4- social pedagogy

8/2/2019 4- Social Pedagogy

1/14

ideas thinkers practice

social pedagogy

The term social pedagogy has been used to describe a range of work straddling

social work and education. Often more holistic and group-oriented than dominant

forms of social work and schooling, social pedagogy (sozial pdagogik) has its

roots in German progressive education - and is sometimes translated as

'community education' or 'education for sociality'. Here we explore its history and

current status.

contents: introduction the pedagogue in ancient greece diestersweg, evolution and educational action tohelp the poor schleiermacher and societal development nartop, community and social pedagogy national

socialism and social pedagogy social pedagogy and social work social pedagogy and social education

social pedagogy and social group work social pedagogy and community learning and development some

issues conclusion further reading and references how to cite this piece

The term 'social pedagogy' has

been used in countries such as

Germany, Holland and Hungary

to embrace the activities of

youth workers, residential or

day care workers (with children

or adults), work with offenders,

and play and occupational

therapists (Galuske 2009). It

has also been used to describe

aspects of church work and

some community development activity. In a few European countries the notion ofanimation

is utilized to cover a similar arena of practice. With the growth of more integrated children's

services in Britain, there has been an interest in social pedagogy as a means of making sense

of the professional development of staff in these areas of state service (Edwards and Hatch

2003; Cameron 2004; DfES 2005). There also has been some usage of the term from those

seeking to explore classroom group work (e.g. Blatchford et. al. 2003).

As an idea sozial pdagogik first started being used around the middle of the nineteenth

century in Germany as a way of describing alternatives to the dominant models of schooling.

However, by the second half of the twentieth century social pedagogy became increasingly

associated with social work and notions ofsocial education in a number of European

countries. Within the traditions that emerged there has been a concern with the well-being

or happiness of the person, and with what might described as a holistic and educationalapproach. This has included an interest in social groups - and how they might be worked

with (see social groupwork). In this piece we explore the historical development of the

concept, and some of the issues that inform its usage.


2/14

The pedagogue in Ancient Greece

To fully appreciate some of the debates around social pedagogy and the role of pedagogues

it is worth going back to the distinction made between teachers and pedagogues in in ancient

Greece. We know that people had 'jobs' as specialist educators. For example, Achilles had a

tutor, Phoenix, who had the task of teaching him to be 'both a speaker of words and a doer of

deeds' (reported in the ninth book of theIliad). Some centuries later, in Athenian society,

there were schools (perhaps based on earlier Babylonian models).

Pedagogues were family attendants (usually slaves) whose duties were to supervise, and be

with, the young sons of the house. Chosen for their reliability (and sometimes their inability

to undertake heavier duties), pedagogues took the boys to the gym and the school (and sat

with them in the classroom). As E. B. Castle (1961: 63) has commented, this attendance of

the pedagogue (paidagogos) on the boys was not purely protective.

Thepaidagogos was also expected to supervise his young charge's manners in

the home and in the street and even in school, where he was in attendance as a

symbol of parental authority throughout the school day. This moral supervisionby thepaidagogos must be stressed. He was more important than the

schoolmaster, because the latter only taught a boy his letters, but the

paidagogos taught him how to behave, a much more important matter in the

eyes of his parents. He was, moreover, even if a slave, a member of the

household, in touch with its ways and with the father's authority and views. The

schoolmaster had no such close contact with his pupils. (Castle 1961: 63-4)

The low status of both teacher and pedagogue meant that they were frequently disrespected

by the boys - and the hovering presence of the pedagogue was hardly likely to endear itself

(op. cit.).

Diestersweg, evolution and educational action to help the poor

By the sixteenth century the notion of pedagogy had come to be understood as referring to

the activities of tutors and school teachers. The notion of social pedagogy (sozial

pdagogik) is said to have been coined in 1844 by Karl Mager (1810-1858) (he was editor of

thePdogische Revue from 1840-48). He used sozial pdagogik as an alternative to

'Collectivpdagogik' - and in contrast to 'Individualpdagogik' (van Ghent 1994: 95).

However, it was the progressive Prussian educational thinker Friedrich Diesterweg (1790 -

1866) (whom Mager drew upon), who brought the idea to a broader audience. Diesterweg

was exercised by the separation of theory and practice within teaching and is sometimes

credited with originating the maxim 'learn to do by doing' (see Kliebard 1987: 37).

Friedrich Diesterweg looked to Rousseau, Pestalozziand, later, Froebel in his educational

writing (but was also well aware of classical Greek thought). He believed that people were

able to develop, to respect and care for others, and to work for the good of the community

(see Gnther 1994: 296 - 297). He came to emphasise the idea of people carrying out their

own activity, and of the fundamental importance of democracy, especially following the 1848

Revolution. Evolution was his central organizing idea:

The educational principle of evolution demands in the educational field: respect

for human nature and of the individual; its stimulation to full development,


3/14

expression, activity and initiative; natural, hence joyful, experience of life;

stimulation to develop the senses, strengthening the body, to explore, to be

lucid and to discover things; providing the minds with suitable nourishment;

constant progress. It forbids: arbitrary assumptions and manipulations of

human nature; any encouragement to act blindly and mechanically; any kind of

drill; rote learning; uniformity; force-feeding with subject matter that is not

understood etc. (quoted in Gnther 1994: 297)

Diestersweg was keen to reform schooling - to take it away from the influence of the church

and politics, and to turn it into a force for social change. He believed that general education

should be open to everyone: 'First educate men, before worrying about their professional

training or class, [because] the proletarian and the peasant should both be educated to

become human beings'. He went on to argue for social pedagogy: 'educational action by

which one aims to help the poor in society' (1850, quoted in Cannan et al 1992: 73). Van

Ghent comments, that as far as the poor were concerned, he did not distinguish between

adolescents and adults, whereas such a distinction was necessary in the educational

doctrines that were applied to the bourgeoisie. 'The threat of socio-economic struggles was

apparently considered to be far more dangerous than the conflicts between generations'

(van Ghent 1994: 96).

Schleiermacher and societal development

What began to emerge was a conception of education concerned with societal (social)

development. Here the earlier contribution of Friedrich Ernest Schleiermacher, the noted

theologian and philosopher (1768-1834) was of some significance. He went 'beyond the

pedagogical principles of "natural self-development" to

embrace an "education for community" (Gemeinschaft)'

(Lorenz 1994: 91). 'Social' in this sense could relate to the

aim of the educational endeavour - the creation of

community - and to the site for the process - in society.

Examining Schleiermacher's thinking, Lorenz says the

following:

One of his theories is that individual intentions are

already directed (by their nature as human intentions)

towards sociability, towards universal social goals. Theother is that only democracy allows the individual will to form. Public life needs

to correspond to and reflect what is pedagogically, psychologically necessary for

the healthy growth of the individual. The conditions for good education are

those of a sound democracy; pedagogical and political processes condition each

other. (op cit. 91-92)

This linking of pedagogy with community and democracy has remained a key theme - and

can be seen in the work of later writers such as Deweyand Freire. However, it did not

instantly recommend itself to those charged with responsibility for developing German

schooling!

Natorp, community and social pedagogy


4/14

As the nineteenth century progressed, debates and insights around the idea of community

developed (Dollinger 2006). For example, Tnnies (1855-1936) published Gemeinschaft and

Gessellschaft(Community and Society) in 1887. There community was defined as 'the

permanent and real form of living together, while society is only transitory and apparent,

and therefore community should be seen as a living organism and society as a mechanical

aggregate and artefact'. It was this idea of community, van Ghent argues, that became fixed

in one of the most influential versions of social pedagogy - that proposed by the prominentGerman philosopher Paul Natorp (1854-1924) (See Kim 2003 for a discussion of his

philosophical work). According to him atomization had made Germany sick - what was

needed was a strong sense of community (Gemeinschaft), education, and a fight to close the

gap between rich and poor. Such education was to take place in three environments: 'from

the educating community of the household, through the national and uniform school, into

the free self-education of adults of all social backgrounds' (Marburger 1979 quoted in van

Ghent 1994: 97).

Paul Natorp may have been a progressive but such a vision of social pedagogy can, in the

hands of a paternalistic or totalitarian state, serve as a new form of social engineering and

adjustment (see Lorenz 1994). It was to take such a turn under National Socialism

National socialism and social pedagogy

In a narrow and exclusive form, social pedagogy can become 'education' that directs the

individual will towards the 'higher level of a communal will'. For example Ernst Krieck

argued for Nationalpolitische Erziehung (national-political education - 'a totalitarian kind of

education', based on irrationalism (van Ghent 1994: 100). As Sunker and Otto (1997) have

shown when the pivotal notion of 'Volk community' (Volksgemeinschaft) is introduced into

the notion of social pedagogy there is considerable danger. They argue (following Franz

Neumann), that the totalitarian state, theFhrer principle, and the ideology of the Volk

community are intertwined. National socialist rule involved putting total, authoritarian

organization in the place of pluralism; and the atomization of the individual. This latter

element entailed breaking down the influence of groupings such as the family, the church

and unions and replacing them with an identity to the Volk community and to its

guardians/leaders. In the Volk community social contradictions and conflicts are overcome.

Character would be formed as part of a larger whole and one's first duty was to the Volk. A

pernicious twist comes in the politics of inclusion and exclusion. The Volk was one of 'blood

and soil'. Those of other 'races', those with disabilities, those who sought to question were

not fit to be members.

In Germany it was young people who were to become the particular object of such

'education' (see, for example, Becker 1946, Harvey 1993). Youth organizations such as the

Bund Deutscher Mdel(League of German Girls) involved a strict separation of the adult

world and that of youth. They assigned girls to youth and this allowed for their intervention

in the 'modernization' of female life and in countering the influence of family (see Reese in

Sunker and Otto 1997). 'Because the state here penetrated by means of racist legislation into

the most intimate spheres, in the area ofthe family, education, reproduction and

the body, it displaced the personal

bonds that were still dominant there


5/14

and replaced them with new societal

authorities and state violence' (Reese

1997: 114). One of the particular forms

utilized as an instrument of social

discipline was the camp. Dudek (in

Sunker and Otto 1997) has examined

some of the key practices and ideas. For example, how the idea of team and service could beused to bind the behaviour of the individual and the camp community into the collective

Volk community; and how 'comradeship' strengthened group identification. In a similar

fashion Schiedeck and Stahlman have focused on the totalizing experience of education

camps. (See organized camps).

Social pedagogy and social work

Unsurprisingly, there was a reaction to this understanding of social pedagogy during

post-war reconstruction. The fear that the educational socialization apparently implied

within social pedagogy could be directed to the needs of the nation at the cost of individualsand of significant groups hung heavy. Moves towards more individual, problem-based work

seemed a safer option than the mass and group work of the then recent past. However,

there was a limited counterbalance through the influence of writers such as Lewin (1948;

1951) on American 're-education' efforts. He made a strong case for the use of small groups

in the resolution of conflicts and the promotion of democracy. It was a theme also taken up

by somewhat more pessimistically byLindeman (who also advised the British army

education service in Germany - see Stewart 1987: 212-214). Thus, as the German social

welfare system evolved, social pedagogy did not take quite the course that Diestersweg

envisaged. Rather than informing the shape of schooling it became seen as the 'third' area ofwelfare beside the family and school. It can be represented as:

a perspective, including social action which aims to promote human welfare

through child-rearing and education practices; and to prevent or ease social

problems by providing people with the means to manage their own lives, and

make changes in their circumstances. (Cannan et al 1992: 73-74)

Conceived in this way it includes a wide range of practice including youth projects, crches

and nurseries, day-care centres, parent-education, work with offenders and some areas of

church work. The linkage with social problems and crisis work situates social pedagogyalongside social work. Social work in Germany was divided into two major branches:

Sozialarbeit(casework/management) andSozial Pdagogik. The former can be seen as a

'general social work service to families and other selected groups' (Cannan et al 1992: 73).

Workers in both areas undertook a common first foundation year of training (Sozial Wegen)

and then specialized in the different approaches. Around half of those qualified as social

workers in Germany trained as social pedagogues.

Social pedagogy and social education

Many of the ideas that informed debates around social pedagogy in the late nineteenthcentury began to influence developments in American educational thought. From the late

nineteenth century on there was a US journal and community of practice centred around

social education (see, for example, Scott 1908). Dewey, through the work of Hebart - and his


6/14

knowledge of Rousseau, Froebel and Pestalozzi - sought to develop what could be described

as child-centred theory. But he added to this a powerful dimension (and one that connects

with the concerns of many early champions of social pedagogy) - that the experience

required for learning was participation in community life (community was defined by Dewey

in terms of sharing in a common life). Thus, his classroom was to be a community in itself - a

place where there are group activities - where people cooperate. Teachers were to join in

with the activities - to take part in a common endeavour. A critical point here is that Deweysaw the environment as social. People learn through interacting with a social environment.

This then links across to his - and other contemporary American writers - concern for

democracy. People like Mary Parker Follett and Eduard Lindeman studied German

developments. We can see a number of similarities with the concerns identified in Follett's

notion of training 'for the new democracy' (see la vie associative).

These ideas also aroused considerable interest amongst UK educators - especially those

operating within what might be called the informal education tradition. They were reflected

in some of the key post-war developments around community centres and associations,community work, community education andyouth work. Perhaps the most significant shift

in terms of practice was the reconceptualization of youth work as social education during the

second half of the 1960s (see, in particular, the work of Davies and Gibson 1967). For a

significant period 'social education' became the dominant way of describing both the content

and the process of youth work. However, it was subject to some critique and gradually

became less prominent - especially as 'informal education' came back into use and gained a

stronger theoretical base (see Smith 1988).

The notion of social education (as being concerned with the relationship we have with

ourselves, others and the world) also became an aspect of debates around schooling. Social

and personal education, then social, personal and health education were part of the

curriculum of many schools. Significantly, in terms of social work and care work, there was a

trend in the 1970s of re-labelling centres for adults with special education needs as social

education centres. Subsequently, other labels and concerns came to predominate -

especially as schooling became more centralized and focused on achieving national

curriculum and other state objectives. More recently in the UK with a growing interest in

happiness and well-being, and appreciation of the problems of the individualistic and

outcome turn that both schooling and social welfare have taken, there appears to be some

movement towards the 'social' (see, for example, Layard and Dunn 2009).

Social pedagogy and social groupwork

The existence of a longstanding discourse around youth work and work with young people,

and interest in social education help to explain why social pedagogy didn't make much

headway as the social professions developed in north America and Britain and Ireland.

Another factor was the growing adoption of ways of thinking and practising drawn from

social group work. As with some key traditions of social pedagogy there was in social group

work concern with mutuality, self-help, and democracy. This was joined with a growing

appreciation ofgroup process and how more facilitative forms of intervention may happen.

Early proponents of social group work such as Grace Coyle drew heavily on the work of John

Dewey - and others concerned with social education. They were also often strongly based in


7/14

civil society(working in social and university settlements, the YWCA and YMCA and youth

organizations). The setting for their activities was associational. Furthermore, a number of

the key writers and researchers in the group work field had been forced to flee from

National Socialism and this made its mark. Kurt Lewin (1948; 1951), for example, had an

appreciation of some of the philosophical themes that could be found running through

German traditions of social pedagogy but placed a strong emphasis upon democratic

endeavour. Similarly, Gisela Konopka (1949; 1954; 1963) infused her work with compassionand a concern for justice. She warned about an over-emphasis upon technique. In Britain

Josephine Klein (1956; 1961) had a strong grasp of the social setting of group activity and

looked to the way in which decisions could be made in an informed way. However, as was

the case with social pedagogy in Germany after the Second World War, group work in north

America changed 'its emphasis from social action and preparation of group members for

social responsibility to problems of individual adjustment (Reid 1981: 154). Yet, within

group work, as Allan Brown (1992: 8) has pointed out, while many workers are purely

concerned to enhance individual functioning, others still look beyond helping the individual

with a problem. Groupwork can emphasize action and influence as well as reaction and

adaption (op. cit.). It can, thus, be argued that:

groupwork provides a context in which individuals help each other; it is a

method of helping groups as well as helping individuals; and it can enable

individuals and groups to influence and change personal, group, organizational

and community problems. (Brown 1992: 8. Emphasis in the original)

A strong strand of 'social goals group work' remains (see, for example, Twelvetress 2008).

More recently the notion of social pedagogy has begun to be used as a way of

conceptualizing group activity in classrooms (see Blatchford et. al2003). However, in this

literature thus far there has been little appreciation of social pedagogy as a longstanding

tradition of thinking and practice.

Social pedagogy and community learning and development

In some respects the tradition of practice within English-speaking countries that has the

strongest resemblance to social pedagogy (at least to those strands that retain an emphasis

on community and sociality) is Scottish. The concern in Scotland from the early 1970s to

develop a comprehensive approach to first, community education, and more recently

community learning and development allowed for important innovations in practice. The

Scottish Executive has argued that community learning and development 'is a way of

listening and of working with people'. The paper continued:

We define this as informal learning and social development work with individuals and

groups in their communities. The aim of this work is to strengthen communities by

improving people's knowledge, skills and confidence, organisational ability and resources.

Community learning and development makes an important contribution towards promoting

lifelong learning, social inclusion and active citizenship. (Scottish Executive 2003)

There has been some tension between seeing community as the 'place' where learning and

development happens, and community as the aim of intervention. There has also been

resistance. Youth organizations have argued that young people have been marginalized, and


8/14

community and voluntary groups have seen the framework applied strongly to the

advantage of state-defined objectives and state-run services. This said, the community

education, and then the community learning and development, framework have created

potential for coherent practice.

Some issues

The history of social pedagogy highlights a number of issues and questions - especiallylinked into its usage within National Socialism. Here though we want to focus on three

areas:

Social pedagogy as a domesticating ideology.

The pedagogue as an alternative way of constructing a professional framework and

identity;

The problem of pedagogy

Social pedagogy - domesticating or emancipatory?

Lorenz poses a a question of lasting significance:

Is social pedagogy essentially the embodiment of dominant societal interests

which regard all educational projects, schools, kindergarten or adult education,

as a way of taking its values to all sections of the population and of exercising

more effective social control; or is social pedagogy the critical conscience of

pedagogy, the thorn in the flesh of official agenda, an emancipatory programme

for self-directed learning processes inside and outside the education system

geared towards the transformation of society? (Lorenz 1994: 93)

This question has special significance given the nature of the ideologies that informed the

activities of National Socialists in Germany during the 1930s and the first half of the 1940s.

As we have already seen social pedagogy became 'education' that directed the individual will

towards the 'higher level of a communal will'. The issue also emerges in the experiences of a

number of societies struggling to throw off the shackles of colonialism such as in the Indian

social education programmes of the late 1940s (see Steele and Taylor 1994) and has been a

feature of some of the educational debates around nationalism. The basic issue here is

whether the vision of community or society entailed is pluralistic and democratic, or narrowand totalitarian (or even elitist). The former is concerned with education so that all may

share in a common life (as Dewey put it); the latter with advantaging a particular group.

When social pedagogy becomes detached from democratic pluralism it can quickly

deteriorate into a pernicious form. The same could be said of many other aspects of social

policy, but the particular use that social pedagogy was able to be put under National

Socialism highlights our responsibility to take special care.

Professional identity - the pedagogue as an alternative paradigm

Some reading this will be resistant to the notion that they could be considered as socialworkers, others that they might be described as educators. Others, perhaps still used to the

ways of discussing social work that are dominant in the UK, might be surprised at the extent

to which education could be considered as part of the work. As Cannan et. al. (1992: 139)


9/14

commented, within Britain there has been a long and political battle between two schools of

activity - social work and community work.

This distinction exists in other European countries, but there is not quite the

same separate philosophical or political rhetoric. Many people who work in

community and social action programmes... in Britain, describe themselves as

community workers or perhaps just project workers. There would be less

shyness about using the term 'social worker' in many other European countries.

(ibid.)

What is also of interest in the German and Danish traditions is the readiness of significant

numbers of workers to describe themselves as pedagogues. Pedagogy and casework appeal

to different theoretical traditions - but both provide insights to the other. Furthermore, and

of significance in relation to the usage of the notion of informal education (as, say against

youth work) in the UK, is the way in which the notion of social pedagogy similarly

transcends particular organizational settings.

Social pedagogy defines the task and the process of all 'social activity' from

theoretical positions beyond any distinct institutional setting and instrumental

interest, and thereby safeguards the autonomy of the profession and appeals to

the reflective and communicative abilities of the worker as the key to

competence. Social work, by contrast, tends to take the diversity of social

services and agency settings as the starting point for the search for appropriate

theories, a search which used to be guided by the desire to find a general,

unifying theory of social work but has since given way to the more pragmatic

and often eclectic use of theory elements from neighbouring disciplines. (Lorenz

1994: 97)

Just how autonomous practitioners can be within state-funded agencies is a matter of some

debate - especially where they are in settings that are dominated by contrasting or

antagonistic ideologies. However, Lorenz does have a point. The taking of the notion of

'pedagogy' into the way in which you name yourself makes a direct appeal to a particular

body of theory and practice - and a particular paradigm.

It is this paradigm - especially the holistic view of the child that runs through social

pedagogy, and the pedagogy tradition that can be found in Denmark - that has appealed to anumber of commentators trying to make sense of developing the children's workforce in

Britain. In Scotland in particular, there has been a significant discussion around the

introduction of a 'new profession' - the Scottish pedagogue (see, for example, Children in

Scotland 2008). This profession could embrace the activities of classroom assistants,

residential care workers, family support workers, family and children centre workers, youth

workers and so on. Browen Cohen (2008) and others have argued that pedagogy should be

the central basis for workforce reform.

Rather oddly, very little attention in this has been given to the approaches and

understandings already generated within the Scottish tradition of community education and

community learning and development (see above). Perhaps one of the reasons for this has

been the readiness on the part of proponents to abandon the notion of the 'social' in the

interest of using the pedagogue paradigm to embrace a wide range of existing occupational


10/14

groups. Even where the 'social' is retained within recent British discussion however, a rather

narrow appreciation has been dominant. This has largely been the result of the location of

the debate within the largely individualistic and deficit frameworks of contemporary social

work and social care. What all of this loses is an orientation toward a pedagogy for sociality -

one that involves engagement with associational life, civic society, and local social systems.

The problem of pedagogyA further set of issues and complications arises from the the usage of the term 'pedagogy' to

describe the process. Here three particular issues arise. First, there is the problem of at

whom the process is aimed. Etymologically, pedagogy is derived from the Greek paidagge

meaning literally, 'to lead the child'. In common usage it is often to describe the principles

and practice of teaching children. Much of the work that 'social pedagogy' has been used to

describe has been with children and young people. While writers like Paulo Freire (1972)

have used the notion of pedagogy to refer to working with adults, there are others who argue

that it is inextricably linked to teaching children. For example, Malcolm Knowles (1970) was

convinced that adults learned differently to children - and that this provided the basis for adistinctive field of enquiry. He, thus, set andragogy - the art and science' of helping adults

learn - against pedagogy. We might wish to question the assertion that the way in which

children and adults learn is significantly different - but what does tend to be true is that

educators tend to approach them differently and employ contrasting strategies.

Second, there are questions around the extent to which the notion of pedagogy has been

formed by the context in which it is predominantly sited - the school. When we use the term

are we importing assumptions and practices that we may not intend? Discussion of

pedagogy is invariably linked to notions such as curriculum, instruction and subject. As such

it may well be useful for thinking about aspects of what informal educators and animateurs

do, but is much less helpful for exploring conversational and convivial forms of practice.

Third, and linked to the above, as Street and Street (1991: 163) highlighted with respect to

Freire, there is the danger of the 'pedagogization' or 'schooling' of everyday life:

When we participate in the language of an institution, whether as speakers,

listeners, writers, or readers, we become positioned by that language; in that

moment of assent, myriad relationships of power, authority, status are implied

and reaffirmed. At the heart of this language in contemporary society, there is a

relentless commitment to instruction.

Our language use as workers, and the way in which we define space can act to constrain

exploration and to subordinate people.

Conclusion

The notion of social pedagogy offers an interesting set of paradigms for informal educators -

especially where it highlights education for sociality. The social education and social group

work traditions carry within them some overlapping concerns, but it is the Scottish

community education and then community learning and development tradition which

provides the closest approximation to the spirit of social pedagogy. The way that 'social

pedagogy' and 'pedagogue' has been used within the UK (from a social care perspective) has

tended to strip away its democratic and communal significance reducing it to a pedagogy for


11/14

case management. However, there is always the possibility of appealing to the traditions

from which it springs - and in the end, nothing is really added without recognizing the

significance of group work and community organization and development.

Further reading

There is a marked shortage of English-language explorations of social pedagogy and

animation. However, the situation is slowly changing - and here we are particularly indebtedto the work of Walter Lorenz and Crescy Cannan.

Aluffi-Pentini, A. and Lorenz, W. (eds.) (1996)Anti-Racist Work with Young People.

European experiences and approaches, Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing. 208 + x

pages. Collection of material which explores racism and the nation state; oppositional and

relational identities; pedagogical principles and approaches plus case material from Britain,

Germany, and the Netherlands. Particularly welcome as the editors contribute substantial

chapters concerning pedagogy.

Cannan, C., Berry, L. and Lyons, K. (1992)Social Work and Europe, London: Macmillan. 181+ xii pages. Includes some discussion of social pedagogy, animation etc. Has chapters on

social Europe; social policies and social trends in Europe; social workers, organizations and

the state; branches and themes of social work (concentrates on Germany and France);

French social work; participation; and social action.

Cannan, C. and Warren, C. (eds.) (1997)Social Action with Children and Families. A

community development approach to child and family welfare, London: Routledge. 225 +

xiv pages. This book looks beyond the usual narrow confines of British social work texts -

looking at more community oriented forms of engagement (especially family centres) and

drawing on traditions of practice from the UK, Germany and France. There is some

recognition of the potential of more educative approaches and a concern with local networks

and institutions.

Lorenz, W. (1994)Social Work in a Changing Europe, London: Routledge. 206 + xii pages.

Excellent discussion of social work in Europe in the twentieth century - especially strong on

animation and social pedagogy. Chapters on social work within different welfare regimes;

ideological positions; social work Fascism and democratic reconstruction; social work and

social movements; social work , multiculturalism and anti-racist practice; and emerging

issues.

Sunker, H. and Otto, H-U. (eds.) (1997)Education and Fascism. Political identity and

social education in Nazi Germany, London: Taylor and Francis. 180 + viii pages. Excellent

collection of papers that explore the use of social pedagogy (pedagogy oriented toward 'folk

community') to develop an ideology sympathetic to the social framework and programmes of

the Nazis. Chapters explore the context; identity formation and social practice; work camps;

correctional education; emancipation or social incorporation - the experience of girls and

young women; why social workers adopted the new order; social work as social education;

the quest for democratic education.

Other references

Becker, H. (1946) German Youth: Bond or free?London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and


12/14

Co.

Bellersen, H. (1928)Die Sozialpdagogik Paul Natorps im Lichte der christlichen

Weltanschauung. Paderborn.

Blatchford, P., Kutnick, P., Baines, E. and Galton, M. (2003) 'Toward a social pedagogy of

classroom group work',International Journal of Educational Research 39: 153172.

Brown, A. (1992) Groupwork. London: Heinemann.

Cameron, C. and Boddy, J. (2005) With Heart, Head and Hands. Community Care, 19th

25th May 2005, pp 36-37.

Cameron, C. (2004) Social Pedagogy and Care: Danish and German practice in young

people's residential care,Journal of Social Work. Vol 4, no 2, pp 133 151.

Castle, E. B. (1961)Ancient Education and Today. Harmondsworth: Pelican.

Children in Scotland (2008) Working it out: Developing the children's sector workforce.

Edinburgh: Children in Scotland.

Cohen, B. (2008) 'Introducting "The Scottish Pedagogue"' in Children in Scotland Working

it out: Developing the children's sector workforce. Edinburgh: Children in Scotland.

Davies, B. and Gibson, A. (1967) The Social Education of the Adolescent, London: London

University Press.

Department for Education and Skills (2005) Childrens Workforce Strategy. A strategy to

build a world-class workforce for children and young people, London: Department for

Education and Skills. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/5958-DfES-ECM.pdf

Dewey, J. (1916)Democracy and Education. An introduction to the philosophy of education

(1966 edn.), New York: Free Press.

Dollinger, B. (2006)Die Pdagogik der Sozailen Frage. (Sozial-)pdagogische theorie vom beginn ders

19. jahrhunderts bis zum ende der Weimarer Republik. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag fr Sozialwissenschaften.

Edwards, L and Hatch, B. (2003)Passing Time: a report about young people and

communities, London: Institute of Public Policy Research. Key findings are available in the

informal education archives: http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts

/ippr_passing_time.htm; full report: http://www.ippr.org/publications/files

/PassingTimefinalreport.pdf

Follett, M. P. (1918) The New State. Group organization the solution of popular

government (3rd impression [1920] with introduction by Lord Haldane), London:

Longmans Green.

Freire, P. (1972)Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

van Ghent, B. (1994) 'The invention of Dutch andragogy: The role of Octavia Hill and Paul

Natorp' in S. Marriott and B. J. Hake (eds.) Cultural and Interculteral Experiences in

European Adult Education. Essays on popular higher education since 1890, Leeds:

University of Leeds.


13/14

Galuske, Michael (2009)Methoden der Sozialen Arbeit: Eine Einfhrung. Auflage: Juventa.

Gunn, G. (1992) Thinking Across the American Grain. Ideology, intellect and the new

pragmatism, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gnther, K-H. (1994) 'Friedrich Adolph Wilhelm Diesterweg' in Z. Morsy (ed.) Thinkers on

Education, Paris: UNESCO.

Harvey, E. (1993) Youth and the Welfare State in Weimar Germany, Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Kim, A. (2003) 'Paul Natorp',Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natorp/ . Accessed January 19, 2009].

Klein, J. (1956) The Study of Groups. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Klein, J. (1961) Working with groups : the social psychology of discussion and decision.

London: Hutchinson.

Knowles, M. S. (1970) The Modern Practice of Adult Education. Andragogy versus

pedagogy, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall/Cambridge.

Konopka, G. (1949). Therapeutic Group Work with Children. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press.

Konopka, G. (1954). Group Work in the Institution - A Modern Challenge. New York:

Association Press.

Konopka. G. (1963).Social Group Work: A Helping Process. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,

NT.

Layard, R. and Dunn, J. (2009)A Good Childhood: Searching for Values in a Competitive

Age. London: Penguin.

Lewin, K. (1948)Resolving Social Conflicts. Selected papers on group dynamics, New York:

Harper and Row.

Lewin, K. (1951)Field Theory in Social Science, New York: Harper and Row.

Linton, D. S. (1991) 'Who has the youth has the future' The campaign to save young

workers in imperial Germany, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Natorp, P. (1899)Sozialpdagogik. Theorie der Willensbildung auf der Grundlage der

Gemeinschaft. Stuttgart: Frommann [1922 edn].

Natorp, P. (1907) Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Sozialpdagogik. Stuttgart.

Otto, H-U. and Thiersch, H. (2005)Handbuch Sozialarbeit / Sozialpdagogik (Gebundene

Ausgabe). Munchen: Reinhardt.

Petrie, P. (2002) Social Pedagogy: An historical account of care and education as social

control, in Brannen, J. and Moss, P. (eds.)Rethinking Childrens Care, Buckingham: Open

University Press.

Reid, K. E. (1981)From Character Building to Social Treatment. The history of the use of


14/14

groups in social work, Westport, Connecticut.

Scottish Executive (2003) Working and learning together to build stronger communities.

Working draft Community Learning and Development Guidance, Edinburgh: Scottish

Executive. Available in the informal education archives: http://www.infed.org/archives

/gov_uk/working_together.htm.

Smith, M. (1988)Developing Youth Work. Informal education, mutual aid and popularpractice, Milton: Keynes: Open University Press.

Steele, T. and Taylor, R. (1994)Learning Independence. A political outline of Indian adult

education, Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education.

Stewart, D. S. (1987)Adult Learning in America. Eduard Lindeman and his agenda for

lifelong education, Malabar, Florida: Krieger.

Twelvetrees, A. (2008) Community Work. London: Macmillan/Palgrave.

Acknowledgements: The picture of children playing with a parachute is reproduced withthe permission of All Saints Youth Project (All Rights reserved). The illustration of Friedrich

Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher is believed to be in the public domain and was sourced from the

Wikipedia Commons. The photograph of a group of Hitler Youth erecting a tent is taken

from the German Federal Archive http://www.bild.bundesarchiv.de/archives/barchpic

/search/?search%5Bform%5D%5BSIGNATUR%5D=Bild+146-2004-0034and believed to

be in the public domain (it has been placed in the Wikipedia Commons).

How to cite this piece: Smith, M. K. (2009) 'Social pedagogy' in the encyclopaedia of

informal education, [http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-socped.htm].

Mark K. Smith 1999, 2007, 2009

infedis a not-for-profit si te [about us] [disclaimer] provided by the YMCA George Williams College. Give us

feedback; write for us. Check ourcopyrightnotice when copying. Join us on FacebookandTwitter.

Hosting by MemsetDedicated Servers [CarbonNeutral].

4- social pedagogy

Documents