Special Issue: Bildung-Psychology: Theory and practice of use inspired basic research

1. Introduction

This special issue consists of eight papers addressing specific aspects of Bildung-Psychology. The concept of Bildung-Psychology was developed by Christiane Spiel and her colleagues to offer a theoretical perspective and a structural model to stimulate use inspired basic research in the field of education and learning. Bildung-Psychology combines ideas from developmental and educational psychology to describe educational processes over the whole educational career among individuals and has a strong focus on lifelong learning. The concept systematically classifies psychological actions in the field of education and learning and deals with questions like, e.g.,: What is lifelong learning? How can competencies for lifelong learning be fostered throughout the life span? Which measures are needed to sustainably implement evidence-based innovations in educational systems?

In the following, we will present the most important principles of Bildung-Psychology, and describe the emergence of this new concept in a chronological order.

Initially, Spiel and Reimann (2005a) published the concept of Bildung-Psychology in the journal Psychologische Rundschau, the official journal of the German association of psychology. In this discussion paper, Spiel and Reimann (2005a) presented four arguments why they decided to develop the new concept of Bildung-Psychology: (1) The term ‘Bildung’ which has no precise equivalent in English, was chosen because the term was well accepted in science as well as in society in the German speaking countries, encompassed the broad area of education and learning, but had implications beyond educational psychology. (2) The internally perceived achievements and potentials of psychology in the educational field were not visible enough in society. (3) The profile of educational psychology was considered as ‘vague’. (4) Previous structural approaches within educational psychology were perceived as failed. Based on these arguments, Spiel and Reimann (2005a) outlined the importance and additional benefit of the new concept of Bildung-Psychology and introduced the structural model of Bildung-Psychology for the first time (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Structural model of Bildung-Psychology.

Bildung defines education and learning on both a formative and a substantive level. On the formative level, Bildung is understood as a product as well as a process. Bildung as a product refers to the characteristics of a person which are desirable from a normative perspective. Bildung as a process focuses on the development of these desirable traits. The substantive level of Bildung deals with the question which characteristics of a person who has acquired some Bildung are really desirable (cp. Spiel, Reimann, Wagner, & Schober, 2008). Spiel and Reimann (2005a) argue that over its history, the meaning of Bildung has often changed. The most prominent person associated with the term ‘Bildung’ is Wilhelm von Humboldt, who advanced Bildung as the basis for a program of education. Current debates on the meaning of Bildung are strongly influenced by the context in which the concept is used. Therefore, the meaning of Bildung as product is dynamic and always embedded in a specific historical context.

According to Spiel and Reimann (2005a), Bildung-Psychology is concerned with all educational processes contributing to the development of individuals, as well as all conditions and measures potentially influencing these processes, i.e., to initiate, maintain, support, and/or optimize them. Hence, Bildung-Psychology is systematically structured and has a strong focus on lifelong learning. Furthermore, Bildung-Psychology understands itself neither as a pure basic research discipline nor as a pure applied research discipline, but covers research activities from basic research to evidence-based practice. Thus, Bildung-Psychology is comparable to the use-inspired research approach by Stokes (1997; cp. Spiel, Schober, Wagner, Reimann, & Strohmeier, 2011), and classifies the most important topics and activities in the broad field of education and learning within a structural model (see Figure 1).

The structural model of Bildung-Psychology introduced by Spiel and Reimann (2005a) contains three dimensions: (1) the Bildung-career, (2) several functional areas, and (3) different levels of activities. The innovation of this model is that all conditions and measures which can influence educational processes are systematically linked.

Bildung-Career. The main assumption of Bildung-Psychology is that every individual passes through a chronological Bildung-career, which neither begins nor ends with traditional schooling. Consequently, the entire life-span is the explicitly declared object of Bildung-Psychology. Accordingly, Spiel and Reimann (2005a) see an analogy to the life-span perspective of developmental psychology (e.g., Baltes, Lindenberger, & Staudinger, 2006). In addition, the dimension Bildung-career is linked to the concept of lifelong learning. Continuous learning in terms of lifelong learning has been accorded a central significance in international educational policy for several years (e.g., European Commission, 2001; cp. Schober et al., 2007), and is defined as ‘all purposeful learning activity, undertaken on an ongoing basis with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competence’ (Commission of the European Communities, 2000, p. 3). Lifelong learning operates as link between theories and practice, and therefore makes a contribution to achieve evidence-based practice.

Functional Areas. For the promotion of evidence-based practice the functional areas of Bildung-Psychology are highly relevant. Spiel and Reimann (2005a) defined five functional areas, namely, research, counselling, prevention, intervention, and controlling (evaluation) as equitable fields of Bildung-Psychology.

Activity Levels. The above described functions of Bildung-Psychology are accomplished on various activity levels, which are oriented in accordance with the ecological model of developmental environments presented by Bronfenbrenner (1979) and Bronfenbrenner and Morris (2006). Spiel and Reimann (2005a) take into account the micro-level, meso-level, and macro-level of the Bronfenbrenner model. The micro-level is the immediate environment in which the individual is living; particularly relevant here are individual learning conditions e.g., those associated with scholastic instruction. The meso-level is the institutional level; e.g., the institutions an individual attends over the course of his/her educational career. The macro-level refers to the entire system which is at work during education; political guidelines and conditions which are legally binding are significant here. In sum, Spiel and Reimann (2005a) emphasize that a common feature to all three structural dimensions is that their subject matter is not isolated from that of the other two.

The presented concept of Bildung-Psychology resulted in an intensive discussion with heterogeneous comments and reactions within the German psychological community (e.g., Greve, 2006; Lang, 2005; Leutner, 2005; Renkl, 2005; Silbereisen, 2005; Spiel & Reimann, 2005b). The representative of the professional association of psychology commented the new concept very positively (Lang, 2005). He found that the concept of Bildung-Psychology was very suitable to support the contribution of psychology to the challenging societal processes and the increasing needs in the educational field. Also, he liked that the message of the concept was very plausibly communicable to politicians and citizens. He also prognosticated a high political and societal acceptance of the concept. In contrast, representatives of the discipline within educational psychology criticized the concept very much. Renkl (2005) argued that the term ‘Bildung’ was not primarily linked with psychology, but rather with educational science, sociology or economy. He especially criticized that the meso- and marco-level of the model were concerned with the education system or educational politics, and not with the core competencies of educational psychologists.

In 2008, a paper with the title ‘Bildung-Psychology: The substance and structure of an emerging discipline’ was published by Spiel and her colleagues. Aim of this paper was to introduce the concept of Bildung-Psychology to the international scientific community.

In 2010, the first textbook of Bildung-Psychology was published by Spiel, Schober, Wagner, and Reimann in german. The innovation of this book is the systematic structure. The book, which addresses researchers, teachers, students of psychology and related disciplines, as well as practitioners in the field of Bildung-Psychology, is designed along the three dimensions of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1). Section 1 includes seven chapters giving an overview about all segments of the Bildung-career each with two examples of use-inspired research approaches; Section 2 gives an overview about the five functional areas, and Section 3 summarizes the three different levels of activities each with two typical research examples. Today, the book is used as teaching and learning material in many Bachelor’s and Master’s degree programmes in the German speaking countries.

In the meantime, further contributions to Bildung-Psychology were published in various journals and edited books, each of these contributions discusses special aspects of Bildung-Psychology (e.g., Spiel, 2012; Spiel et al., 2011; Spiel, Schober, Wagner, & Reimann, 2014), and at the university of Mannheim the first professorship of Bildung-Psychology was established.

Now, the focus of this special issue is on both theories and practice of use inspired basic research in the field of Bildung-Psychology. Each of the following eight papers addresses specific cells respectively dimensions of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology.

2. Overview of contributions to the special issue

The aim of this special issue is to illustrate the potential of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology for developmental and educational research as well as significant research activities in this field. The eight contributions were selected because each of them demonstrates important features of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology. Hence, in the following the findings of each paper will be summarized, and the papers will be classified according to the dimensions of the structural model (see Figure 1). The special issue contains three theoretical and five empirical papers. While the theoretical papers discuss important topics of Bildung-Psychology, the five empirical papers cover a broad spectrum of the Bildung-career. The studies were conducted in different European countries – Germany, Finland, Austria, Cyprus, and The Netherlands –, and refer to various age-specific educational phases in the Bildung-career, from primary school to tertiary school (see Figure 1).

In the first paper, Schober, Brandt, Kollmayer, and Spiel discuss the specific potential of the concept of Bildung-Psychology to succeed in overcoming the theory-practice problem of universities in the field of education. The relevance of this problem is explained by elaborating the important role of universities in transferring evidence-based knowledge from educational research to decision-makers and practitioners. There is an emerging expectation for universities to explicitly take responsibility for demands of the society and to address social, economic and societal challenges – the so called ‘Third Mission’. The Third Mission has two key priorities: (1) targeted use and transfer of scientific knowledge to help resolve diverse societal challenges, and (2) transfer of technologies and innovations in the form of cooperations with public and private enterprises. The authors argue that Bildung-Psychology is of high relevance for this mission, also beyond its specific research topics. Bildung-Psychology delivers a helpful integrative perspective that can be considered as one desideratum for the development of a systematic ‘Third Mission Strategy’. Therefore, Bildung-Psychology can be considered also as model for other disciplines.

To illustrate this argumentation, two examples from the field of Bildung-Psychology are presented, which combine the domain specific approach and the general mission. One example contains an innovative and evidence-based teaching concept in higher education – Vienna E-Lecturing, and the training program REFLECT – Gender Competence through Reflective Coeducation – is an example of a responsible research activity in the field of Bildung-Psychology.

The core areas of this theoretical paper are related to the cell ‘Tertiary school’ (Dimension: Bildung-career) of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the second paper, Noam and Malti introduce a new conceptual framework to understand and enhance child and adolescent social-emotional development (SED). SED was defined as an umbrella term that describes individuals’ various interpersonal and intrapersonal skills in the domain of social and emotional competencies, and entails (1) an individual's understanding of emotional experiences in the self and others, (2) the ability to express emotions in an age-appropriate way, and (3) emotion regulation capacities. The authors argue that while much research on SED has been conducted and various evidence-based programs on social-emotional learning have been widely implemented, there are still significant gaps in the research-practice connection. Based on this conceptualization, core dimensions of SED (action orientation, emotion control, assertiveness, sympathy, trust, self-reflection, optimism) were defined and a tool through which children, teachers, and caregivers are able to report on dimensions of SED was developed. This tool is called the Holistic Student Assessment and it generates individual, classroom, and whole school profiles of SED. Furthermore, it is illustrated how these profiles can be used to inform intervention planning and to implement developmentally sensitive strategies to promote SED and to intervene in the case of psychopathology among children and youth. Finally, the authors discuss how their developmental and holistic approach to better understand and assess SED relates to Bildung-Psychology. They argue that cultivating human minds involves not only thoughts and abstract reflection but that an equal emphasis on educating emotions, natural instincts, and regulatory capacities in everyday social interactions is needed. Therefore, SED describes processes that contribute to the development of Bildung of an individual over the lifespan, leading to an educated individual and ultimately to a mature self.

The core areas of this theoretical paper are related to the cell ‘Research’ (Dimension: Functional areas) of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the third paper, Fixsen, Schultes, and Blase focus on implementation science. The authors point out similarities between implementation frameworks and the Bildung-Psychology model. The integrated view offered by Bildung-Psychology regarding lifelong learning as influenced by factors on the micro-, meso-, and macro-level (Spiel et al., 2008) corresponds well to the findings from the developing field of implementation science. In line with lifelong learning, implementation is a growing science built on research and evaluation of practices that unfold over years and decades. This theoretical paper illustrates the relationship between implementation science and Bildung-Psychology by presenting a cascading logic model that guides implementation activities on the micro-, meso- and macro-level. The authors provide a historical overview of the emergence of implementation science based on experiences with the implementation of a concrete intervention (Teaching-Family Model), which was developed over time into a systematic implementation approach covering different system levels (Teaching-Family Sites). The Teaching-Family Model was developed as a family-style, group home (residential) treatment program for teenagers referred from the delinquency system. Although the treatment was already effective in the pilot phase, the implementation to produce sustainable success took years to evolve. Based on this example, the authors summarize the importance of implementation science for putting effective interventions into practice with the following formula: effective innovations x effective implementation x enabling contexts = socially significant outcomes. The authors also present the cascading logic model which includes activities on the micro-, meso-, and macro-level. The paper demonstrates that the cascading logic model makes an important contribution to a sustainable use of implementation research in the field of Bildung-Psychology.

The core areas of this theoretical paper are related to the cell ‘Intervention’ (Dimension: Functional areas) of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the fourth paper, Wolter and Hannover focuses on the role of gender stereotypes to better understand gender differences in academic self-concept and performance outcomes in mathematics and reading among primary school students. In line with basic assumptions of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology, this study incorporates gender stereotypes as a relevant factor in explaining educational trajectories with respect to gender differences in subject domains in the early Bildung-career. The authors assume that to the extent that girls and boys ascribe gendered attributes to themselves (gender role self-concept), their academic self-concepts and performances are consistent with gender stereotypes half a year later, at the end of the first grade in primary school. The authors measured gender role self-concept, and analysed its impact on children's academic self-concepts, performance in mathematics, and reading half a year later. As expected, girls ascribed more feminine and boys more masculine-stereotyped behaviours to themselves. Furthermore, the more feminine children described themselves the better was their reading performance half a year later, while no indirect effects, mediated via the academic self-concept, appeared. Also, the more masculine children described themselves, the higher were their mathematics related ability self-concepts half a year later. However, maths achievements were unrelated to any of the other variables. The authors conclude that gender stereotypes need to be targeted already in pre-school as they predict ability self-concepts already in the first year of primary school. Thus, in line with basic assumptions of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology and its focus on lifelong learning, preschool years are an important developmental period to prevent ‘gendered’ Bildung-careers. More studies are needed to better understand how gender role self-concepts of young children impact the development of gendered academic self-concepts and skills in adolescence and adulthood.

This empirical paper can be placed in the cell ‘Primary school/Research/Microlevel’ of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the fifth paper, Salmela-Aro, Muotka, Alho, Hakkarainen, and Lonka examine school burnout and engagement profiles and investigate whether these profiles differ depending on the socio-digital participation among pre-adolescents. Following a person-oriented approach, latent profile analysis revealed five groups: Engaged students, who formed the majority (50%); stressed students, who reported high exhaustion and high inadequacy as a student (4%); students with high scores on all the components of school burnout, particularly cynicism, but also on exhaustion and inadequacy as a student (burnout group; 5%); students, whose cynicism was directed in particular towards studying and school (moderate in cynicism; 15%); bored students, whose feelings of cynicism were nevertheless elevated (emerging cynicism; 26%). Overall, the results revealed that almost half of the pre-adolescents (46%) felt some degree of cynicism towards school. On the one hand, engaged students used socio-digital technologies less intensively than the others. On the other hand, the students that were high and moderately high on cynicism reported using socio-digital technologies for educational purposes more intensively than the engaged students. Moreover, the students that were high and moderately high on cynicism reported that they would be more academically engaged and hardworking at school if they were able to make more use of information and communication technologies at school. These results indicate that one way to promote the engagement of cynical students might be to offer them the possibility to make greater use of socio-digital technologies at school. Finally, the authors discuss the implications of the study for Bildung-Psychology. They argue that socio-digital technology is one important tool for pre-adolescents to develop Bildung and to acquire knowledge acquisition practices.

This empirical paper can be placed in the cell ‘Secondary school/ Research/Microlevel’ of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the sixth paper, Lüftenegger, Finsterwald, Klug, Bergsmann, van de Schoot, Schober, and Wagner report evaluation results regarding the effectiveness of the TALK programme, an intervention to promote lifelong learning among adolescents. The concept of lifelong learning is in the core of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology as it comprises the whole Bildung-career (see Figure 1). The main goal of the TALK programme is to develop secondary school pupils’ competencies for lifelong learning by optimizing teaching and enhancing competencies among teachers within a three semester teacher training. In this paper, the authors investigate whether the already proven gain in teacher competencies through the TALK programme also led to corresponding, perceptual changes in teaching and pupils’ competencies for lifelong learning. To define lifelong learning two core factors are important: (1) an enduring motivation and appreciation for learning and education, and (2) those competencies that are needed to successfully realize this motivation through concrete learning activities (e.g., self-regulated learning). In order to evaluate the effectiveness of TALK, a pretest-posttest-follow up design including both training and control groups was utilized. Multivariate multilevel growth curve analyses showed the benefit in fostering lifelong learning competencies in schools on several levels. Effects were observed for pupils’ perceptions of their classroom instruction (i.e., positive failure climate; a classroom climate more supportive of self-regulated-learning) and their individual motivation. The authors discuss the challenges to develop, implement and systematically evaluate a teacher training programme with the aim to foster pupils’ competencies in different schools and classrooms. In addition, the evaluation study of the theoretically grounded intervention programme TALK is a best-practice example how to consider standards of evidence in the field of Bildung-Psychology.

This empirical paper can be placed in the cells ‘Secondary school/Research, Intervention, Prevention, Counselling/Micro-, Mesolevel’ of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the seventh paper, Solomontis-Kountouri, Gradinger, Yanagida, and Strohmeier describe the implementation of the ViSC program in Cyprus. The ViSC program is a socio-ecological anti-bullying program which was developed, implemented and evaluated in Austria. To tackle bullying on different levels in the educational system, a cascaded train-the-trainer model has been realized. Nine permanent staff members of the Cypriot Ministry of Education were trained as multipliers by researchers. These multipliers trained teachers in three Cypriot schools and teachers trained their students. To investigate the effectiveness of the program, a quasi-experimental longitudinal study was conducted. Data from adolescents of three intervention and three control schools was collected via self-assessments at pre-test, post-test and follow-up. To investigate the program effectiveness regarding the reduction of victimization and aggressive behaviour, multilevel growth models were applied (time points at level 1, individuals at level 2, and classes at level 3). The analyses revealed that the program effects differed depending on the grade level of the students. Overall, the program was more effective for grade 7 compared to grade 8 students. In grade 8, bullying and victimization increased more in the intervention group compared with the control group at time 2, but also steeper decreased at time 3 indicating a sensitizing effect of the program. The authors point out that evidence-based bullying prevention in schools is a key area of Bildung-Psychology. The implementation of the ViSC program enables sustainable knowledge transfer between research and practice for the benefit of the well-being of Cypriot students.

This empirical paper can be placed in the cells ‘Secondary school/Research, Intervention, Prevention, Counselling/Micro-, Mesolevel’ of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

In the eighth paper, Koops, van den Kerkhof, Ostermeier, and van de Schoot investigate the opinions and attitudes of young adults studying at Utrecht University (The Netherlands) regarding their main study motivations. The authors contrast two prototypical orientations: The ‘McKinsey’ orientation and the ‘von Humbold’ orientation. While the main motivation of the ‘McKinsey’ oriented students is the job market, Bildung is the most important goal for the ‘von Humbold’ oriented students. For this purpose, a new measure was developed. Students were asked about their opinion regarding the relevance of science, the aims of universities, the student’s own general academic attitudes, and finally whether the participant is planning to make the choice for a research master or a professional master. Those who chose a research master were finally asked why they made this choice. The authors hypothesized to find a two-component structure of the measure referring to von Humboldt component (Bildung), and the McKinsey component (job market). They expected that students who already made the choice for special programmes that offer broader intellectual formation will have higher scores on the von Humboldt component than on the McKinsey component, while in contrast their counterparts show the opposite pattern. Finally, they compared students who made the choice for applied and practical work and therefore choose a professional oriented master with students who choose a research master. They hypothesized that those students who make the choice for a research master will score higher on the von Humboldt orientation than on the McKinsey orientation, while the opposite was expected for academic master students. Results demonstrate that the two motivations are indeed important for university students. Students who pursue a research master’s degree score higher on scientific and lower on economical motives than their counterparts. Opinions on the aim of the university also differed in the expected direction: students pursuing a research master scored lower on the factor of vocational education than their counterparts. Finally, for the questions on general opinions, those students who choose a research master score higher on the von Humboldt component and lower on the McKinsey component than the students who pursue an academic master.

This empirical paper can be placed in the cell ‘Tertiary school/Research/Microlevel’ of the structural model of Bildung-Psychology (see Figure 1).

3. Conclusion and outlook

In sum, this special issue shows the presence, importance and potential of Bildung-Psychology and its structural model. Bildung-Psychology incorporates theoretical ideas of developmental psychology by focusing on life-long learning (Bildung-career), five functional areas, and three activity levels. The eight papers which are presented in this special issue represent important examples of Bildung-Psychology, three with a theoretical focus, and five with an empirical one. All papers use clearly defined and integrative theoretical frameworks and have an explicit relation to the concept of Bildung-Psychology.

We hope that this special issue stimulates future studies in this field. In our view, the structural model of Bildung-Psychology demonstrates interfaces to other disciplines like, developmental psychology, life span sciences or educational science and identify possible inter- and multidisciplinary research approaches along the whole Bildung-career in different functional areas and activity levels.

But this special issue delivers not only an overview about activities in the field of Bildung-Psychology, it is also a ‘tribute’ to Christian Spiel as the main founder of Bildung-Psychology. Since many years, Christiane Spiel has conducted research and has worked as university teacher on a very high international level at the University of Vienna. Beyond that, she is holding many advisory capacities at the interface between science and society. She has been intensively promoting both the evidence-based practice and transfer of scientific knowledge to help resolve various societal challenges. Bildung-Psychology became Christiane Spiel’s mission, for her Bildung-Psychology is more than the field she works in, Bildung-Psychology also comprises her basic attitudes as person and scientist, Bildung-Psychology is the Third Mission of universities in its pure form.

Petra Wagner
Department of Social Work, School of Medical Engineering and Applied Social Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Linz, Austria
[email protected]
Dagmar Strohmeier
Department of Social Work, School of Medical Engineering and Applied Social Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Linz, Austria
[email protected]
Barbara Schober
Faculty of Psychology, Department of Applied Psychology: Work, Education and Economy, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
[email protected]