions of everyday practices, but they also
refer to values and meanings far beyond the institutional sphere (Gulløv & Højlund,
2003, p. 142).
The personal perspective includes adults and children as participants in different
institutional settings. The teachers in kindergarten and school are part of society,
socialised through their own upbringing and education and their understanding of
the demands and expectations put on them by society, the local municipality, and
parents. The children have their first social experiences in the family, where they are
socialised into traditions and norms in their own family, before they meet and inter-
pret the demands and expectations of kindergarten teachers and other children.
Since children in China usually enter kindergarten at the age of three and as many
as 84.4% of children in Norway attend kindergarten from the age of one (Statistic in
Norway, 2019) children are exposed to a double-socialisation process
(Sommer, 2003).
Activity settings are planned and organized situations or shared activities in the
pedagogical practice in kindergarten, in which children are expected to participate
(Hedegaard, 2012), such as outdoor playtime. Analysing and conceptualising what
is occurring in an activity setting means investigating the societal and institutional
conditions for the activity setting together with the demands on children and kinder-
garten teachers in the social situation.
In most cases, the original time regulation is based on intentional and conscious
choices of action to reach specific goals. Time regulation is thereby not a neutral
dimension of the everyday life of kindergarten, but rather reflects societal demands
as well as institutional practices. This implies that, for example, the time schedule
can be traced back to what former kindergarten teachers have tried to achieve and
what the object of kindergarten has been (Stetsenko, 2005). This history may reflect
clear intentions. However, conscious choices about time regulation may over time
become routinised, immanent and taken for granted, so that the justification for
regulating time may amount to little more than pointing to having regulated it that
way previously.
7.3 S
tudying Children’s Outdoor Play Activities
in Kindergarten
The fieldwork for this study was conducted in March 2017 with 7 days of observa-
tions in a Chinese kindergarten and five2 days in a Norwegian kindergarten. The
observations were participant observations which consisted of obtaining photos and
video of children’s activities and play in the outdoor playtime activity setting in
each kindergarten. We also obtained insight into the time regulation through obser-
vations and interviews of the teachers.
7.3.1 The Sample of Kindergartens
The two kindergartens in this study both emphasize children’s access to outdoor
activities. The Chinese kindergarten is a public kindergarten in one of the suburbs
of Beijing and has 300 children from the ages of 2–6 years in 9 classes. The kinder-
garten is providing approximately 2 h daily outdoor time for children, in accordance
to the demands in the new curriculum guidelines. These outdoor activities range
from gardening, animal care, physical exercises, child-initiated play, teacher orga-
nized games, and outdoor project work. In addition to activities in the outdoor play
2
The children and the teachers in the Norwegian kindergarten were already familiar with the
researcher, so the relation had been previously established. The parents and the children them-
selves had given their consent to be videotaped.
area, the kindergarten organises projects on a farm connected to the kindergarten

and environmental projects in the local surroundings.
The Norwegian kindergarten is situated in the outskirts of Bergen and has 90
children in the from the ages of 1–6 years in 6 groups. It is an outdoor kindergarten,
which means that the children and the kindergarten teachers spend most of the day
outside, approximately 6 h in the cold and dark season, and around 8 h during the
summer. Three to four times per week, they go on trips to other play spaces, parks,
sport areas, or natural settings to play, ski, ice skate, or mountain walk. Lunch and
afternoon snacks are served outside, unless it is very cold or raining heavily.
7.3.2 Participants
In the Chinese kindergarten, 30 children and their two kindergarten teachers partici-
pated. In the Norwegian kindergarten, 12 children and their two kindergarten teach-
ers participated. All children were 4–5 years old.
7.3.3 Empirical Material and Analyses
The photo and video material from the kindergartens consists of 3 h of video and
more than 100 photos from the Chinese kindergarten and the same amount of mate-
rial from the Norwegian kindergarten. The empirical material also includes inter-
views with the principals and kindergarten teachers, framework plans, and time
schedules.
The analyses takes as its point of departure the different qualitative levels of
interpretation suggested by Hedegaard (2008b), beginning with a common sense
interpretation to understand what is occurring in the activity setting. Then the situ-
ated practice level is analysed to determine the time regulations in the actual kinder-
garten context, which is followed by a thematic analysis to obtain an overview of
the empirical material and understand the patterns in the pedagogical practices.
7.4 Ethics
This study is based on a thorough knowledge of young children’s learning and

development in ECE and insight into the legislation and purpose of the researched
institutions.3 We respect children’s integrity, safety, and well-being as well as the
3
As researchers, we are situated in the Nordic context, Denmark and Norway, with a solid founda-
tion in ECE, as kindergarten teachers and as kindergarten teacher educators. Additionally,
Birkeland has more than 15 years of experience with ECE in China (Birkeland, 2019, 2020), and
children’s and kindergarten teachers’ right to be anonymous in our research. We

were ready to leave the role of researcher and take on the role of responsible adult
in every situation during our research (Sørensen, 2014). The Norwegian Centre for
Research Data, NSD, has approved the study ethically and the Chinese kindergarten
gave permission according to their ethical standards.
7.5 Findings and Analysis of Empirical Material
In this section, we will first introduce the general daily time schedule in the two
kindergartens. Then we will present the time regulation of different activities during
outdoor playtime. Furthermore, we will give examples of the transition between
indoor and outdoor activities in the two kindergartens. In the last section, we will
present our analysis of how the time regulations give indications of values, expecta-
tions/demands, and intentions/goals.
7.5.1 The General Daily Time Schedule
Table 7.1 is an overview of the daily time schedule in the two kindergartens. The
table illustrates how much time the children spend indoors and outdoors.
Both time schedules include indoor and outdoor activities, meals, and transition
periods. The main difference in the two time schedules is the amount of time spent
outdoors and indoors. Another significant difference is the period allocated for rest
in the Chinese kindergarten.
Table 7.1 Daily activity settings in the two kindergartens
Time Activity – China Activity – Norway
07.00–07.30 Arrival, breakfast and indoor play
07.30–08.00 Arrival
08.00–09.00 Corner activity
09.00–09.30 Snacks/bathroom Transition/bathroom
09.30–10.30 Activity of the day Outdoor playtime
10.30–11.30 Outdoor activity
11.30–12.00 Lunch Lunch outdoor
12.00–14.20 Sleeping time Outdoor playtime
14.20–14.40 Snacks
14.40–15.30 Outdoor activity Snacks outdoor
15.30–16.00 Indoor activity Outdoor playtime
16.00–17.00
Sørensen has several years of experience with outdoor activities in kindergartens in Denmark and
Norway (Sørensen, 2013).
The children in the Chinese kindergarten are expected to be outdoors 2 h a day
according to the Curriculum Guidelines (MOE), see Fig. 7.1. Exceptions to this rule
occur during polluted days with bad air quality and days with tough weather condi-
tions, such as heavy rain, snow, or cold weather. Then the children are indoors doing
physical training and games. During the 7 days of observation, the children stayed
indoors all day one of the days. The schedule has a variety of activities such as cor-
ner activity, the activity of the day, outdoor activities, and daily living activities such
as meals, hygiene, bathroom visits, and sleeping time. All children leave the kinder-
garten at the same time at four in the afternoon.
The time schedule in Fig. 7.1 is a visual illustration of children’s time spent out-
doors and indoors in the Chinese and Norwegian kindergartens. This schedule
depicts how much time the children spend outdoors either on trips to other outdoor
play spaces or on the playground in the Norwegian kindergarten, totalling 6 h. This
is not regulated by the Norwegian curriculum guidelines, named Framework plan,
but rather is an institutional choice of being an outdoor kindergarten. The arrival
period is not clearly defined with specific activities, but is open to individual choices,
breakfast, and play. The transition from indoors to outdoors is based upon individ-
ual choices among the children whether they want to go out early or play indoors.
There are no organized activities for the children during this period. Additionally,
daily living activities such as bathroom visits and hygiene are based upon individual
needs. The meals are served outdoors unless it is extremely cold or rainy. The chil-
dren leave at different times, and they spend approximately 7–8 h in kindergarten
per day. The kindergarten closes at five in the afternoon.
7.5.2 The Time Schedule on the Outdoor Playground
When looking specifically at the outdoor activities, one can identify similarities and
differences between the two kindergartens.
The total time spent outdoors differs in the two kindergartens, 2 h and 6 h for the
Chinese and Norwegian kindergartens, respectively (Table 7.2). As a percentage of
the time spent outdoors, both kindergartens have time for teacher-organized games,
child-initiated activities and transitions. The Chinese kindergarten has additional
collective physical training such as Gong Fu and dancing. The Norwegian kinder-
garten has no such collective physical training; instead the children are physically
active when they go walking on trips and when they are playing in nature or at dif-
ferent sport arenas.
The general time schedule for outdoor activities in the Chinese kindergarten does
not give a full picture of the clearly structured activities and time regulation.
Table 7.3 demonstrates the detailed structure of the outdoor playtime.
The time is clearly structured, as displayed in Table 7.3, providing a specific time
schedule for the different activities such as collective physical training, teacher
organized games and child-initiated play during this one-hour outdoor playtime.
Chinese Kindergarten Norwegian Kindergarten
Outdoor playtime (25%) Indoor (75%) Outdoor playtime (75%) Indoor (25%)
Fig. 7.1 Outdoor playtime throughout the entire day in Chinese and Norwegian kindergarten (To be able to compare the amount of time spent indoors and
outdoors, Fig. 7.1. is based on the condition that children spend approximately 8 h per day in kindergarten in China and in Norway, and thus 25% or 75%
respectively of the time is allocated for outdoor playtime)
Table 7.2 Amount of time allocated for different activities, as a percentage and minutes of daily
outdoor playtime
Activities in the Chinese kindergarten, amount of Norwegian kindergarten, amount of
outdoor time time in different activities outdoor time in different activities outdoor
Percentage Minutes Percentage Minutes
Collective 10% 12 0% 0
physical training
Teacher-organized 20% 24 15% 54
activities
Child-initiated 50% 60 60% 216
activities
Transitions 20% 24 15% 54
Meals 0% 0 10% 36
Total 100% 120 100% 360
Table 7.3 Regulation of Time Activity

outdoor playtime in the
10.30–10.35 Line up in the hall and walk outside
Chinese kindergarten
collectively
10.35–10.45 Collective activity with physical training
10.45–10.50 Collective transition to the game area
10.50–11.05 Collective teacher organized game
11.05–11.10 Transition to another area of the
playground
11.10–11.30 Play activities (sand, climbing, bicycle)
11.30–11.35 Collective transition indoors and lunch
time
The time schedule is also dominated by being a collective time schedule where all
the children do the same kind of activity and have collective transition periods.
In contrast to the Chinese outdoor playtime, the Norwegian outdoor playtime is
less structured, and there is more time for spontaneous choices and child-initiated
activities (Table 7.4).
7.5.3 Time Regulation of the Transitions Between Activities
The time regulation is particularly clear during transition time. This is seen in the
transition between indoors and outdoors activities and in-between-activities. Here
we present two examples of transitions, one from each kindergarten.
Table 7.4 Regulation of outdoor playtime in the Norwegian kindergarten

Time Activity
08.30– Transition, visiting bathroom, getting dressed and ready to go outside at an
10.00 individual pace
10.00– Outdoor activities, primarily child-initiated activities
12.00
12.00– Lunch outdoors unless the rain is very heavy
12.30
12.30– Outdoor activities, primarily child-initiated activities (85%) and secondary
15.00 teacher-initiated activities (15%)
15.00– Afternoon snack (fruit and bread) outdoors, unless the rain is very heavy
15.30
15.30– Outdoor activities until children picked up by parents
17.00
7.5.3.1 T
ransition from Indoor to Outdoor Activities
in the Chinese Kindergarten
It is Monday morning at 10.30. The music is coming on in the classroom and all the
children are tidying up after their collective activity, putting their chairs by the
tables (ready furnishing for lunch after outdoor playtime).
Observations:
Some children go to the bathroom and some children go to the hallway and line up. After a
few minutes all children are ready to walk outdoors. Two of the boys are having fun
together, laughing. All the children walk in two lines with the teacher in front down the
stairs to the first floor. The stairway has footprints going down on the right side of the stairs,
whereas the footsteps going up is on the left side. The children use most of the space when
going out and no one corrects them.
The transition period between different activities in the Chinese kindergarten is

collectively organised and characterised by routine and efficiency. Due to societal
and institutional demands, the children do not go outside if the weather or level of
air pollution do not permit it. This means that the issue of taking warm clothes or
rain clothes is not applicable. The children often wear their coats on inside in the
wintertime and in the summer time there is little use for rain clothes. The children
do not need to wait for each other to get dressed, but go directly outside. In addition,
the teacher organises the transition between different activities outdoors and the
children walk collectively from one area to another.
7.5.3.2 T
ransition from Indoor to Outdoor Activities
in the Norwegian Kindergarten
It is Monday morning around 8 o’clock, and the group has the kindergarten bus at
their disposal, so the activity of the kindergarten teacher is concentrated on getting
ready to leave. The teachers have different jobs to do; a lot of packing occurs
because each child must have his or her own backpack with extra clothes, lunch box,
and a bottle of water. The kindergarten teachers also bring their own outdoor gear, a
first aid kit, coffee, children’s knives, and handicraft items.
Observations:
Four boys are together outside the wardrobe, where they are waiting to leave the kindergar-
ten. They were quickly dressed and ready, wanting to wait outside, and spend time playing
‘play-fight’ on the waiting area. It is a privilege for the eldest to play outside, without super-
vision, and this is attractive to the four boys. Play-fight is a sort of experimental activity: it
is a test of strength, courage, and endurance, both entertaining and scary at the same time.
There are different rules in this activity, not all kinds of fighting are accepted, and the fight
must stop when one of the participants says ‘I’m not okay’. Suddenly, the play-fight gets
loud and sounds like someone is in trouble. The teacher opens the door and asks if every-
thing is fine, and reminds the children of some of the rules in play-fight.
When all children are dressed to go and all bags are packed, it is the end of the
play-fight activity for this time. The activity was the boys’ way of utilising the small
amount of time during transition from the indoor to the outdoor program.
The children in the Chinese kindergarten require little time to be dressed for dif-
ferent weather conditions. Rather, the transition was collective and efficient with
little time to wait for each other. There were moments of communication between
the children, but few playful episodes.
The children in the Norwegian kindergarten spend a significant amount of time
training to be dressed for the cold and wet climate and training to be independent in
putting their outdoor clothes on. This means that the children have to wait for every-
one to finish before leaving for a trip or waiting for a teacher to walk with them to
the playground. This provides room for playful episodes and communication for the
children.
7.5.4 A
nalyses of Values, Expectations, and Goals during
Outdoor Playtime
A common-sense interpretation of the time schedule reveals that it as an important

institutional condition in both kindergartens regulating the day and the specific
activity setting, and is a situated practice for children’s learning, development, and
cultural formation. A thematic interpretation of the findings indicates that temporal
settings are value-laden and reifications of intentions and goals and clearly define
expectations and demands of the children (see Table 7.5).
Studying the time schedule in the Chinese kindergarten demonstrates societal
and cultural values of variation and balance. This is expressed in the balance
between daily living activities and learning/play activities, between teacher and
child-initiated activities, between rest and activity, and between indoor and outdoor
activities. In the Norwegian kindergarten, one can clearly identify the importance of
outdoor life as the most valuable space for learning and development and the impor-
tance of conquering natural elements.
Table 7.5 Values, expectations, and goals in the time regulation of outdoor playtime
Time regulation Chinese kindergarten Norwegian kindergarten
Societal and Balance as an overall value Outdoor life as real life
cultural values Children need protection against natural Children need to experience
elements natural elements and weather
conditions to become strong
Self-regulation through the collective Self-management/autonomy and
group – interdependence independence
Institutional Efficiency Learning and development takes
goals time
Highly structured Spontaneous structure
Balance between different activity settings, Play as the most important
between teacher-initiated and children- activity to develop
initiated activities, rest and activity
Physical training through exercises Physical training through play
activities
Expectations Protect themselves from tough weather Endure tough weather conditions
and demands conditions
Self-regulation by adjusting to the time Individual self-regulation – find
schedule of the group meaningful activities within
broad frames for activity
Listening to and following instructions Take initiative, being
imaginative, creative, and robust
Furthermore, we found highly specific demands and expectations of the children

in both kindergartens. The children in the Chinese kindergarten are supposed to
move from inside to outside in an efficient way. Slowing down this transition was
regarded as a loss of time. They have limited time on the outdoor playground since
the space is shared by many classes at different times, and time should be used effi-
ciently. The transitions between the different activity settings on the outdoor play-
ground are also collective, based upon interdependence and a high degree of
efficiency. The time regulation in the Norwegian kindergarten is more individual-
ised and seems to demand more autonomous behaviour. Nevertheless, the Norwegian
kindergarten children are expected to be outdoors in any kind of weather. There is
also a clear expectation for the children to find meaningful activities in playing out-
doors, whether they are on the kindergarten playground or on trips in nature.
7.6 Discussion
These findings illustrate that time regulation is not just an organisational issue, but
is also influenced by societal values and institutional expectations and demands on
what to emphasise in everyday life in kindergarten. In this way, time regulation is an
important condition for institutional practices and children’s play and cultural
formation.
7.6.1 Time Regulation as Condition for Institutional Practices
Many aspects of Chinese early childhood education practices have changed over the
past 30 years in accordance with a series of state-led, top-down ECE reforms pro-
moting play-based, child-initiated, and individual-oriented practices (Tobin, Hsueh,
& Karasawa, 2009; Liu & Tobin, 2018). Contemporary Chinese ECE is a hybrid
terrain of old and new practices, producing tensions between Chinese traditional
cultural expectations and Western educational values (Liu & Tobin, 2018).
Traces of this hybrid terrain of contemporary Chinese ECE can be identified in
the regulation of time in outdoor playtime. In the 1950s, Chinese early childhood
education was highly influenced by ECE in the Soviet Union (Liu & Tobin, 2018).
Activities in kindergarten programs were highly structured with limited time for
every lesson, approximately 20 min, with a primary focus on teacher-initiated col-
lective activities (Pan, Wang, & Li, 2018). This has been the dominant practice in
Chinese kindergarten until the last decade. However, the time regulation of outdoor
activities is, as reflected in our findings, now highly influenced by the Chinese
framework for kindergartens, namely the Early Learning and Development
Guidelines for children aged 3–6, which emphasises time for child-initiated play
and individual-oriented pedagogy. Outdoor playtime may now be considered a
hybrid of collective activities such as guangbo ticao, teacher organized collective
games, and child-initiated play activities. This balance of a variety of activity set-
tings in outdoor practice is a predominant feature of the time regulation in this
Chinese kindergarten.
Outdoor activities and play have been and are still highly valued in the Norwegian
society in general and in early childhood education in particular. Historically,
Norwegian kindergartens have emphasised the importance of outdoor play. Moser
and Martinsen (2010) found that the general time spent outdoors in summer time
was 70% or two-thirds and in winter time 30%, or one third, of the time. The domi-
nant institutional practice in this particular Norwegian kindergarten is to have out-
door playtime and outdoor activities most of the day. However, in response to
discussions of increasing pressure for learning outcomes in Norwegian kindergar-
tens combined with more strict safety rules on the outdoor playground, there is a
countermovement emphasising more outdoor activities by establishing outdoor kin-
dergartens. The time regulation in this particular kindergarten is an example of this
countermovement, which argues for being outdoors in all weather conditions.
As a consequence of the loose structure of the time regulation, the content of the
outdoor playtime is based upon spontaneous decisions and choices and is, as such,
less predictable for the children. Most of the activities are based upon children’s
own initiatives, although teachers decide the time frames of when to undertake spe-
cific activities, such as when to go for ice skating or play in the forest. The children
can act within a certain frame of possibilities decided by the teachers, and therefore
everything is not based on the children’s own ideas. This form of time regulation
demonstrates that the teachers need to pay attention to both societal and institutional
values and plans and adjust this to their knowledge about the particular child.
7.6.2 Conditions for Play and Cultural Formation
A grand narrative of the history of Chinese early childhood education is considered

by many researchers as being defined by the hybrid influence of Confucianism,
Communism, and Western ideals (Liu & Tobin, 2018). However, as Liu and Tobin
argue, this grand narrative may be reductionist and tautological (2018). All early
childhood education is informed, influenced, and inspired by cultural loans. This
grand narrative underestimates the complexity and fluidity of Chinese culture and
society. Chinese children are introduced to traditional collective physical training,
which may seem to contradict the emphasis in the curriculum guidelines on child-
initiatives and child-initiated play. Keeping both collective physical training and
child-initiated play as activities in outdoor playtime underscores the importance of
balance in Chinese early childhood education. The outdoor activities are thus
intended to support Chinese traditions and values.
At first glance, the collective movements from indoor to outdoor may be inter-
preted as exclusively disciplining children’s bodies through accommodation to the
temporal order, which requires the correct use of time and the children’s correct use
of their body. This interpretation may overlook the implicit cultural logic about the
pleasure of the collective spirit (Liu & Tobin, 2018). The pleasure of the collective
spirit and cultural formation through the group is clearly exemplified by the guangbo
ticao, which is only possible to do collectively and which has other dimensions than
pure physical training (Liu & Tobin, 2018).
Simultaneous to cultural formation through collective experiences, the time reg-
ulation of the outdoor period in the Chinese kindergarten clearly manifests the
importance of individual time. Although the time frame is decided by the teachers
with little influence from the children, the children had time for developing their
play without corrections or instructions from the teachers. Introducing child-
initiated play in accordance with the curriculum guidelines has been a somewhat
painful process in Chinese kindergartens (Pan et al., 2018). Child-initiated play has
been interpreted in many ways and the teachers have had problems loosening the
control and structure. In this kindergarten, it was clearly observed that the time
regulation provides conditions for child-initiated play.
Just like the time regulation in China, the time regulation in the Norwegian kin-
dergarten has embedded specific expectations and demands on the children. The
children are expected to take the initiative to play and find meaningful activities in
nature. This is an example of giving children ‘action space’ in the educational envi-
ronment (Nordin-Hultman, 2004). Other expectations and demands are to be self-
organised, organising the play, and individually deciding on playmates. These
expectations do not express an emerging practice. Quite the contrary, these expecta-
tions have been dominant practice for a long time in Norway. The notion of free
play, meaning that children are supposed to take the initiative and decide the topic
of play, play-materials, and who to play with have been dominant practice in
Norwegian kindergartens for decades and even more so during outdoor play
(Kallestad & Ødegaard, 2013). In this way, one can say that the children demon-
strate self-regulation by organising their own activities.
7.7 Concluding Remarks
As illustrated in this chapter, the question of time regulation in kindergartens is not

simply an organisational, structural question of division of labor and shared play-
ground. Implicit cultural beliefs with different values, expectations, and demands
are embedded in the regulation of time in both kindergartens. In turn, these time
regulations in kindergartens establish the conditions for different institutional prac-
tices as well as conditions for children’s play and cultural formation.
The implicit cultural logic in the Chinese kindergarten indicates the impor-
tance of collective spirit of living in harmony with others. The time regulation has
a repetitive character of bodily practices combining self-discipline, perfection
through rigorous training, and social harmony. The time regulation in the Chinese
kindergarten further illustrates the importance of balance: balance between
teacher-initiated activities and child initiated activities, balance between physical
training and play, balance between large group activities and individual/small
group activities, and balance between activity and rest. The transition periods
demand efficiency and give little space for children’s spontaneous playful epi-
sodes and communication.
The implicit cultural logic in the Norwegian kindergarten implies the importance
of enduring and conquering nature and weather conditions. The children are sup-
posed to find meaningful activities and be self-organised. The loosely structured
transition periods can result in much waiting time; therefore, practitioners expect
the children to make these periods meaningful for themselves. The expectations of
taking the initiative and being autonomous are prevalent.
Due to the changing demands from curriculum guidelines and education frame-
works, the question of time regulation needs to be addressed. Changes in curricu-
lum guidelines with an emphasis on play and outdoor must be followed up by
questions of time regulations and changes in these guidelines. As illustrated in the
Chinese kindergarten, the kindergarten has made changes in the amount of out-
door time and the amount of time allocated for child-initiated play after the cur-
riculum reforms. The findings and discussion in this article highlights the
importance of conducting qualitative in-depth studies of how the regulation of
time impacts pedagogical practices in kindergartens and our understanding of
children’s cultural formation.
References

social others, and self. In M. Fleer, M. Hedegaard, & J. Tudge (Eds.), Childhood studies and
the impact of globalization: Policies and practices at global and local levels. New York:
Routledge.
Birkeland, Å. (2019). Temporal settings in kindergarten: A lens to trace historical and current cul-
tural formation ideals? Journal of European Early Childhood Education and Care Research,
27(1), 53–67.
Birkeland, Å. (2020). Contradictory cultural formation ideals in a time of increased emphasis
on individualization. A cross-cultural study of kindergarten practices in China and Norway.
Doctoral Thesis NTNU:344.
Brussoni, M., Gibbons, R., & Gray, C. (2015). What is the relationship between risky outdoor play
and health in children? A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health, 12(6), 6423–6454.
Dowda, M., Pate, R. R., Trost, S. G., Almeida, M. J., & Sirard, J. R. (2004). Influences of preschool
policies and practices on children’s physical activity. Journal of Community Health, 29(3),
183–196.
Dowda, M., Pfeiffer, K. A., Brown, W. H., Mitchell, J. A., Byun, W. And Pate, R. R. (2011).
Parental and environmental correlates of physical activity of children attending preschool.
Journal of Archives, Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 165 (10), 939–944.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualita-
tive research (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Framework Plan for Kindergartens. Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2017).
Gulløv, E., & Højlund, S. (2003). Feltarbejde blandt børn. Metodologi og etik i etnografisk børne-
forskning. København, Denmark: Gyldendal.
Hammer, A. S. E., & He, M. (2016). Preschool teachers’ approaches to science: A comparison
of a Chinese and a Norwegian kindergarten. European Early Childhood Education Research
Journal, 24(3), 450–464.
Hedegaard, M. (2008a). A cultural-historical theory of children’s development. In M. Hedegaard
& M. Fleer with J. Bang and P. Hviid (Eds.), Studying children: A cultural-historical approach.
Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Hedegaard, M. (2008b). Developing a dialectic approach to reearching children’s development.
In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer with J. Bang and P. Hviid (Eds.), Studying children: A cultural-
historical approach. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Hedegaard, M. (2009). Children’s development from a cultural-historical approach: Children’s
activity in everyday local settings as foundation for their development. Mind, Culture and
Activity, 16(1), 64–81.
Hedegaard, M. (2012). Analyzing Children’s learning and development in everyday settings from a
cultural-historical wholeness approach. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(2), 127–138.
learning and development: An analysis of learning in home and school. Learning, Culture and
Social Interaction, 3(3), 188–194.
Hu, B. Y., Marco, A. D., & Chen, Y. (2015). Examining the quality of outdoor play in Chinese
kindergartens. International Journal of Early Childhood, 47(1), 53–77.
Kallestad, J. H., & Ødegaard, E. E. (2013). Children’s activities in Norwegian kindergartens. Part
1: An overall picture. Cultural Historical Psychology, 10(2), 86–94.
Karlsson, M. (2012). Fysisk aktivitet öker benmassan hos barn men endast obetydligt hos vuxna.
Malmø,Sweden: Ortopediska kliniken, Universitetssjukhuset MAS.
Leontiev, A. N. (2005). Study of the environment in pedological works of L.S. Vygotsky. A critical
study. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 43(4), 8–28.
Liu, C., & Tobin, J. (2018). Group exercise in Chinese preschools in an era of child-centered peda-
gogy. Comparative Education Review, 62(1), 5–30.
Moser, T., & Martinsen, M. T. (2010). The outdoor environment in Norwegian kindergartens as
pedagogical space for todllers’ play, learning and development. European Early Childhood
Education Research Journal, 18(4), 457–471.
Nordin-Hultman, E. (2004). Pedagogiska miljøer och subjektskapande. Stockholm: Liber.
Pan, Y., Wang, X., & Li, L. (2018). Early childhood education and development in China. In
M. Fleer & B. V. Oers (Eds.), International handbook of early childhood education. Dorthrecht,
The Netherlands: Springer.
Sandseter, E. B., & Lysklett, O. B. (2017). Outdoor education in the Nordic region. In C. Ringsmose
& G. Kragh-Muller (Eds.), Nordic Social Pedagogic Approaches to Early Years. E-book. Cham,
Switzerland: Springer.
Sommer, D. (2003). Barndomspsykologi. Udvikling i en forandret verden. Copenhagen, Denmark:
Kbh: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Sørensen, H. V. (2013). Børns fysiske aktivitet i børnehaven: en analyse af 5–6 årige børns
muligheder og betingelser for fysisk aktivitet. Aarhus, Denmark: Viasystime.
Sørensen, H. V. (2014). Ethics in researching young children’s play in preschool. In M. Fleer &
A. Ridgway (Eds.), Visual methodologies and digital tools for researching with young children.
Dorthrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Sørensen, H. V., & Birkeland, Å. (2020). Children’s explorative activities in kindergarten play-
grounds: A case study in China and Norway. In M. Hedegaard & E. E. Ødegaard (Eds.),
Children’s exploration and cultural formation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook
of qualitative research (pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Statistic Norway. (2019). Barnehagedekning, før og nå. www.ssb.no
Stetsenko, A. (2005). Activity as object-related: Resolving the dichotomy of individual and collec-
tive planes of activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 70–88.
Tobin, J. J., Hsueh, Y., & Karasawa, M. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan
and the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1998). Child psychology. The collected work of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 5. New York:
Plenum Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2016/1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. International
Research in Early Childhood Education, 7 (2), 1–23.
Waller, T., Ærleman-Hagser, E., & Sandseter, E. B. (2017). The sage handbook of outdoor play and
learning. Los Angeles: Sage.
Wang, X., Woolley, H., Tang, Y., Liu, H., & Luo, Y. (2018). Young children’s and adults’ percep-
tions of natural play spaces: A case study from Chengdu. Cities, 7, 173–180.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles: Sage.
Chapter 8
Exploring the Taken-for-Granted
Advantage of Outdoor Play in Norwegian
Early Childhood Education
Abstract It is claimed that nature is given temporal and cultural dimensions in

Norway, in a transgression of the distinction between nature and culture. The overall
emphasis on nature in the Nordic countries may represent an unconscious taken-for-
granted understanding of nature as the best place for children’s play, learning and
cultural formation. Understandings of a strong Norwegian cultural connection to
nature, and thereby outdoor life, as an important arena for children’s cultural forma-
tion may be challenged by changes in Early Childhood Education (ECE) institu-
tions and the contemporary society. Such changes can force conflicts that help in
depicting what is taken for granted. This chapter is therefore structured around the
research question: What conflicts can be found between ECE teachers’ values and
motives for outdoor play versus contextual conditions and demands in personal,
institutional and cultural perspectives and in the perception of nature? By explor-
ing conflicts between contextual conditions and demands and ECE teachers’ values
and motives, the aim is to get a broader insight into perspectives and conditions for
children’s cultural formation. The analysis draws on 15 interviews with ECE teach-
ers, political documents and earlier research. The analysis reveals that nature as a
valued arena for cultural formation, through play, may not be as apparent as expected
in Norwegian ECE.
Keywords Early childhood education · Nature · Nordic · Cultural formation · The

taken-for-granted
L. T. Grindheim (*)
KINDknow Kindergarten Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity
and Sustainable Futures, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway

130 L. T. Grindheim
8.1 Introduction
The overall emphasis of the impact of nature in the Nordic countries may result in
taken-for-granted understandings of nature as the best place for children’s playing,
socialisation and cultural formation. The historical heritage of Norwegians’ con-
nectedness to nature is outlined in Gullestad’s (1992) pioneering anthropological
works, in which she describes how nature was an important symbol in the formation
of a national identity in Norway (p. 202). Her arguments align with Witoszek’s
(1991) work, which asserts that the connection to nature is a national identity for
Norwegians (p. 12). Witoszek traces this national identity to the Norwegian empha-
sis on the pleasure of outdoor activities, the happiness of staying in the wilderness
in the family cabin during weekends and holidays, the position of the Norwegian
farmer who played an important role in building the democratic model in post-war
Norway, the strong egalitarian impulses and Næss’ (2005) Deep Ecology utopia. In
Næss’ utopian vision, humans, animals, plants, forests and oceans co-exist. There is
no need for alcohol or other stimulant drugs because no one is bored. Witoszek
(1991) claims that nature is given a temporal and cultural dimension in Norway that
overcomes the distinction between nature and culture (p.13).
The Norwegian conceptualisation of nature as part of the national identity
explains why it is considered culturally important for children to develop a strong
attachment to nature. According to Gullestad (1992), there is an understanding
among Norwegians that attachment to nature serves to bind the nation together
(p. 202). Until the 1990s, most children in Norway did not attend ECE institutions.
Before ECE institutions became well established in Norway, most Norwegian par-
ents expected their children to play outdoors for several hours each day, in order to
obtain benefits from wild-life experiences and to become more independent
(Gullestad, 1992, p. 204). In addition, Nilsen (2008) outlines how state policy has
traditionally regulated access to nature for families and individuals (p. 44). She
points to the Law of Common Access (loven om allemanssretten), which gives
everybody the right to access the natural environment, whether this is privately or
publicly owned. Nilsen (2008) also points to geographical opportunities for nature
engagement in Norway, due to the short distances between towns and unbuilt spaces.
Both the Law of Common Access and close proximity to nature – even if living in a
town – facilitate the practical and everyday access to nature for most Norwegians.
The same politics, expectations and practices have also been a part of Norwegian
ECE institutions. The politics are spelled out through the framework plan for the
content and tasks for kindergartens (UDIR, 2017). ‘…[C]hildren shall be given out-
door experiences and discover the diversity of the natural world, and kindergartens
shall help the children to feel connectedness with nature’ (p.11). Birkeland and
Sørensen (2021) report that children in Norwegian kindergartens are – on average –
outside for 2 h a day in winter and more than 4 h in summer. The fenced play-
grounds have features that are both cultivated and not cultivated; for instance, there
are areas with stones, hills and trees as well as play equipment like swings, sandpits,
8 Exploring the Taken-for-Granted Advantage of Outdoor Play in Norwegian Early… 131
play houses and play boats. Most ECE institutions visit local natural spaces, such as
the forest and coast, at least once a week and more often during the summer.
In addition to these kinds of typical outdoor play experiences in ECE institu-
tions, Moen, Blekesaune, and Bakke (2008) point to the increasing number of nature
daycare centres (naturbarnehager) in Norway. In these naturbarnehager, children
spend time in the local nature – outside the fenced playground of the institution –
during the core period of the day when all the children in the group are present
(10 am to 2 pm), every day, throughout the year. Moen et al. (2008) assert that these
ECE institutions are popular among parents. Lysklett and Emilsen (2007) outline
that these ECE institutions also are popular among teachers, especially male kinder-
garten teachers. The popularity can be explained by Nilsen’s (2011) research that
describes the strong expectations of teachers that Norwegian children should master
the wilderness and the climate. Valuable outcomes from outdoor activities are also
underlined by Sandseter’s (2009) research, which demonstrates that the ability to
encounter risks and challenges is ultimately beneficial for development. Sandseter
(2009) describes how children intentionally pursue risk in their outdoor play through
seeking great heights and high speed and by performing play in hazardous, danger-
ous and daring manners. Additionally, the children actively evaluate the positive and
negative outcomes of these play situations. Therefore, outdoor play is emerging as
an important area for developing the ability to encounter risk.
The customary Norwegian connectedness to nature may indicate an unconscious
taken-for-granted understanding of nature as the best place for children’s cultural
formation. In spite of this conviction and in line with taken-for-granted understand-
ings, it seems to be hard for ECE teachers to explain why they see the outdoor
environment as important. The taken-for-granted can be recognised by investigating
tensions or conflicts (Grindheim, 2020). This chapter is therefore structured around
the question: What conflicts can be found between ECE teachers’ values and motives
for outdoor play versus contextual conditions and demands in personal, institu-
tional and cultural perspectives and in the perceptions of nature? By analysing
teachers’ vocalisations about outdoor play, I investigate conflicts between the teach-
ers’ values and motives about outdoor play versus conditions and demands from the
institutional and cultural perspectives and from the perception of nature. Thereby, I
aim to investigate the assumed approach to play in nature in Norwegian ECE.
There is seldom a singular discourse of what is considered to be the most impor-
tant or the best approach for the next generation. The Norwegian (and the Nordic
countries’) history of strong connections to nature, and thereby valuing outdoor life
as something important to pass on to the next generation, may be challenged by
changes in ECE institutions or in the contemporary society. By obtaining a broader
insight into several perspectives on children’s outdoor play and learning, we may be
able to both challenge our view of cultural formation and explore what are regarded
as important content and methods in ECE institutions. The analysis from 15 qualita-
tive interviews among ECE teachers, earlier research about outdoor play or condi-
tions for outdoor play, and political documents, reveals that nature as a valued arena
for cultural formation through play is not as obvious as may be expected. The results
132 L. T. Grindheim
from the analysis indicate that humans, culture and nature seem to be hard to sepa-
rate in children’s cultural formation during play in nature.
8.2 Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework that underpins my analysis to trace conflicts between

ECE teachers’ values and motives for outdoor play, versus conditions and demands
in their context, takes departure from Ødegaard and Krüger’s (2012) outline of cul-
tural formations. They present cultural formation as an always-present and continu-
ous process, in which active agents are at the core of learning and cultural formation.
Humans’ learning and cultural formation are contextualised, situated, mediated and
embedded in their given cultural context (p.12). Ødegaard and Krüger (2012) pres-
ent cultural formation as a descriptive concept that depicts an act of humans in rela-
tion to the conditions in their given culture. Both the process (act) and the result of
being a part of the activity are embedded in cultural formation (p. 22). Understanding
both the process and the result as cultural formation leads to the realisation that
humans are both being formed and able to form their culture, the people they are
involved with and their contexts.
Understanding humans as both shaped by and actively shaping the conditions
and demands of the culture and the practices they participate in is in line with how
Hedegaard (2009) outlines children’s development as interwoven into institutional
practices that are embedded in societal and cultural conditions and demands. Even
though Hedegaard’s theory emphasises children’s learning and development, I take
departure from her thinking while emphasising the teachers’ values and motives,
aiming to depict knowledge from the personal, institutional, cultural and natural
perspectives. The taken-for-granted advantage of outdoor play in Norway is chal-
lenged by tracing the conflicts that occur between teachers’ values and motives
versus the conditions and demands in personal, institutional and cultural perspec-
tives and regarding the perceptions of nature.
8.3 Method
The material that forms the starting point for my analysis is from a study undertaken
in collaboration with an ECE institution in Norway from April 2015 to August
2017. Most often, empirical material that informs analysis in research emphasising
everyday activity is, in the first stage, collected from the researcher’s physical posi-
tion in the field (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008, p. 29). This is not the case in this project.
The primary position of what data were collected comes from the teachers’ under-
standing of what activities they found interesting. However, my concerns and aims
for the project, and the way I cooperated with the teachers, also contributed to the
choices that were made. The institution is located in an urban area on the west coast
of Norway. During the period of this research, 63 children between one and 6 years
of age were attending the institution. They were divided into four age-specific
groups. The staff comprised nine assistants and seven teachers, including the man-
ager and an extra teacher who took care of children with special needs.
Five teachers at this ECE institution made videotapes to illustrate children’s
activities that they found to be of special interest and value. I visited their institution
to pick up the videos and interviewed the teachers who had recorded the activities,
meeting one teacher at a time as well as the children in the video(s). I visited the
institution 11 times for 2 to 4 h to do the interviews. Altogether, I obtained 13 videos
of activities that range in length from 1:11 min to 10 min, and all are followed by
comments from the teachers who made the recordings. Seven videos also include
comments from the children involved. The videos contain activities that took place
over the period of 1 year and involve different teachers, children, activities and
places, but they are all from the same institution.
My project was part of the research group Conditions for Children’s Explorations.
Since two of my colleagues in this research group were investigating outdoor activi-
ties (Birkeland & Sørensen, 2021), I told the teachers that I preferred that they chose
indoor activities when making videos of activities of special value and interest. The
main emphasis was on what they saw as especially valuable and interesting activi-
ties, which may explain why six of the thirteen videos recorded outdoor activities,
in spite of my suggestion that they should audio-visually record indoor activities. It
may also indicate that the cultural dimension of outdoor activities as valuable activi-
ties in the Norwegian context could trump my wish for them to pick indoor activities.
Following my first analysis, which evoked more questions about the teachers’
values and motives for the activities they found of specific value and interest, their
opinions about play and the conditions and demands they meet in their daily prac-
tices, I did a group interview (lasting about 90 min) with four of the five teachers
who had made the videotapes. In addition, I participated in two staff meetings (each
lasting 1 h): the first to introduce and discuss my aims and research interest and the
second to present and discuss my findings.
That the videos included outdoor activities despite my wish for indoor activities,
and that no one in the group interview mentioned the subject of outdoor activities or
referred to differences in outdoor and indoor activities, awoke my interest in how
outdoor play is explained and outlined by Norwegian ECE teachers. This interest
became even stronger when I noticed that, not only did the teachers hardly mention
their views about outdoor education, but neither did I follow up this theme by ques-
tions in the interview. All these experiences may point to using the outdoors in ECE
as something ‘taken-for-granted’. I therefore contacted several ECE institutions,
using the initial questions from the group interview and including a question about
outdoor play. From this request, I received nine texts in response. Some of these
texts were an individual response and some of them were notes from a group discus-
sion among the staff in an ECE institution. The material for my analysis is based
upon the content about outdoor activities in these nine texts, and comments made by
the teachers about six audio-visual recordings of outdoor activities. Altogether, this
creates a data collection of 15 qualitative interview transcripts. In addition, I include
134 L. T. Grindheim
political documents, the Norwegian Framework Plan for the contents and tasks of
kindergartens, and earlier research, to inform my analysis.
The analysis builds on a conflict analysis (Grindheim, 2020), in which I trace
conflicts between values and motives versus conditions and demands from personal,
institutional and cultural perspectives and regarding the perceptions of nature. The
data from the interviews with teachers are thereby considered to reflect their values
and motives; and the teachers’ articulations point to conditions that are seen in per-
sonal, institutional and cultural perspectives and regarding the perceptions of nature.
The interviews form the basis for my analysis, but the teachers’ utterances are
understood in relation to relevant policy documents and earlier research. Although
some of the conflicts can be related to more than one perspective – they are interwo-
ven and interrelated – I keep them separated, aiming to make my analysis more
transparent. The teachers’ verbalisations are written in quotation marks. I am fully
aware that this small-scale qualitative material does not represent all Norwegian
ECE teachers. In spite of these limitations, I suggest that my analysis points to
something relevant to take into consideration when discussing the content and
methods of early childhood education.
8.4 Analysis and Findings: Conflicts in the Four Perspectives
To obtain more insight into conflicts that can be traced between ECE teachers’ val-
ues and motives for outdoor play versus contextual conditions and demands for
outdoor play, I trace conflicts in the data from personal, institutional and cultural
perspectives, and regarding the perceptions of nature.
8.4.1 Conflict from the Personal Perspective
From the interviews, a conflict seems to occur between teachers’ values and motives
for emphasising outdoor free play (less controlled) versus their arguments for the
need for teachers to be present and involved.
8.4.1.1 L
ess Controlled Play Versus the Need for Teachers to Be Present
and Involved
On the one hand, all the teachers stated that ‘outdoors there were fewer activities
controlled by the teachers’. I interpret this as a reflection of their understanding of
‘free’ play as valuable and that less control is a motive for outdoor activities. This is
in line with research that states that ‘free’ play and outdoor activities are often pre-
sented as being closely connected in Norway (Nilsen, 2012). Also, all the teachers
stated the benefit that ‘children were using their whole body for learning outdoors’.
I understand these comments to indicate that they value embodied learning. The
value of learning as embodied – as more than cognitive and mental – is also empha-
sised in research (Stolz, 2015). Additionally, the teachers’ responses demonstrated
that they value ‘outdoor activities as physical training (gross motor skills)’. I inter-
pret this as valuing physical health and that this can more easily be obtained in
nature or outdoors in free play, which confirms Gullestad’s (1992) research. The
teachers also pointed out that there were ‘fewer conflicts outdoors – especially in
the wilderness’, which I interpret as valuing harmony. The connection between
nature, free play/freedom and harmony can be traced in the heritage from the
Norwegian philosopher, Arne Næss (2005), and his conceptualisation of nature as
an ecological utopia (or Deep Ecology) where humans, animals, plants, woods and
sea are connected in peace and harmony (Witoszek, 1991). The teachers also men-
tioned that outdoor activities and free play ‘support good self-esteem’, which I
interpret as valuing well-being. The connection between outdoor free play and well-
being can also be traced in Sandseter’s (2009) research that demonstrates that chil-
dren who challenge themselves in outdoor activities are better able to manage
risk-taking.
On the other hand, when asked what conditions were necessary for obtaining the
types of play that they value, the teachers responded that this kind of play ‘asked for
present, engaged, involved teachers that are aware of what values are to be empha-
sised’. They also stated that ‘knowledge about play, respect for children, their needs,
development and conditions’, are necessary to obtain the teachers’ favourable opin-
ion of outdoor activities. When organising my material this way there seems to be a
contradiction and a conflict between all the benefits of outdoor, free play and the
need for the present, educated, conscious and well-trained teacher. Perhaps this is an
indication that nature per se is not enough in the eyes of the teachers. It seems that
both the intentional human teacher and the outdoors are considered essential to
facilitate good education.
8.4.2 Conflicts from the Institutional Perspective
From the interviews, three conflicts seem to occur from the institutional perspective.
One is the teachers’ values and motives for education in nature versus valuing insti-
tutional activities. Another is the teachers’ valuing of children as tribes separated
from adults versus intergenerational perspectives. In addition, a third conflict occurs
between teachers’ taken-for-granted values and motivations for outdoor activities
versus claims for more administrative tasks.
136 L. T. Grindheim
8.4.2.1 Education in Nature Versus Valuing Institutional Activities
On the one hand, the teachers stated that there were more opportunities for ‘multi-
tasking outdoors, there were possibilities for several activities that happened paral-
lel in time’. For example, when two girls were pretending to make cakes out of sand
and water, one of them went to collect more water. On her way she engaged with
other children pretending to be workers making a dike to keep the water from the
fields, at the same time as she was involved in the sand and water play with the first
girl. I interpret this – as the teachers value and are motivated to expand children’s
ability to multitask – as being able to shift activities and being flexible. This is in
line with Nilsen’s (2012) research in which she traces how readiness to shift and
flexibility come to the forefront when teachers condition and value outdoor activi-
ties (p. 218).
The teachers also pointed out that ‘there is more space for play involving a vari-
ety of roles; for example, family play where there is room for movement like taking
a taxi or a bus or driving the car to work because of the physical distances that it is
possible to create between the “house” and “work”’. In addition, the teachers point
to the outdoors as ‘a place that allows for experiences like watching the rubbish
truck and the workers emptying the rubbish bins or the construction of a new build-
ing’. I interpret these two last utterances as demonstrating that the teachers value
and are motivated to expand children’s role-playing. Valuing role-play for children’s
development has a long history in ECE and can be traced from the heritage of
Vygotsky (2016), who emphasises (role) play as the leading line in children’s
development.
On the other hand, the content of the children’s outdoor play, their activities and
roles that I refer to above, are institutional activities. The children made cakes, recy-
cled the water, played families, used private and collective transport and went to
work when playing in nature. In addition, due to the closeness between nature and
urban areas, the children were able to watch different workers preforming societal
duties like emptying rubbish bins and constructing new buildings on their way to
investigate the local nature. All these activities can be connected to institutions like
homes or workplaces. Therefore, a contradiction and a conflict seem to occur
between education outdoors or in the wilderness, while at the same time valuing
institutional content. Perhaps this indicates the cultural heritage that emphasises
humans’ duty to cultivate and harvest nature. Such a cultivation has to happen in
nature. Again, it seems to be hard to separate humans and nature when educating
children.
8.4.2.2 V
aluing Children as Tribes Separated from Adults Versus
Intergenerational Perspectives
On the one hand, the teachers stated that ‘the outdoors made room for play that
children can manage without teachers being a part of the game. Play that requires
space – games like hide-and-seek that are more fun the more children that are
involved’. I interpret this as that the teachers valued and were motivated to establish
community, belonging and friendship among children, which is also in line with the
Norwegian Framework Plan for the content and tasks of kindergartens:
‘Kindergartens shall make good provision for play, friendship and the children’s
own culture’ (UDIR, 2017, p. 20). Research presented by Kjørholt and Tingstad
(2007) indicates that when constituting childhood as a period in the lifespan of
humans, children were constituted as something other than adults. Children became
tribes – separated from adults embedded in their own culture (James, Jenks, &
Prout, 1998). Like western societies colonising indigenous tribes and thereby
destroying their culture, adults’/teachers’ interventions in children’s lives may harm
their peer-communities.
On the other hand, as mentioned above, the teachers pointed to institutional con-
ditions and demands like ‘the need for qualified teachers’. Therefore, a contradic-
tion and a conflict occur between understanding children as a community of peers
that had to be protected from adults versus an intergenerational perspective empha-
sising that there are also empowering and important relations between the genera-
tions (Grindheim, 2017; Lee, 2001; Mannion, 2010).
8.4.2.3 M
otivations for Outdoor Activities Versus Claims for more
Administrative Tasks
On the one hand, all the teachers mentioned how they value outdoor activities.
Reasons for their valuing and motivating for children’s outdoor activities are read
from their descriptions of the benefit from outdoor play that formed conditions for
children to ‘using their [children’s] whole body’, ‘supporting self-esteem’, ‘sup-
porting creativity’, ‘challenging gender dichotomies’, and ‘laying the foundation
for sustainable development’.
On the other hand, Norwegian ECE institutional managers have experienced
changes in the last few years in their contextual conditions and demands for what
duties to perform, by receiving more administrative responsibility because of
changes in the way that Norwegian local municipalities are organised. Therefore,
the managers need to delegate more administrative tasks to the teachers (Børhaug,
2011; Seland, 2009). Research has depicted that extra administrative tasks are limit-
ing the time that teachers are directly involved with the children (Granrusten &
Moen, 2009; Helgøy, Homme, & Ludvigsen, 2010; Larsen & Slåtten, 2014). These
administrative tasks, in addition to more meetings among the teachers, are often
done in the period of the day when children are playing outside. Therefore, the less
qualified members of staff often spend more time looking after the children during
outdoor play.
This dilemma of how to prioritise tasks can be traced from the teachers’ utter-
ances that pointed to ‘room and space, material, time and economy’ and ‘qualified
teachers’ when asked for conditions for realising the outdoor play they valued.
Their priority of when to interact with the children may, on the one hand, indicate
that the time spent outside will be of educational value even if less qualified staff
138 L. T. Grindheim
members are looking after the children because of the advantage of nature as an
agent for cultural formation. On the other hand, it may indicate that the overall
emphasis on nature is not as overall as expected since it may be seen as an arena of
lesser educational value. Thereby, the involvement in the outdoor context is not
prioritised among teachers. Anyway, a conflict occurs between what context (out-
door or indoor) that is emphasised for educational purposes versus the taken-for-
granted motivations and value of outdoor activity.
8.4.3 Conflict from the Cultural Perspective
From the interviews, a conflict seems to occur between parents’ and politicians’
expectations of ECE to solve a range of contemporary challenges that serve as con-
ditions and demands versus taken-for-granted Norwegian values and motives for
more unstructured outdoor activities.
8.4.3.1 U
nstructured Outdoor Activities Versus Measurable
Educational Outcomes
In the interviews all the teachers, on the one hand, mentioned that ‘outdoor activities
are less regulated by the staff’. On the other hand, the teachers’ valuing of fewer
regulations and motivations for children’s initiative forms a conflict with changes in
Norwegian ECE. During recent years, Norwegian ECE institutions have experi-
enced both a growing and changing public and political interest (Grindheim, 2018).
The growing interest can be explained by the rapid expansion of ECE institutions in
Norway. From being a desired option for a few (18% in 1980), there are now ECE
institutions available for most Norwegian children (91% in 2017). Therefore, most
of the citizens, including parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, are personally
engaged in how ECE institutions are contributing to their children’s education. In
some urban geographical areas, the owners of ECE institutions compete to attract
parents. Therefore, families are viewed as customers within the framework of com-
petitive local institutions regulated as a market for meeting the individuals’ needs
for future education. Political interest in ECE institutions is also changing. Not only
are ECE institutions viewed as a political tool for gender equality by paving the way
for women’s role in the labour market (Korsvold, 2005, p. 21), but they are also seen
as an arena for resolving a variety of contemporary problems. Through early inter-
ventions, ECE institutions are supposed to neutralise class differences
(Stortingsmelding nr. 41:2008–2009, 2009:10), provide school readiness for bilin-
gual children (Stortingsmelding nr. 17:1996–98; Stortingsmelding nr. 49:2003–2004;
NOU 2011:14; Drange & Telle, 2011) and prevent behavioural problems and school
dropouts (Webster-Stratton, 1999). From an economic perspective, education paves
the way for early intervention, so that the outcomes can be achieved in the least
‘costly’ way possible. This can be seen in the constant pressure to start teaching
academic skills at a progressively younger age (Bodrova, 2008). Education is

emerging as an economic investment. Politicians and parents are thereby strong
agents, representing both economic and political resources, when it comes to defin-
ing the content and methods of ECE (Grindheim, 2018). Economic and political
resources are important conditions and demands for ECE institutions.
These conditions and demands in the societal/cultural perspective influence what
are seen as important content and methods in ECE and ask for measurable educa-
tional outcomes controlled by teachers. At beforehand defined measurable out-
comes form a contrast and conflict to what the teachers pointed to when describing
outdoor activities as ‘less regulated by the staff’. Outdoor activities in nature are
seldom structured, teacher led, learning activities with explicit academic aims.
Therefore, a contradiction and a conflict emerge between demands for ECE to solve
a range of contemporary challenges in the presumedly less costly way to meet their
customers’ wishes versus the taken-for-granted values and motives for outdoor and
more child-initiated activities. The teachers’ reference to ‘economy’, as a condition
for the play they value, also underlines the emphasis on costs and this emerging
conflict.
8.4.4 Conflicts from the Perception of Nature
From the interviews, two conflicts appear from the participants’ perception of
nature. The first is a conflict between teachers’ values and motives understanding
nature as ‘good’ and serving equity, versus nature as dangerous. The second is a
conflict between the teachers’ values and motives understanding nature as valuable
in itself (eco-centric perspective), versus nature as a tool for meeting human needs
and something to be cultivated by humans (anthropocentric approach).
8.4.4.1 Nature as Good Versus Nature as Dangerous
On the one hand, the teachers asserted that ‘outdoor activities can challenge gender
dichotomies’. I interpret this utterance as that the teachers value and are motivated
to create more equity among genders. The statement is followed by the explanation,
‘in outdoor play in nature, there are fewer gendered tools for play’. The outdoors as
an arena for more equity among genders is often supported by research (i. e. Erden
& Alpaslan, 2017).
On the other hand, the teachers, when asked for conditions for obtaining less
gender-biased play, responded that this play called for conditions ‘like smaller
groups of children, since play in the wilderness, for example climbing trees, calls
for teachers paying close attention’. Therefore, a contradiction and a conflict seem
to occur between an understanding of nature as a creature of the good (equity among
genders), versus nature as dangerous. Werler (2015) states that nature does not have
any intention or plan for humans – neither good, nor bad. He states that the
140 L. T. Grindheim
dichotomy between nature and culture is a construction, made by language and by

the duty to cultivate and harvest nature.
8.4.4.2 N
ature as Valuable in Itself Versus Nature as a Tool for Meeting
Human Needs
On the one hand, the teachers state that ‘play in nature is more creative and more
explorative’. I interpret this as teachers valuing natural materials that children use as
mediating tools in play, for example rocks and sticks, because it is not pre-defined
how to use them or what they should be used for, like more commercial toys, that
are more frequently encountered indoors. There may also be more to explore out-
doors; the teachers pointed to ‘insects, plants, water, sand, trees to climb’. I interpret
this as reflecting the teachers’ perception of nature as a tool for the conscious human
being, that is close to an anthropocentric approach.
On the other hand, the conditions for obtaining this valuable creative, explorative
play is based upon access to natural spaces that are still not cultivated by humans.
In addition, the teachers pointed out that ‘outdoor play lays the foundation for sus-
tainable development’. I interpret this as that the teachers value and are motivated to
continue the heritage of an educational understanding of sustainable development
emphasising children’s closeness to nature by playing in nature (Sanderud &
Gurholt, 2014). By learning to love nature, humans will also care for and protect
nature (Chawla, 2006), and recognise the connectedness and the dependence
between nature and humans, and that we all are nature (Dickinson, 2016). Thereby
nature is presented as valuable in itself, closer to an eco-centric perspective.
Connectedness to nature has been a global discourse in sustainability education
(Boldermo & Ødegaard, 2019). The national discourse in Norway, valuing outdoor
activities, has been closely connected to the global discourse on environmental pro-
tection (Heggen, 2016). The main approach in the national and global discourses is
that connection to nature is leading the line to constructing environmentally protec-
tive subjects (Nilsen, 2012, p. 215). Therefore, a contradiction and a conflict seem
to occur between the anthropocentric and the eco-centric perspectives.
8.5 Summing Up and Exploring the Emerging Conflicts
From the personal perspective, there seems to be a conflict between all the benefits
of outdoor play and the need for the present, educated, conscious and well-trained
teacher. From the institutional perspective, three conflicts occur. First, there is a
conflict between education in nature versus the valuing of institutional activities.
Second, there is a conflict between the teachers’ valuing children as tribes separated
from adults versus intergenerational perspectives. Third, there is a conflict between

teachers’ taken-for-granted values and motivations for outdoor activities versus
claims for more administrative tasks. From the cultural perspective, a conflict
occurs between expectations of parents and politicians versus taken-for-granted cul-
tural valuing of more unstructured outdoor activities. In the perceptions of nature,
two conflicts occur. The first is a conflict between nature as innocent – serving the
good – versus nature as dangerous. The second is a conflict between nature as valu-
able in itself versus nature as a tool for meeting human needs. Outdoor activity
seems to be valued from all perspectives, but conflicts are emerging, when meeting
conditions and demands.
When exploring these conflicts, most of them indicate that nature, culture and
humans are hard to separate. Drawing on interviews, research, political documents
and changing cultural conditions and demands for ECE it seems, on the one hand,
that the historical emphasis on outdoor activities is narrowed. On the other hand, if
nature per se makes children free, offers harmony, more space for a variety of activ-
ity in the institutions, societal equity between genders, peer-communities and an
eco-centric understanding, there may be a possibility of making spare time for
teachers to do administrative tasks. This forms a contrast to utterances that empha-
sise the present, educated teacher, knowledge, economy, experiences for institu-
tional role-play and nature as a tool for creativity. In addition, outdoor activities also
emerge as being trapped between the Norwegian ‘love of nature’ and the expecta-
tions of educational outcomes. The interviews also reveal that outdoor activities are
constituted by the kinds of practices that are embedded in ECE, the Norwegian
culture, and nature, which is accessible and frequently in use.
Ambiguities occur, according to what conditions are best for cultural formation.
An understanding of nature as both a place that does not have an intention and as
one that represents ‘good formation’, appears. The teachers’ articulations reflect
their valuing of and motives for outdoor activities when they are explicitly asked for
their opinions. It may be a task for researchers to raise such questions to obtain
knowledge of the taken-for-granted. Thereby, both teachers and researchers will
have a voice in the choir of agents that direct the content and values in ECE, to serve
conditions for children’s exploration. The taken-for-granted can be neither improved
nor cultivated if not conceptualised. When humans and nature emerge as two sides
of one coin, they can easily be trapped as the one or the other, and the outdoor envi-
ronment can offer neither cultural nor natural formation without the presence of
interacting humans. In this way, a more complete model can emerge, which includes
nature, culture and humans where both children and teachers are in intergenera-
tional relations, in the ongoing formation of ECE. Active and conscious researchers
and teachers, in collaboration with children and parents, as well as a variety of
contexts for children’s exploration, are important for children’s exploration, play
and learning.
142 L. T. Grindheim
References
Birkeland, Å., & Sørensen, H. V. (2021). Time regulation as institutional condition for children’s
outdoor play and cultural formation in kindergarten. In L. T. Grindheim, H. V. Sørensen, &
A. Rekers (Eds.), Outdoor learning and play: Pedagogical practice and children’s cultural
formation. Springer.
Bodrova, E. (2008). Make-believe play versus academic skills: A Vygotskian approach to today’s
dilemma of early childhood education. European Early Childhood Education Research
Journal, 16(3), 357–369.
Boldermo, S., & Ødegaard, E. E. (2019). What about the migrant children? The state-of-the-art in
research claiming social sustainability. Sustainability, 11(2), 1–13.
Børhaug, K. (2011). Barnehageorganisasjonen–autonomi eller standardisering? Tidsskriftet FoU i
praksis, 5(2), 49–66.
Chawla, L. (2006). Learning to love the natural world enough to protect it. Barn, 24(2), 57–78.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Introduction. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),
Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 1–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dickinson, E. (2016). Ecocultural conversations: Bridging the human-nature divide through con-
nective communication practices. Southern Communication Journal, 81(1), 32–48.
Drange, N., & Telle, K. (2011). Gratis kjernetid i barnehage. Effekt på skolekarakterene til barn fra
innvandrerfamilier. In N. P. Sandbu (Ed.), Utdanning 2011 – veien til arbeidslivet, Statistiske
analyser 124. Oslo, Norway: Statistisk sentralbyrå.
Erden, F. T., & Alpaslan, Z. G. (2017). Gender issues in outdoor play. In T. Waller, E. Ärlemalm-
Hagsér, E. B. H. Sandseter, L. Lee-Hammond, K. Lekies, & S. Wyver (Eds.), The SAGE hand-
book of outdoor play and learning (Vol. 348, pp. 349–363). London: Sage.
Granrusten, P. T., & Moen, K. H. (2009). Mindre tid til barna?: om pedagogiske lederes tidsbruk
etter kommunal omorganisering. In I. S. Mørreaunet, V. Glaser, O. F. Lillemyr, & K. H. Moen
(Eds.), Inspirasjon og kvalitet i praksis – med hjerte for barnehagefeltet (pp. 123–138). Oslo,
Norway: Pedagogisk forum.
Grindheim, L. T. (2017). Children as playing citizens. European Early Childhood Education
Research Journal, 25(4), 624–636.
Grindheim, L. T. (2018). Beyond uniform reproduction: Exploring children’s imaginative play
through the lenses of their teacher. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 21(1), 58–69.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949118783384
Grindheim, L. T. (2020). Conflict analyses: A methodology for exploring children’s cultural for-
mation in early childhood education. In M. Hedegaard & E. E. Ødegaard (Eds.), Children’s
exploration and cultural formation (pp. 65–82). London: Springer.
Gullestad, M. (1992). The art of social relations. In Essays on culture, social action and everyday
life in modern Norway. Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.
Activity, 16(1), 64–82.
Heggen, M. P. (2016). Education for sustainable development in Norway. In J. Siraj-Blatchford,
E. Park, & M. Cathy (Eds.), International research on education for sustainable development
in early childhood (pp. 91–102). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Helgøy, I., Homme, A., & Ludvigsen, K. (2010). Mot nye arbeidsdelingsmønstre og autoritetsrelas-
joner i barnehagen. Tidskrift for velferdsforskning, 13(1), 43–57.
James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Kjørholt, A. T., & Tingstad, V. (2007). Flexible places for flexible children: Discourses on new kin-
dergarten architecture. In H. Zeiher, A. T. Kjørholt, D. Dympna, & H. Strandell (Eds.), Flexible
childhood? Exploring children’s welfare in time and space (pp. 169–189). Odense, Denmark:
University Press of Southern Danmark.
Korsvold, T. (2005). For alle barn. Barnehagens framvekst i velferdsstaten. Oslo, Norway:
Abstrakt Forlag.
Larsen, A. K., & Slåtten, M. V. (2014). Mot en ny pedagogisk lederrolle og lederidentitet? Tidsskrift
for Nordisk Barnehageforskning, 7(5), 1–9.
Lee, N. (2001). Childhood and society. Growing up in an age of uncertainty. Buckingham, UK:
Open University Press.
Lysklett, O. B., & Emilsen, K. (2007). De er mange, de er motiverte, de er menn i natur-og fri-
luftsbarnehage. Sluttrapport fra prosjektet “Menn i natur-og friluftsbarnehager”. Trondheim,
Norway: Dronning Mauds Minne Høgskole for Førskolelærerutdanning.
Mannion, G. (2010). After participation: The socio-spatial performance of intergenerational
becoming. In B. Percy-Smith & N. Thomas (Eds.), A handbook of children’s participation
(pp. 330–342). Oxford, UK: Routledge.
Moen, K. H., Blekesaune, A., & Bakke, H. K. (2008). Hvem bruker natur- og friluftsbarnehager?
Barn, 26(3), 37–56.
Næss, A. (2005). Deep ecology of wisdom. Edited by H. Glasser & A. Drengson In Cooperation
with the author and with assistance from bill Devall and George sessions. In H. Glasser &
A. Drengson (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess, X. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Springer.
Nilsen, R. D. (2008). Children in nature: Cultural ideas and social practices in Norway. In
A. James & A. James (Eds.), European childhoods. Cultures, politics and childhood in Europe
(pp. 38–60). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nilsen, R. D. (2011). Født med ski på beina? På ski i et fargerikt fellesskap. In I. T. Korsvold (Ed.),
Barndom Barnehage Inkludering (pp. 151–172). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
Nilsen, R. D. (2012). Flexible spaces – Flexible subjects in ‘nature’: Transcending the ‘fenced’
childhood in daycare centres ? In A. T. Kjørholt & J. Qvortrup (Eds.). The modern child and
the flexible labour market. Early childhood and care (pp. 203–221). In A. James & A. James
Studies (series Eds.) Childhood and youth. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
NOU Norges offentlige utredninger. (2011:14). Bedre integrering. Mål, strategier og tiltak. Oslo,
Norway: Barne-, likestillings- og inkluderingsdepartementet.
Ødegaard, E. E., & Krüger, T. (2012). Studier av barnehagen som danningsarena. In E. E. Ødegaard
(Ed.), Barnehagen som danningsarena (pp. 19–47). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
Sanderud, J. R., & Gurholt, K. P. (2014). Barns nysgjerrige lek i natur–Utforskende dannelse.
Nordic Studies in Education, 34(01), 3–20.
Sandseter, E. B. H. (2009). Risky play and risk management in Norwegian preschools – A qualita-
tive observational study. Safety Science Monitor, 13(1), 2–12.
Seland, M. (2009). Det moderne barn og den fleksible barnehagen. Ph.D. thesis (258). Trondheim:
NTNU, NOSEB.
Stolz, S. A. (2015). Embodied learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(5), 474–487.
Stortingsmelding (White Paper) nr. 17. (1996–97). Om innvandring og det flerkulturelle Norge.
Oslo, Norway: Kunnskapsdepartementet.
Stortingsmelding (White Paper) nr. 41. (2008–2009). Kvalitet i barnehagen. Oslo, Norway:
Kunnskapsdepartementet.
Stortingsmelding (White Paper) nr. 49. (2003–2004). Mangfold gjennom inkludering og deltake-
lse. Oslo, Norway: Kunnskapsdepartementet.
UDIR Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017). Framework plan for the content
and tasks of kindergartens. Oslo, Norway: Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2016). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. International
Research in Early Childhood Education, 7(2), 1–24.
Webster-Stratton, C. (1999). How to promote children’s social and emotional competence. London:
Paul Chapman/Sage.
Werler, T. (2015). Læring i og av naturen? Epigenetiske aspekter ved et didaktisk problem. In
B. O. Hallås & G. Karlsen (Eds.), Natur og danning. Profesjonsutøvelse, barnehage og skole
(pp. 37–57). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
Witoszek, N. (1991). Der Kultur møter Natur: tilfelle Norge. Samtiden, 4, 11–19.
144 L. T. Grindheim
Chapter 9
‘All of the Wild’: Cultural Formation
in Wales Through Outdoor Play at Forest
School
Angela Rekers and Jane Waters-Davies
Abstract This chapter takes the specific context of outdoor play in the Foundation
Phase in Wales to explore how children’s activity and participation is mediated
through the socio-material affordances of muddy puddles at forest school. The
research was underpinned by the cultural-historical tradition of making visible the
sociocultural practices and individual participation which shape the child’s experi-
ence within an educational setting. The discussion in this chapter is centred upon
the following questions: During forest school sessions for pupils aged 4- and
5-years old, what conflicts may be surfaced as classroom teaching staff aim to meet
Welsh Government expectations for both outdoor play and self-regulatory skills
development? How do these conflicts shape the child’s experience of participating
in outdoor play? The analysis draws upon data gathered during 8 months of field-
work; audio-visually-recorded observations and video-stimulated interviews with
classroom teachers and forest school leaders are used to consider an episode of
conflict during play in a muddy puddle. We explore, from child and adult perspec-
tives, the institutional values of the Foundation Phase, demands for reception year
practice and subsequent expectations about children’s participation, highlighting
the mediating messages being given about ‘how to be’ and what competencies are
valued in the activity setting of mud play.
Keywords Conflict · Motive orientation · Socio-material affordances · The

Foundation Phase and Forest School in Wales
A. Rekers (*) · J. Waters-Davies

Institute of Education and Humanities, University of Wales Trinity Saint David,
Carmarthen, UK

146 A. Rekers and J. Waters-Davies
9.1 Background
Since devolution in 1999, the Welsh Government (WG) has established goals for
education in its National Curriculum for Wales based upon environmental sustain-
ability, the Rights of the Child and Wales’ unique cultural identity, including the
Welsh language, as an independent country within the United Kingdom (UK).
Additionally, goals for play-based learning both in- and outdoors are included in the
Foundation Phase Framework (FPF), the statutory curriculum for children between
the ages of 3- and 7-years old (Taylor et al., 2015; Welsh Government, 2008/2015).
Pertinent to the content of this chapter, it is worth noting the FPF was founded upon
a concern to diminish the persistent attainment gap between pupils considered to be
disadvantaged and their more advantaged peers, which is a feature of the Welsh
education landscape (EEF, 2018; Waters, 2016). In the Welsh context of multiple
deprivation, we acknowledge evidence about how this context shapes teacher behav-
iour, indicating that teachers, as the general population, tend to hold negative bias
and associated low expectation about the potential attainment of those from socio-
economically deprived backgrounds (Campbell, 2013, 2015; Welsh
Government, 2017).
The FPF requires teachers to take an active, participatory role in children’s play
and activity, and to facilitate exploratory learning. The child is viewed as inherently
curious and active in the search for meaning. However, teachers are also required to
assess literacy and numeracy skills development and to support children’s develop-
ment of self-regulatory social skills. Baseline assessments and outcomes-based
requirements of the Foundation Phase contribute to a ‘top-down’ pressure, which
can contribute to practitioners’ (mis)understandings of child-directed play (Siraj,
2014), and a lack of time for observing children’s learning within self-directed play
(Rekers-Power, 2020). There are also deeper tensions at work within the enactment
of the FPF. The Foundation Phase practitioner needs to adopt a pedagogy based on
a theoretical understanding of the child that is informed by sociocultural theory,
rather than one that relies heavily on developmental theories (Waters, 2016). Yet, the
accountability systems indicted above determine a conceptual understanding of the
young child as needing to be developed into the ‘school-ready’ child. This chapter
asks about the construction of the ‘school ready’ child, and offers a view that young
children may indicate their developing self-regulation skills during playful
behaviour.
Outdoor play is increasingly recognised as providing conditions for children’s
learning and development that are in alignment with FPF values (Bilton & Waters,
2017). Since the implementation of the FPF from 2008, forest school (FS) provision
has been advocated as a means of providing experiential outdoor learning and play
for young children on a regular basis (DCELLS, 2009; Knight, 2016; WAG, 2008).
Historically in Wales, outdoor learning experiences have been located within the
field of outdoor education, in the domain of one-off ‘field trips’, and/or residential
centre provision for older students (Williams & Wainwright, 2014). Therefore, the
FPF has created new cultural standards through expectations for everyday
9 ‘All of the Wild’: Cultural Formation in Wales Through Outdoor Play at Forest School 147
opportunities for children to utilise the outdoor environment for learning and play-
ful activity. This chapter uses empirical research findings to demonstrate some of
the tensions inherent in the attempt to cultivate cultural conditions for outdoor
learning.
Within the Welsh context there is a transitional ‘Reception’ year of education
that marks the child’s journey into statutory school at the age of 5 years. Pupils
generally begin this Reception year when 4 years old. The Reception year sits
within primary school and provides a rich time of cultural formation as the child
negotiates and appropriates the standards of the distinct FPF early childhood cur-
riculum within the school setting. This chapter demonstrates how cultural formation
in the outdoors can be mediated by a conflict between (mis)understandings of out-
door play-based approaches and institutional demands for the young child to
‘become’ self-regulated in readiness for primary school. We consider the implica-
tions of such conflict for children’s trajectory of self-experience.
In the research study upon which this chapter is based, the FS programme was
delivered by a registered charity that provides year-long sessions for learners of all
ages and abilities in local woodlands, as well as outdoor learning and play training
for teachers and other professionals. As an institution, the charity’s practice is
informed by its values for delivering a learner-centred pedagogical approach based
upon engagement with the natural world (Rekers-Power, 2020). Rather than follow-
ing a set curriculum, FS practice is based upon a set of Six Principles (FSA, 2018).
These principles, or values, situate the individual as holistically developing within
an ecological community encompassing both human and non-human nature. There
is an expectation that practice will be based upon learner (child)-initiated, leader
(adult)-supported playful experiences. Moreover, there is the expectation that the
natural environment will also initiate and shape activity.
As an alternative pedagogical model (Kraftl, 2015; Rekers-Power, 2020; Waite
& Goodenough, 2018) or ‘wilder’ approach (Knight, 2016, p. 57) to outdoor learn-
ing, FS provides opportunities for children’s appropriation of affordances not neces-
sarily promoted by the indoor classroom or school-grounds provision. Indeed, one
critical feature of FS is the opportunity for imaginative and developmentally appro-
priate risky play (Davis & Waite, 2005; Ridgers, Knowles, & Sayers, 2012).
Although tensions lie in assuming all forest school leaders adhere to a particular
value-system or pedagogical approach (see Leather, 2018), in this study the FS lead-
ers had personal and professional values that aligned with an ‘ecosocial identity’
(McCree, 2020) based upon environmental ethics related to social ecology and deep
ecology social movements (Rekers-Power, 2020). Although the charity was an insti-
tution based upon an alternative pedagogical approach founded in ecological under-
standings, it also aligned with the FPF intentions for outdoor, experiential play.
The tensions that are surfaced in this chapter centre upon the difficulties that
early childhood practitioners may encounter when their understanding of outdoor
play means they fail to recognise the extent of the skills being practiced by children
in such play activity. The episode outlined in this chapter considers mud play as an
activity setting (Bang, 2008). Mud play, usually in the form of ‘mud kitchens’
(White, 2011), is an increasingly institutionalised activity setting in early childhood
settings, due to conceptualisations of children having reduced opportunities to play

outdoors and to engage in play with natural materials (Chawla, 2015). Indeed, in the
pilot study, one young boy, when asked what he liked about forest school, replied:
‘All of the wild! Especially the mud!’ Yet, such wild play becomes a contested space
in the episode presented here. The teacher in this study expressed concerns about
the behaviour of some of the children in her class and in interview, she maintained
that they ‘need to learn how to play without being so out of control’. This statement,
with its implicit judgement that certain types of play and certain manifestations of
self-regulation do not reflect the ‘school-ready’ child, sets the backdrop for the epi-
sode considered in this chapter.
The questions guiding the analysis of the empirical material presented here are:
During a forest school session for young children, what conflicts in cultural forma-
tion may be surfaced, as new teaching staff aim to meet Welsh Government expecta-
tions for outdoor play if considered distinctive from other goals such as
self-regulation? How do these conflicts shape the child’s experience of participating
in outdoor play? This chapter, therefore, reflects upon an episode of playful activity
at FS to explore, from the child’s and practitioner’s perspectives, the values and
expectations of institutional practice in relation to outdoor play and how children’s
participation is framed and shaped by these values and demands.
The research project detailed the social and material affordances of institutional
practice and the engagement of individual children in activity settings, in order to
consider the cultural formation of children’s developing motive orientation and
competencies as they actively negotiate the values, expectations and demands of
institutions (Hedegaard, 2018). The study was underpinned by Hedegaard’s (2018)
wholeness approach to studying children’s development using cultural historical
activity theory. Hedegaard (2014) asserts that to study the child’s perspective, it is
necessary to ‘follow how the child's orientation in the world interacts with the
demands that the child meets in the different institutional settings’ (p. 192). The
demands and expectations of institutions are conceptualised by Hedegaard (2014)
as ‘forces from the surrounding world on the child that guide the child's activities’
(p. 192); yet, the child also is understood to be an active agential being who shapes
their own activity by appropriating the affordances of the socio-material environ-
ment in line with their motive orientation (Bang, 2009).
The doctoral study built upon Bang’s (2008, 2009) conceptualisation of behav-
iour settings (Heft, 1988) and affordances (Gibson, 1979/2015) as the basis for an
environmental affordance perspective analytic framework. In doing so, it is possible
to explore the mediational affordances of things, social others and self-experience,
in order to make visible the inter/intra-activity at work within cultural formation.
Things are comprised of artefacts, or that which has deliberate institutional inten-
tion, as well as natural features, surfaces and substances, such as mud puddles,
which may/may not have deliberate institutional intention, yet the affordances of
which may also be mediated in practice (Rekers-Power, 2020). The affordances of
social others include the biotic lifeforms, primarily human, with which the child
engages in socially-directed activity (Ibid). The notion of the affording of self-
experience contributes to an interpretation of how the individual experiences the act
of participating in activity settings, with existing and developing competencies and
motive orientation in dialectic relationship with those which are valued within col-
lective practice (Bang, 2009).
Transitions, crisis and conflict are all considered pivotal to the social situation of
development as the individual participates in collective activities. As an individual
within collective experience, the child develops motive orientations in relation to
their perspective of these practices (Bang, 2009). The child’s existing motive orien-
tation can be most visible in episodes of conflict when they are unable to do what
they want to do or when their activity appears to be in opposition to that which is
promoted or valued by the practice situation (Hedegaard, 2018). This conceptualisa-
tion of conflict as a moment of intersection between individuals’ motive orienta-
tions and between an individual and an institution demonstrates two central tenets
of cultural historical theory relevant to the material presented here: one, that the
individual is an active agent, experiencing and participating in culturally- and
historically-situated institutional practice on multiple levels in the moment; and
two, that analysis of these moments of intersection between institutional demands
and individual participation has the potential to contribute to theorisation of both
practice and participation.
9.3 Method
The empirical material presented here is from data gathered during a doctoral
research project. The ethnographic study was undertaken in a primary school, cater-
ing for children between the ages of 3- to 11-years, located in the centre of a local
authority-maintained housing estate in an urban, post-industrial town. Adjacent to
the housing estate is 7000-acre woodland, where forest school sessions for the
reception year children take place one day a week throughout the school year.
During the project, the first author visited both the classroom and the forest school
setting for one to two days per week during two school terms and collected data
using observations, audio-visual recordings, interviews and video-stimulated
accounts (Theobald, 2017). The material discussed below has been selected on the
basis of conflict from the corpus of data that included 10 hours of video-recorded
observations and 3 hours of video-stimulated interviews.
Participants included children, teaching staff and forest school staff. There were
two reception year classes at the school; one class was led by an Early Years teacher
(EYT), who had training in early childhood pedagogy, and the other by a Newly
Qualified Teacher (NQT) whose previous experience had been working with chil-
dren aged 94–5 years11 as a teaching assistant. The episode presented here is from
the Newly Qualified Teacher’s class; she is anonymised as ‘Mrs Evans’. The Forest
School Leaders (FSL) had youth work and play work qualifications, in addition to
their Level 3 Forest School Leader training.
9.4 Material
In this episode of conflict, we consider both the visible conflict between children
and adult, as well as the less visible conflict between societal and institutional val-
ues and the teacher’s interpretation of subsequent demands; these conflicts provide
opportunity to surface both the child’s and the adult’s perspectives. At forest school
(FS), a group of children are playing in and around a muddy puddle. The FS Leaders
have set up the FS site prior to the children’s arrival; during this episode, they are
engaged with other children who are lighting a campfire, climbing trees and
using tools.
The available things with which the children in this episode engage are as fol-
lows: artefacts, such as waterproof jackets and wellington boots, buckets, spades, a
drainpipe set at an angle between a tree and a rock, and plastic toys, i.e. dinosaurs,
buckets and balls (Fig. 9.1). The features and substances with which they engage
include the mud, the water, sticks and the space within and outside of the puddle.
Some of the children are using spades for digging mud on the edges of the puddle;
others are playing with the buckets, collecting water to pour down the drainpipe.
The social others include the children’s peers as well as the teacher, a teaching
assistant and the researcher. The adults stand on the periphery, observing the chil-
dren’s play. The classroom teacher and a teaching assistant are watching the
Fig. 9.1 The Muddy Puddle activity setting

children, as well as chatting with each other; the researcher is standing nearby film-
ing with an iPhone.
Joshua, aged 5, enters the water to stand and balance on a plastic tray lying in the
puddle (boy on the right in Fig. 9.1). He is smiling. Mrs Evans says sharply,
‘Josh-u-a!’ He turns to look at her, bites his lip, turns back to the water and
scoops some up in a bottle. The teacher repeats his name.
From an adult perspective, confirmed by later video-stimulated interviews with
adult participants, it appears that she is saying his name because she is concerned
he is in the water with his camouflage trousers getting wet, as they are not water-
proof, nor are they tucked into his wellington boots. Joshua’s reaction, however,
indicates that he does not understand why she is saying his name; yet, her tone is
warning. Indeed, some children look up from their play to look at the teacher and
follow her gaze to Joshua. Although Joshua does not have waterproof trousers
on, he has worn camouflage trousers deliberately for forest school. These are the
kind of ‘trousers that [one of the forest school leaders] wears’, he asserts later in
a video-stimulated interview. This demonstrates his motive orientation to align
with demands using FS leaders as role models, and her clothing as a
guide, although this alignment is not recognised by the teacher.
Joshua gathers some water from the puddle into his bucket and walks around the far
edge of the puddle (away from Mrs. Evans) and pours his water down the drain-
pipe. The water splashes onto a plastic dinosaur at the bottom of the pipe. Joshua
smiles at the teacher. This activity appears to be acceptable as she stops saying
his name in a warning tone and turns to talk to the teaching assistant.
Opposite the drainpipe, Chantelle, in a pink waterproof suit (far right in Fig. 9.1),
approaches the puddle with a small container of water that she has retrieved from
a nearby stream. She smiles at the teacher and says, ‘I’m just gonna [sic] throw
this in here.’ Chantelle turns to the other children and shouts: ‘Ok, guys, out of
the way!’
The children who are digging stop to watch her. There is a big splash as the water is
thrown into the puddle. Joshua is looking at Chantelle, smiling and laughing; the
other children also watch the water’s dispersal in the puddle with interest.
Chantelle looks in her bucket and throws out the little water that remains.
Mrs Evans says sharply to Chantelle: ‘Do you think that’s a good idea?’
Chantelle looks tentatively at the teacher, with a half-smile on her face.
Mrs Evans repeats the question twice more. Chantelle is still smiling at the teacher,
but begins to back away, looking around nervously.
Mrs Evans continues: ‘What would they say if they got soaked? What would you
say if someone went and poured muddy water all over you?’
Chantelle continues to back away; but, Joshua has moved into the centre of the
puddle, where the water Chantelle poured has landed.
Mrs Evans says to Chantelle: ‘Think! Chantelle, think!’
Chantelle, looks down at her bucket, and says quietly, ‘I can’t.’
Joshua has filled his bucket with water. He calls, ‘Look out!’ and flips the water out
of it up into the air. It lands on him and he smiles at the teacher. No one else is in
the puddle. Is he trying to draw Mrs Evans’ attention from Chantelle, showing
Mrs Evans that he knows to tell others to watch out, or demonstrating that if
Chantelle had gotten him wet, he would not mind?
Mrs Evans turns her attention to Joshua. ‘What would someone say if – What would
you say if someone threw muddy – water over you?’
Joshua looks down at the muddy water. He shrugs, looking confused, half smile on
his face, looking into the muddy puddle. Chantelle walks to the far side of the
puddle so that Joshua is in between the teacher and herself, drops her bucket in
the water, then retreats from the puddle to go play elsewhere.
Another boy, Joe, pours water down the drainpipe and Mrs Evans laughs. She says
to the teaching assistant: ‘Joe loves water play!’ From her response, it appears
that pouring water down the drainpipe is the preferred way of utilising full buck-
ets of muddy water from a classroom institutional perspective, although she has
not articulated this verbally to the children, and although it is at odds with the
forest school institutional perspective, which allows space for risky play.
9.5 Analysis
9.5.1 Conflict: Institutional Conditions for Outdoor Play
There is some tension between how outdoor play is conceptualised from a forest
school (FS) perspective and from a classroom/school perspective (Maynard, 2007).
The forest school leader training incorporates sustainable use of natural resources
and a play work perspective that supports the provision of resources as ‘loose parts’
(Nicholson, 1972). In interview the FS Leaders said that they evaluated mud play
from three angles. These are related to sustainability: ‘is the environment being
harmed?’; safety: ‘is the muddy puddle become stagnant and breeding harmful bac-
teria’ or ‘is the mud going in anyone’s eyes?’, and developmentally: ‘in what ways
is this activity supporting learning and development?’. Their response to the epi-
sode, as ascertained in video-stimulated interviews after the event, was that the chil-
dren were enjoying themselves, taking care of each other, and throwing/pouring
water to see how it landed indicating early scientific concept development. The
leaders said there was not a ‘right’ way to play in the muddy puddle and that getting
wet was part of the children’s learning to manage risk and exploring properties of
the natural world. Therefore, from the FS perspective, the children’s activity with
things was in alignment with FS expectations.
The FS leaders also saw alignment in the social others affordances aspect of the
episode. They remarked that Chantelle warned the others to ‘look out!’ before she
threw the water, which they perceived as demonstrating care for others, and that
Joshua seemed to try to ‘protect’ Chantelle by diverting the teacher’s attention from
her to himself to demonstrate that not everyone would mind if someone got them
wet. These perceptions of acceptable ‘wild’ play characterise the motive
orientations of the forest school leaders, in which there is room for social and
exploratory play in which getting wet is an acceptable risk. The FS leaders asserted
that they consider play, even risky play, as a means of practicing competencies in
social skills and self-regulation (e.g., Bodrova, Germeroth, & Leong, 2013; Brussoni
et al., 2015; Pellegrini & Smith, 1998; Whitebread, Jameson, & Basilio, 2015). The
perceptions of the leaders when viewing this episode provide a basis for interpreting
alignments between motive orientation of forest school and the children. Importantly,
the forest school leaders’ interpretations of the event align with the demands of
Foundation Phase to provide opportunities for experiential play, risky and social
play considered beneficial for children’s learning and development.
The teacher’s perspective, however, is in conflict with FS practice and is arguably
in contrast with FPF values. Her perspective of the play appears based upon how
outdoor play might be promoted on school grounds or her expectations for chil-
dren’s behaviour indoors, as demonstrated by the constraints she places on the affor-
dances of water play. Careful play using artefacts in specific ways is encouraged;
but, ‘wild’ play, in which children utilise the affordances of artefacts differently to
expectation and might get themselves or others wet, is discouraged. The teacher
suggested, in the video-stimulated interview following the event, that her response
to the children’s play was motivated by annoyance at the children for getting wet, as
well as by concern about children learning to care for themselves and others – and,
importantly, her perception that Joshua and Chantelle were not competently doing
so. The teacher’s motive orientation, as representative of the school institution, was
focused upon controlling the activity and the children’s participation therein, pre-
sumably in order to maintain control and ensure everyone was able to play without
getting uncomfortable, e.g., wet. This suggests an orientation toward risk-aversion
that, rather than supporting children in learning to manage risk, results in their con-
fusion and disengagement. The teacher’s response also indicates a cultural perspec-
tive in which the children’s inter/intra-actions with the natural materials of the
environment are less recognised or valued than the inter/intra-actions with human-
fabricated artefacts, although both have cultural constraints specific to their
intended ‘uses’.
9.5.2 C
onflict: Motive Orientations
and the Personal Perspective
The conflict between the teacher and the children (Joshua and Chantelle) highlights
how the institutional perspective, as enacted by the teacher, presents a dilemma for
the children’s participation. The teacher perceives the ways in which Joshua and
Chantelle play with and in the muddy puddle to be problematic. In interview, she
maintains that they ‘need to learn how to play without being so out of control’. We
may conjecture that, from her perspective, these children were not displaying what
she would accept as ‘school-ready’ self-regulation; this may create concern or even
fear on her part of the children being ‘out of control’. From an environmental affor-
dance perspective, the children appropriate the affordances of the muddy puddle for
wading, splashing and throwing, as well as pouring. Not all of these affordances are
encouraged by the teacher. Although this way of participating is not necessarily out
of alignment with forest school motive orientations for experiential and exploratory
play with natural materials, the teacher would prefer that these affordances are con-
strained (Kyttä, 2003) at forest school as they would be on school grounds.
Similarly, the social others available in the activity setting – the teacher and
peers – afford watching, laughing and playing together, which is in alignment with
practice demands. Yet, because throwing of water and wading in deep water is not
acceptable from the teacher’s perspective, the teacher does not recognise the appro-
priation of valued social affordances. Indeed, her own social affordances for Joshua
and Chantelle also include reprimanding, rejecting and confusing. The conflict
highlights how what the teacher affords the children is not in alignment with
Foundation Phase values for supporting and guiding. Due to this, Chantelle eventu-
ally disengages and leaves the activity setting. This results in a failure to support
Chantelle’s developing motive orientation, as an individual within collective prac-
tice, who is both capable of looking out for her peers and demonstrates a desire to
be in alignment with institutional values by looking to the teacher for approval.
The socio-material affordances of the muddy puddle hold the potential to con-
tribute to how Chantelle may begin to perceive of herself as a competent member of
the class culture: as one who looks out for others, as one who successfully plays, and
other self-experiencing affordances for cultural formation. Bang (2009) asserts that
the developing of motive orientation in alignment with institutional orientation
allows for a sense of self as one who has or is developing the competencies that are
valued. Because Chantelle’s personal actions in relation to the collective activity of
muddy puddle play appear to be rejected by the teacher, an opportunity is lost to
engage Chantelle in developing an understanding of what expectations there are for
participation in the muddy play and how she might form motive orientations that are
more clearly in alignment with institutional practice. The forest school leaders, who
were less astonished by the ‘wild’ throwing of water, were better able to view
Chantelle as socially and physically competent. Had they been present, perhaps they
would have been able to laugh with her and praise her care for the others, thus rein-
forcing her self-experience as one who is capable of both playing well with natural
materials and with others.
Joshua also seems to be without a clear understanding of how he might be able
to participate in a way in which he might receive praise for aligning his motives with
those of the institutional perspective(s). By continually looking to the teacher for
approval, he also demonstrates a motive orientation to both play with the muddy
water and please the teacher. Additionally, although he does not have waterproof
trousers on, he has worn his camouflage trousers in order to fit into what he sees as
a forest school dress code. They are the same as one of the forest school leader’s
trousers. The teacher’s interactions with him seem to confuse him, rather than
guide him.
Joshua also demonstrates motive alignment with school practice in regards to

how to treat others. He seems to care for Chantelle by trying to deflect the unwanted
attention from the teacher from her to himself, trying to make the teacher laugh and
calling ‘look out’ to his peers. The teacher, Mrs Evans, however, displays disap-
proval toward his behaviour, rather than articulating praise or clarifying what is
expected. His developing motive orientations of dressing appropriately, caring for
others, exploratory play with natural materials and playing well with peers have
been ignored. Later, however, the teacher offers approval and recognition toward
Joe, a child whose ways of participating and his appropriation of the water play
more visibly, and perhaps consistently, align with the teacher’s expectations and
demands. Although Joshua also appropriated water play similarly when he used the
plastic tube in similar ways, his actions were not necessarily praised and specifically
supported by the teacher. His ways of meeting the affordances of the activity setting,
as an expression of his own playful interaction with available materials, were met
with disapproval, thus reducing opportunity for him to understand how he contrib-
utes to and belongs in the institutional culture of the reception year.
The aligning of motive orientations is a way in which children begin to develop
in relationship with the collective, institutional practice (Bang, 2009). The ways in
which the child experiences self in relation to collective motive orientations contrib-
utes to the child’s engagement with institutional practice. The child begins to be
able to see oneself in relation to what is valued in practice, such as ‘caring-for-
others-able’ and ‘playing-well-able’. If the child’s ways of participating are rejected
without support for how to be in alignment or without acknowledgement of existing
competencies, children are at risk of becoming disengaged and unable to understand
how their participations fits in to the collective whole.
9.6 Discussion
Children’s cultural formation occurs as children participate in everyday activities

within institutional practices of home, care and educational settings. Kallestad and
Ødegaard (2013) assert that cultural formation is ‘the shaping of new meanings,
identities and practice’ (p. 75), recognising the dialectical activity that characterises
both the individual’s development and the sense of self as a participant within col-
lective practice. From a cultural-historical perspective, the social and material con-
ditions of institutional practice mediate children’s participation; thus, the values,
expectations and demands that characterise institutional practice may be viewed in
relationship with the affordances of activity settings (Bang, 2009). Across the lifes-
pan, individuals are confronted with the values, expectations, demands and stan-
dards of new institutions; conflict or crisis may arise particularly during times of
transition as they learn to merge existing skills and motive orientation with the new
standards.
The episode presented here indicates that young children are looking toward the
adults to determine what values are being promoted and trying to understand what
is expected of them in relation to institutional values and demands. The FS leaders

recognised the children’s developing competencies in alignment with institutional
values and expectations in these episodes; however, the teacher appeared focused on
shortcomings and lack of specific competencies. This may be due to the newly qual-
ified teacher’s previous classroom experience in another school or her lack of pro-
fessional development in play or outdoor play specifically. The Foundation Phase
Framework can be aligned with international approaches to early childhood educa-
tion and care predicated upon a commitment to play, most often valued for contrib-
uting to learning outcomes and cognitive development, as well as emotional, social,
and physical development (Broadhead, 2006, 2009; Brooker, 2011; Pellegrini,
1988, 2009; Siraj-Blatchford & Silva, 2004; Wood, 2007a). Research on play also
asserts its potential for enhancing the well-being of the child, as an individual and
as belonging to a group (Aasen & Waters, 2006; Sandseter & Seland, 2016).
However, as Wood (2007a) notes, a shift from a pedagogy based on achievement
of specific curriculum outcomes to one that requires a play-based approach is sig-
nificant and full of inherent tensions. These tensions centre on the problematic
nature of how play is understood (e.g. Wood & Attfield, 2005), the regulation of
play within early childhood curriculum frameworks (Wood, 2007a, 2007b) and the
reification of play within early years practice (Cannella, 1997; Stephen, 2012). The
ambiguity inherent in the claims made in Foundation Phase documentation for ‘well
planned play’ (WAG, 2008, p. 5), ‘free play’ (WAG, 2008, p. 5) and play that is
‘structured with clear aims for children’s learning’ (WAG, 2008. p. 7), without any
differentiation between these play forms, may illustrate further the challenges fac-
ing practitioners seeking to implement the Foundation Phase Framework.
The conflicts described in the muddy puddle activity surface a lack of recogni-
tion on the part of the teacher that the children are developing self-regulatory com-
petences and aligned motive orientations by looking to her for guidance and caring
for each other, even in risky play that may be perceived as ‘too wild’ or ‘out of
control’. This situation, we argue, may contribute to children becoming margin-
alised as badly behaved and subsequently disengaging from school learning if they
perceive that they are failing to meet teacher expectations.
This chapter highlights the social and material affordances of institutional prac-
tice and the engagement of individual children in activity settings, in order to con-
sider the cultural formation of children’s developing motive orientation and
competencies as they actively negotiate the values, expectations and demands of
institutions (Hedegaard, 2018). The Foundation Phase was conceptualised as an
alternative approach to formal schooling for children under the age of eight. The
outdoor environment, when coupled with an alternative pedagogical approach such
as play and nature pedagogies like forest school, allows for children’s experiential
learning through the medium of playful activity with natural materials. Hännikainen,
Singer and van Oers (2013, p. 165) assert that:
[P]lay seems to be a valuable medium for children to participate in cultural life, to learn
how to live together, to learn how to deal with authority, conflicts and power, and to appro-
priate basic cultural values, attitudes, abilities and knowledge.
The values of Early Years provision in the UK typically relate to learning and
skills outcomes, which are shaped by accountability measures and meeting
pupils’ wide range of needs, so that children develop their competencies and
realise their potential to participate as members of a classroom first and, later
on, mainstream society. These values lead to demands and expectations for
learning, participating and behaving, e.g., self-regulation and listening, in order
to promote smooth transitions between pre-school, reception year and primary
school. Importantly, play in the outdoors can be a valuable medium for chil-
dren’s participation in a cultural life that expands the range of affordances for
cultural formation and ‘participation in cultural life’ (Hännikainen et al., 2013),
including interactions with non-human nature in a more ‘common worlds’ peda-
gogical approach (Taylor, 2013). In light of Welsh Government goals for well-
being and sustainable futures (Welsh Government, 2015), it is essential that
alternative pedagogies, such as forest school, are able to not only create space
for such experiences that allow for a wider range of socio-material affordances
and ways of being, but that such pedagogies not be constrained themselves by
lack of understanding or training.
Government policy for education is based upon the ‘values, beliefs, activities and
practices’ (Tudge et al., 1999, p. 68) of wider mainstream society, which attempts to
unify a diverse population toward a communal goal of civic engagement, opportu-
nity and responsibility. These values and expectations, in turn, influences percep-
tions of learners’ competencies (Aasen, Grindheim, & Waters, 2009; Mahn &
John-Steiner, 2002; Waite, Huggins, & Wickett, 2014) and significantly affects chil-
dren for whom educational equity is most essential (Wood, 2007b). Hedegaard
(2010) argues that values and demands may also lead to tensions between expecta-
tions for the child as a future being while also providing ‘space’ for children to be
themselves in the present and to be viewed in terms of existing competencies.
Arguably, a cultural framework that limits or does not recognise the role of chil-
dren’s interactivity with the affordances of natural materials, even while arguing for
outdoor play, loses opportunities for children to develop sustainable ecological
identities as part of the wider community of species as well as to develop an identity
as a successful learner.
By observing diverse children’s participation in relationship with the socio-
material affordances of the woodland, teaching staff may be encouraged to consider
how children are developing motive orientation in alignment with the multiple val-
ues of the Foundation Phase Framework. In doing so, teachers may be better able to
support children’s diverse ways of participating, in order that children who may be
at risk from disengaging in school due to a perceived lack of alignment may be more
inclusively engaged and find space to belong.
References
Aasen, W., Grindheim, L. T., & Waters, J. (2009). The outdoor environment as a site for children’s
participation, meaning-making and democratic learning: Examples from Norwegian kindergar-
tens. Education 3-13, 37(1), 5–13.
Aasen, W., & Waters, J. (2006). The new curriculum in Wales: A new view of the child? Education
3-13, 34(2), 123–129.
Bang, J. (2008). Conceptualising the environment of the child in a cultural-historical approach.
In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Studying children – A cultural-historical approach
(pp. 118–138). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill Education.
social others, and self. In M. Hedegaard, M. Fleer, & J. Tudge (Eds.), World yearbook of
education 2009. Childhood studies and the impact of globalization: Policies and practices at
global and local levels (pp. 161–181). London/New York: Routledge.
Bilton, H., & Waters, J. (2017). Why take young children outside? A critical consideration of
the professed aims for outdoor learning in the early years by teachers from England and
Wales. Social Sciences: Special Issue: Equality and Social Inclusion: The Role of Education,
6(1), 1–16.
Bodrova, E., Germeroth, C., & Leong, D. J. (2013). Play and self-regulation: Lessons from
Vygotsky. American Journal of Play, 6(1), 111.
Broadhead, P. (2006). Developing an understanding of young children’s learning through play:
The place of observation, interaction and reflection. British Educational Research Journal,
32(2), 191–207.
Broadhead, P. (2009). Conflict resolution and children’s behaviour: Observing and understanding
social and cooperative play in early years educational settings. Early Years, 29(2), 105–118.
Brooker, L. (2011). Taking children seriously: An alternative agenda for research? Journal of Early
Childhood Research, 9(2), 137–149.
Brussoni, M., Gibbons, R., Gray, C., Ishikawa, T., Sandseter, E. B. H., Bienenstock, A., et al.
(2015). What is the relationship between risky outdoor play and health in children? A sys-
tematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(6),
6423–6454.
Campbell, T. (2013). Stereotyped at seven? Biases in teacher judgements of pupils’ ability and
attainment (CLS working paper 2013/8). London: Centre for Longitudinal Studies.
Campbell, T. (2015). Stereotyped at seven? Biases in teacher judgement of pupils’ ability and
attainment. Journal of Social Policy, 44(03), 517–547.
Cannella, G. S. (1997). Deconstructing early childhood education: Social justice bad revolution.
New York: Peter Lang.
Chawla, L. (2015). Benefits of nature contact for children. Journal of Planning Literature, 30(4),
433–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595441
Davis, B., & Waite, S. (2005). Forest schools: An evaluation of the opportunities and challenges
in early years (Final Report). Available at: https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/uploads/production/
document/path/6/6761/Forestschoofinalreport2.pdf
Department for Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills (DCELLS). (2009). Foundation
phase outdoor learning handbook. Cardiff, UK: Welsh Assembly Government. https://hwb.
gov.wales/storage/fcb8539c-9 be7-4 883-8 542-3 5d7b54b56f2/foundation-p hase-o utdoor-
learning-handbook.pdf
Education Endowment Foundation. (2018). Attainment gap report. https://educationendowment-
foundation.org.uk/public/files/Annual_Reports/EEF_Attainment_Gap_Report_2018.pdf
Forest School Association (FSA). (2018). Principles and criteria for good practice. Available at:
https://www.forestschoolassociation.org/full-principles-and-criteria-for-good-practice/
Gibson, J. J. (1979/2015). The ecological approach to visual perception (classic Ed.). New York/
London: Psychology Press.
Hännikainen, M., Singer, E., & van Oers, B. (2013). Promoting play for a better future. European
Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(2), 165–171.
Hedegaard, M. (2010). Forward. In M. Fleer (Ed.), Early learning and development. Cultural-
historical concepts in play (pp. vii–x). Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.
learning and development: An analysis of learning in home and school. Learning Culture and
Social Interaction, 3(3), 188–194.
Hedegaard, M. (2018). Children’s perspectives and institutional practices as keys in a whole-
ness approach to children’s social situations of development. Learning, Culture and Social
Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.04.008
Heft, H. (1988). Affordances of children’s environments: A functional approach to environmental
description. Children’s Environments Quarterly, 5(3), 29–37.
Kallestad, J. H., & Ødegaard, E. E. (2013). Children’s activities in Norwegian kindergartens. Part
1: An overall picture. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 9(4), 74–82.
Knight, S. (2016). Forest school in practice. London: Sage.
Kraftl, P. (2015). Alter-childhoods: Biopolitics and childhoods in alternative education spaces.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(1), 219–237.
Kyttä, M. (2003). Children in outdoor contexts. Affordances and independent mobility in the
assessment of environmental child friendliness. PhD dissertation. Helsinki University of
Technology, Centre for Urban and Regional Studies.
Leather, M. (2018). A critique of forest school: Something lost in translation. Journal of Outdoor
and Environmental Education, 21(1), 5–18.
Mahn, H., & John-Steiner, V. (2002). The gift of confidence: A Vygotskian view of emotions. In
G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century (pp. 46–58). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell Publishing.
Maynard, T. (2007). Encounters with Forest School and Foucault: A risky business? Education
3-13, 35(4), 379–391.
McCree, M. (2020). Future shock, generational change, and shifting eco-social identities: Forest
school practitioners’ reasons to train. In A. Cutter-Mackenzie, K. Malone, & E. Barratt Hacking
(Eds.), Research handbook on childhood nature: Assemblages of childhood and nature research
(pp. 925–952). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer International Handbooks of Education.
Nicholson, S. (1972). The theory of loose parts. An important principle for design methodology.
Studies in Design Education and Craft, 4(2), 5–14.
Pellegrini, A. D. (1988). Elementary-school children’s rough-and-tumble play and social compe-
tence. Developmental Psychology, 24(6), 802–806.
Pellegrini, A. D. (2009). The role of play in human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Smith, P. K. (1998). Physical activity play: The nature and function of a
neglected aspect of playing. Child Development, 69(3), 577–598.
Rekers-Power, A. (2020). Exploring young children’s participation and motive orientation in the
reception year classroom and at forest school. PhD thesis. University of Wales Trinity Saint
David. https://repository.uwtsd.ac.uk/1410/
Ridgers, N. D., Knowles, Z. R., & Sayers, J. (2012). Encouraging play in the natural environment:
A child-focused case study of Forest school. Children’s Geographies, 10(1), 49–65.
Sandseter, E. B. H., & Seland, M. (2016). Children’s experience of activities and participation and
their subjective well-being in Norwegian early childhood education and care institutions. Child
Indicators Research, 9(4), 913–932.
Siraj, I. (2014) An independent stocktake of the Foundation Phase in Wales. Final report. London:
IOE. Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/20340/1/140519-independent-stocktake-of-the-
foundation-phase-in-wales-en.pdf
Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Silva, K. (2004). Researching pedagogy in English pre-schools. British
Educational Research Journal, 30(5), 713–730.
Stephen, C. (2012). Looking for theory in preschool education. Studies in Philosophy and
Education, 31, 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-012-9288-5
Taylor, A. (2013). Reconfiguring the natures of childhood. London: Routledge.
Taylor, C., Rhys, M., Waldron, S., Davies, R., Power, S., Maynard, T., Moore, L., Blackaby, D., &
Plewis, I. (2015). Evaluating the foundation phase: Final report. Available at: http://gov.wales/
docs/caecd/research/2015/150514-foundation-phase-final-en.pdf
Theobald, M. (2017). Children as research participants in educational research using video-

stimulated accounts. International Journal of Educational Research, 86, 131–144.
Tudge, J., Hogan, D., Lee, S., Tammesveski, P., Meltsas, M., Kulakova, N., Snezhkova, I., &
Putnam, S. (1999). Cultural heterogeneity: Parental values and beliefs and their preschoolers’
activities in the United States, South Korea, Russia and Estonia. In A. Göncü (Ed.), Children’s
engagement in the world. Sociocultural perspectives (pp. 62–96). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Waite, S., & Goodenough, A. (2018). What is different about forest school? Creating a space for an
alternative pedagogy. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21(1), 25–44.
Waite, S., Huggins, V., & Wickett, K. (2014). Risky outdoor play: Embracing uncertainty in pur-
suit of learning. In T. Maynard & J. Waters (Eds.), Exploring outdoor play in the early years
(pp. 71–85). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Waters, J. (2016). The foundation phase in Wales – time to grow up? Wales Journal of Education,
18(1), 179–198.
Welsh Assembly Government (WAG). (2008). Play/active learning: Overview for 3–7 year
olds. Cardiff, UK: Welsh Assembly Government. Available at: https://hwb.gov.wales/stor
age/52aae98d-65ed-4065-9222-1a7876e150de/play-active-learning-overview-for-3-to-7-
year-olds.pdf
Welsh Government. (2008/2015). Curriculum for Wales: Foundation Phase Framework (Revised
2015). Available at: http://learning.gov.wales/docs/learningwales/publications/150803-fp-
framework-en.pdf
Welsh Government. (2015). Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. https://www.leg-
islation.gov.uk/anaw/2015/2/contents/enacted
Welsh Government. (2017). Index of multiple deprivation indicator update. Available online:
https://gov.wales/welsh-index-multiple-deprivation-indicator-update-2017
White, J. (2011) Making a mud kitchen (2nd Ed.). Muddy Faces. https://www.muddyfaces.co.uk/
download/mudpack2016/books/Making_a_mud_kitchen_english.pdf
Whitebread, D., Jameson, D., & Basilio, M. (2015). Play beyond the foundation stage: Play, self-
regulation and narrative skills. In J. Moyles (Ed.), The excellence of play (4th ed., pp. 84–93).
Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Williams, A., & Wainwright, N. (2014). Camping on concrete: Professional development of adven-
turous activities in Wales. University of Wales Journal of Education, 17(1), 6–29.
Wood, E. (2007a). New directions in play: consensus or collision? Education 3-13, 35(4),
309–320.
Wood, E. (2007b). Reconceptualising child-centred education: Contemporary directions in policy,
theory and practice in early childhood. FORUM, 49(1&2), 119–133.
Wood, E., & Attfield, J. (2005). Play, learning and the early childhood curriculum (2nd ed.).
London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
Chapter 10
E-STEM in Everyday Life: How Families
Develop a Caring Motive Orientation
Towards the Environment
Sylvia Christine Almeida and Marilyn Fleer
Abstract Internationally there is growing interest in how young children engage

with and learn concepts of science and sustainability in their everyday lives. These
concepts are often built through nature and outdoor play in young children. Through
the dialectical concept of everyday and scientific concept formation (Vygotsky LS,
The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky. Problems of general psychology, V.1, (Trans.
N Minick). Editor of English Translation, RW Rieber, and AS Carton, New York:
Kluwer Academic and Plenum Publishers, 1987), this chapter presents a study of
how families transformatively draw attention to STEM and sustainability concepts
in the everyday practices of the home. The research followed a focus child (4–5 year
old) from four families as they navigated everyday life and talked about the environ-
ments in which they live. Australia as a culturally diverse community was reflected
in the families, whose heritage originated in Europe, Iran, India, Nepal and Taiwan.
The study identified the multiple ways in which families introduce practices and
conceptualise imagined futures and revisioning (Payne PG, J HAIA 12:2–12,
2005a). About looking after their environment. It was found that young children
appear to develop concepts of STEM, but also build agency in exploration, with
many of these explorations taking place in outdoor settings. We conceptualise this
as a motive orientation to caring for the environment, named as E-STEM. The study
emphasises for education to begin with identifying family practices and children’s
explorations, as a key informant for building relevant and locally driven pedagogi-
cal practices to support environmental learning.
Keywords Environment · Sustainability · Agency · Transformative · Young

children
S. C. Almeida (*) · M. Fleer

Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

162 S. C. Almeida and M. Fleer
10.1 Introduction
Growing environmental changes do impact on young children directly and indi-

rectly. Yet the research suggests that very little attention has been directed to identi-
fying children’s experiences or to determining how everyday environments at home
and in the community shape perspectives and motive orientations (Hedegaard,
2012). Despite young children’s views generally not being documented as part of
the research, there is evidence that they do have agency, with some research show-
ing that they can and do productively ‘contribute ideas, energy and creativity to
managing and solving local [environmental] issues’ (Davis, 2015, p. 16). But as yet,
we do not know enough about how families create the conditions to support their
children to be agentic about caring for the environment.
This chapter is concerned with presenting the findings of a study that sought to
determine how families in everyday life create the conditions for children’s explora-
tions of STEM, but with a focus on caring for the environment. Known as E-STEM
(Environmental – Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), the goal of
the study was to examine how some families living in Australia, contribute posi-
tively to the cultural formation of children in ways that develop a motive orientation
for caring for the environment. Although debates exist in relation to terms, such as
environmental sustainability education (Madden & Liang, 2017), environmental
education (Davis, 2009), education for sustainable development (Siraj-Blatchford,
Mogharreban, & Park, 2016), we focus primarily on a broad conception of environ-
ment as conceptualised by Payne (2014) where we foreground the child’s everyday
experiences in the home and community. Community experiences are often embed-
ded (although not limited to) outdoor settings that offer rich learning and play
opportunities for young children.
To achieve the goals of this chapter, we followed children over time in a broad
range of everyday contexts in order to gain insights into how families and communi-
ties introduce STEM thinking in informal settings, such as homes, playgrounds, and
community events. In drawing upon cultural-historical theory (Vygotsky, 1987), we
analysed how children’s experiences informed their understandings about the world
around them as a particular form of cultural formation. The findings are presented
in the latter part of the chapter. We begin this chapter by discussing the literature
relevant to the focus of the study.
10.2 Background Literature on Sustainability
Overall, studies of early childhood sustainability and environmental education have

made important contributions to sustainability, with contributions from Canada
(Elliot & Krusekopf, 2017), Chile (Simonstein, 2016), China (Zhou, Liu, Han, &
Wang, 2016), Kenya (Macharia & Kimani, 2016), Korea (Park, Shin, & Park, 2016),
Norway (Heggen, 2016), Portugal (Folque & Oliveira, 2016), Sweden (Kultti,
10 E-STEM in Everyday Life: How Families Develop a Caring Motive Orientation… 163
Larsson, Arlemalm-Hagser, & Pramling-Samuelsson, 2016), Turkey (Haktanir,

Guler, & Ozturk, 2016), UK (Siraj-Blatchford, 2016), and the USA (Mogharreban
& Green, 2016). What emerges is a plurality of pedagogical practices (Arlemalm-
Hagser, 2017) for the development of a concept of sustainability (see Pramling
Samuelsson & Park, 2017), with some international comparisons between early
childhood educators (Japan, Australia and Korea) showing that traditional nature
based approaches dominated (Inoue, O’Gorman, Davis, & Ji, 2017).
Studies focused on early childhood have mostly been “fragmented and ill
defined” (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2016, p. vii,). To rectify this, the OECD has funded
research, and this important work has identified biodiversity, climate change and
disaster risk reductions as key for future change and that these should be tackled
more systematically (Siraj-Blatchford & Pramling-Samuelsson, 2016). While there
are some cultural-historical studies focusing on environmental education through
everyday experiences in early childhood (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie, 2013),
there is limited understanding of how the learning of concepts supports a caring
environmental orientation or action at home.
In line with a need for more systematic focus in research, Young and Elliott
(2014) have recognized not only meaningful contexts for learning concepts of sus-
tainability, but have identified key concepts that young children are capable of
engaging in in support of caring for the environment. Young and Elliott (2014) have
suggested that the concept of sustainability can be realized through early learning
(Young & Elliott, 2014) of big ideas, such as, conservation, life and food cycles,
biodiversity, endangered species. Similar content areas have been documented by
Desjardins and Wakkary (2011). These studies focus on a conceptually oriented
approach and can be clustered around core concepts of E-STEM that the study
reported in this chapter is interested in.
Studies relevant to the focus on family appear to be far and few between with
limited research into children’s experiences at home and its impact in later life as
pointed out by Payne’s (2005a) who found that parents played a key role in develop-
ing what he called green environmental sensibilities. Families raised children’s con-
sciousness of caring for the environment in everyday routines in the home. In
interviewing families about their practices across three generations, Payne (2005b)
found doing as an approach to learning was central to how these families enacted
environmental activism. Habituation and naturalism emerged as the dominant prac-
tice. There was a meshing of real, direct, active and embodied experiences as part of
the daily routines. Payne says that the families fostered “an ethos or culture that a
positive difference” could be made “through one’s everyday actions and interac-
tions” (p. 92). As with the previous study, Payne (2005b) noted that families found
it was not important to teach ecological knowledge but that consciousness raising, a
sense of agency, resourcefulness and lateral power in ‘sustaining’ were found to be
central for caring for the environment. He conceptualized the independent relations
of household members and plants, animals and so on, as oikos – environmental
house or place.
Intergenerational research by Meeusen (2014) has also demonstrated that fami-
lies pass on environmental concerns to their children, but only in families engaged
in effective communication with their children. The study undertaken in Belgium,

surveyed parents and their adolescent children and noted no gender differences.
Communication also featured in a Danish qualitative study by Grønhøj (2006) when
examining green consumer practices associated with organic food, water and
energy, waste and transport. Mostly, families’ interactions were conflict-ridden, and
families mostly dealt with day-to-day practices with inconspicuous consumer
behavior.
Payne (2014) has suggested that the everyday lives of children goes beyond
nature and includes broader contemporary developments, such as the internet and
how this mediates life in the home. For instance, “Children now experience unknown
people, virtual images or abstract events on the other side of the globe in cultural
settings, socio-environmental conditions and time frameworks utterly different
from their own” (p. 69). It has been argued that meaningful contexts in early child-
hood for realizing these learnings include, biodiversity audits, creating frog bogs,
bird baths and feeders, and making compost, worm farms and vegetable patches
(Young & Elliott, 2014) all of which are mostly situated in outdoor learning contexts.
In line with these earlier studies we were interested to know how families create
the conditions for the cultural formation of their children related to E-STEM. We
examined the organization of young children’s participation in everyday routines in
the home and across their communities, in order to better understand how E-STEM
learning in everyday practice positively contributes to the caring of the environ-
ment. In particular our research sought to delve into knowing how families frame
children’s conceptual thinking over time to inform and support their actions in solv-
ing everyday problems, particularly meaningful problems associated with sustain-
ability and caring for the environment.
10.3 The Study
Our research aimed to shed light on how STEM concepts give opportunities for
environmental exploration in everyday family contexts where a child’s cultural for-
mation is in the process of developing. In line with this aim we sought to identify
and understand how diverse families with their children:
1. pay attention (or not) to environmental and scientific problems that arise infor-
mally in everyday life
2. create the conditions (or not) for children to seek out and use STEM concepts in
order to solve meaningful problems in everyday life that are linked with environ-
mental issues
10.3.1 Participants
The research had 5 focus children in the age range of 4–5 years and their extended
families from one state of Australia in order to capture a broader range of family
members engaged in everyday scientific problems. The participants exemplify the
Australian representation of cultural heritages originating in Europe, India, Iran,
Nepal and Taiwan.
10.3.2 Procedure
Stage One: Families Filming Everyday Practices and Routines Using a digital
GoPro action-camera, families filmed everyday practices in their home and com-
munities over a period of 2–6 months. The action-camera was mounted to a small
cap/headband, and given to a focus child from each family.
Each family was visited 3 times in the course of the data collection period for
collection of video content and for informal in situ interviewing. We collected over
14 hours of data per family.
Stage Two: Preparation of Stimulated Recall Video Content The research team
examined the data for examples of practices associated with everyday concepts and
STEM concept formation, and where participation structures for learning are organ-
ised in the context of solving problems. Segments of video material were put on to
memory sticks, and sent back to the families, and then subsequently used as the
basis for focus group interviewing.
Stage Three: Focus Group Interviewing Using stimulated recall techniques (Lyle,
2003), the families attended two focus group sessions throughout the data collection
period to discuss the videos, photographs, and any other items with the research
team they felt explained their home contexts and previous STEM problems that they
may have solved with their children. These sessions were conducted in family
homes with the research team members. These moments of data were used during
the stimulated recall interviews to deepen conversations.
At the conclusion of the data collection period, families were brought together
for a final focus group discussion of their materials and the edited movie files on
memory sticks. This culminating session was an important event for children and
their parents involved in the research to celebrate the work they do together as fami-
lies and foreground the learning opportunities that their everyday practices offer to
their young children.
Stage Four: Data Analysis and Synthesis The analysis was informed by cultural-
historical theory. Young children experience their physical world every day of their
lives through participating in family routines and different activity settings. Mostly
children experience their physical world at an everyday level, such as when com-
posting food scraps (decomposition), sorting rubbish into different bins (materials
and their properties), or when harvesting vegetables from the garden (growth, life
and living). When these routines become consciously understood as specific con-
cepts during discussions and actions with their families, it can be argued that fami-
lies are supporting the cultural formation of the child. Captured in curriculum and
in the literature as STEM concepts, STEM concepts are human cultural inventions.
Analysing the relations between everyday and scientific concepts helped us to better
understand the practices of the families. We used Vygotsky’s conception of every-
day and scientific concept formation to determine when and how families dynami-
cally helped their children to understand STEM concepts to explain the observed
family practices of caring for the environment. How children entered into these
practices and how families created the conditions and participation structures was
further theorised using Hedegaard’s (2012) conception of motives and demands.
The researchers synthesed data from Stages 1, 2 and 3 using Vygotsky’s (1987)
conception of everyday and scientific concept formation to determine when and
how families dynamically helped their children to understand STEM concepts to
explain the observed family practices of caring for the environment. How children
entered into these practices and how families created the conditions and participa-
tion structures was further theorised using Hedegaard’s (2012) conception of
motives and demands.
10.4 Findings
The findings of our research point towards significant and meaningful links made by
families with their children in relation to caring for the environment while at the
same time learning STEM concepts. The two main themes addressed in this
chapter are:
Everyday family practices that give time and space to the cultural formation
of E-STEM.
Everyday adult-child interactions that support the cultural formation of E-STEM
concepts.
10.4.1 E
veryday Family Practices that Give Time and Space
to the Cultural Formation of E-STEM
Intentional practices that support meaningful environmental and STEM related

everyday concepts appeared to be deeply embedded in many of the families’ every-
day practices. Parents, grandparents, siblings, uncles/aunts and local/community
Table 10.1 Everyday family practices linked to STEM concepts

Organised activities to support
Everyday routines Agentic practices abstracted learning
Everyday walks Creating cloth bags at home to Investigate projects to further extend
support children’s interests in children’s interests, for example in
reducing use of plastic bags rainbows or volcanos
Skype conversations Searching for online Learning from online videos and shows
and digital searches materials - weather and about science concepts, like where
tornados to see how these are things come from and how things are
formed made
Building and Special ‘lessons’ organised by aunty to
gardening with support learning of the water cycle,
extended family including making special props and
experiments
green spaces seem to play a crucial role in supporting links between practice and
concepts (see Table 10.1).
The study found that adults provided opportunities both explicitly and implicitly
to feature STEM in children’s lives. There were three types of routines evident in
the families we followed.
First, at the implicit level, everyday practices featured families giving time and
space for children to experience the outdoor environment. By creating routines, like
working with family members in the garden, children physically explored life and
living, and positively experienced the localised footprint of food production.
Similarly, everyday walks and visits to the park gave children opportunities to expe-
rience the outdoor environment, and to have the possibility to experience nature and
all that this affords. These examples shown in Table 10.1 Column 1, illustrate
E-STEM at the everyday practice level because children viscerally experienced
their outdoor environment, thus building everyday conceptual foundations for later
noticing and potentially abstracting from these concrete experiences. At the every-
day level, we theorise that children are building experiential understandings of the
E-STEM concepts such as, the footprint of local food production, where in the
future comparisons could be made to the quality/organic nature of the produce
bought or questions asked about the footprint when buying vegetables. Similarly,
observation of the local biodiversity featured in children’s lives when visiting parks,
and these experiences were in some families only at the everyday conceptual level
because adults did not draw attention to E-STEM concepts to explain the practices.
Consistent with the research of Payne (2005a) these early practices are thought to
positively impact on later beliefs and values expressed by adults when remembering
their early experiences of nature.
Second, our findings show that other families engaged explicitly in E-STEM
practices at the everyday level. For instance, in making carry bags to take to the
shops, families actively demonstrated sustainable practices (Table 10.1, Column 2).
These practices are illustrative of working at an everyday conceptual level in
E-STEM because children experience making bags, using these bags when shop-
ping, and knowing from family dialogue that they replace the use of plastic bags.
This example is illustrative of an agentic practice to reduce plastics and avoid prob-
lems of plastics in the waterways. Making calico bags demonstrates an important
practice and orientation to caring for the environment. But it does not show in itself,
what level of scientific understanding children have about the risks of plastics for
the biodiversity of the waterways or other important E-STEM concepts. At the
everyday level, this practice and others like it enacted in the family homes, builds
foundations for practical actions important for later deeper conceptual understand-
ing of E-STEM. This is in keeping with the key role of everyday concepts as theo-
rised by Vygotsky (1987).
Third, at the abstract E-STEM conceptual level, some families introduced to
children important STEM concepts that would help them better understand big
ideas in caring for the environment, such as, learning about the water cycle, or
searching for information associated with the weather. STEM concepts introduced
by the adults in the families appear to matter, as they seemed to follow the everyday
conceptual pathways that children experienced or showed interest in. A typical
example from the data set follows in the next section. Importantly, the introduction
of abstract concepts (Table 10.1, Column 3) could meaningfully explain the every-
day practices and routines (Vygotsky, 1987), and therefore could theoretically open
up opportunities for children to act with conceptual understanding in the future.
Together, the implicit and explicit everyday family practices noted in the data
(Table 10.1) suggest that children’s cultural formation of E-STEM was in the pro-
cess of developing. Important practices and family routines associated with nature
appeared to be orienting children towards acting in support of their environment. By
families giving time and space to experiencing nature, or engaging in practical
everyday activities in support of caring for the environment, important pathways for
later E-STEM understanding were being laid.
10.4.2 E
veryday Adult-Child Interactions that Support
the Cultural Formation of E-STEM Concepts
A second major finding related to the importance and diversity of adult-child inter-
actions in support of caring for the environment. We noted a clustering of interac-
tion types associated with explicit or implicit E-STEM content, but also valued
family practices some of which were intergenerational but not necessarily focused
on caring for the environment.
Profiles of adult-child interaction that were identified are discussed in relation to
the implicit and explicit E-STEM practices as introduced above (horizontal axis).
The vertical axis captures the continuum of direct and indirect instruction by the
adults across families and contexts (Fig. 10.1).
In the previous section, implicit E-STEM interactions were noted through how
the family provided time and space to walk through to the local park and experience
nature and when making calico bags. Details of three examples from different
environmental contexts (Table 10.1) follows, where adult-child interactions are

shown. In the first example, Edgar is making a parsley dip after harvesting the herb
from the vegetable garden as shown in Fig. 10.2.
Vignette 1: Uncle’s veggie patch

The following vignette from a home visit where the family is sharing data and
recalling their experiences. Mum prompts Edgar to explain what they did with
the GoPro yesterday. They took it to Uncle Shane’s veggie patch. Edgar with
his Mum’s help explains that the veggie patch is in the front door and they
picked parsley to make special dip. Edgar helps his Mum make it.
Mum: Yesterday where did we go?
Edgar: Hmmm
Mum: Uncle Shane’s veggie patch
RA: Ohh and where is this veggie patch?
Edgar: Mum can you help me say
Mum: OK. Uncle Shane’s veggie patch is our in the front yard and Uncle
Shane lives next door. He is Riley’s daddy. And what did we pick from
the garden?
Edgar: To make my special dippy
Mum: Yes to make your special dippy. What do we need?
Edgar: Parsley
RA: Do you know how to make your dippy? Do you help your mom?
Edgar: Yeah I do ((Go Pro video and conversation during Home visit 2)
DIRECT ADULT-CHILD INSTRUCTION
IMPLICIT E-STEM EXPLICIT E-STEM
INDIRECT ADULT-CHILD INSTRUCTION
Fig. 10.1 Typologies of adult-child interactions that support the cultural formation of E-STEM
concepts
Fig. 10.2 Harvesting food from the vegetable garden
DIRECT ADULT-CHILD INTERACTION

Oriented to practice
Interactions focus on practice
INDIRECT ADULT-CHILD INTERACTION
Fig. 10.3 Interactions focus on practice
This example can be conceptualised along the horizontal continuum as closer to an

implicit E-STEM profile of the cultural formation of the child to caring for their envi-
ronment. This pedagogical practice is illustrated in the bottom left side quadrant, as
shown in Fig. 10.3 below. In this example, the family pedagogy is oriented towards
practice because no instruction or mentioning of E-STEM concepts is evident.
However, it is an important everyday practice about nature and the harvesting of food.
We also noted similar nature activities in other families, but where a different
kind of interaction was evident. Examples of family pedagogy that gives more
explicit E-STEM content follows in Vignette two and three. The second vignette is
Fig. 10.4 Vignette 2 Noticing small detail in the environment and looking to find out more
related to a nature walk where ‘noticing and subsequent researching’ is illustrated,

and the third vignette features story narratives to foreground the changes in the same
environment over time.
Noticing and researching: What we found was that families not only engaged in
practices in support of caring for their environment, they also created opportunities
for noticing the biodiversity in nature when on family walks but with a view to
researching STEM concepts to give greater scientific meaning to what was observed.
For instance, Vignette 2 taken from the data set elaborates the environmental peda-
gogical features of family practices for making conscious valued forms of STEM
concepts at the everyday level. As will be shown below, the families’ everyday prac-
tices appeared to feature many opportunities for supporting children to notice ‘little
things’ in nature using all their senses. In Vignette 2 Fig. 10.4, the image shows the
family examining a branch of wattle that they found outdoors. Banoo noticed some
features of this wattle and so the family decided to bring a part of it home in order
to further explore it through researching in books and on the internet.
A big part of the conversation between the adult and the child was comparing the
leaves and blossoms of the found branch, to the images on the computer with Banoo
then exclaiming ‘So it must be the same’ (GoPro video data shared during Focus
group interview 2, Family Banoo). This was a family practice which was encour-
aged in Banoo since Banoo was a baby and had continued over time. According to
the mother, ‘Even when Banoo was very young, when Banoo was in my arms, I
encouraged her to touch leaves’ (Focus Group interview2, Family Banoo).
Narratives for foregrounding environmental changes over time: Vignette 3 is a
narrative that featured through reading books and passing down family stories. This
is especially foregrounded in Edgar’s data where storytelling and passing down
family values are important in the family (particularly about DIY such as compost-
ing and gardening and preserving food).
Vignette 3: Mum Explains That Story Telling Occurs Often

Grandma talks about stories when she was a child living locally and things
that her own mother told her. Mum explains that stories and talking is often
about how the area has changes over time, especially in relation to past gen-
erations of the family (fourth generation living in the local area). Talking
about how the land and natural environment and talking about how things
have changed, having to be careful about impact on the environment and sus-
tainable use of resources. Since the family has lived in the same local area for
four generations, there is sharing and talk about how the local environment
has changed over time and Edgar is often part of this conversation.
This is exemplified in the conversation below:
Mum: We do a lot of story telling and (looking at his sister) will make up
stories at night for the boys. A lot of these are traditional stories like Goldilocks
and the three bears etc where we will change the names
Grandma: But I tell a lot of stories too. Like I’ll tell stories about mum –
my mum or my dad or when I was a child and we could roam all around the
cliff and we would build cubby houses…… things that my mother told me and
I now grasp and take those contexts in. I think my mum was remarkable so I
tell things that she did when she was growing up.
Mum: And I think this is where – we are third and fourth generation living
here in this area – we talk about it a lot. Like when we drive to school we talk
about, isn’t it funny how grandpa used to play marbles here because there
was so much bush and trees. And now isn’t it a bit sad that there are no trees
around (Focus group interview 1, Family Edgar)
It was found that some families mentioned indirect attention on abstract concepts
of E-STEM through deliberately embedding learning within everyday practices. For
example, one of the participants said:
Grandma and Mum are both teachers, and talk a lot about how learning is ‘embed-
ded’ in E’s everyday life. Rather than pre-planning for learning, it usually occurs as
opportunities arise throughout the day. Mum values the pedagogical abilities of
both the early childhood teacher and family day carer. It is evident that both Mum
and Grandma are both very aware of, and extend, the learning that occurs during
kinder or day care (Researcher field notes after Focus group interview 1 and 2,
Family Edgar).
These examples can be plotted on to the typology shown in Fig. 10.5 in the bot-
tom right quadrant.
While intentional and purposeful learning of science and sustainability was evi-
dent in families’ everyday practices, there were a number of planned educational
interventions. These opportunities arose on an ad hoc basis and families maximised
the learning potential these provided. For instance, visiting zoos, aquariums, histori-
cal places, old mining towns, botanical gardens as well trips to home countries and

Everyday and E-STEM dynamic
Interactions focus on bringing together E-STEM concepts

with practice:
Noticing and researching
Narratives for foregrounding E-STEM
Fig. 10.5 Interactions focus on bringing together E-STEM concepts with practice
other overseas destinations provided may learning opportunities. But there were
also organised activities specifically for the instruction of E-STEM concepts. What
we found when analysing the data, was that some families appeared to teach con-
cepts to their children when on excursions, and others when setting up organising
activities specifically for this purpose. There were two ways that this tended to hap-
pen in the families in our study. Some families directly taught abstract concepts
through setting up activities associated with an interest. An example of a simulation
is given further below to illustrate this profile of family pedagogy (Vignette 4).
Some families directly taught E-STEM concepts in a formal manner to their chil-
dren, as is shown in the cooking example further below (Vignette 5). Both vignettes
focus on teaching concepts, but not necessarily on caring for the environment at
that moment.
10.4.2.1 Indirect Attention on Abstraction
Simulations of STEM concepts: In Vignette 4, Sahil’s family organised many activi-

ties to support his interest in lava, tornadoes and volcanoes as a follow up to learning
at his centre. The following typical example shows a carefully crafted and designed
activity creating volcanoes using baking soda and water along with Sahil’s favourite
cars (Fig. 10.6).
Aunty Mary explains how the hot molten rock comes to the surface of the earth. Sahil asks
how this can be, and she explains. Then she adds the vinegar to the ‘volcano’ to make the
‘lava’. Sahil pretends to touch it saying ‘its hot, its hot’. (Family focus group interview 2
sharing Sahil Phone video explaining volcanoes).
This example of everyday practice can be plotted in the top left-hand quadrant
because the focus is on direct adult-child interaction through creating a simulation
to feature STEM concepts. It is an abstracted concrete activity (Fig. 10.7).
Fig. 10.6 Vignette 4 Setting up specific activities at home to learn about abstract concepts -
simulations
Simulations
Indirect attention on abstraction

Fig. 10.7 Indirect attention on abstraction
10.4.2.2 D
irect Instruction of Abstract Concepts Not Related
to the Environment
An everyday routine that was popular among the families was cooking. Some fami-
lies especially involved their children in this practice, using the opportunities to
highlight specific STEM concepts. What we noticed was that some families used
cooking from a view of learning science and family traditions, but did not make
explicit links to the environment or sustainability. Vignette 5 of ‘cooking with con-
cepts’ follows.
Anita is seen participating in the process of making chappatis which is a daily
family routine (Fig. 10.8).
Anita is rolling some dough with a rolling pin while Mum asks what is happening. Anita
explains what it is.
Mum: when you are rolling the dough what is happening to it?
Anita: It’s getting circle
Mum: It is changing its shape, mm?
Fig. 10.8 Vignette 5

Cooking without concepts
Mum then points out that the dough was a ball but now it is flat and round. (Phone video
shared by family)
Mum encourages Anita to keep rolling to see if it can be made thinner. ‘A’ looks at the
dough and explains that it looks like a diamond shape, and then a ‘lemon shape’. (Go Pro
video data and Family focus group interview 2)
The adult is questioning and describing what is happening mathematically and to

some degree scientifically during the process of making the chappatis. The focus
group interviews suggested that the activity was also seen by the adult as a way of
staying connected to family traditions and the ethnic practices of their culture.
Science concepts like, rolling, pushing, pulling, and mathematical concepts, such
as, thick, thin and shape, provide contexts for Anita’s everyday conceptual develop-
ment. There is also an explicit foregrounding of STEM concepts through direct
instruction by the adult. But as with the example of the vignette of volcano simula-
tion, there is no specific mention or link made to caring for the environment or
sustainable practices in food security, footprint, etc., as was found in the earlier
examples. This adult-child interaction example of cooking with a focus on concepts
is plotted in the right top quadrant because the interaction is direct and explicit
(Fig. 10.9).
Overall, the study found a range of pedagogical profiles, and these were focused
on STEM concepts (biodiversity), E-STEM practices (making calico bags), and
also valued family and cultural practices (cooking) that were not necessarily associ-
ated with the focus of this chapter. However, the latter pedagogical practices gave
context for better understanding how different families created the conditions for
the cultural formation of E-STEM.
Interactions focus on concepts
Direct instruction of abstract concepts

Fig. 10.9 Direct instruction of abstract concepts
10.5 Discussion
By investigating the practices of our focus families, we were able to examine how
in the different home contexts, children were being oriented towards caring for their
environment as part of their cultural formation. Through using a typology to map
and analyse practices, we were able to make visible both adult-child interaction
types (vertical axis) and the degree of STEM concepts introduced to children (hori-
zontal axis). The typology gave the possibility of noting if STEM concepts were
made explicitly conscious to children and if they meaningfully supported the chil-
dren to care for their environment. Figure 10.10 brings together the exemplars intro-
duced in this chapter within the typology.
As might be expected, a diversity of pedagogical approaches was evident across
the families for orienting children to the environment. What we noticed was that
STEM concepts were being introduced regularly to the children – some explicitly
and others more implicitly. However, not all families made links with the STEM
concepts in support of looking after the environment. These families clustered in the
top two quadrants of the typology. What we learned about these families was that
direct adult-child interaction focused on learning STEM concepts, such as cooking
with children and the volcano activity. We also learned that this direct instructional
interaction type appeared to be closely aligned with the learning of abstract STEM
concepts. But the context seemed to be meaningful for the children, even though the
interactions were not at all related to caring for the environment. Learning about
caring for the environment did not appear to be conceptualised by these particular
families as something to be taught directly to their children.
All families knew the goals of the research and were active agents in document-
ing what mattered to them about E-STEM for their child. So it was surprising that
Simulations Interactions focus on concepts
Indirect attention on abstraction Direct instruction of abstract concepts

Oriented to practice Everyday and E-STEM dynamic
Interactions focus on bringing together E-STEM concepts

with practice:
Noticing and researching
Interactions focus on practice Narratives for foregrounding E-STEM
Fig. 10.10 A diversity of pedagogical approaches in families for supporting E-STEM
E-STEM was not featured in the actions of the families when showcasing valued
family practices through video recording everyday practices.
In summary, the families in our research who adopted more direct adult-child
instruction of STEM did not practice E-STEM instruction explicitly. This raises
questions for us as researchers. Could these families potentially have a more broadly
framed view of the environment, whereby direct instruction of STEM was thought
to give conceptual understandings in support of future thinking and action in caring
for the environment? Could E-STEM not be viewed by these families as an abstract
concept? Payne (2010) has said that when researching green families that they are
“far more interested in an everyday ecopolitical education” of their children than
building a conceptual orientation that is “factually driven” (p. 228). We suggest that
in our families, adult-child interaction is about learning STEM concepts for future
meaningful actions – that is, learning concepts that they can use later to make
informed scientific decisions which could support caring for the environment.
Theoretically, our families could be thought to be conceptually oriented and poten-
tially future driven. Further research would be needed to confirm this theoretical
proposition.
In turning to the bottom quadrant of the typology, we also learned that families
who were more implicit in their actions, appeared to use everyday practices to
embed learning of concepts, but with a motive orientation towards caring for the
environment. Those families who clustered in the bottom two quadrants of the
typology exhibited practices that oriented the children to the environment, such as
the making of calico bags or researching biodiversity of their local community. We
suggest that E-STEM learning is being established at an everyday level and is being
oriented to immediate action, but with future understandings of the science concepts
associated with caring for the environment being laid.
Finally, our findings suggest that those families who are orienting their children
to E-STEM appear to be more implicit in their interactions. It is possible that caring
for the environment is considered by these families as something that they wish to
make visible to their children within the practice of everyday life, rather than as
specific lessons abstracted from the practice of the environment. It would appear
that the children are being shown ways to act in support of the environment through
participating in practices, such as making calico bags, harvesting food, or studying
plants after walking in the park. These family experiences appear to afford an action
oriented approach to the environment, such as, researching, using alternatives,
experiencing local footprint, which when taken together could be theorised as agen-
tic, future oriented practices, that support the next generation to care for the environ-
ment. However, more research is needed to have confidence in this theoretical
proposition.
10.6 Conclusion
This research aimed at better understanding the contexts of young children who
come from diverse cultures and who are supported by their families with learning
about their environment including play and learning in nature and outdoors.
Theoretically, a cultural-historical reading of our findings would suggest that chil-
dren’s everyday experiences are important in building future imaginings of sustain-
able practice and foundations for learning or acting with knowledge of E-STEM in
the future. Focusing on the child’s perspective of their lived everyday contexts, is a
new focus for research that has the potential to yield base line data that can inform
future studies into understanding how the diversity of families who live in Australia
interact with their children in support of caring for the environment.
A key finding of our research was the crucial role adults play in helping children
transition from everyday concepts to E-STEM concepts through their lived experi-
ences. These happen either from direct, intentionally set up opportunities or embed-
ded instances that are harnessed by families for delving deeper into learning about
caring for their environment. Our research showed the deep connections between
STEM and E-STEM learning and how families orient children to the latter through
indirect interactions. Foregrounding conceptual connections is suggestive of the
potential for building children’s motive orientation in support of environmental and
sustainability practices and future action. Payne (2005a) suggests that in his
research, “parents’ eco-pedagogy and praxis (re)constitute the environmental
actions and learning of their children” (p. 2) as part of everyday family practice.
Bottcher and Dammeyer (2016) in the context of disability introduce the concept of
imagined futures which helps explain this finding. They suggest that families have
an imagined future in mind as part of the upbringing of children. Families want the
best for their child, and they organise experiences in line with this goal, regardless
of how far away that imagined future might be. Incrementally, families build the
experiences and understandings daily in line with their goal of the imagined future.
How families do this varies, such as an explicit or implicit focus on E-STEM and
direct or indirect instruction. The typology of family practices presented in this
chapter is a first step in theorizing this relationship that we found between adult-
child interactions and direct and indirect E-STEM conceptual oriented practice.
However, more research is needed across a broader number of families if we are to
understand E-STEM practices in family homes can bring about lasting change in
support of our fragile environment.
Acknowledgments Monash University’s Faculty of Education Small grant scheme supported

this project. We acknowledge Marija Sliogeris for her amazing work as a research assistant and the
wonderful families for their generous participation.
References
Arlemalm-Hagser, E. (2017). Student teachers’ workplace-based learning in Sweden on early

childhood education for sustainability: Experiences in practice settings. IJEC, 49, 411–427.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-017-0205-9
Bottcher, L., & Dammeyer, J. (2016). Development and learning of young children with disabili-
ties. A Vygotskian perspective. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Davis, J. (2009). Revealing the research ‘hole’ of early childhood education for sustainability
a preliminary survey of the literature. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 227–241.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620802710607
Davis, M. (Ed.). (2015). Young children and the environment (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Desjardins, A. & Wakkary, R. (2011). How children represent sustainability in the home.
In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on interaction design and children
(pp. 37–45). New York, NY, USA, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/1999030.1999035.
Edwards, S., & Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2013). Pedagogical play types: What do they suggest for
learning about sustainability in early childhood education? International Journal of Early
Childhood, 45(3), 327–346.
Elliot, E. & Krusekopf, F. (2017). Thinking outside the four walls of the classroom: a Canadian
nature kindergarten, 49, (pp. 375–389), doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-017-0205-7.
Folque, A., & Oliveira, V. (2016). Education for sustainable development in Portugal. In J. Siraj-
Blatchford, C. Mogharreban, & E. Park (Eds.), International research on education for sustain-
able development in early childhood (pp. 103–122). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International
Publishing.
Grønhøj, A. (2006). Communication about consumption: A family process perspective on ‘green’
consumer. Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review, 5(6), 491–503.
Haktanir, G., Guler, T., & Ozturk, O. K. (2016). Education for sustainable development in Turkey.
In J. Siraj-Blatchford, C. Mogharreban, & E. Park (Eds.), International research on education
for sustainable development in early childhood (pp. 139–154). Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing.
Hedegaard, M. (2012). Analyzing Children’s learning and development in everyday settings from
a cultural-historical wholeness approach. Mind, Culture, Activity, 19(2), 127–138.
Heggen, M. P. (2016). Education for sustainable development in Norway. In J. Siraj-Blatchford,
C. Mogharreban, & E. Park (Eds.), International research on education for sustainable devel-
opment in early childhood (pp. 91–102). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Inoue, M., O’Gorman, L., Davis, J., & Ji, O. (2017). An international comparison of early child-
hood educators’ understandings and practices in education for sustainability in Japan, Australia
and Korea. IJ EC, 49, 353–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-017-0205-5
Kultti, A., Larsson, J., Arlemalm-Hagser, E., & Pramling-Samuelsson, I. (2016). Education
for sustainable development in Sweden. In J. Siraj-Blatchford, C. Mogharreban, & E. Park
(Eds.), International research on education for sustainable development in early childhood
(pp. 123–139). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Lyle, J. (2003). Stimulated recall: A report on its use in naturalistic research. British Educational
Research Journal, 29(6), 861–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192032000137349
Macharia, M., & Kimani, N. (2016). Education for sustainable development in Kenya. In J. Siraj-
Publishing.
Madden, L., & Liang, J. (2017). Young children’s ideas about environment: Perspectives from three
early childhood educational settings. Environmental Education Research, 23(8), 1055–1071.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2016.1236185
Meeusen, C. (2014). The intergenerational transition of environmental concern: The influence
of parents and communication patterns within the family. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 45(2), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2013.846290
Mogharreban, C., & Green, S. (2016). Education for sustainable development in the USA. In
J. Siraj-Blatchford, C. Mogharreban, & E. Park (Eds.), International research on education
for sustainable development in early childhood (pp. 91–102). Cham, Switzerland: Springer
Park, E., Shin, E., & Park, S. (2016). Education for sustainable development in Korea. In J. Siraj-
Publishing.
Payne, P. G. (2005a). Growing up green. Journal of HAIA, 12(3), 2–12.
Payne, P. G. (2005b). Families, homes and environmental education, Australian. Journal of
Environmental Education, 21, 81–95.
Payne, P. G. (2010). Moral spaces, the struggle for an intergenerational environmental ethics and
the social ecology of families: An ‘other’ form of environmental education. Environmental
Education Research, 16(2), 209–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620903580545
Payne, P. G. (2014). Children’s conceptions of nature. Australian Journal of Environmental
Education, 30(1), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2014.26
Pramling Samuelsson, I., & Park, E. (2017). How to education children for sustainable learning
and for a sustainable world. IJEC, 49, 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-017-0205-1
Simonstein, S. (2016). Early childhood education for sustainable development in Chile. In J. Siraj-
Publishing.
Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2016). Early childhood education for sustainable development in the UK. In
J. Siraj-Blatchford, C. Mogharreban, & E. Park (Eds.), International research on education for
sustainable development in early childhood. Cham, Switzerland: International Perspectives on
Early Childhood.
Siraj-Blatchford, J., Mogharreban, C., & Park, E. (Eds.). (2016). International research on educa-
tion for sustainable development in early childhood. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International
Publishing.
Siraj-Blatchford, J., & Pramling-Samuelsson, I. (2016). Education for sustainable development in
early childhood care and education: An introduction. In J. Siraj-Blatchford, C. Mogharreban,
& E. Park (Eds.), International research on education for sustainable development in early
childhood. Cham, Switzerland: International Perspectives on Early Childhood.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky. Problems of general psychology,
V.1, (Trans. N. Minick). Editor of English Translation, R.W. Rieber, & A.S. Carton, New York:
Kluwer Academic and Plenum Publishers.
Young, T., & Elliott, S. (2014). Ways of thinking, acting and relating about sustainability. Deakin
West, ACT, Australia: Early Childhood Australia.
Zhou, X., Liu, Z., Han, C., & Wang, G. (2016). Education for sustainable development in China.
In J. Siraj-Blatchford, C. Mogharreban, & E. Park (Eds.), International research on educa-
tion for sustainable development in early childhood (pp. 43–58). Cham, Switzerland: Springer
Chapter 11
Curious Curiosity – Reflections on How
Early Childhood Lecturers Perceive
Children’s Curiosity
Marianne Presthus Heggen and Anne Myklebust Lynngård
Abstract Curiosity and wonder are considered fundamental for children’s devel-
opment. However, no precise definition of curiosity exists, and there is little research
on the nature of curiosity. There is also a lack of knowledge and ideas about how
pedagogy can sustain and stimulate curiosity. Drawing upon empirical material
from semi-structured interviews with seven Early Childhood Teacher Education
(ECTE) lecturers from the disciplines of mathematics, arts, literature, drama, peda-
gogy, science and physical education about their view of children’s curiosity, the
authors aim to explore the lecturers’ understanding of children’s curiosity and how
this understanding varies between disciplines. Children enact their curiosity in a
cultural-historical context. The cultural-historical tradition of outdoor play is a part
of the institution’s practices influencing the children, while the children may use
curiosity to influence the content of these practices. Although the lecturers are from
different disciplines, their understanding of curiosity were consistent, particularly
with regards to their focus on bodily expressions of curiosity. Expanding the con-
cept of curiosity, we suggest the term bodily curiosity to recognise and operation-
alise a sensory, active and embodied search for answers. Similarly, we suggest the
term bodily wonder about a kind of embodied philosophising.
Keywords Curiosity · Bodily curiosity · Bodily wonder · Cultural conditions for

curiosity · ECE
With respect then to curiosity, the teacher has usually more to learn than to teach. (Dewey,
1910, p. 29)
M. P. Heggen (*) · A. M. Lynngård

KINDknow, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norge

184 M. P. Heggen and A. M. Lynngård
11.1 Introduction
Curiosity is one of the most commonly used words to describe children’s behaviour
in early childhood. Children’s curiosity is often expressed by asking questions and
there is an understanding that the more questions asked, the more curious a child is
(Jirout & Klahr, 2012). However, children explore the world with all their senses,
not only verbally.
As natural science lecturers in early childhood teacher education (ECTE) we
wanted to investigate children’s curiosity in nature; thus, in a pilot study in 2017 we
equipped children with action cameras worn on their chests and filmed their activi-
ties in nature. We expected to see curious children asking questions in line with
earlier research. Through our analysis, we found that the children were actively
engaged with and explored nature, but they asked few concrete questions. We noted
many interesting situations and will share two of those here. These, as well as oth-
ers, made us realize that we did not have a good tool to categorise and discuss chil-
dren’s behaviour and link it to curiosity. We found a need for a deeper understanding
of the concept curiosity, the difference between curiosity and wonder, and its link to
exploratory behaviour. The situations described below demonstrate some of the
dilemmas we faced when we tried to analyse behaviour as signs of curiosity.
We are in a nature area with a Norwegian pre-school. Only a minute after we start our trip
a little boy screams happily and jumps up and down on the ground. “Look, I found two of
those things with spit on it,” he says. “Spittlebug,” the teacher replies. “Oh, there are more
of them; there are three, no four,” the little boy continues. He is very eager and looks happy.
Several other children are joining him, looking at the bushes with all the spittlebugs. The
teacher asks him if he remembers reading about this animal in a book. “Yes,” he replies, and
continues looking for more of them. “Let`s see if we can find anything inside the spit. We
can use a straw,” the teacher suggests. “There is nothing inside,” one of the girl states.
“Maybe it has moved,” the teacher replies. “Yes, maybe it has moved to here,” another child
says. A girl starts to explore some bushes a bit away from the other children. She is talking
to herself saying, “I also found a, eehh, spittlebug, no I found two, and there is a third.”
The next day, in a forest with another pre-school, we discovered a boy sitting alone by
a pond putting his hands into it, shifting them from inside to outside very slowly. This con-
tinued, looking like a ritual. The boy did not speak, and he was just looking at his hands in
the pond. He was concentrating intently. After many minutes, I asked him what he was
doing. “I am washing my hands,” he said, and the moment he had with the pond was over.
He stood up and walked away.
In the first situation, the child discovered an animal they have been reading about
earlier. Was his reaction a sign of curiosity and desire to learn more about the ani-
mal, or was it a sign of pure happiness at meeting an old friend? They looked inside
the spit to find the real animal as the teacher suggested, yet the situation ended in a
competition to find the most animals. In the second situation the boy involved did
not speak at all. He just held his hands in the pond and stared into his hands in the
water. Was he curious about anything, or was it a situation of silent wonder? What
are the differences between curiosity and wonder, and does it really matter?
These examples show how important it is that pre-school teachers recognize dif-
ferent signs of curiosity to be able to maintain and develop it. Outdoors, and
11 Curious Curiosity – Reflections on How Early Childhood Lecturers Perceive… 185
especially in nature, there is an expectation that children’s innate curiosity will

bloom. In the outdoor-tradition in Scandinavian pre-schools, many learning activi-
ties take place in nature. These activities are often expected to start with children’s
initiative and curiosity, but studies indicate that it is necessary to question the qual-
ity of follow-up learning interactions (Lynngård, 2015), as well as whether such
initiatives are followed up in the pre-schools (Ejbye-Ernst, 2011; Thulin, 2011).
As natural science lecturers, we have our understanding of curiosity and wonder,
but other lecturers may have other perspectives. Through early childhood teacher
education, the students develop their understanding of such concepts from lecturers
based in different disciplines; these multiple perspectives shape their practices
together with the “culture” in the pre-schools themselves. Therefore, in the multi-
disciplinary context of ECTE, we wanted to investigate how lecturers from different
disciplines conceptualise curiosity.
Importantly, to understand and discuss how we can support children’s curiosity,
a deeper understanding of the terms curiosity and wonder is needed, and, how these
concepts are established and expressed. In this article, we first explore and discuss
these two terms, then turn to our research question: How is curiosity understood
among lecturers from different disciplines in early childhood teacher education?
11.2 Curiosity and Wonder in Theory
Curiosity, as a concept, seems to be taken for granted (Chak, 2007); although it is a

concept that has been discussed for centuries, no exact definition exists (e.g. Jirout
& Klahr, 2012). Based on Loewenstein’s (1994) broad review of studies on curios-
ity theories, Jirout and Klahr (2012, p. 125) propose an operational definition for
measuring children’s scientific curiosity, as ‘the threshold of desired uncertainty in
the environments that leads to exploratory behaviour.’ Yet, this definition is too
complex to function as an everyday definition of curiosity in ECE and ECTE. It
neither includes the value perspectives related to relational and democratic perspec-
tives that Menning (2017) suggests to include in a definition of curiosity.
Central in Loewenstein’s (1994) review is the information gap theory of curios-
ity, suggesting that curiosity is a result of the unpleasant feeling of deprivation. This
gives a motivation to seek information to reduce the negative feeling. There are,
however, no clear distinctions between the terms curiosity and interest (Luce & Hsi,
2015). This link between interest and curiosity is recognized when Kashdan and
Silvia (2005, p. 368) suggest defining curiosity ‘as the recognition, pursued and
intense desire to explore novel, challenging and uncertain events.’ In this under-
standing, it is the individual’s motivation that links interest to curiosity in which
new discoveries enhance interest and increase curiosity.
Dewey (1910) describes curiosity as a desire for fullness of experience. He
describes a flow in this process starting with physical curiosity, based on sensory
experiences. This curiosity may be developed by social influence, and further sup-
ported as intellectual curiosity when it is transformed into interest in problem
solving. Berlyne (1954) distinguishes between perceptual and epistemic curiosity.

Perceptual curiosity is aroused by new or special sensory impressions leading to
specific explorations (Berlyne, 1954), while epistemic curiosity is stimulated by
intellectual uncertainty leading to questioning to gain knowledge (Berlyne, 1966).
Others have separated curiosity into ‘diversive’ and ‘deep epistemic’ curiosity
(Lindholm, 2018, p. 988). Diversive curiosity is expressed as a somewhat ‘superfi-
cial’ desire to know facts. Deep epistemic curiosity builds upon diversive curiosity,
but also includes characteristics of wonder, such as reflection and experiential ques-
tioning. Lindholm (2018) argues that a child needs to have a solid foundation of
facts before independent and scientific thinking can take place. Hence, Lindholm
(2018) argues that deep epistemic curiosity normally take place in older children. In
this kind of curiosity, the combination of wonder and diversive curiosity causes
reflection, knowledge and a desire to find out more, implying a tight connection
between curiosity and wonder.
Lindholm (2018) and many others (e.g. Hadzigeorgiou, 2014; Opdal, 2001)
articulate the differences between the two concepts. Opdal (2001) describes wonder
as ‘the state of mind that signals we have reached the limits of our present under-
standing, and that things may be different from how they look’ (p. 332). He suggests
that wonder can contribute to a desire to investigate and seek new discoveries, thus
playing an important part in development of creativity and critical sense.
Philosophical pondering is more often connected to wonder, and physical explora-
tion linked to curiosity (Opdal, 2001). Lindholm (2018) describes wonder as a silent
experience of something that triggers the senses and is ignited by perception rather
than reflection.
Children are assumed to be born curious (Hodgkin, 1976), but other arguments
suggest this is not the case (e.g. Lindholm, 2018). Some studies indicate differences
between children’s curiosity (Cohen, Schone-Bake, Elger, & Weber, 2009; Gruber,
Gelman, & Ranganath, 2014). It is difficult, however, to know how curious a child
is. Children express their curiosity in different ways (Luce & Hsi, 2015), and their
curiosity may be reflected towards different objects (Coie, 1974). Curiosity is often
thought to be verified by verbal questioning, and the more questions the child asks,
the more curious a child is perceived (Jirout & Klahr, 2012; Patrick &
Mantzicoupoulus, 2015). Expressions of curiosity, however, vary between different
cultures (Rogoff, 2003), and children from different cultures are known to ask dif-
ferent types and amounts of questions (Harris, 2012).
Curiosity can also be seen as exploratory behaviour or as collecting and touching
(Jirout & Klahr, 2012). Gurholt and Sanderud (2016) introduce the concept of curi-
ous play as a theoretical framework to understand children’s attractions and explo-
rations in nature. Based on Merleau-Ponty’s (2013) argument that children’s
existence is rooted in their bodily orientation to the environment, Sanderud and
Gurholt (2014) suggest that curious play may help children’s self-understanding
and generate more curiosity. Children’s curious, explorative and playful activities in
nature can be interpreted as a drive to explore their bodies through sensory interac-
tions with the surroundings (Sanderud & Gurholt, 2014).
The terms curiosity and wonder are widely used in pre-schools as well as in cur-
riculums and literature concerning early childhood (e.g. Menning, 2017). Hammer
(2012) showed in her study that wondering was among the highest valued activities
in pre-schools. Although curiosity and wonder are considered as fundamental for
development in any society, there is a lack of knowledge, ideas and even discussions
on how pedagogy can nurture or inhibit curiosity (Cohen et al., 2009; Egan, Cant,
& Judson, 2014; Lindholm, 2018). Curiosity seems to be valued as a tool for gain-
ing knowledge (Menning, 2017), and teachers that support children’s own investiga-
tions are seen to support children’s curiosity and learning more than those explaining
verbally (e.g. Milne, 2010; Van Schijndel, Franse, & Raijmakers, 2010).
Indeed, Lindholm (2018) argues that the scientific explanations teachers give in
response to children’s curiosity may prevent further curiosity instead of promoting
it. He concludes that early childhood teachers should pay attention to moments of
wonder to maximize children’s experiences. This is in line with the pedagogical
practices Hammer (2012) found; it did not matter what the child was wondering
about, wonder in itself was seen to be important. According to this line of thought,
children in pre-schools should be stimulated through experiences in nature, arts,
aesthetics and stories (Hadzigeorgiou, 2005; Lindholm, 2018). If we consider curi-
osity and wonder as different concepts, one of the conclusions must be that they call
for different actions from the teachers in pre-school; certainly, Lindholm (2018)
argues that a focus on wonder in early childhood stimulate curiosity in the future.
The lecturers in ECTE may be seen to represent different disciplinary cultures.
Our knowledge is developed and formed in the cultures in which we participate
(Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978). If, as Menning (2017) argues, we do not necessar-
ily share a common understanding of the terms curiosity and wonder, these different
understandings may affect the way lecturers treat curiosity in early childhood
teacher training.
11.3 Research Context
Although children’s curiosity is considered a general phenomenon, curiosity is also

shaped by culture. From this cultural-historical perspective, ECTE lecturers may
have contributions which may be applicable generally across cultures, as well as
culturally specific contributions. Therefore, we will present the research context.
This study was undertaken in Norway, where most children between one- and
six-years old attend early childhood education institutions. There is a strong socio-
cultural tradition in these settings that emphasises play, learning and care (Ministry
of Education and Research, 2017). Pre-school staff consists of one to two peda-
gogues and trained assistants per group of children. The pedagogues have com-
pleted a three year Bachelor’s degree course in Early Childhood Teacher Education
(ECTE); the three year programme is organized around multi-disciplinary subject
areas, such as arts; nature, health and movement; children’s play and learning, etc.
The lecturers of these subjects are mixed from different disciplines and the courses
are structured in a range from disciplinary to interdisciplinary teaching (Hauge &

Heggen, 2019). Some pedagogues in the pre-schools also have a post-graduate
Master’s degree in Early Childhood. The assistants may have a high-school special-
ization in Early Childhood, but this is not compulsory. Some assistants have had
previous careers or training in other backgrounds.
Knowledge may be seen in a cultural-historical context as something that we
construct and reconstruct (Fleer & Pramling, 2014). We postulate that the knowl-
edge, or understanding, of curiosity by the staff in the pre-schools is shaped by the
university training of the pedagogues, as well as their everyday pedagogical life in
the pre-schools. In parallel, we believe that the ECTE lecturers’ perceptions of curi-
osity are coloured by their culture, in the sense of their disciplinary background and
professional environment. In order, therefore, to get an insight into the views on
curiosity that exist in ECTE in Norway, we interviewed ECTE lecturers from differ-
ent disciplines on their conception of children’s curiosity.
11.4 Methodology
To explore the concept of curiosity in ECTE, we interviewed ECTE lecturers from

seven disciplines on subjects related to their understanding of curiosity. We chose a
semi-structured interview, structured around five questions upon which elaborations
were made during the interviews. The interview revolved around our open-ended
questions: Can you say a little on what you consider ‘curiosity’ to be in children?
How can one discover children’s curiosity? Should one stimulate children’s curios-
ity? Is there a separation between curiosity and wonder? Which literature, if any, do
you think your understanding of curiosity is based on?
In our invitations to the interviews, the lecturers were informed that we worked
with children’s curiosity. They were asked to refrain from reading literature on the
theme prior to the interview, as we wanted to explore their already established
understandings that they convey to the students. The interviews lasted around 30
minutes; they were recorded and transcribed by the researchers.
The interviews were analysed using a conventional qualitative content analysis
(Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The researchers familiarized themselves with the mate-
rial by transcribing and reading the material individually. We then discussed the
material and started identifying codes that seemed apparent in the material. Both
researchers then coded all the transcriptions individually. During a subsequent dis-
cussion, we coded the categories based upon our findings in relation to the follow-
ing themes: expressions of curiosity, stimulation of curiosity, curiosity or wonder,
curiosity in ECE [Early Childhood Education] and ECTE, theoretical perspectives
on curiosity, disciplinary perceptions of curiosity and curiosity as a cultural trait.
These categories form the basis for the discussions in this chapter.
The ECTE lecturers included in this paper were selected to represent the variety
of disciplines present in ECTE. Although most subjects in ECTE have a practical
aspect, some disciplines are seen as more theoretical than others. We wanted to
cover both practical and more theoretical disciplines; therefore, we invited lecturers
from pedagogics, science didactics, arts, mathematical didactics, drama, physical
education and language. We invited one lecturer from each field, and everyone
responded positively to participating in the research. We selectively chose to invite
lecturers that we consider to have a particularly tight connection with early child-
hood education. Six of the lecturers were among those we first invited. One was our
second choice.
The pre-school lecturers portrayed a rich understanding of curiosity. It is our
impression that they share many of their views on curiosity, although their under-
standings also differ. To shed light on how the different professional cultures may
have coloured their views on curiosity, quotes and some of the general descriptions
are labelled with initials: Arts lecturer (AL), Drama lecturer (DL), Science lecturer
(SL), Mathematical lecturer (ML), Pedagogue lecturer (PL), Physical Education
lecturer (PE), Language lecturer (LL).
11.5 Portrayed Perceptions of Curiosity
Overwhelmingly, the lecturers saw intrinsic values in children’s curiosity. They also
seemed to consider children as born curious, in line with research literature (e.g.
Hodgkin, 1976; Jirout & Klahr, 2012). This implies that the trait is universal for all
children, and the lecturers justified this with evolutionary explanations, e.g. that the
children need to explore the world to learn and to get to know themselves, their
environment, and the relationships between humans and between humans and their
environment. If you consider curiosity as a basis of existence... then it is clear that
if you stop being curious then, no, that is only depressing. No. But, if you stop being
curious, you stop caring about your surroundings (PL). This quote demonstrates
how the pedagogue, as well as several of the other lecturers, see connections
between curiosity and development, thus emphasising the value she gives it. In this
section, we will look further into how the lecturers describes children’s curiosity
and reflect upon how this relates to literature on curiosity.
11.6 Understanding Curiosity
11.6.1 Curiosity in Different Cultures
In Norwegian pre-school culture, children’s participation forms the basis for the
pedagogical activities (Menning, 2017; Ministry of Education, 2017). The lecturers
in our study state that although they, in line with this culture, consider curiosity as a
positive trait, it may cause challenges in the daily life in the pre-schools: Curious
children may give the adults challenges in busy everyday situations. [...] I think that
curious children, not always are considered positively (LL).
Some of our lecturers pinpoint that different cultures value curiosity differently.
Their view is supported by the finding that children’s questioning differs between
cultures in different countries (Gauvain, Munroe, & Beebe, 2013) and that children
asking questions to elder in a society may be considered impolite (Harris, 2012).
Lindholm (2018) sees curiosity as more of a cultural than a genetic trait. The art’s
lecturer expressed how she saw this: The view on curiosity might have changed, and
it might also be culturally dependent. Do we want curious children? In different
cultures, this might not be so important. [...] But, I have concluded, that of course
we want curious children. It is a quality in the act of being curious, and curiosity is
something we want in our education, and in my discipline, we try to stimulate curi-
osity because in curiosity, there is a drive to understand, to learn and understand
your life and yourself.
One of the lecturers also mention how she considers gossip to be a negative form
of curiosity. When we asked if she saw this in children, she said: No, no. Thank god!
It is a cultural thing that comes later, I think (DL). Surprisingly, a study by O’Neill,
Main, and Ziemski (2009) shows that pre-schoolers talk about other people and
their thoughts and feelings, in ways that are similar to the concept of gossip. There
may be good reasons to talk about other’s feelings and thoughts, although this is
considered negatively in many cultures.
11.6.2 Curiosity or Wonder?
As we have seen in the theoretical outline on curiosity and wonder, these concepts
are often intermingled with an indistinct separation between the two. The lecturers
in our study attempted to distinguish between the two concepts. The arts lecturer
described that for her, wonder and curiosity have different colours. The language
lecturer stated: If you look it up in a dictionary, wonder might be listed as a syn-
onym, and vice versa. She continues to explore her own separate understanding of
the two concepts: ...Curiosity for me means that you have a bigger drive to figure
things out, to find a result, while to wonder, then you are not so concerned to link
this to a result. Curiosity was often described as a will, an urge or a need to under-
stand, an understanding in line with the information-gap-theory where children are
curious because they feel a need to achieve understanding (Loewenstein, 1994).
While the physical education lecturer links curiosity to bodily activity, she links
wonder to thought processes: I believe that wonder is more a process of thoughts,
they may question things, but they don’t have to be active. [...] if you are to separate
it like that. This resembles how Berlyne (1966) describes epistemic curiosity, show-
ing how the concepts of curiosity and wonder is intermingled. Wonder was linked to
situations of imagination or fantasy, seeking a different kind of knowledge. Wonder
has a more philosophical aspect than curiosity said the pedagogue. However, she
continues with a reservation: ...the way I understand this. This understanding is

similar to the distinction used by Opdal (2001).
Lindholm (2018) argues that children’s predispositions to wonder and curiosity
is affected by age and claim that we should have more attention to wonder than
curiosity in early childhood education. The lecturers we interviewed however argue
that both wonder and curiosity belongs in the field of early childhood education.
They are in line with the Norwegian Framework plan for Pre-schools (Ministry of
Education, 2017) which describes how pre-school staff shall stimulate children’s
curiosity [...] and encourage them to wonder, investigate, trial and experiment
(pp. 50–51). The difference between the concepts of wonder, curiosity and explora-
tion, seems to be unclear in this framework also, but wonder and curiosity are used
in relation to different subject areas. Where curiosity is linked with learning natural
sciences, wonder is more commonly used in connection with arts and music
(Menning, 2017).
11.7 Expressions of Curiosity
11.7.1 Bodily Expressions
All the lecturers highlighted how one could observe children’s curiosity in their
body language and activities. Several of the lecturers talked about body language as
an expression of curiosity: that they put their nose and head forwards (DL). Some
of them also talked about children’s gaze. I see it in their eyes! (PL). The pedagogue
also notes that we may discover when curiosity is satisfied in children’s body lan-
guage and eye-movement. The language lecturer express: I also believe that one
may be curious and quiet. That depends on the topic of the children’s curiosity.
While definitions of curiosity often state that curiosity leads to exploratory behav-
iour (Jirout & Klahr, 2012), it seems as the lecturers we interviewed linked bodily
movements as indicators of curiosity directly, not only as indictors of further explo-
ration derived from curiosity. This understanding of bodily expressions of curiosity
might be understood in light of Merleau-Ponty’s (2013) bodily phenomenology, in
which the world is sensed through bodily exploration. In Merleu-Ponty’s (2013,
p. 330) words, “It is not consciousness who touches or who palpates, it is the hand.”
The lecturers also underlined how children’s bodily expressions of curiosity dif-
fer. The pedagogue lecturer elaborates: [W]hen a one-year-old is curious, it is often
about pulling that cord and put it in their mouth to see what happens then. [...]
Every time a small child gets their hands on new things, they explore them. [...]
Older children may start to be curious about more than what they see right in front
of them. [...] When you are older you tend to explore more in depth, and spend more
time on each thing. The sensory curiosity she describes here can be seen as physical
curiosity, the first step in the development of reflective thoughts (Dewey, 1910).
This understanding seems to be in line with earlier studies on the curiosity of small
children that share their attention and ask questions by pointing their finger towards
the object of interest (Begus & Southgate, 2012).
The physical education teacher links curiosity with bodily movement, but also
that it could lead to physical exploration: I see an active child, exploring the envi-
ronment. How can I use this environment? [...] They explore the environment and
they try out activities and such things, then I consider them as curious, they are
curious on the room, or they are curious on this area, or ... So, I first and foremost
think of an active child (PE). This spontaneous exploration has also been high-
lighted in earlier behavioural studies on curiosity (Jirout & Klahr, 2012), and such
physical exploration has been linked to children’s investigation of the environment
and their own bodies through curious play (Gurholt & Sanderud, 2016).
11.7.2 Verbal Questions
Verbally expressed questions are often described as the foundation of children’s

curiosity (Jirout & Klahr, 2012; Patrick & Mantzicopolous, 2015). Still, the lectur-
ers we interviewed all talked extensively about bodily expressions of curiosity
before they refered to verbal questions. Questioning was only described after first
having described the bodily expressions. The lecturers then elaborated how verbal
questions would supplement other signs of curiosity. They also described how the
ability to ask questions could be age-dependent. While a bit older children might
perhaps ask questions in addition. Not in place of, but in addition (PE). Such an
age-dependent development of verbal inquiry is described in Engel (2015) and
might be connected with deep epistemic curiosity. As this relies on an age-dependent
development, Lindholm (2018) suggest that deep epistemic curiosity is uncommon
in pre-school age children. For the study participants, it appears they think that
questions were over-rated. The science lecturer underlined that the questions did not
have to be verbal: No... the kid stops in the middle of a movement, or gaze, or... The
lecturers in our study hence seem to value bodily expressions of curiosity over
questioning.
Questions are not necessarily signs of curiosity, and both the pedagogue and the
science-lecturer problematize this. The science lecturer described how children
might express genuine curiosity through questions, but she also underlined that it
was hard to interpret these signs, and she suggested that often children ask questions
in order to gain attention or recognition, rather than expressing curiosity. The sci-
ence lecturer refers to a recent article in a newspaper: He [the author] claimed that
children ask questions although they are not interested in the answers. Hence, that
it was just a façade, that it was not important... to get answers (SL). She continues
however with: I do not think I recognize this. It is not clear whether answers to such
questions lead to enhanced interest and curiosity.
The lecturers hence described how children’s expressions of curiosity differ. The
diversity of expressions, especially those which are subtle, such as the children’s
gaze, challenge the teacher’s ability to recognize curiosity. We will look further into
this when we explore what the lecturer expressed about curiosity in early childhood
education.
11.8 Stimulation of Curiosity
11.8.1 The Role of the Environment
In line with Dewey (1910), the interviewed lecturers agreed that teachers who pro-
vide children with rich environments and experiences will support their curiosity.
They express that it is important to create space and designate sufficient time for
curiosity. The Drama lecturer expressed it as opening doors [...] to where the
answers are, to where we may explore more. To more inspiration. This may refer to
what other lecturers describe as rich and generally stimulating environments or
activities. Hackman and Engel found that children’s curiosity varied more between
children in different environments than between children of different ages, underlin-
ing the importance of the environment (Engel, 2015). Creating space for explora-
tion, questioning and wonder in rich environments has been argued to condition
curiosity (Gurholt & Sanderud, 2016). Lindholm (2018) argues for maximising
situations with a rich variety of experiences, drawing from art, nature and culture,
and the interviewed lecturers found rich environments in nature to be well suited for
stimulation of curiosity.
However, even in what might be described as a rich environment, such as the
outdoors, the role of the teacher is still critical. The mathematics lecturer was con-
cerned that teachers too often minimize situations in which children express or
could express curiosity. She questioned the focus on teaching children the definition
of a perfect circle, which, in a mathematical sense, is so strict and theoretical that
children may not be able to find a perfect circle in nature. Instead, she argued that
encouraging children to find many examples of ‘almost round’ objects in nature was
more likely to stimulate curiosity.
11.8.2 The Role of the Teachers
The lecturers expressed that, in their opinion, curiosity can be stimulated and sus-
tained and they shared many reflections on how this is possible. They highlight ECE
centres and the teacher’s important role in sustaining curiosity: It is important to
take care of it too; [it is] one thing to stimulate it, [and another] to take care of it
(ML). Dewey (1910) suggested that teachers could merely “keep alive the sacred
spark of wonder and to fan the flame that already grows” (p. 29). Participants saw
this stimulation as the responsibility of the teachers and stated that teachers could
stimulate children’s curiosity by creating opportunities for rich experiences and by

their reactions to children’s expressed interests.
Teachers’ reactions to children’s exploratory behaviour affect their further inves-
tigation (e.g. Chak, 2010). The science lecturer links the tendency to extend an
explorative situation with the ability of the teachers to be curious themselves: It is
particularly dependent on being with curious adults. [...] I am certain there is a
contagion effect (SL). The science lecturer later elaborates about having ‘…a
behaviour that makes you collect sensory perceptions. I guess it will tempt others to
ask you what you are doing. Hence a kind of “look here”, but “listen here” – the
exploring movements one step ahead of “Look here!” (SL).
The physical education lecturer expressed it her way: How the adults are in the
pre-schools [...] in relation with movement and development and in connection with
the development of the entire child. [The child] must be able to experience different
environments and then it is clearly the adult that has to seek out the different envi-
ronments (PE). There are many aspects to this conditioning, and the pedagogue
touched upon several of these in the following statement: You must create space for
questions from the children, and you have to acknowledge the children when they
bring forward whatever they have to contribute [...] It is not sufficient to sit and be
ready to answer questions when they come, but you have to show, as an adult, that
we may have these manners, and that I as an adult also can be curious, and ... when
we suddenly find something in the forest, find [an animal] cadaver, or whatever
might show up, then for adults to be curious yourself [...] For adults, it is so easy to
think safety straight away, let’s keep away, there might be bacteria here. What?
What in the world, what has happened here, and yes, how can we find out what kind
of animal it is. [...] Then we start to wonder. What do you think it is? It is probably
a dinosaur, or maybe a deer, or maybe a dog or, and then they start (PL). The peda-
gogue lecturer stresses that adult’s use of time, opening up situations and being
curious are important in such situations. Where adults actively ask many questions,
it has been found that also children ask more questions (Harris, 2012). It might be
easier to support children’s curiosity, to maximize a situation, to prioritize time to
explore and enter situations of sustained shared thinking as a curious adult. Certainly,
if met the right way, children’s own curiosity may often be the best stimulation of
even more curiosity. The lecturers focus on how teachers should take the time to be
a good conversational partner. When children and adults have a common commit-
ment and share their thoughts in sustained shared thinking, conversations last longer
and better support children’s development (Siraj-Blatchford, 2009). Focusing on the
role of the teachers, the language lecturer said: Be a conversation partner that sup-
ports wonder, rather than hurrying to a closed answer.
11.8.3 Stifle Curiosity?
Several of the lecturers were concerned that teachers may stifle children’s curiosity.
The arts and the mathematics lecturer describe how we often don’t prioritize time to
let curiosity flourish. Because we do some things that I believe minimize a little bit
quickly in our everyday activities, you are in a hurry and then reply too quickly or
dismiss it. Are not entering into the curiosity in a way. One are not ready to accept
the invitation to tag along, to be curious (ML). The mathematics and science lec-
turer specify how pre-school teachers may resolve questions by giving absolute
answers. We know so much. It is hard not to give all the answers. (ML). The math-
ematical lecturer is further concerned that an apparent availability of correct answers
deprive room for curiosity, and she questions whether curiosity is valued in early
childhood mathematics education: Because you think there is only one right answer.
Then there will be no room for curiosity or wonder. The science lecturer gave an
example: Maybe there is a tendency that we might say: “Yes, that is a Crested Tit”
and then it stops. So, some answers stop communication (SL). Closed answers, such
as mentioning species names, have been found to shorten children’s engagement
(Gustavsson & Pramling, 2014), while open-ended communication may sustain it
(Siraj-Blatchford, 2009).
In fact, children may stimulate other children’s curiosity more successfully than
teachers are able to. In line with Harris (2012), many of our lecturers express how
they believe that children of the same age often are the best stimulators of curiosity:
To be in an environment where other children also may be curious, like three-year
olds, then it is very socializing with a three or four-year old that is already curious.
This will be more decisive than an adult (SL).
11.9 Curiosity and Learning
The lecturers we interviewed seemed to consider that stimulation of wonder and

curiosity are a way to ensure appropriate learning in early childhood. You may say
that curiosity, wonder and exploration belong in the field of early childhood educa-
tion. [...] to lead us into a different way to work according to frameworks (DL). The
Drama lecturer expands this further when she describes how both curiosity and
wonder are present in the framework plans to ensure that they are not tempted to old
fashioned teaching. No early childhood persons want that, but maybe, maybe peo-
ple outside the field of early childhood. Parents, or... Therefore, it seems the lectur-
ers value curiosity for its learning potential. Whereas Dewey (1910) links curiosity
through wonder to learning, others (e.g. Opdal, 2001) suggest that philosophical
wonder can lead to curiosity and exploration, further leading to learning. Although
the lecturers separated between curiosity and wonder, and linked them to learning,
it was not clear from this material how they made this link.
Whereas curiosity has been linked with the motivation to learn and more effec-
tive learning experiences (e.g. Gruber et al., 2014), the lecturers in this study seem
to be more concerned that curiosity may ensure an appropriate method by which to
learn. The focus on curiosity in whitepapers and frameworks (Menning, 2017) may
however lead to an anticipation of many questions from the children. Several of the
lecturers underline that equating frequent questioning from children with curiosity
is a problematic myth. Moreover, the drama lecturer express concern: It may be
something to hide behind... that they [the children] are so curious, hence that they
are given the responsibility to learn everything by themselves today. That the adult
disclaim responsibility... Right? (DL). She continued: Not all children are equally
curious, I think that is part of a myth. Of course, they are different. Children are very
different. [...] It is not that simple (DL). Thus, she echoes Gruber et al. (2014) who
found individual differences in curiosity.
11.10 Curiosity in Early Childhood Teacher Education
11.10.1 Theoretical Perspectives on Curiosity
None of the lecturers gave a clear definition of curiosity, and few used literature on
curiosity in their teaching. Yet, the lecturers were able to provide a few examples of
literature that they linked to curiosity. The arts lecturer said she used thinking from
Reggio Emilia to support her understanding. The drama lecturer cited Vygotsky as
central to linking curiosity to learning in a suitable way for small children. The sci-
ence lecturer also used Vygotsky to link curiosity with fantasy; and, she linked
curiosity with research on brain development. Not surprisingly, the lecturer with
most clear references on this theme was the pedagogue. She linked curiosity to
Næss and Huizunga’s concept of Homo ludens, the playing human and Piaget’s
thoughts on equilibrium. These theoretical backgrounds range from theories close
to early childhood practices to more philosophical works on the human mind.
Jirout and Klahr (2012) discuss that such variation may result from a lack of a
good operational understanding of the concept of curiosity. It is interesting to see
that lecturers in ECTE, where curiosity is a central concept, have an incomplete
understanding of these concepts. An increased theoretical understanding of curios-
ity seems to be needed in early childhood teacher education. As the science lecturer
in this study exclaimed: I feel ashamed!
11.10.2 Disciplinary Differences in Perception of Curiosity
The lecturers’ understanding of curiosity and wonder have been developed within
their disciplinary theoretical frameworks, but the understanding of curiosity also
includes other interdisciplinary differences. The lecturers we interviewed described
various objects of curiosity, such as different natural objects, animals or trees, or on
how things work, often framed within their discipline. While the arts lecturer
described curiosity on materials, the drama lecturer talks about the implicit explora-
tion in process-drama. Curiosity was also described as playing with words or cre-
ation of new words (LL), on different forms or figures (ML), on different phenomena
(SL) or active exploration (PE). The object of curiosity was sometimes also
described as abstract, such as language or relations between humans: What is impor-
tant for me is not only about how things work, but how relations work (PL). Menning
(2017) calls for this broad understanding as it includes curiosity as a democratic
value, and points to the implications of this in teacher education.
We see these different understandings as natural in a multidisciplinary education.
Different children are curious about different objects (Coie, 1974), and there might
be a risk that early childhood teachers recognize or stimulate the form of curiosity
they value the most. The physical education lecturer expresses this: First and fore-
most, I think of an active child. [...] And I think that for me that might be more
important (PE).
These differences need to be addressed in early childhood teacher education. As
the science lecturer in our study expressed: ...I believe that those who will work in
early childhood education should consider: Where do I stand in this context – which
understanding do I have? And again, that they might shift between different concep-
tions of different subjects. It might be that curiosity in drama, arts, is something
different than curiosity in relation to natural sciences.
11.10.3 Curious Students
The lecturers seemed to have an underlying assumption that curiosity lessened as

children got older, in line with Patrick and Mantzicopoulos (2015) study of chil-
dren’s motivation for learning science and Luce & Hsi’s (2015) study which found
that questioning seems to decrease with age. They problematized a lack of curios-
ity among the students, and they are not the only ones. As Parvanno states: ‘stu-
dents seem to lose what once came naturally’ (Parvanno, 1990, in Jirout & Klahr,
2012, p. 126). This worries the lecturers we interviewed for two reasons. First,
they worried for the students’ own sake: But I think that the students must be curi-
ous. They get nothing out of the education unless they have curiosity as a driving
force to explore new things (NT). This perspective is underlined by Hadzigeorgiou
(2014) who saw that student involvement increases when teachers awaken wonder
and emphasize this part of their learning process. Secondly, the lecturers stressed
that early childhood teachers should be curious to stimulate children’s curiosity in
pre-schools. ECTE must support and develop the student’s curiosity: They must
practice wondering. The children deserve that (DL). The study’s participants
agree with Engel (2009), who argues that education programs must provide young
teachers with a chance to pursue and expand their own curiosity to cultivate it in
their students. There are, however, few studies which consider how we may stimu-
late curiosity at the university level (see discussions in Egan et al., 2014; Luce &
Hsi, 2015).
11.11 Further Contemplations
We started this chapter with two stories in nature showing possible signs of curiosity
in pre-school children. Both stories are open for interpretations, demonstrating the
difficulty in knowing how to recognize curiosity and how it should be met. The
question now remains to see if we are closer in our understanding of the two stories
after interviewing early childhood teacher educators representing different
disciplines?
All the lecturers we interviewed highlighted the importance of curiosity in pre-
school and shared a surprisingly similar understanding of curiosity. Nevertheless,
there were differences, mainly on views on the objects of curiosity. Some of the
differences may indicate that their understanding is based within their disciplines,
such as how the physical education teacher highlights bodily activities and the peda-
gogue highlights relationships. The disciplinary differences are also reflected in the
lecturers’ theoretical perspectives. The lecturers suggest similar ways to sustain and
stimulate curiosity. Although the similarities between the lecturers are evident, the
present differences reveal a challenge for early childhood teachers trying to under-
stand, define, operationalize and theorize the concept of curiosity.
All the lecturers in our study state that curiosity must be sustained and stimu-
lated, that ECE teachers are responsible for this, and that doing it effectively requires
insight and knowledge. In the situation with the spittlebug, the pre-school teacher
shared the situation with the boy and she seemed very interested in what he had
found. Despite this, her intervention did not seem to stimulate further curiosity
among the children. Rather, the children seemed to be motivated by each other, in
line with what our lecturers claim: children at the same age often are the best stimu-
lators of curiosity.
The way we meet children’s apparent wonder and curiosity is important. When
the boy was sitting with his hands in the pond, the adult abruptly ended the activity
with her intervention. The boy’s activity may have many similarities with what the
lecturers described as wondering, a philosophical state where you might fantasize
and seek a different kind of knowledge. This boy may also, of course, just have been
enjoying the sensation of the water on his hands, not thinking of anything in particu-
lar at all. Regardless of what he was doing, it seems that by asking a question, the
adult disrupted his interaction with the water.
These stories reveal the need for a better understanding of curiosity and how we
may stimulate that in children. They also point back to one of the most interesting
parts of this study, namely how all our lecturers highlight bodily curiosity. The lec-
turers describes how curiosity is expressed through bodily language and active
explorative behaviour, and to a lesser degree by verbal questioning. This is unlike
the impression we get from earlier research and literature. Where Dewey (1910)
describes physical curiosity as sensory experiences and a first step in curiosity, our
lecturers describes bodily curiosity as a state with an intrinsic value of equal or even
higher significance than other varieties of curiosity. We hence suggest the term
bodily curiosity to recognize and operationalize this sensory, active and embodied
search for answers. When the boy was sitting by the pond, we would like to suggest
that he was in a sort of bodily wonder – not seeking cognitive understanding, but
simply as a kind of embodied philosophizing. Bodily curiosity and bodily wonder
will be subject to further research.
References
Begus, K., & Southgate, V. (2012). Infant pointing serves an interrogative function. Developmental
Science, 15(5), 611–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01160.x
Berlyne, D. E. (1954). A theory of human curiosity. British Journal of Psychology, 45, 180–191.
Berlyne, D. E. (1966). Curiosity and exploration. Science, 153, 25–33.
Chak, A. (2007). Teachers’ and parents’ conceptions of children’s curiosity and explo-
ration. International Journal of Early Years Education, 15(2), 141–159. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09669760701288690
Chak, A. (2010). Adult response to children’s exploratory behaviours: An exploratory study. Early
Child Development and Care, 180(5), 633–646.
Cohen, M. X., Schone-Bake, J., Elger, C. E., & Weber, B. (2009). Connectivity-based segregation
of the human striatum predicts personality characteristics. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 32–34.
Coie, J. D. (1974). An evaluation of the cross-situational stability of children’s curiosity. Journal
of Personality, 42(1), 93–116.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Downloaded from: Globalgreybooks.com 20.08.2019.
Egan, K., Cant, A., & Judson, G. (2014). Wonder-full education: The centrality of wonder in teach-
ing and learning across the curriculum. New York: Routledge.
Ejbye-Ernst, N. (2011). Pædagogers formidling af naturen i naturbørnehaver. PhD dissertation,
Aarhus University.
Engel, S. (2009). Is curiosity vanishing? Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 48(8), 777–779.
Engel, S. (2015). The hungry mind. The origins of curiosity in early childhood. Cambridge, MA/
London: Harvard University Press.
Fleer, M., & Pramling, N. (2014). A cultural-historical study of children learning science.
Dordrecht, the Netherlands/New York: Springer.
Gauvain, M., Munroe, R. L., & Beebe, H. (2013). Children’s questions in cross-cultural perspec-
tive: A four-culture study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(7), 1148–1165.
Gruber, M. J., Gelman, B. D., & Ranganath, C. (2014). States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-
dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit. Neuron, 84(2), 486–496. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.08.060
Gurholt, K. P., & Sanderud, J. R. (2016). Curious play: Children’s exploration of nature. Journal
of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 16(4), 318–329.
Gustavsson, L., & Pramling, N. (2014). The educational nature of different ways teachers commu-
nicate with children about natural phenomena. International Journal of Early Years Education,
22(1), 59–72.
Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2005). Romantic understanding and science education. Teaching Education,
16(1), 23–32.
Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2014). Reclaiming the value of wonder in science education. In K. Egan,
A. Cant, & G. Judson (Eds.), Wonder-full education: The centrality of wonder in teaching and
learning across the curriculum. New York/London: Routledge.
Hammer, A. S. E. (2012). Undervisning i barnehagen. In E. E. Ødegaard (Ed.), Barnehagen som
danningsarena. Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
Harris, P. L. (2012). Trusting what you're told: How children learn from others. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Hauge, K. H., & Heggen, M. P. (2019). Tverrfaglighet i norsk barnehagelærerutdanning – et
forslag til begrepsavklaring. Nordic Studies in Education, 39, 249–263.
Hodgkin, R. A. (1976). Born curious: new perspectives in educational theory. New York: Wiley.
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative
Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Jirout, J., & Klahr, D. (2012). Children’s scientific curiosity: In search of an operational definition
of an elusive concept. Developmental Review, 32(2), 125–160.
Kashdan, T. B., & Silvia, P. J. (2005). Curiosity and interest: The benefits of thriving on novelty
and challenge (Oxford handbook of positive psychology, 2009).
Lindholm, M. (2018). Promoting curiosity? Possibilities and pitfalls in science education. Science
& Education, 27, 987–1002.
Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological
bulletin, 116(1), 75–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.75
Luce, M. R., & Hsi, S. (2015). Science-relevant curiosity expression and interest in science: An
exploratory study. Science Education, 99(1), 70–97.
Lynngård, A. M. (2015). På jakt etter naturfag i natur- og friluftsbarnehagen. In B. O. Hallås
& G. Karlsen (Eds.), Natur og danning. Profesjonsutøvelse, barnehage og skole. Bergen,
Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
Menning, S. F. (2017). Tracing curiosity with a value perspective. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk
og kritikk, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.23865/ntpk.v3.531
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2013). Phenomenology of perception. London/New York: Routledge.
Milne, I. (2010). A sense of wonder, arising from aesthetic experiences, should be the starting
point for inquiry in primary science. Science Education International, 21(2), 102–115.
Ministry of Education and Research. (2017). Rammeplan for barnehagen. Oslo, Norway:
Utdanningsdirektoratet. Retrieved from https://www.udir.no/globalassets/filer/barnehage/ram-
meplan/framework-plan-for-kindergartens2-2017.pdf
O’Neill, D. K., Main, R. M., & Ziemski, R. A. (2009). ‘I like Barney’: Preschoolers’ sponta-
neous conversational initiations with peers. First Language, 29(4), 401–425. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0142723709105315
Opdal, P. M. (2001). Curiosity, wonder and education seen as perspective development. Studies in
Philosophy and Education, 20, 331–344.
Patrick, H., & Mantzicopoulos, P. (2015). Young children’s motivation for learning science.
In K. Cabe Trundle & M. Saçkes (Eds.), Research in early childhood science education.
Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Sanderud, J. R., & Gurholt, K. P. (2014). Barns nysgjerrige lek i natur – Utforskende dannelse.
Nordic Studies in Education, 34(01), 3–20.
Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2009). Conceptualising progression in the pedagogy of play and sustained
shared thinking in early childhood education: A Vygotskian perspective. Education and Child
Psychology, 26(2), 77–89.
Thulin, S. (2011). Lærares tal och barns nyfikenhet: Kommunikation om naturvetenskapliga
innhåll i førskolan. PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg.
Van Schijndel, T. J. P., Franse, R. K., & Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2010). The exploratory behavior
scale: Assessing young visitors’ hands-on behavior in science museums. Science Education,
94(5), 794–809. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20394
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, UK/London: Harvard University Press.

Carte PDF Outdoor

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carte PDF Outdoor

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carte PDF Outdoor

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Perspectives on

Early Childhood Education and Development 34

Liv Torunn Grindheim

Editorial Board Members

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/7601

Outdoor Learning and Play

ISSN 2468-8746 ISSN 2468-8754 (electronic)

children in kindergartens and schools must consider universal access to green

Director of KINDknow Research Centre, Elin Eriksen Ødegaard

Funded by Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

1 Outdoors and Nature in Pedagogical Practices

8 Exploring the Taken-for-Granted Advantage of Outdoor Play

Sylvia Christine Almeida is a senior lecturer in environmental, sustainability and

science education in the Faculty of Education at Monash University with strong

Åsta Birkeland is a professor in early childhood education at Western Norway

Natália Meireles Santos da Costa is a psychologist and a PhD student at the

Marilyn Fleer is an Australian Research Council laureate professor and holds the

foundation chair of Early Childhood Education and Development at Monash

Liv Torunn Grindheim is a professor of early childhood pedagogy at the

Kindergarten Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable

Min He is an associate professor of early childhood education at East China Normal

Marianne Presthus Heggen, PhD, is a professor at Western Norway University of

Liang Li is a senior lecturer in early childhood education in the Faculty of

Education, Monash University. Her research focuses on cultural-historical studies,

Anne Myklebust Lynngård is an associate professor at Western Norway University

of Applied Sciences, Norway, and has a background in ecology. She is an experi-

Wanqiu Meng is an assistant lecturer in preschool education Faculty at Shanghai

Elin Eriksen Ødegaard is professor and director of KINDknow – Kindergarten

Knowledge Centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable Futures – at

Gloria Quiñones is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Education at Monash

University, Australia. Gloria’s research focuses on studying affect, emotions, play

Angela Rekers, PhD, is a lecturer in health, social and childhood studies at Neath

Avis Ridgway, PhD, is an adjunct research associate in the Faculty of Education at

Maria Clotilde Rossetti-Ferreira has graduated in philosophy, has specialization

in clinical psychology, obtained a PhD in psychology from the University of London

Alicja Renata Sadownik, PhD, is associate professor at the Western Norway

Hanne Værum Sørensen is an associate professor at VIA University College,

Aarhus. She holds an MA in child psychology and a BA in social education. Her

Jane Waters-Davies is associate professor and applied research lead (education) at

Liv Torunn Grindheim , Hanne Værum Sørensen , and Angela Rekers

© The Author(s) 2021 1

Keywords Cultural formation · Cultural- historical theory · Early childhood

The status of outdoor activities in educational practices like Early Childhood

1.2 Theoretical Approach

1.3 Methodological Approach

society to include the perception of nature as a condition for cultural formation

1.4 Analysis and the Depicted Conditions

In Chap. 2, Ridgway, Quiñones and Li investigate the activity of three toddlers

the children to be exploratory, playful, and imaginative co-collaborators may be

In Chap. 3, Costa, Rossetti-Ferreira and Mello investigate babies and toddlers’

In the institutional perspective, there appear to be alignments between motives

In Chap. 4, Sadownik investigates children’s outdoor activities in ECEC1 as a condi-

ECEC institutions in Norway are for children from 1 to 6 years old.

1.4.8 ‘All the Wild’ in Wales

1.4.11 Conditions for Cultural Formations in the Ten Chapters

peers and in the neighborhood, and increased opportunities for sustainability

teacher education programs in relation to theorising and conceptualising curiosity

Avis Ridgway, Gloria Quiñones, and Liang Li

Abstract Discussion on toddlers’ outdoor play practices in various cultural spaces

Keywords Toddlers · Outdoor play · Imagination · Cultural formation

Director of KINDknow Research Centre, Elin Eriksen Ødegaard

1 Outdoors and Nature in Pedagogical Practices

8 Exploring the Taken-for-Granted Advantage of Outdoor Play

1.2 Theoretical Approach

1.3 Methodological Approach

1.4 Analysis and the Depicted Conditions

1.4.8 ‘All the Wild’ in Wales

1.4.11 Conditions for Cultural Formations in the Ten Chapters

2.2 Theoretical Grounding

2.2.1 Socio-cultural Experience

2.2.2 Imagined and Embodied Transformations

2.3 Method: Visual Narrative Methodology

2.4 Story One: Toddler Luci (2 Years Old)

2.5 Story Two: Silvia (2 Years Old)

2.6 Story Three: El (2.7 Years Old)

2.7.1 Cultural Formation in Toddlers’ Outdoor Environment

3.2 Research Question and Objective

3.3 Theoretical Approach

3.5 Results and Discussion

3.5.1 Attached Outdoor Spaces as Part of Everyday Life

3.5.2 Projects, Workshops and the Diversification of Spaces

3.6 Final Considerations

4.3 Cultural Formation

4.4 The Child’s and Children’s Perspectives

4.7.1 Content Analysis with a Focus on Outdoor Education

4.7.2 Research Participants

4.8.1 Gender-Traditional Parents of Boys

4.8.1.1 “ Manning the Boys Up”: Outdoor Activities

4.8.2 Gender-Liberal Parents of Boys

4.8.3 Gender-Traditional Parents of Girls

4.8.3.1 Outdoor Activities as a Tool of Normative Disaster

4.8.3.2 I t’s Not for the Girls, But It’s Good for My Relationship

4.8.4 Gender-Liberated Parents of Girls