Theoretical and practical knowledge in social pedagogy: levels and agents of the pedagogical knowledge production

ABSTRACT

This article will answer two questions: What are the characteristics of knowledge applied and produced within the framework of social pedagogy? And how are theory and practice articulated in the production and application of social pedagogical knowledge? To this end, the article first presents some of the different types of knowledge existing in the framework of the social sciences and the characteristics that define them. Following that, an analysis is provided of how theory and practice are related to one another in the application and creation of (social) pedagogical knowledge, and then a proposal is made to define the three levels in this process, which I have called: (I) Research; (2) Integration; and (3) Relationship. The next section analyses how, when and where said social pedagogical knowledge is produced and applied at each of these three levels, and by whom, and it ends with some conclusions.

KEYWORDS:

• Pedagogical knowledge
• social pedagogy
• social education
• social work
• theory
• practice

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. Reflecting the current situation in Spain, in this text we will differentiate between Social Pedagogy as an interdisciplinary matrix of knowledge and Social Education, the latter being the concrete profession that embodies the former. The professions of Social Pedagogy in other European countries are social pedagogue and social worker.

2. Úcar (2013, p. 9) stated: I take this concept from Lahire, who notes that instead of cause and effect, some philosophers prefer to speak of ‘reciprocal disposition partners’ even to refer to physical realities. For instance, ‘when salt dissolves in water, salt and water are reciprocal partners’ (Crane, 1996, p. 9) (2004, p. 83).

3. One might argue that this is difficult in socio-educational intervention with young children or with people with mental health problems, for example. Elster argues that paternalism is appropriate only when freedom to choose is likely to be severely self-destructive and especially when it also harms others (Elster, 1990, p. 64). Nussbaum, for her part, has pointed out that, in general terms, paternalistic treatment is appropriate if the individual’s capacity to choose and autonomy are compromised (Nussbaum, 2007, p. 369).

4. This second level of pedagogical knowledge can be produced individually or in groups.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Xavier Úcar

Xavier Úcar works at the Departament de Teories de l’Educació i Pedagogia Social, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. He does research in Social Pedagogy and Social Education; Community Education and Sociocultural Animation Programmes; Educational and Pedagogical Theory; and Youth Empowerment. Co-director of the Collection of books about ‘Community Action and Social-Educative Action’ of Graó Publishers (2006-2013). Chair of ‘Coordinadora per l’Animació Sociocultural de Catalunya’ (CASC_CAT) (2009- 2014). Chair of Iberoamerican Society of Social Pedagogy (SIPS) (2013-2019). He has written more than 100 publications including books, book chapters and journal articles. Latest publications: trilogy of books called ‘Pedagogías de lo social’ [Pedagogies of the social] (2016) in UOC Publishing and ‘working with young people. A social pedagogy perspective from Europe and Latin America’ edited with P. Soler & A. Planas. Oxford University Press, 2020

(http://uab.academia.edu/XavierUcar) (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Xavier_Ucar)