Microsoft Word - Dialogue about learning across the Northern Norway-Russia border (Layout).docx


Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) A43 

  

 
 
Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-
Russia border: An analysis of textbooks in kindergarten 
teacher education 

 
Elena Merzliakova 
UiT – The Arctic University of Norway, 
Norway 

 
Mikhail Gradovski 
University of Stavanger, 
Norway 

 
Elin Eriksen Ødegaard 
KINDknow Research Centre, Western 
Norway University 

 

 
Abstract 
This paper is the first in a series of three studies that explore the pedagogy used in the Norwegian and Russian early 
childhood settings by examining texts that are part of the syllabus in two early childhood teacher education programs 
that participated in our project with student international exchanges. The study explores how Mikhail Bakhtin’s notion 
of dialogue relates to the concept of ‘learning’ in the context of early childhood teacher educations in Northern Norway 
and Northern Russia. The data sources are textbooks used as syllabi for kindergarten teacher education in those 
countries. These national dialogues are understood as authoritative discourses on the concepts of learning to which 
the students in both countries have to relate. By being inspired by Bakhtin’s notion of dialogue, we consider that the 
ideas in textbooks areas are in a dialogic relationship as they are parts of a regulating battle between centrifugal and 
centripetal forces. A constructivist perspective on learning and the division of the learning process into subject, 
knowledge and education areas are identified as the centripetal forces in the dialogue on learning. Activities, tools, and 
the role of adults are identified as centrifugal forces. Based on the hypothetical premise that textbooks influence 
practices and that practice may unfold as textbooks describe, we have created hypothetical discussions between 
educators and students in these countries. The study provides better insight on the premises for the dialogue about 
learning across international borders which can be useful in internalization and exchange programs in kindergarten 
teacher educations in different countries. 
 
Keywords: Learning, textbooks, early childhood teacher education, internalization, dialogism. 

Elena Merzliakova was born in Nikel, RSFSR (Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic). Where she first 
graduated from the Herzen State Pedagogic University of Russia in Saint-Petersburg with a diploma in 
early childhood teacher education. Afterward, she moved to Tromsø Norway. To work as a kindergarten 
teacher and at the same time work on her master's at the University of Tromsø. She graduated with her 
master's from the University of Tromsø in pedagogy in 2000. Now she works as a lecturer in pedagogy at 
this university on campus Alta. Where she is currently pursuing her first Ph.D. in Internationalization in 
higher education. Her other research interest is found in understanding the different teaching concepts that 

ISSN: 2325-3290 (online)  



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A44 

are used in the world today and finding ways to create a dialogue between them, to find the best practices 
to teach children. https://uit.no/ansatte/elena.merzliakova 

Dr. Mikhail Gradovski is born in Minsk, Belarus. After graduation from the Norwegian University of Science 
and Technology in Trondheim as a doctor rerum politicarum in 2008 with the thesis devoted to the 
Norwegian Dialogue Pedagogy, Gradovski has participated in both national and international research 
projects on doctoral supervision, professional supervision, use of dialogue in education, and mental skill 
development. Currently, he is the main coordinator of an international EU Horizon2020 project that focuses 
on the development of Ph.D. candidates’ skills. He has supervised both postgraduate, graduate, and 
undergraduate students. As a teaching practitioner, he is using a dialogical approach based on an 
understanding of both teacher and learner as partners with equal rights to make judgments on what is 
relevant, important and true. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3098-1447 

Elin Eriksen Ødegaard is research director at 'KINDknow - centre for Systemic Research on Diversity and 
Sustainable Futures', also called BARNkunne in Norwegian. She is a capacity builder with commitments to 
sustainability and equity in the early years. She researches in the areas of early childhood education and 
teacher education with particular attention to conditions for children's cultural formation and teachers’ 
transformative practices. Keywords in her research are often: play, exploration, collaborative narratives and 
dialogic engagement. She produced the animated films “Becoming, - the first 1000 days of early childhood,” 
and “Plum Skum” - YouTube. Elin Eriksen Ødegaard - Western Norway University of Applied Sciences 
(hvl.no) 

Acknowledgement 
We would like to acknowledge the funds received for the Ph.D. study from UiT—The Arctic University of Norway and 
additional support from the KINDknow Knowledge Center of Systemic Research on Diversity and Sustainable Futures, 
Western Norway University of Applied Sciences (HVL), The Barents Secretary and The National Research School for 
Teacher Education (NAFOL). 

ÏÒÒ 

Introduction 
The overall aim of this study is to shed light on the conditions for cultural transformation and 

dialogues across borders between Russia and Norway in the region of the Barents, regarding teacher 
education of the early childhood pre-service teachers. Moreover, the study brings forward a long-term 
pedagogical aim of nourishing dialogues and supporting friendship among the early childhood student-
teachers and teacher educators across the border between Norway and Russia in the region of the Barents. 
By scrutinizing how the concept of “learning” is conveyed in most syllabus textbooks in Northern Russia 
and Northern Norway, the rationale is to ground our understandings of the discursive conditions of the 
student’s professional development in these geographical areas. The Barents is a cornerstone of regional 
cooperation in the far north of Europe. Due to the more interconnected and interdependent world in which 
we live, the idea of “region” is becoming more elastic and porous. Regionalization is an evolutionary process 
that builds on existing realities and current initiatives. Therefore, it is useful to understand the kindergarten 
teacher’s intercultural encounter as a dialogic and heteroglossia process (Holquist, 1981; Kirova et al., 
2018).  

 This study, following a Bakhtin-inspired discourse analysis, begins with an assumption of 
difference and similarities as an integral part of cultural activity and its outcomes, such as textbooks in use 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A45 

for professional education. In addition, we consider the co-created constraints, hypothetically locally 
situated that the students and teacher educators encounter while reading a textbook.  

Studies situated in regional contexts have received increased interest, attracting more applicants 
to international studies in higher education (Altbach & Teichler, 2001). This is suitable when cooperation 
between educational institutions is part of an already-existing plan to develop a particular region (Knight, 
2013). This study was situated in the region of Barents in the far North Europe. The background for studying 
how the notion of children’s ‘learning’ is conveyed in textbooks across the national borders of Northern 
Norway and Northeast of Russia, was the existing memorandum of understandings between universities in 
Barents; UiT- The Arctic University of Norway and Murmansk Arctic State University. In addition, the study 
was connected to KINDknow Research center’s goal of sustainable futures which includes value orientation 
in research to global and local awareness. Global awareness and resilience to conflict is emphasized in 
education for sustainable futures (UNESCO, 2016). Studies anchored in regional development can 
encourage internationalization. 

 Exposing pre-service teachers to diversity and provoking them to rethink their taken-for-granted 
assumptions about their neighbors were central to the pedagogical program included in the research 
design. The pedagogical program followed up the Norwegian policy on internationalization in higher 
education. It is stated that students should be introduced to and become a part of the international discourse 
on pedagogy to achieve a high international academic level. Furthermore, irrespective of the level of its 
use. It should be in the curriculums of study programs rather than in the institutions (NMER, 2017, p. 63). 
Internationalization is thus understood as a requirement for Norwegian kindergarten teacher education 
(UHR, 2012).  

Similarly, internalization is a part of a discourse on the modernization of higher education in Russia 
(Kukarenko & Zashikhina, 2017). In this perspective, international cooperation has become a resource and 
driving force of Russian university development.  

There is a general expectation that internationalization and exchange in higher education contribute 
to mutual understanding and problematizing taken-for-granted assumptions and practices (Jones, 2017). 
Yet, a wide range of factors will impact the experience of students when they study abroad or in other ways 
partake in the exchange, dialogue, and collaboration across borders. Earlier studies point to the 
environmental factors arising from personal history, family context, institutional nature, country location of 
the study destination, and policy (e.g., Jones, 2017). Each of these has a role to play. However, this study 
aims to provide a premise for a more informed dialogue across the international borders of Norway and 
Russia on an epistemological level, in a much-needed area of research.   

Driving our rationale for comparing the textbooks is the belief that comparison does not mean that 
one discourse is better than the other but rather the belief that by comparing the epistemological 
underpinnings of the concept of “learning” we can go beyond the surface of the understandings of what 
takes place in practice in the respective early year’s institutions. With this in mind, our aim is to open up 
discourses of learning in education. Knowledge of nuances in epistemology across borders can shed light 
and facilitate reflection on our educational curriculum and contribute to a more culturally sensitive form of 
teacher education and later teachers’ practices.   

The main research questions in our study are as follows: What information on the concepts of 
learning is found in authoritative discourses on learning in textbooks used in kindergarten teacher education 
in Northern Norway and Northern Russia? And how can this information be used as the premise for cross-



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A46 

border dialogue? The first research question will be addressed by answering the following two sub-
questions: 

1. What discourses about children’s learning in kindergartens can be identified in textbooks in 
kindergarten teacher education programs? 

2. What similarities and differences exist in the concepts of learning found in the textbooks in the two 
countries?  

The second research question will be addressed by, first, considering how the information about 
the concepts of learning in the two discourses relate dialogically to each other and then by discussing how 
these findings can be used to innovate the cross-border dialogue. 

These questions allow us to perform a literature review drawing on the inspiration from Richard 
Andrews (2010). We compare and relate the contents of different textbooks dialogically, revealing 
similarities and differences in the perception of children’s role in their learning and the positions of the 
organizers of learning situations in kindergarten. Moreover, we identify various perceptions of the tools for 
children’s learning outlined in the textbooks. To that end, we recognize the centrifugal and centripetal forces 
(Bakhtin, 2012) enabling a cross-border dialogue among educators. The study is relevant for teacher 
education regarding the perspective of international understanding in general and cultural exchange in the 
region. 

Earlier research 
According to Anders Holmgren (2011), textbook research is not a separate field of research 

because it has not an internal structure and autonomy. Today, it is a somewhat interdisciplinary research 
activity on the threshold between pedagogy and didactics.  

There is no agreement about what the core content of learning should be, neither in Norway nor in 
Russia. A study of the syllabus literature in the area of children’s development, play, and learning in 
Norwegian kindergarten teacher education reveals that there is no canon of textbooks in Norway 
(Bjerkestrand et al., 2015; Sataøen & Fossøy, 2019). Both the content and scope of the syllabus literature 
vary greatly from institution to institution, and the authors question the disparities of the findings and ask 
whether the syllabus literature is too scientifically uncritical. They suggest that the reason for this might be 
that, yet no common teacher educational culture in Norway has been developed (Sataøen & Fossøy, 2019). 
In Russia, the main disagreement is about what kind of knowledge textbooks should contain, “the true 
knowledge” or different opinions on study subjects of different researchers (Galaguzova, 2018; Mirskij, 
2004).  

John Bennett (2010) concludes in a comparison between Russian and Nordic curricula that the 
Russian tradition of kindergarten has much in common with the Nordic, despite a stronger focus on health 
in the Russian kindergarten. In most regions, investment in young children remains high (Bennett, 2010). 
When it comes to structural aspects, such as the pre-service training of educators and the number of 
children per staff, the Russian kindergartens compare well with most Western countries. He finds that 
Russian kindergartens pay attention to the holistic development of young children. The curricula are child-
oriented and based on a strong tradition of research. While the Russian tradition includes “a balanced mix 
of instruction, child-initiated activities and thematic work where adult purposes are foregrounded” (p. 21), 
the Nordic tradition includes mostly the child’s own strategies for learning through relationships and through 
play and through educator scaffolding at the appropriate moment.  



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A47 

In a study of how the concepts of play and learning were discussed and which of the two was the 
dominant concept in the national framework plans (curriculum) for kindergartens in Norway, China, Finland, 
and Hong Kong, Aihua Hu and Elin Eriksen Ødegaard found that the concept of learning is clearly present 
and multifaceted in all framework plans (Hu & Ødegaard, 2019). Nevertheless, the concept of learning was 
weighted differently and was given different connotations in the framework plans. “Learning to know,” 
“learning to do,” and “learning to be” have different positions in the four frameworks. The two Confucius 
frameworks pay more attention to “learning to know,” while the Nordic gives more attention to “learning to 
do” and “learning to be”.  

The question as to how globalized concepts and discourses have a local impact in various local 
kindergarten teacher education programs was studied in three different kindergarten teacher training 
programs—a bachelor’s degree in Namibia, part-time education in an indigenous region of Colombia, and 
a workplace-based kindergarten teacher education for students having immigrant/refugee backgrounds in 
Canada (Kirova et al., 2018). This study showed how the expectations that the researchers describe as 
Western and related, for example, to describing children’s development and learning became difficult and 
almost impossible for some of the students. In Colombia, the students had a hard time comprehending how 
one could teach children something by playing with them. They described their own upbringing by adults 
who never played with children and how they had to change their attitudes and ways of being through 
education. They had to stop saying “no” to children and instead encourage them, and they had to unlearn 
the coercion of children. The researchers reflect on how some globalized, so-called correct kindergarten 
educational practices challenge or colonize local practices in several places in the world (Kirova et al., 
2018). 

Ole Erik Klingle’s (2016) study on the construction of the professional identities of students studying 
to become kindergarten teachers who have spent one semester studying in Nicaragua shows how students 
use traditional pedagogical discourses and concepts of play and teaching to construct dichotomies for their 
identities. The students used positively charged terms, such as recognition and participation, related to 
playing, and strongly identified with play as a learning method. 

The research on management documents for kindergartens in different countries also shows that 
children’s learning is an important concept (Hu & Ødegaard, 2019). However, there is disagreement over 
whether there are common kindergarten practices and discourses related to learning across countries. 
Some researchers believe that diverse traditional pedagogy discourses exist (Klingle, 2016), while others 
question whether there are globalized discourses and practices related to learning (Kirova et al., 2018).  
Another important finding in these studies is the difference between the discourse of learning to know, 
learning for school approach, on one hand, and that of learning to do and to be, on the other hand, a Bildung 
approach, found in the Nordic countries. Of special interest here is Bennet’s (2010) study showing that the 
Russian and the Nordic kindergartens are not that different. 

Perspective, sample, and analytical approach 
The data sources for our study are the textbooks used as syllabi for kindergarten teacher education 

in Northern Norway and Northern Russia. The textbooks were chosen because they are information and 
knowledge channels that all students and professionals in the education programs use. Such textbooks 
contain academic, authoritative ideas that are provided to all students through their education and to which 
they must relate. The textbooks always strive to convey a specific conceptual and value content 
(Andreassen, 2008, p. 49). 

The concepts of the Russian philosopher, literary scholar, and educationalist, Mikhail Bakhtin are 
central in the analysis. Bakhtin (2012, p. 95) believes that the ideological becoming of the individual includes 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A48 

the process of acquiring the ideas of others. It is important to understand that the process of ideological 
becoming does not only include the process of acquiring the ideas of others. For us, however, due to the 
research questions that we are focusing on in this article, it is this process, as an element of the ideological 
becoming, that we want to draw the attention to, as it represents the authoritative discourse. The 
authoritative discourse, which the textbooks’ texts represent, has an embedded authority that exists 
irrespective of the readers of these texts, the students. It is irrelevant for the content of this article whether 
the students recognize its authority or not. Bakhtin (2012, pp. 95–97) describes this discourse as “a 
religious, political, moral, ancestral, teachers’, etc.” discourse and characterizes the meaningful structure 
of the discourse as motionless and dead since it is completed and unambiguous. Furthermore, Bakhtin 
writes: 

The authoritative word comes compactly into our linguistic consciousness in the form of an inseparable mass. 
One must either acknowledge this discourse completely or reject it altogether. [...] The authoritative discourse is 
not produced, it is conveyed. (Bakhtin, 2012, p. 97) 

The students’ ideological becoming as professionals is possible thanks to the dialogue that occurs 
between the authoritative discourse and the inner persuasive discourse, the students’ own opinion on the 
subject that includes prior knowledge and understandings. This dialogue causes the students to make 
choices between the meanings these discourses bring forth, and thus a new understanding is generated. 
Bakhtin (2012, p. 46) writes that the word makes sense only when we take it from the contexts created by 
others and make it our own. 

The Russian concept of learning is different from the Norwegian concept of learning. Bakhtin calls 
the phenomenon of interdependence between concepts and contexts heteroglossia, the notion that every 
expression has different meanings in different contexts. A context means a set of conditions related to time 
and place that influence how utterances take on meanings. Notions of learning are uttered in a universe of 
opinions that already consist of different and contradictory utterances. The new utterances make sense 
based on the relationships with the previously expressed utterances in which they are included. Holquist 
explains the essence of utterances: 

At any given time, in any given place, there will be a set of conditions – social, historical, meteorological, 
physiological – that will ensure that a word uttered in that place and at that time will have a meaning different than 
it would have under any other conditions, all utterances are heteroglot in that they are functions of a matrix of 
forces practically impossible to recoup. And therefore, impossible to resolve. (Holquist, 1981, p. 428) 

Any utterance is a response to someone or a response to something expressed in the past, and, 
at the same time, it has content created by the fact that it is aimed at a recipient (Ongstad, 2004). We 
examine the textbook texts as the authors’ responses to the educational discourses in the students’ 
respective countries of origin. In the dialogue on learning, the utterances or ideas in the Russian and 
Norwegian textbooks will be considered as being in a dialogic relationship with the students as they are 
parts of a regulating battle between centrifugal and centripetal forces. It is important to understand that our 
understanding of discourse and the use of the analytical tool of the centripetal and centrifugal forces are 
Bakhtin-inspired and not pure Bakhtinian.  Bakhtin’s centripetal and centrifugal forces are socio-logical 
characteristics of a spoken language. The centripetal forces “unite and centralize verbal-ideological 
thought” and centrifugal forces are responsible for” the uninterrupted process of decentralization and 
disunification” (Bakhtin, 1981, pp.270-272). The centrifugal forces make the utterances socially and 
linguistically different (Bakhtin, 2012, p. 24), ensuring the affinity of ideas to different discourses in different 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A49 

historical and social contexts, as well as for the potential to develop new ideas. These forces are in an 
unresolvable struggle that can only be experienced and studied. Furthermore, this struggle is not a 
dialectical struggle of logical contradictions or a struggle of individual wills but a permanent condition of a 
language (Bakhtin, 1981, p. 273). These forces are simultaneously present in any utterance and thus in a 
dialogue. To illustrate this struggle, we would like to cite the example from Schuman: 

Bakhtin is parsimonious with examples, but, on the simplest level, when I say “tree,” I invoke the centripetal force 
of a stable, unified concept that involves a trunk and branches. When I invoke this concept, I want to be 
understood in a particular way by the listener to whom I am speaking. That desire, conditioned by the listener’s 
expected response, is also centripetal, insofar as it depends on some agreement between us authorizing a 
meaning for the word in our particular situation. In tension with these centripetal forces are the centrifugal forces 
of hundreds of types of trees, specific trees, specific experiences of trees (romantic interludes, childhood 
escapades, escapes, lynchings, crucifixions), metaphorical possibilities (the tree of life, family tree), slang (“up a 
tree”), and the listener’s receptivity (hostile, agreeable, tuned out). The word “tree” carries with it at all times all 
these possibilities and many more, and while the centripetal force tends toward one meaning (or a particular 
meaning at a particular moment), the centrifugal force of language tends to fracture meaning in many directions. 
(Schuman 2002, pp. 49-50) 

While Bakhtin’s idea behind the forces was to use these to characterize any utterances from a 
socio-logical position on the level of words as they are dialogically both voiced and heard by particular 
people in particular situations (Schuman, 2002), we, inspired by Bakhtin, use the concepts of centripetal 
and centrifugal forces as the concepts to describe the forces of authorized meanings (Schuman, 2002). 

In this study, we are interested in the concepts of learning that the textbooks in our selection convey 
to a student. Each concept of learning that each textbook contains is thus considered to be a force of 
authorized meaning. It is important to note that we do not analyze if these textbooks are written in such a 
way that they invite to a dialogue on learning and we do not doubt that there are countless struggles of the 
forces in a pure Bakhtinian understanding of the centripetal and centrifugal forces in every utterance on 
learning in these textbooks. However, we are interested in a dialogue that appears when a learner reads 
the textbook’s authorized meaning of what learning is. This dialogue is the dialogue between the texts and 
a learner is not a speech dialogue with spoken and heard utterances that Bakhtin’s concepts of centripetal 
and centrifugal forces were invented to analyze. We are interested in the dialogic relationships between a 
student and the discourses on learning represented in the Norwegian and Russian textbooks. We 
understand these relationships as relationships between the concepts with different ideologies and values. 
In relation to a student, each textbook’s concept of learning becomes an authoritarian monologic discourse 
that represents a centripetal force that pressures a student to believe in its message on what learning is 
and thus unite with it.  This invitation to uniformity shared and common meaning, is met by the students’ 
meanings, that is a centripetal force towards diversity, as Gíslason (2019) puts it. Thus appears a dialogue 
on what learning is between the authoritarian discourse of the textbook and an inner persuasive discourse 
of a student. 

By scrutinizing how the learning concepts are dialogically related to one other, we are able to 
provide better insight on the premises for the dialogue about learning across international borders among 
the students in different countries. We will relate the findings, the authoritative discourses, to each other 
and then discuss how these apply/relate dialogically to the inner persuasive discourses that the students 
might have when they relate to the authoritative discourses. 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A50 

We have analyzed the textbooks used in kindergarten teacher education in Russian and Norwegian 
part of the Barents region, Finnmark, Troms, and Nordland in Norway (the Norwegian group) and in 
Murmansk Oblast, Arkhangelsk Oblast, the Republic of Karelia, and the Republic of Komi in Russia (the 
Russian group). Our sample is limited to the books that have been used in the study programs in both 
countries since 2014. This choice was made due to political changes in kindergarten teacher education in 
both Norway and Russia. In Norway, a new kindergarten teacher curriculum was adopted in 2013, while 
Russia introduced a new educational standard for preschool teacher education in 2014. We have reviewed 
all the obligatory reading lists on the theme “Children’s development, play, and learning” or similar courses 
in the kindergarten teacher education program in Northern Norway1 for the period from 2013 to 2017. Then 
we selected the books that are on the reading lists in all these educational institutions. In addition, in our 
sample, we included books that we considered to be trendsetters in the Norwegian study programs. 

Our Norwegian group consists of the following textbooks: 

- Askland, L., & Sataøen, S. O. (2014). Utviklingspsykologiske perspektiver på barns oppvekst (Developmental 
psychological perspectives on children’s adolescence). Gyldendal Akademisk.  

- Rønning, G. S. (2013). Rammeplan for barnehagen, hva så? (Framework plan for the kindergarten, so what?). 
Cappelen Akademisk.  

- Glaser, V., Solids, I., & Drugli, B. (Eds.) (2014). Utvikling, lek og læring i barnehagen. Forskning og praksis 
(Development, play and learning in kindergarten. Research and practice). Fagbokforlaget. 

- Gunnestad, A. (2014). Didaktikk for barnehagelærere: en innføring (Didactics for kindergarten teachers: an 
introduction). Universitetsforlaget. 

We sent requests for reading lists on children’s learning in kindergarten to all four higher 
educational institutions in Northern Russia2 and received responses from Murmansk Arctic State University 
and Petrozavodsk State University. We selected the books used in both educational institutions. In addition, 
we used information on the reading lists that we found on the official websites of the Russian institutions.  
The Russian group consists of the following textbooks: 

- Mikljaeva, N. V., Mikljaeva, Y. V., & Vinogradova, N. A. (2015). Doshkolnaia pedagogika (Preschool pedagogy). 
Jurajt. Moskva. 

- Turchenko, V. I. (2013). Doshkolnaia pedagogika (Preschool pedagogy). Flinta. Moskva. 

- Gogoberidze, A. G., & Solnceva, O. V. (2017). Doshkolnaia pedagogika s osnovami metodik vospitania i obuchenia 
(Preschool pedagogy with a basis for methodology in upbringing and training). Piter. Saint-Petersburg. 

- Galiguzova, L. N., & Mesjerjakova-Zamogilnaja, S. J. (2017). Doshkolnaia pedagogika. Uchebnik i praktikum 
(Preschool pedagogy. Textbook and practical training). Jurajt. Moskva. 

Our analysis consists of three steps. The first step is a literature review of the concepts of learning’s 
contents in each group of the sample we describe. We make a narrative synthesis of the narrative kind 
which might be better described as “a blended account of differences rather than as complete synthesis” 
(Andrews, 2010, p.405). In the second step, the results of the narrative reviews of the concepts of learning 
from the two groups are compared. The third step is a description of the dialogical relationships between 
the concepts. 

For the selection of the sub-concepts included in the concepts of learning, we combine Knud Illeris’s 
notion of learning (Illeris, 2012) with Vygotsky’s concept of learning (Säljö, 2016, p. 112). Illeris understands 
learning as an interaction between the individual’s acquisition process and the social process of the context 

 
1 Nord University (Campus Nesna, Campus Bodø, and Campus Levanger); UiT Norges Arktiske Universitet (Campus Tromsø and 
Campus Alta). 
2 Murmansk Arctic State University (MASU), Northern Arctic Federal University (SAFU) in Arkhangelsk, Petrozavodsk State University, 
and Syktyvkar State University. 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A51 

where this learning takes place. The acquisition process includes the content (what is learned) and driving 
force (what initiates the acquisition process). The idea that individuals develop their mental functions by 
engaging in communication with their surroundings and familiarizing themselves with languages, thinking, 
ideas and practices is central to the socio-cultural understanding of learning attributed to Vygotsky (Säljö, 
2016, p. 112). The texts in the textbooks are analyzed and presented in our literature review based on the 
following sub-concepts posed as questions: 

- Learning activities: What are activities in which it is thought that kindergarten children learn? How should 
these be organized and implemented? 

- Tools: What tools are children supposed to learn to use?  

- Kindergarten teacher as an adult: What role should adults play in children’s learning? 

- Other children: What role should other children play in a child’s learning? 

- The learning child: What role should the child play in his/her own learning? 

For that reason, we read books and highlighted all parts which could answer our questions. Then 
we read those highlights and made a conclusion on the main meaning that those highlights tried to make. 
For example, answering the question of what role should adults play in children's learning in Askland & 
Sataøen (2014), we found followed excerpts: 

The adults have to understand the consequences of their actions, and their influence on children's development. 
Their need for education to make an environment of high quality (with references to Dalli et.al., 2011, p.17). 

The goal is to understand what is happening to the child right now, more than to guess what is going to happen. 
This perspective must be a grounded perspective, for all who work with children (p.22).  

The adults must react to an infant child, and structure the child’s relations to the environment (p.39). They must 
be able to understand child’s signals, initiatives, and reactions. (p. 51). 

These excerpts conveyed the role of the teacher as responsive to the child’s signals, initiatives, 
and reactions. An attentiveness to the ‘here-and-now’ moment and a moral obligation for attunement to the 
child is emphasized. 

We continued to write highlights until the end of the book. Then we made a conclusion which 
became a part of the text below: “Adults should actively try to understand the child’s way of expressing 
themselves, and their own professional ethical responsibility for the child." 

The second step in the analysis consists of an internal and external comparison of the various 
notions of the concepts of learning. In the internal comparison, we identify similarities and differences 
between the results of the analyses of the Norwegian and the Russian groups. The results of the internal 
comparison is the first step of our external comparison where we, drawing on the method of comparative 
inquiry proposed by David Phillips (2006), contextualize the findings from the analyses of the concepts of 
learning of the Norwegian and Russian groups and discuss what contributions the findings can make to the 
understanding of conditions for children’s learning in general. 

In the third step, we relate the findings dialogically to each other by identifying the forces that can 
form the premises for the dialogue between the Norwegian and the Russian understandings of the concepts 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A52 

of learning. We identify the authoritative discourses from two neighboring countries that interact with the 
students’ inner persuasive discourses. 

Results and discussion 
What authoritative discourses about children’s learning in kindergartens can be identified in 
textbooks in kindergarten teacher education in Northern Norway? 

In the book by Askland and Sataøen (2014), the focus is on the following learning activities: 
interaction, communication, social interaction with the environment, and daily tasks in kindergarten. The 
authors pay a great deal of attention to the language and its development in children. In addition, emphasis 
is placed on the mastery of interaction with others. The child should also learn affect regulation, the 
importance of feelings, task solving, and useful strategies for problem solving. 

Aksland and Sataøen (2014) devote most of the pages of their book to discussions about the role 
of adults in children’s development. The adults should be active and engaged in communication and other 
types of interaction with the child. The adults should create a good emotional climate as such climate is a 
condition for the positive development of the child. The adults should actively try to understand the child’s 
way of expressing themselves and stay in certain situations somewhat removed to allow the relationships 
between the toddlers to appear and evolve. The adults should support the learning potential of all the 
children and perform scaffolding of tasks after the child’s zone of proximal development has been identified. 
The most important thing is that the educator be aware of their own psychological theoretical 
understandings, including their perspective on humanity. 

Children should be encouraged to establish and maintain good relationships with other children, 
which is considered to be preventive regarding potential mental health problems. Children’s peers can also 
play important roles in scaffolding. The child is described as active, competent, inquiring, and socially 
participative. Moreover, Aksland and Sataøen (2014) believe that the child continuously constructs a story 
about him/herself, an understanding of oneself and one’s own knowledge based on one’s own experiences. 

Rønning (2013) believes that children learn thanks to a multitude of opportunities that are found in 
everyday life. She believes that learning activities are part of the content of the kindergarten, which consists, 
according to Rønning, of everything that takes place in kindergarten, including activities and the adults’ 
ways of being with the children.  

Rønning’s book presents principles for choosing learning activities. The activities are chosen based 
on an interaction between children, adults, and the ideas expressed in various plans (the framework plan, 
the annual plan, and the monthly plan). To provide information on the content of the activities, reference is 
made to the subject areas in the framework plan for the kindergarten’s content and tasks. 

The adults should be receptive to the children’s input and interests. The employees of the 
kindergarten should ensure that the children are part of what is going on in the kindergarten and that they 
stay motivated. The employees shall have the competence to implement in practice the provisions 
described in the framework plan. The employees are expected to know how to facilitate learning for children 
in kindergarten. It is recommended that staff members agree on a basic view for the whole kindergarten. 

The child is referred to as a subject. One sees the child as a “human being” and considers all 
children as co-creators and participants in a knowledge production process. Moreover, the child is 
considered as having agency in his own life and should gradually take responsibility for his own choices. 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A53 

Rønning (2013) does not write about the tools children should learn to use or what role the other children 
should have in the child’s learning.  

Gunnestad (2014) uses the word “methods” when describing learning activities and writes that 
methods may have to do with both how the teacher plans to present a topic or an activity and the means 
the child uses to acquire the knowledge about a particular topic or problem area. Gunnestad (2014) 
specifies that the child uses an approach to process or capture a problem area and make it his own. This 
means that children’s learning activities are defined as approaches that are used to acquire knowledge 
about a field. Moreover, Gunnestad (2014) believes that kindergarten has a rich range of methods that can 
be used. These include play (both facilitated and free), storytelling, dissemination, dramatization, the use 
of toys, walks, conversation, experiments, models, one’s own activity, discovery learning, and 
demonstrations. In addition, music, arts and crafts, and other esthetic activities can be both methods 
(learning activities) and content.  

Information about tools does not appear in the text. Kindergarten teachers are considered 
interactive partners for children and are responsible for didactic planning. The adults can have both an 
asymmetric and symmetric relationship with children in the learning processes. This means that the adults 
can take on a range of roles that allows both instrumental manipulation and facilitation for a real I–you 
relationship in a dialogue.  

Gunnestad (2014) believes that interaction with other children has a decisive impact on children’s 
development and considers children in general as active, inquisitive, and contact-seeking beings. The child 
should actively participate in his/her learning and acquire experience in socializing with both adults and 
other children and through experiences.  

In the book edited by Glaser et al. (2014), the authors of chapters rarely recommend specific 
teaching plans for the development of a particular type of competence or skills. As a rule, reference is made 
to the framework plan (2011), and it is recommended that kindergarten teachers shall integrate activities 
that lead to development in play, experimentation, or everyday activities. The content of the chapters does 
not enable an answer to questions about tools that children should learn to use. The authors of the chapters 
believe that the learning activities in a kindergarten should be based on play. They mention both free play, 
which is important for emotional and social development, and facilitated play with the adult as an active 
participant, which is important for motor and linguistic skills development. For linguistic development, the 
importance of dialogic reading (reading in pairs or groups after each other) and facilitated play activities are 
emphasized. Although the authors believe that skills training is essential for children to develop skills, it is 
pointed out that the training should not be imposed but proposed to the children surrounded by 
encouragement and positive attention. It is also recommended to use joint reading sessions, both in 
kindergarten and at home, to develop literacy skills. The development of numeric and other mathematics-
related skills should happen through facilitated play, everyday activities, and experimentation. 

It is emphasized that adults should play an active role in children’s development and that adults 
should facilitate and lead play, everyday activities, and experiments. Other children are considered to be 
especially important co-players when it comes to development and learning. The importance of friendship 
ties formed through participation in social interaction and different types of play is emphasized.  

Throughout most of the book, children are referred to as participating agents who will learn and 
develop through play and their own experience. It is important to point out that the asymmetry of 
relationships between the adults (subjects), who facilitate, and the children, who participate in facilitated 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A54 

activities, is not problematic. It is pointed out that a child shall participate as an equal partner, having real 
power to determine his/her own participation. 

Internal comparison of the Norwegian textbooks 

All the Norwegian textbooks highlight exercises involving interaction in everyday life as important 
activities for learning. Adults should be active, interacting partners and facilitators in children’s day-to-day 
lives. The child is referred to as an active actor (agent, subject) in their own learning. As the authors of the 
books mainly describe principles for choosing learning activities, it is impossible to draw conclusions as to 
what tools the children are supposed to learn to use.  

The differences between the contents of the books are mainly in the form of social interaction with 
the environment, such as language skills, play, and music activity and their importance for children’s 
development. There are also differences in how the other children’s role is discussed. In the book by 
Rønning (2013) there is no mention of the role of other children. We conclude that different elements of the 
sociocultural view on learning are given varying levels of emphasis in the books. Whereas Askland and 
Sataøen (2014) describe the role of adults in a straightforward and detailed way, Rønning (2013) and 
Gunnestad (2014) describe the role the adults play by pointing out their participation in determining the 
principles for choosing learning activities. Glaser et al. (2014) emphasize showing how and in what way 
different learning activities can promote children’s development. 

What authoritative discourses about children’s learning in kindergartens can be identified in 
textbooks in kindergarten teacher education in Northern Russia? 

Gogoberidze and Solnceva (2017) use the term activity when describing learning activities. 
Children’s learning activities are divided into different types based on the various forms of activity content, 
the kinds of activities that are dominant in relation to age group, and who organizes or initiates the activities. 

Activities may have different content depending on the educational area with which they are 
affiliated. Activities can be initiated and facilitated by either the educators or the children. Adult-led activities 
consist of organized educational activities and routine situations. A detailed, age-group structured overview 
of the number of educational situations per week and length of the facilitated activities is provided. Daily 
activities include free play, performing assignments and chores (e.g., covering the table), free 
communication between children, and that between children and adults. In these learning situations, 
children have their own experiences that can be used in organized educational activities. A child is also 
allowed to develop their own already-existing knowledge and skills in new situations as well as enhance 
their own independence and imagination. Among children’s own activities, play is mentioned as the 
predominant activity.  

A detailed review of tools is provided for each area of education. The child should also learn to use 
tools when learning new knowledge or new skills. These consist of being able to observe, understand what 
the adults are saying, act on the utterances that the child receives from the adult, reflect the result of 
exploratory activities in language, and collaborate with peers.  

The adult has a leading and central position in the children’s learning processes. The adult is 
described as a subject who interacts and develops with the child. The adult should be able to help the child 
to systematize and elaborate on his/her own experiences and place these within a context. The adult must 
be able to plan the educational process and the developing environment based on the needs a particular 
child has to ensure that the education process has the desired effect on the child.  



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A55 

The child needs other children to gain experience in social behavior, which means communication 
and mutual understanding with other people and on demonstrating moral skills. The child is referred to as 
a subject in his/her own activity. This means that the child has values, interests, and freedom to choose. 
The child is viewed as an independent and autonomous being.    

Galiguzova and Mesjerjakova-Zamogilnaja (2017) believe that children learn through the activities 
that are predominant for their age (i.e., discovery and play) and through interaction with other people. Play 
can include playing with objects and procedural play. Procedural play is an activity in which the child can 
act as a make-believe adult. Through this activity, the child can mirror the adult’s activity process and 
imagine the result of the activity.  

The activities that result in children’s learning can be facilitated using various methods of upbringing 
and learning. The activities that should be facilitated include language activities (activities in which an adult 
explains or talks about something); sensory activities (activities in which the child sees, hears, and tastes); 
practical activities (activities in which the children themselves do something about things); activities where 
an adult sets a goal and shows examples; and activities where an adult sets a problem objective without 
offering a solution.  

Learning how society works and the instrumental use of objects the child is familiar with are 
mentioned as predominant for this age. The most important tools the child should learn to use are cultural 
ways of exploring objects and the social world. Examples of these ways are observing, exploring, 
experimenting, solving problem situations, fantasizing, and communicating with adults and peers. 

Kindergarten teachers are supposed to observe children’s personality growth and development 
and set educational goals and methods of realization based on the child’s individual interests. Kindergarten 
teachers are partners, models for imitation, and experts in assessing the child’s skills and knowledge. 
Furthermore, it is stated that the kindergarten teacher is to have verbal interaction with the child in everyday 
contexts. The adults should get the child interested in the learning activities, too. The teacher should gain 
the child’s trust, stimulate the child to participate in activities, and expand the child’s experiences in five 
areas of education according to the Russian Federal Standard for Preschool Education. 

The child needs other children, as playing with other children has a psychotherapeutic function for 
young children. Interaction with other children is a prerequisite for the development of an adequate self-
image. The child can consider other children in the same way as objects. It is adults who help the child to 
discover objects. The child should be active in his interaction with others and in activities with objects. 

According to Mikljaeva et al. (2015), the goal behind the organization of the interaction and teaching 
for children in a kindergarten is to facilitate children’s physical, cognitive, social-communicative, ethical, and 
esthetic development. To promote physical development, it is recommended to use facilitated play. 
Cognitive development should be encouraged by organizing activities in which the child can apply their own 
knowledge, skills, and experience. Social-communicative and ethical development should be ensured by 
getting children involved in facilitated play; giving them opportunities for joint and independent work; 
introducing various forms of cultural expression (folk dance, music, movies); and excursions outdoors—in 
the micro-environment (the kindergarten itself, the surrounding streets), the meso-environment (the city, 
the region, the country), and the macro-environment (other nations, Earth as a planet, space). Esthetic 
development shall be ensured by involving children in various activities, including facilitated play; different 
types of work; teaching sessions where each child will be able to explore, use, and evaluate; the exhibition 
of children’s work; excursions; and drama and music performances with children as participants.  



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A56 

Mikljaeva et al. (2015) mention the use of tools only in connection with the use of a form or method 
of teaching and development. The tool that is mentioned the most is a toy (often dolls or toys that represent 
real objects) that the child is supposed to manipulate to demonstrate or explain something to other children. 
It is also recommended to use puppets to play a character when the child participates in a theatrical 
performance.  

Adults play an important role in children’s learning and development. The adult is responsible for 
the organization and exercise of all learning and development activities. Other children are described as 
important active agents in the relationship with the learning child (the learner). The role of the other children 
in the relationship with the learner is highlighted by the third stage of the knowledge style—self-control. It 
is recommended to encourage the children to provide feedback to each other on performance 
achievements. The other children are expected to contribute as learning subjects when they use visual and 
communicative learning methods and play. 

As a starting point, Mikljaeva et al. (2015) believe that the child should be the subject, that is, be 
able to participate in his/her own decisions regarding the activities. Both reading activities and all the 
developmental- and learning-associated activities around the child should be facilitated by adults. Great 
emphasis is placed on the role of adults both in the kindergarten and outside the kindergarten. Free play 
as a phenomenon and its role and features are not discussed. The children should be able to express 
themselves in ways they choose, but these expressions should take place within the framework determined 
by the adult.  

Turchenko (2013) presents five different approaches to early childhood pedagogy. Three out of five 
approaches allow for different levels of children’s own active participation. The first approach demands that 
children have their own time for free play that they themselves plan and participate in without adults being 
involved. In the other two approaches, it is expected that children have only limited opportunities to 
participate. The main activities promoting learning are facilitated play and organized sessions, both of which 
are led by an adult. The children are expected to actively use available toys and to be given opportunities 
to create their own objects. Otherwise, tools should be used so that children can acquire different types of 
knowledge. 

The adult plays an important role. The adult is responsible for the organization, the implementation, 
and the outcomes of children’s development and learning. At the same time, the adult is also expected to 
be a partner. These expectations are described but are not discussed in relation to one another.  

Other children also play an important role. They act both as triggers in each other’s development 
and as active, contributing agents in their own upbringing and socialization. Although the role played by 
other children is indicated, the relationship between this role and those of the adults is not elaborated on. 
The child is referred to as an object of research and as a subject in regard to the processes of upbringing, 
education, and socialization. 

Internal comparison of the Russian textbooks 

We note that the contents in the Russian textbooks are clearly structured and classified according 
to the national framework plan (curriculum) for kindergarten (Federalnyj gosudarstvennyj obrazocvatelnyj 
standart doshkolnogo obrazovanija). Gogoberidze and Solnceva (2017) and Galiguzova and Mesjerjakova-
Zamogilnaja (2017) consider children’s activities as a basis for structuring the content of learning in a 
kindergarten. In the book by Mikljaeva et al. (2015), the child’s areas of development are emphasized.  The 
main contents of the book by Turchenko (2013) entail educational approaches that should be used to 
facilitate children’s participation.  



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A57 

All these books mention all the basic elements in the concept of sociocultural learning. Learning 
activities are described as adult-facilitated activities. The tools that the children will learn to use are mainly 
linked to the acquisition of different types of knowledge. Other children play an important role in the child’s 
learning. The child is referred to as a subject in his/her own learning.  

The differences between the Russian books lie mainly in the reference to the role of toys as tools 
in children’s learning. 

External comparison of the Norwegian and Russian textbooks 

Comparisons between these two groups of books show that there are great differences between 
the books in each country. Books in both countries contain references to the government and management 
documents for kindergartner’s where the concept of learning is clearly present (Hu & Ødegaard, 2019). The 
similarities and differences between the samples indicate that there are discourses that run across 
international borders, that is, traditional (Klingle, 2016) or global (Kirova et al., 2018) pedagogical 
discourses and local and national understandings of these.  

There are many similarities between the books. The child is referred to as a subject in both samples. 
The other children are referred to as important and necessary partners in the child’s learning. Kindergarten 
teachers are referred to as active and responsible for facilitating learning activities. Reference is made to 
the national steering documents for the kindergarten whenever the content of learning activities is 
discussed. This close link to the steering documents in both samples indicates a close connection to the 
professional field of work in kindergarten.  

The differences seem to lie in the role of adults in children’s learning and the focus on the tools that 
children should master. This means that the learning situation is understood differently in the two samples. 
In Russian books, learning is understood as a process that takes place mainly thanks to adult-centered 
activities. The primary concern is what tools the kindergarten teacher will teach the child to use. Learning 
activities in the Russian textbooks are described very systematically in that each learning activity is 
described based on the importance it has for learning. In the Norwegian books, learning should be woven 
into everyday life’s routine situations, and the main focus is on the children’s learning process, while the 
specific content the children should learn is arguably less important. This conclusion is in accord with 
Børhaug et al. (2018), who point out the fact that in Norway a holistic approach to learning is practiced, 
where the pedagogical practice is largely linked with everyday situations.   

Based on Illeris’ (2012) understanding of learning, we conclude that the Russian books emphasize 
the content and the results of the learning process. The most attention is given to which tools the child 
should learn to master and which learning activities the kindergarten teachers should make provisions for. 
In the Norwegian books, the emphasis is on the interactive dimension of the learning process (the 
interaction between the kindergarten teacher and the children and among the children themselves) and 
how the kindergarten teachers should create and maintain children’s motivation for learning (what the child 
is interested in and how to sustain this interest). 

The emphasis on the kindergarten teacher’s tasks related to children’s learning and on the 
systematic organization of learning indicates that the Russian textbooks conceptualize children’s education 
as something that results from, first and foremost, teaching children rather than children’s own learning. 
Ball and Forzani (2009) define teaching as what the teacher does to cause someone to learn something. 
Educators’ teaching includes planning, implementation, and evaluation. A description of children’s 
education that more or less resembles this Russian understanding of children’s education can be found in 
only one book from the Norwegian sample, in the book by Gunnestad (2014).  



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A58 

It is interesting to note that all the Russian textbooks in the sample are textbooks in early childhood 
pedagogy. The theme “Children’s development play and learning” in the Norwegian kindergarten teacher 
education is also dominated by early childhood pedagogy. The dissimilarity we see here may also be linked 
with different understandings of pedagogy as subjects in kindergarten teacher education. It seems that 
pedagogy in the Russian textbooks is a subject primarily about teaching children in kindergarten—that is, 
more didactic oriented. In the Norwegian textbooks, it seems that pedagogy is a subject pertaining to how 
children learn and develop and how all kindergarten employees can understand, support, motivate, and 
lead the children. 

How can the findings—the concepts of learning—relate dialogically with one other? 

Our data represent two national dialogues on the concepts of learning. These national dialogues 
are authoritative discourses on the concepts of learning that the students in both countries have to relate 
to. Thus, the concepts of learning as authoritative discourses can influence students´ concepts, and, in 
some cases, may even overpower, or “kill” any inner persuasive discourses in which the students could 
possibly participate. To find out how the concepts of learning expressed in Norwegian and Russian 
textbooks relate to each other dialogically, we can distinguish similarities and differences in the two 
authoritative discourses and, thus, understand better, what students in each country have to relate to, or 
not. This knowledge, in turn, will inform the practices for developing values of diversity and pluralism, the 
practices and contents of the activities for the cross-border exchange programmes in the activities where 
students from both countries participate. 

In all the textbooks that we have reviewed, learning is described as a process in which the child is 
an active player in a supportive or contributing environment of things and other people. These ideas belong 
to the constructivist perspective on learning (Illeris, 2012). Learning in kindergarten is divided into areas 
corresponding to their categorization in the governance documents in the respective countries. A 
constructivist perspective on learning and the division of the learning process into subject, knowledge, and 
education areas can be identified as the centripetal forces in the dialogue on learning. These are forces 
that can ensure that a common understanding is established and shared in terms of the discourses on 
learning in the Russian and Norwegian textbooks. According to Bakhtin, there is’…neither a first nor a last 
word and there are no limits to the dialogical context (it extends into the boundless past and the boundless 
future) (Bakhtin, 1986:170). This means, for our study, that meanings found by students and educators in 
a textbook, can never be final once and for all. Signs, as letters and words in the textbooks, alter the 
intertextuality in the cultural place and time, but they will be altered again by the readers. Thus, the readers 
of these textbooks exercise centrifugal forces that situate this constructive perspective on learning. The 
results of this process may allow this constructive perspective to become a part of the shared meaning 
when a reader unites with the textbook and may evoke a reaction of critique and criticism and thus lead to 
the disunity with the authors of the textbook where this constructivist perspective is described. In both 
cases, there will be an alteration of the meaning, even in the case of unity as the reader always relates the 
message to their own previously acquired knowledge and meanings.   

Activities, tools, and the role of adults are the categories in which differences are most evident in 
the textbooks. These ideas can be identified as the centrifugal forces in the dialogue on learning. To us, it 
seems that the adult has an indisputable role as leader and decision-maker in the Russian textbooks, while 
the role of the adult in the Norwegian textbooks varies between being responsive to children’s initiatives 
and interests in spontaneous events and one of a leader of pedagogical activities.  To us, it seems that the 
tools in the Russian books are one of the main issues and thus they are much discussed, while in the 
Norwegian books, they hold a more peripheral position. There is a trend to prioritise the importance of the 
role of everyday activities and the importance of allowing the children to freely make decisions regarding 
these everyday activities in the Norwegian textbooks, while there is a clear classification and typology of all 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A59 

the activities in the Russian books. Both of these positions represent centripetal forces and invite the 
students to unite with their messages. If the differences of these discourses were to be addressed, their 
discussion could ensure that the dialogue between the discourses extends beyond the dialogue about both 
the constructivist perspective on learning and the division of children’s learning processes into areas of 
knowledge in kindergarten. We believe that such dialogues should be facilitated after the students are 
informed and aquired an understanding of both centrifugal and centripetal forces and their roles in the 
meaning making for a reader of a textbook. Understanding the ways of meaning making and the role of the 
centripetal and centrifugal forces becomes, thus, an important premise for cross-border dialogues between 
the students. 

The common understanding of pedagogy as a subject matter about kindergarten practices 
conveyed in the textbooks in Russian and Norwegian discourses, creates opportunities for collaboration 
between educators across national borders in the Barents region. Based on the hypothetical premise that 
textbooks influence practice and that the practice may unfold as textbooks describe, we can create 
hypothetical discussions. Educators from both countries may choose to emphasize the active role of both 
children and educators as agents of learning in the educational process. However, since ‘learning’ in the 
Norwegian textbooks is conveyed as events that take place both in everyday and formal activities and in 
the Russian textbooks as taking place in adult-led formal activities, the dialogue on these issues will 
probably result in arguments about the views on the child’s position as an agent in their own learning as 
well as views on how preschool teachers’ practices may enhance children’s learning.  It can be anticipated 
that there may appear desires to discuss autonomy of a child in their own learning versus autonomy of a 
teacher as a professional practitioner. The questions may appear of how children’s autonomy can be 
maintained in situations where learning content and results are predefined by adults and how preschool 
teachers can secure children’s organized learning when the learning content is mostly defined by the 
child/children. The contradictions between the two different understandings of autonomy and the balance 
between them in practice may become issues of discussions both within these two national discourses and 
between them. 

In the light of heteroglossia, a collaboration between educators from different countries can be 
treated as a discourse within the same context or tradition with the presence of the unifying centripetal 
forces and the centrifugal forces that aim towards disunity of the meanings. There are always differences 
and similarities between understandings of pedagogy in different countries (Bennet, 2010; Hu & Ødegaard, 
2019). There will also exist internal differences and similarities in the discourses in the different countries.  
In order for the cross-border dialogue to take place, there must also be voices within the partner countries 
that respond to the ideas that are created due to the process of cooperation. 

It may be fruitful to organize a hypothetical dialogue on the issue of understanding of learning in 
preschool settings embedded in the sociocultural theory of learning. Our comparison of the two discourses 
shows that all the basic elements of the concept of sociocultural learning are mentioned in the Russian 
textbooks. However, the issues of tools (what children should learn to use) are almost nonexistent  in the 
description of the theory in the Norwegian textbooks. This can perhaps be explained by the fact that 
sociocultural theory of learning is understood and practiced differently in two countries, which is not 
surprising and is also documented in the earlier research (Veraska & Sheridan, 2018). If such dialogue is 
organized within the context of collaboration, it may provide good opportunities to discuss the relationship 
between the elements of the concept including the relationship between the child and the contents the child 
should learn during the preschool years. 

Another tradition that may be fruitful for the development of a cross-border dialogue between 
educators is didactics. The Russian authoritative discourse defines learning situations as the situations 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A60 

where children are primarily subjects to didactics-related knowledge, while the Norwegian authoritative 
discourse defines learning situations as situations where both teaching and learning contents are related 
to the area of the general didactics as described by Alexander Von Oettingen (2017). Von Oettingen 
describes several models or directions in general didactic. Thus, the ideas described in Norwegian 
textbooks are identified as the formative theory model where questions about why and what one wants to 
teach are fundamental for answers to questions about how and by what means one wants to present the 
content. Teaching that is offered in a Norwegian preschool has to be strongly connected with the child's life 
outside, and thus teaching must be an integrated part of the child's life in a preschool. This calls for the 
priority of the knowledge about a particular child and the priority of thinking of teaching as integrated in 
everyday activities rather than considering teaching as as separate self-contained activity that is not 
necessarily connected to what happens in a particular preschool. The understanding of learning in the 
Russian authoritative discourse can be characterized as an example of the learning theory model for 
didactics. Within this model, the child's knowledge construction takes place in communication with the 
outside world in specially designed adult-led learning activities.  Thus, a dialogue about didactics’ role in 
preschool can be organized as a dialogue between different types of didactics where meaning is constantly 
negotiated. 

As we mentioned early, there is a difference between the discourse of learning to know, learning 
for school approach, and that of learning to do and to be, a Bildung approach that is popular in the Nordic 
countries. The first discourse can be understood as a discourse about teaching and education in preschool. 
The second discourse can be understood as a discourse about Building. The idea of teaching subjects in 
preschool is not foreign to the Norwegian context. The pedagogy as a scientific area in Norway has been 
recently dominated by the tradition of educational science (Brunstad et al., 2015). At the same time, there 
is opposition to this tradition. For example, Herner Sæverot (2017) believes that pedagogy with its basic 
value issues cannot be reduced to the understanding of this area suggested by the partisans of the science 
of education. Marte Eriksen (2018) also believes that the preschool pedagogy in early childhood teacher 
education should be a general subject embedded in the German Bildung tradition, rather than the science 
of education. These discourses, in other words, are based on similarities and differences between the 
German tradition of Bildung, on the one hand, and the science of education in the English-speaking world, 
on the other. It is possible to draw parallels here to a possible dialogue between Russian and Norwegian 
preschool educators where the formation theory and the learning theory of didactics in preschool are 
discussed. 

In the Russian discourse, one can observe contradictions that can render fruitful ideas for the 
dialogue in the Russian-Norwegian cooperation in the preschool area. Pedagogical practice based on the 
formation tradition at its core is also found in Russia, but most of such practices are found in higher 
education areas (Mayer & Rakhochkine, 2018). Although the current guidelines in the new standard for 
preschool education include an expectation that a preschool teacher should follow up the child's initiative 
(Minobrnauka, 2013), the pedagogical practice in most Russian preschools is strongly influenced by the 
practices based on socio-cultural theory (Veraska & Sheridan, 2018). Thus, the ideas and results of the 
dialogues that may be organized as a part of the Russian-Norwegian cooperation may become sources for 
the development of ideas in the national discourses on preschool pedagogy both in Russia and Norway. 

From the dialogical perspective, the goal in any collaboration is to maintain dialogue, and use the 
centrifugal and centripetal forces in dialogues for creating opportunities for the voices to become unique. 
In our study, we have described authoritative discourses about the concepts of learning found in the higher 
educational preschool textbooks in the northern regions of Norway and Russia. We have outlined issues in 
our findings that can be used to organize the dialogues in the area of preschool as a part of cross-border 
collaboration activities. Collaborations are always done by participants and influenced by environmental 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A61 

factors like personal history (e.g., Jones, 2017), pedagogical discourses and concepts which are traditional 
for the participants (Klingle, 2016), and participants’ values. For a collaboration to be considered successful 
from the dialogical perspective, it is important to allow all the voices to be heard. 

Conclusions 
We have analyzed a concept of learning presented in the textbooks used in preschool teacher 

education in Northern Russia and Northern Norway. This study contributes to the understanding of the 
concept of learning, one of the key concepts within the body of knowledge that can be found in the preschool 
textbooks in both countries and may be of value to those interested in the internationalization of pedagogical 
practices and the role of textbooks in the field of preschool education. We have also argued for the 
importance of cross-border dialogues between early childhood education students and teachers from both 
countries with a focus on understanding children’s development and learning. 

References 
Altbach, P. G., & Teichler, U. (2001). Internalization and exchanges in a globalized university. Journal of 

Studies in International Education, 5(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/102831530151002  

Andreassen, B.-O. (2008). Et ordinært fag i særklasse. En analyse av fagdidaktiske perspektiver i 
innføringsbøker i religionsdidaktikk (An ordinary subject in a special class. An analysis of didactic 
perspectives in introductory books in religious didactics) (Doctoral thesis). University of Tromsø, 
Tromsø. https://hdl.handle.net/10037/1570  

Andrews, R. (2010). The place of systematic reviews in educational research. British Journal of 
Educational Studies, 53(4), 399–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00303.x   

Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic Imagination - Four Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.  

Bakhtin, M. (2012). Compendium of works. Volume 3: Slovo v romane. Jazyki slovjanskih kultur. 

Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal 
of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109348479  

Bennet, J. (2010). Pedagogy in early childhood services with special reference to Nordic approaches. 
Psychological Science and Education, 3, 15–21. 
https://psyjournals.ru/files/31230/psyedu_2010_n3_Bennet.pdf                  

Bjerkestrand, M., Fiske, J., Hernes, L., Pramling Samuelsson, I., Sand, S., Simonsen, B., & Ullmann, R. 
(2015). Barnehagelærarutdanninga. Meir samanheng, betre heilskap, klarare profesjonsretting? 
(Preschool teacher education. More cohesion, better wholeness, clearer orientation towards 
profession?) Report from the Follow-up Group for Kindergarten Teacher Education to the 
Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. Report no. 2. https:// blu.hib.no/wp-
content/uploads/2015/09/Rapport-2.pdf        

Bostad, F., Brandist, C, Evensen, S Faber, H. C. (2004). Bakhtinian Perspectives on Language and 
Culture -Meaning in Language, Art and New Media. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.  

Brunstad, P.O., Reindal, S.M. & Sæverot, H. (Red.). (2015). Existence and pedagogy. A conversation 
about the task of pedagogy. University Press. 

Børhaug, K., Brennås, H. B., Fimreite, H., Havnes, A., Hornslien., Ø., Moen, K. H., Moser, T., Myrstad, A., 
Steinnes, G. S., & Bøe, M. (2018). Barnehagelærerrollen i et profesjonsperspektiv – et 
kunnskapsgrunnlag (The role of kindergarten teacher from a professional perspective – A 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A62 

knowledge base). The expert group on the role of kindergarten teacher. Norwegian Ministry of 
Education and Research.  

Galaguzova, M.A. (2018). Uchebnik kak sredstvo formirovanija nauchnyh pedagogicheskih ponjatij u 
studentov (Textbooks as a source for formation of scientific pedagogical concepts). I Ponjatijnyj 
apparat pedagogiki obrazovanija. Kollektivnaja monografija (Concepts and Terms in Pedagogy 
and Education. Collective monograph). Ministerstvo obrazovanija I nauki Rossijskoj Federacii. 
Uralskij Gosudarstvennyj Pedagogicheskij Universitet. Ekaterinburg. 

Holmgren, A. (2011). Fält, skuggfält och grensdragningsarbete: teoretiske verktyg för analys av 
läroboksforskning. (Field, shadow fields, and boundary-work: Theoretical tools for analysis of 
textbook research). Praktiske Grunde - Nordisk tidsskrift for kultur- og samfundsvidenskab, 4(1), 
17–26. 

Holquist, M. (Ed.) (1981). The dialogic imagination. Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. University of Texas 
Press.   

Holtsmark, S. G., & Mankova, P. (Eds.). (2015). Naboer i frykt og forventning. Norge og Russland 1917-
2014. (Neighbors in fear and anticipation. Norway and Russia 1917–2014). Pax Publishing House 
a/s. 

Hu, A., & Ødegaard, E. E. (2019). Play and/or learning: Dominant concepts in national curriculum 
guidelines for early childhood education in Norway, Finland, China and Hong Kong. Annual 
Review of Comparative and International Education. International Perspectives on Education and 
Society, 37, 207–224.  

Eriksen, M. (2018). Pedagogikkens betydning i barnehagen. In Østrem, S. (ed.) Barnehagen som 
samfunnsinstitusjon. Cappellen Damm Akademisk. 

Gíslason, I. (2019). Centripetal and centrifugal forces in teacher class dialogues in inquiry-based 
mathematics. Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics 
Education, Utrecht University. February 2019. Utrecht, Netherlands. hal-02435309 

Illeris, K. (2012). Learning. Gyldendal Akademisk. 

Jones, E. (2017). Problematising and reimagining the notion of “international student experience.” Studies 
in Higher Education, 42(5), 933–943. https://doi.org.10.1080/03075079.2017.1293880 

Kirova, A., Massing, C., Cleghorn, A., & Prochner, L. (2018). Complexities of insider-outsider positioning 
in a comparative study of early childhood teachers education programs. In S. M. Akpovo, M. J. 
Moran, & R. Brookshire (Eds.), Collaborative cross-cultural research methodologies in early care 
and education context (pp. 99–113). Routledge.  

Klingle, O. E. (2016). «Det er jo lek og læring, sant?» Konstruksjon av profesjonelle identiteter og kritiske 
standpunkt. (“It’s play and learning, right?” Construction of professional identities and critical 
stances). Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk, 2, 36–52. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/ntpk.v2.210  

Knight, J. (2013). A model for the regionalization of higher education: The role and contribution of tuning. 
Tuning Journal for Higher Education, 1(1), 105–125.  

Kukarenko, N. & Zashikhina, I. (2017). Internalization the Russian Way: Modenization of the Higher 
Education System in Russia. In Sundet, M., Forstorp, P-A. & Örtenblad, A. (eds.), Higher 
Education in the High North. Academic Exchanges between Norway and Russia. Springer 
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56832-4 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A63 

Meyer, M.M. & Rakhkochkine, A. (2018). Wolfgang Klafki’s concept of ‘Didaktik’ and its reception in 
Russia. European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 17(1), 17–36. DOI: 
10.1177/1474904117718757 

Mirskij, E. (2004). Nauka kak socialnyj institutt (Vitenskap som sosialt institutt). I Vyshee obrazovanie v 
Rossii (Høgre utdanning i Russland), 8, 89-108. http://www.vovr.ru/arhiv2000-04.html  

Minobrnauka (2013). Føderal standard for statlig førskoleutdanning. (FGOS Federalnyj gosudarstvennyj 
obrazocvatelnyj standart doshkolnogo obrazovanija).  

Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (NMER). (2017). Kultur for kvalitet i høyere utdanning 
(Quality culture in higher education). Report to the Storting no. 16 2016-2017. Norwegian Ministry 
of Education and Research  

Ongstad, S. (2004). Bakhtin’s triadic epistemology and ideologies of dialogism. In F. Bogstad, C. 
Brandist, L. S. Evensen, & H. C. Faber (Eds.), Bakhtian perspectives on language and culture. 
Meaning in language, art and new media (pp. 66–88). Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. 

Phillips, D. (2006). Comparative education: Method. Research in Comparative and International 
Education, 1(4), 304–319. DOI: 10.2304/rcie.2006.1.4.304  

Säljö, R. (2016). Læring – en introduksjon til perspektiver og metaforer. (Learning – An introduction to 
perspectives and metaphors). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. 

Sataøen, S., & Fossøy, I. (2019). Valg of Studielitteratur i barnehagelærarutdanninga [Selection of 
syllabus literature in kindergarten teacher education]. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 103(2–3), 83–
95. 

Schuman, Sh. (2002). Authorizing meaning in The Merchant of Venice. Text and Performance Quarterly, 
22(1), 47-62. DOI: 10.1080/10462930216603 

Sæverot, H. (2017). Pedagogikk er en handlingsvitenskap. In Sæverot, H. & Werler, T.C. (ed.). 
Pedagogikkens spark. Kunnskapsformer i pedagogikkvitenskap. Gyldendal Akademisk.  

UHR Teacher Education. (2018). Nasjonale retningslinjer for barnehagelærerutdanning (National 
guidelines for kindergarten teacher education).  

UNESCO (2016). Global Education Monitor Report – Education for People and Planet. Creating 
Sustainable Futures for all. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 
Paris: UNESCO publishing.  

Veraksa, N. & Sheridan, S. (2018). Vygotsky’s Theory in Early Shildhood Education and Research. 
Russiand and Western Values. Routledge. 

Von Oettingen, A. (2017). Almen didaktik eller kunsten at undervise. In Sæverot, H. & Werler, T.C. (ed.). 
Pedagogikkens spark. Kunnskapsformer i pedagogikkvitenskap. Gyldendal Akademisk. 

  

 

 

 

 



Dialogue about “learning” across the Northern Norway-Russia border 
Elena Merzliakova, Mikhail Gradovski, Elin Erikson Ødegaard 

 
 

Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal | http://dpj.pitt.edu 
DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2022.416  |  Vol. 10 (2022) 
 

A64 

 

 
 

New articles in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 United States License. 
 
 
 
 

This journal is published by Pitt Open Library Publishing. 
.