Social pedagogy and social group work

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 of group 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 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 endeavor. Similarly, Gisela Konopka (1949; 1954; 1963) infused her work with compassion and 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. Group work 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. al 2003). 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, organizational 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 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.

Список використаних джерел

1.Cannan, C., Berry, L. and Lyons, K. (1992) Social Work and Europe, London: Macmillan p.181

2.Smith, M. K. (2009) 'Social pedagogy' in the encyclopedia of informal education [http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-socped.htm]

3.Hämäläinen, J. (2003). The Concept of Social Pedagogy in the Field of Social Work, Journal of Social Work, 3(1), 69–80.

4.Social Pedagogic Thinkers http://www.socialpedagogy.co.uk/links1.htm

5.Oxtoby, K. (2009) How does Social Pedagogy work on the continent, and what are the barriers to its use in the UK. Lessons from Europe on Pedagogy. Available from: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/03/18/111007/social-pedagogy-inpractice.html