Sociální pedagogika | Social Education 57

Volume 4, Issue 1, pp. 57–71, April 2016

ISSN 1805-8825 | doi:10.7441/soced.2016.04.01.04

Czech version/Česká verze

The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work

Blahoslav Kraus^1

Stanislava Hoferková^2

Contacts to authors

1,2 University of Hradec Králové,

Faculty of Education,

Rokitanského 62,

500 03 Hradec Králové

blahoslav.kraus@uhk.cz

stanislava.hoferkova@uhk.cz

Kontakty na autory

1,2 Univerzita Hradec Králové,

Pedagogická fakulta,

Rokitanského 62,

500 03 Hradec Králové

blahoslav.kraus@uhk.cz

stanislava.hoferkova@uhk.cz

Copyright © 2016 by authors

and publisher TBU in Zlín.

This work is licensed under the

Creative Commons Attribution

International License (CC BY).

Abstract: The article analyses the development of the relationship

between social work and social pedagogy at the end of the 20th

century in the Czech Republic and compares this relationship to the

one in neighbouring countries (Germany, England, France,

Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Slovakia,

Russia, Lithuania). The article further deals with various concepts

of this relationship (including identification, differentiation,

and convergent principle). It also compares the paradigms of social

pedagogy and social work (autonomy, similarities and differences

mainly in epistemological terms). Series of paradigms appear in

both social work and social pedagogy during their development.

A prevailing tendency towards the multi-paradigmatism can be

seen. Furthermore, the article discusses the differences in

professional aspirations within both fields and the number of job

opportunities for the fields graduates. A conclusion of the article is

dedicated to the professional career within social pedagogy

and social work regarding the real life situation in both fields.

Keywords: social pedagogy, social work, development

of paradigms, pedagogization, social education

Ke vztahu sociální pedagogiky a sociální práce

Abstrakt: Cílem studie je identifikování konvergentních

a divergentních prvků sociální práce a sociální pedagogiky

prostřednictvím obsahové analýzy a komparace. Výzkumný soubor

tvoří vědecké a odborné texty slovensky, česky, německy nebo

anglicky píšících autorů, s důrazem na definování obou disciplín

a priorizaci slovenské a české jazykové oblasti. Ve studii

identifikujme konvergentní a divergentní prvky sociální práce

a sociální pedagogiky jako dvou jedinečných disciplín a profesí,

přikláníme se k názoru, že sociální pedagogika je teoretičtější

a všeobecnější, zatímco sociální práce je praktičtější a vědou více

aplikovanou, avšak pro obě disciplíny je důležitá intenzivní

spolupráce usilující předně o prevenci sociálně patologických jevů

ve společnosti a vedoucí k zdravému fyzickému, psychickému

a sociálnímu vývoji jedince.

Klíčová slova: sociální pedagogika, sociální práce, vývoj, paradigma,

pedagogizace, sociální výchova

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 58

1 Genesis and concepts of social work and social pedagogy

Concepts of social work and social pedagogy vary regarding the genesis of each field. Both disciplines

have special status within the system of science disciplines in the Czech Republic. Even though social

pedagogy has longer tradition (more like a way of theoretical thinking than a science discipline) it

gained fundamental position as well as social work after the year 1990. Both disciplines have

undergone interesting development since then. Common phenomenon of both fields is their still

increasing professionalisation, increasing importance from the theoretical and practical point of

view, and an interest in their study.

Some roots of social work can be found during the period of First Republic in connection to the figure

of Masaryková. However, the social work did not exist as a science discipline and its development

started after the year 1990, it was conducted at sociological workplaces within the Anglo-American

concept which distances itself from the social pedagogy. To this can be added that pedagogy is not

taught anywhere in the Czech Republic as a part of social work. Association of Educators in social

work does not even include social pedagogy in a minimum standard study plane.

An initial discussion regarding the legitimacy of social work as a scientific discipline resulted in an

opinion that social work has defined itself as an individual, integrated science discipline (separate

workplaces at universities are taken as evidence of that fact). Social work undergone longer-term and

more extensive development in western countries. In the broadest sense it is generally defined as a

scientific field engaging in activities that prevent or solve the problems of individuals and groups,

rising from the conflict between the needs of an individual and social institutions, with the intention

of improving quality of life. In real life it is a realisation of social policy. Social work enters the social

policy when the needs of citizens are not adequately met.

In that context it mainly provides these functions:

a) Curative – social work removes barriers, dysfunctions, and their results from life of an

individual that prevent his or her optimal development.

b) Stimulatory – social work secures a harmonic relationship of an individual and a society.

The state of social pedagogy (its roots go back to G. A. Lindner) must be described as chaotic mainly

in the first years after the velvet revolution (see Kraus, 1996). At the beginning the term “social

pedagogy” was used to describe whole methodological approach to pedagogy in its broad sense, as

well as the individual discipline that was (before the revolution) called educational theory. Nowadays

the term social pedagogy is clearly defined as an individual scientific discipline, which has strongly

multidisciplinary and integrating character.

Social pedagogy focuses on the everyday life of the individual, analyses his or her life situations and

creates such changes of social environment so as to help to optimize a personality development, and

minimize the discrepancy between an individual and a society. Emphasised is socio-educational help

for vulnerable groups of children and youth, and educational work with marginal groups. Main theme

of the whole field is a development of social creativity and an activation of everyone’s individual

power. It also focuses on a development of individual’s healthy lifestyle regarding his or her

individual abilities (Kraus, 2014).

In any case, we accept the broader concept of social pedagogy, according to which is this discipline

focused not only on problems of pathological character, marginal groups, on parts of populations

that are at risks of their development, and on people with potentially deviant behaviour, but also,

primarily, on the whole population in terms of creating a harmony between the needs of an

individual and a society, in terms of creating an optimal way of life in a given society.

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 59

Basic functions of social pedagogy are:

- Preventive (to minimize all threats to optimal social development and to prevent deviant

behaviour).

- Compensational (to compensate all disadvantages, handicaps, and to correct behaviour

deviations).

In Germany both disciplines have many years of tradition even though the origin of every discipline

can be found in different historical period. Whereas social pedagogy and social pedagogical work can

be traced to the middle of nineteen century, the concept of social work is forming after the Second

World War. Further development has, mainly in recent years, strongly integrative character. The

coordination board, lately working in Germany on ensuring comparability of education programs

across the federation, is recommending to replace the existing dualism (two titles are used

Sozialpadagogik/Sozialarbeit) by one title Soziale Arbeit which is more in accordance with the Anglo-

American concept of “Social Work.” This concept is related to the overall status of pedagogy as such

in those countries.

According to the Huppert and Schinzler (1995), activities of a social nature relate to both fields and

boundaries are drawn artificially. As Wagner declares, social work and social pedagogy have

homogeneous professional paradigm, and the question is, weather it means a unity of both

disciplines or maintaining their own autonomy (including the fact that social pedagogy is viewed as

being more academical discipline than social work). Wagner advises to maintain some autonomy of

both disciplines even at the price of certain dualism (Wagner, 1998). Schilling believes that even

though both fields had common historical roots, in the 20th century they had evolved into relatively

independent fields, and its current trend is towards convergence (Schilling, 1999).

In Switzerland there is a similar view on social pedagogy and social work. “Although in real life

practice the fields of social work and social pedagogy are increasingly overlapping, in the theoretical

studies separate approaches are still applied. In the near future, however, an integration is assumed”

(Hochstrasser, 1991, p. 21).

In other western countries social work has usually longer and grater tradition than social pedagogy.

In English speaking countries the socio-pedagogical issues, and theoretical issues regarding education

in general are being dealt with in terms of sociology (or psychology), and therefore the term social

pedagogy is rarely to be seen. Recently is the situation changing and social pedagogy is being

discussed. A proof of this is the book by Camerona and Mosse (2011) “Social Pedagogy and Working

with Children and Young People” or the journal “International Journal of Social Pedagogy,” which is

being published since 2012 and aims to support a discussion about social pedagogy in English

speaking countries (International Journal of Social Pedagogy, 2006). The current state of both

disciplines is described in the third part of this paper.

Different situation is in Poland. Here the field of social work started to develop from the discipline of

social pedagogy, which has a longer tradition in Poland. Social pedagogy was seen as methodological

and theoretical base, and therefore, the founder of pedagogy Radlinská viewed the social work as a

branch of social pedagogy, other branches being: educational provident, cultural educational work,

and educational health care (Pilch & Lepalczyk, 1995). Social work is seen as a practical activity for

helping individuals and families that got into difficult situation in life with the aim of their full

participation in society. It is recently developing as an independent science discipline regardless the

social pedagogy (Brągiel, 2001).

In Slovakia, the development was similar. It was given mainly by the fact that the field of social work

was forming mostly at pedagogical work places (departments and faculties), namely in Banská

Bystrica, Prešov, Bratislava. Consequently, it also formed the view on the relationship of both

disciplines. Further development of both disciplines lead to convergence (Hroncová, Hudecová, &

Matulayová, 2001). Social work has gained, nowadays, an independent status as a field of science, it

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 60

has its own scientific support and independent workplaces. It justifies a different concept and a

significant shift to the aforementioned Anglo-American model. To this situation that is similar to our

situation, Kratochvílová says: “It is alarming that study plans of social work, at some faculties, are

missing pedagogical disciplines. I believe that this mistrust and neglect of pedagogy is the result and

a relic from the period of excessive criticism after the social changes in 1989, when pedagogical

disciplines were criticised not only for its theories marked by the regime, but also for the mistakes

and failures in a practical implementation of a school policy” (Kratochvílová, 2001, p. 422).

In Lithuania, the social work and social pedagogy began to intensively develop in the 90s. Currently

they are perceived as distinctive and independent disciplines. Social work is developing on the basis

of sociology and social pedagogy is based on education science. Even though the profession of social

worker and social pedagogue are regulated by different resorts, both pursue similar goals and are

often using the same methods and means to achieve them (Leliūgienė, Giedraitienė, & Rupšienė,

2006). In Lithuania, social pedagogue became a part of a school assistance system and is perceived as

specialist, who cares for the solution of children’s social problems at an educational institution

– school, kindergarten, children’s day centre, care institution (Vaitkevicius, 1995; Leliūgienė, 2003).

In Russia, the 90s were, as well as in our country, the period of searching. It was a time when social

pedagogy, being a relatively new discipline, was defining itself, and was defining the relation to the

other scientific disciplines not only to pedagogical disciplines including social work. According to

Lipskij, social pedagogy is mainly theoretical discipline whereas social work is a practical approach in

real life (see Lipskij, 2004). Lipskij notes significant development in both fields in response to the

development of a social sphere of the whole society. He addresses gnoseological and methodological

basis of social pedagogy, he deals with technologies and processes in socio-pedagogical practice. The

work of Nikitin and others (2002) is, by its approach, closer to the practical use. It defines social

pedagogy in a broad sense as pedagogical aspects of social development of an individual, so called

“social functioning”, and social activities. The main topic is the educational assistance in the whole

socialization process, and its regulation. Nikitin also focuses on socio-pedagogical profession,

including activities associated with social work in to the field of social pedagogy, mainly in fields of

children’s and youths social-rehabilitation, and a work with people with personality disorder, socially

maladjusted people, including penitential care and “corrective” re-socialization pedagogy.

2 Paradigms of social pedagogy and social work

Concept of paradigm is not unambiguous. Accepting the basic definition by Kuhna, who perceives a

paradigm as a set of generally recognized scientific results representing, in a given time, a model of

issues and their solutions, for a given group of academics (Kuhn, 1997, p. 10), we must find the

situation confusing in both fields, social work as well as social pedagogy. As has been already

mentioned, several paradigms appear in both fields.

A. Regarding social work paradigms, there have been several of them during the course of its

development. Charitable paradigm (its essence was actually missionary work among atheists),

medical paradigm (it was an effort to get to know the social context in which the client lives on

the basis of “social diagnosis” and to propose an adequate way of helping him or her – “social

therapy”), psychotherapy (applying a psychoanalytical approach in order to understand client’s

personality, and to act also preventively within the “field therapy”) Next model is a sociological

paradigm that turns the attention of social workers from internal to external causes (client’s social

and economical conditions) and the social worker takes the role of a “social reformer.”

A relatively recent model, which appeared in the 80s, is the paradigm of a manager, where a

client becomes a customer and into a social work vocabulary are getting expressions like market,

competition, commercialization, supply, demand, etc. (Kappl, 2008).

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 61

The last decades show that it is not possible to rely only on one concept, and therefore, at the end of

the 90s, Payne brings the concept of “small paradigms” (Payne, 1997).

1. Reflexivly-therapeutical: the aim of social work is to help to secure a psychosocial well-being of

an individual or group. Social work is a reflexive process through which clients can gain control

over their own lives.

2. Socialy-collectivistic – according to which people are gaining an influence on their lives by the

help of socio cooperation and solidarity. Social work aims to strengthen people’s

consciousness in order to participate on the creation and modification of institutions, to

contribute in changing the social order, and to create a society based on equality.

3. Individualistically-reformational – this concept sees the social work as one aspect of a whole

system of social services. Its aim is to meet the individual needs and to try to improve social

services. It means helping mainly by providing information, qualified advice, and making

resources available. It is a change in society and its institutions in order to be able to suite to

the needs of its citizens (Navrátil, 1998).

The concept of Ondrejkovič (2000) is also based on the above mentioned point of view:

1. Therapeutic – based on client principal; It’s about helping individuals and groups in order to

restore a distorted balance in the functioning of society. Main condition is a serious social

diagnosis.

2. Consulting – based on consulting service regarding legal issues, psychological problems,

relationships (domestic violence), and social issues (unemployment).

3. Reform paradigms – it focuses on problem solving strategies on the macro-social level

including social policy, economy, with the aim of effective social planning (for example help for

the whole region)

4. Educational – teaching social skills, pro-social education, helping with multicultural issues

solutions, re-qualification, etc.

According to DuBois and Miley, the aim of social work is to ensure that clients will no longer need the

help of social worker, and also that clients will be able to manage their problems on their own,

what’s more to ensure that they will not get in to the problems at all in the first place.

The title Social Work – An Empowering Profession, defines the aim of social work as an effort for

awaking manpower so everybody will be able to update their skills and knowledge. This is the

mission of modern social work – empowering clients to solve their problems by themselves, enhance

human ability to cope with their lives and operate efficiently. According to the authors, social work

performs three functions (DuBois & Miley, 1992):

1. Consulting – its core is the client’s problem.

2. Resource management – use and coordination of social services, connecting clients with the

formal and unofficial resources.

3. Educational.

B) Looking in history for paradigms of social pedagogy we will find, similar to social work, charity

paradigms, therapeutic paradigms, consulting and especially educational paradigms.

Ondrejkovič mentions therapeutic paradigms, including individual help, crisis intervention (quick

help), socio-therapy (a set of steps having a positive impact on life situation of people, who are at risk

regarding negative phenomena), counselling paradigms (crisis and drop-in centers, helplines,

pedagogical and psychological counselling, premarital counselling), educational paradigms (healing

pedagogy, retraining, preventive programs), macro-social paradigms (social planning, solving

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 62

problems on the macro-level, being consistent with state social policy) (Ondrejkovič, 2004).

Knotová (2004) speaks about these paradigms: counselling, anthropological and re-educational.

A trend towards multi-paradigmatism is clear from above mentioned approaches. In this spirit is

social pedagogy described in a book Man-Environment-Upbringing (Člověk – prostředí – výchova)

with subheading Questions of Social Pedagogy (K otázkám sociální pedagogiky) by Kraus and

Poláčková et al. (2001). Here is social pedagogy presented as a scientific discipline of trans-

disciplinary nature focusing on the role of environment in upbringing and education not only in

connection to the problems of disadvantage groups that are at risk, potentially deviant acting groups,

vulnerable groups, but also in connection to the whole society by creating a harmony between the

needs of individuals and the society and contributing to the optimal way of life at a given time in a

given social conditions. Similarly is social pedagogy seen by Kraus (2014) in his new work Basics of

Social Pedagogy (Základy sociální pedagogiky).

Huppertz and Schinzler are bringing an interesting point of view, arguing that social pedagogy/social

work fulfil these functions (Huppertz & Schinzler, 1995):

- Pedagogical (contributing to the optimal development of personality, formation of a lifestyle).

- Preventive (activities and programs contributing to the prevention of various deviations).

- Compensation (activities balancing deficits from e.g., a very little stimulating environments).

- Correction (activities related to population placed in jails, institutions, homes).

- Tutorial (e.g. legal assistance and protection for those who find themselves on the margins of

society).

- Structural (influencing processes relating to living conditions at the macro-social level, e.g.,

in the field of employment).

- Distributive (help and work with refugees and immigrants).

Noack defines in publication titled Sozialpädagogik the scope of social pedagogy as: leisure time and

education experience, socio-cultural work, work with children and youth, work with families, work

with the elderly but also work with the unemployed, the homeless, helping those who are

dependent, advice on debt (Noack, 2001). Again, it is clear that these concepts mingle the areas of

social pedagogy and social work.

In both social work and social pedagogy can be found some basic paradigms that can be summarized

as follows: counselling, therapeutic, re-educational, reform (structural), and also a paradigm that is

crucial for social pedagogy, educational. From some points of view, prophylactic paradigms are

integrated in social work

Paradigm stressing educational aspect of social work is based on the opinion that the social work

activities have educational character and that there are not many activities without educational

aspect in them (Tokárová et al., 2003). It should be noted that this paradigm is accepted very rarely

in the Czech Republic. Mollenhauer (1966) states that the activities that cannot be seen as

pedagogical phenomenons are slowly disappearing.

3 Context and specifics of social pedagogy and social work

Social work that excludes pedagogical aspects is based, uncritically, on American “Social Work.” It

copies the system that originated in different social and historical conditions and today does not exist

in its original form. Strict rejection of pedagogical aspects in social work relates to false notions of

pedagogy associated with traditional paternalistic activities, authoritarianism in the family and at

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 63

school. On contrary, social work often takes on socially progressive pedagogical approaches and

solutions (e.g., group work, individual approach of education reform, intervention into the client's

environment, etc.) (Ondrejkovič, 2000). Additionally, both areas benefit from disciplines like

sociology, psychology, law, medicine, and others.

It can be said that, overall, there are three possible views on the relationship between the two

disciplines (Ondrejkovič, 2000):

a) The first approach, used in German-speaking countries, is a unification of both disciplines.

b) The second approach, typical for English-speaking countries, represents a clear differentiation

of both fields (if social pedagogy is even mentioned).

c) The third approach, is based on integration while maintaining a certain independence of both

disciplines (this approach is typical for Slovakia, and in a certain sense, Poland).

The first approach, in addition to already mentioned German authors, holds also Pfeiffer (1994).

Social work and social education are, according to Pfeffer, disciplines dealing with certain

professional conduct in the given society, which is predetermined by the normative foundations of

that society. Social work is referred to as a practically oriented science that must necessarily take into

account the living conditions of the clients. Noack (2001) sees social work as part of social education

and speaks about social pedagogical work. Erler also highlights the conceptual ambiguity, both terms

are understood essentially as synonyms and their differentiation, according to him, lies in the core of

the individual discipline that is either in social care (social work), or in social education activities

(social pedagogy) (Erler, 1993).

There is a consensus that in practice socially educational activities are closely associated with social

work. Solution of the scientific identity of both disciplines is still stimulating a discussion. In any case,

both fields, relating to social development, consistently pursue a goal of an active improvement of

life quality (Braches-Chyrek & Süncker, 2009).

The second approach is typical for the USA, Great Britain and other Western countries that have

adopted this model. As has been already mentioned, the situation is slowly changing in recent years.

In England during the 90s within the concept of social work, social pedagogy is beginning to be

mentioned referring to the German tradition, pointing out that it could enrich individualistic

conception of the English understanding of the concept of social work (Szmagalski, 2010). Petrie also

played an important role in the development of social education, in addition to the already

mentioned Cameron. Both understand social pedagogy as a discipline that forms the basis of

educational and care work with children and youth, especially in orphanages. Following the European

tradition they define four basic areas where is the social pedagogy applied: theory of education in

the environment, education policy, social and educational work with children and youth, and

education of social workers (Petrie & Cameron, 2009; Petrie, 2001).

In France, social pedagogy is not understood as a separate discipline, it is more about pedagogical

reflection of serious topics regarding socio-educational activities in connection with the

psychoanalytic theories, humanistic psychology and pedagogy, and critical pedagogy. Such socio-

educational topics then become part of the professional preparation of educators, social and cultural

animators and social workers (Bon, 2009).

Social pedagogy is discussed also in the Northern countries, discussions are about epistemological

and ontological questions of social pedagogy (Hämäläinen, 2003). For example, in Sweden is the

social pedagogy increasingly perceived as an important theoretical concept for the development of

social work as well as having practical applications in the fields of social work, but it is not perceived

as an individual discipline. Social Pedagogy seems to be a current issue mainly in connection with the

growing social problems and their solving process, and in cooperation with social work and special

need education (Eriksson & Markström, 2009, 2004). Similar situation is in Finland, where

Hämäläinen defines social pedagogy as meta-theory of social work. According to him, social workers,

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 64

who work in different environments, must have knowledge and skills in the field of social education,

social mobilization and personal social development (Hämäläinen, 1989).

Also in Denmark is social pedagogy viewed as an academic discipline that has its own place within the

academic teaching. It is defined as a wide range of integration activities, which develop personality,

and skills necessary for life in contemporary society. It establishes forms of social work prioritizing

help to individuals with integration into society and in a processes of helping and learning (Madsen,

2006). Social pedagogy is reflected in education and care work of social workers and pedagogues,

who work with children and youth in their environment, in support of families, seniors and other

socially disadvantaged groups.

The third concept of social pedagogy is typical for Poland. Marynowicz-Hetka (2008), understands

social work as a field of social effects of various subjects that help in individual development, social

groups to overcome difficult life situations. In this context social pedagogy brings aspects axiological,

anthropological, and educational, into the social work and is giving it a sense, wholeness, and

educational foundations in terms of an individual and a society. Socio-pedagogical perspective on

social work can be conceptualized as field of social worker’s impact based on social interaction. Social

pedagogy also helps to clarify the mechanisms of designing and shaping the environment.

Radziewicz-Winicki states that social pedagogy creates theoretical and philosophical basis for social

work and is bringing an educational aspect into it (Radziewicz-Winicki, 2008). A remarkable work in

this aspect is the work of Kantowicz (2013) Pedagogika (w) pracy socjalnej. Kantowicz draws

attention to educational aspects of social work primarily in connection with strengthening the client’s

ability to be active and using knowledge of social pedagogy about the social environment.

As has been already mentioned, this approach prevailed also in the Slovak Republic. According to

Hroncová, Hudecová and Matulayová (2001), social pedagogy is a theoretical and general science,

which stresses socio-educational aspects in the relationship with a person who found himself in need

and also helps to prevent dysfunctional processes in human lives by intentional intervention into

their lives. Strieženec (2000) emphasizes the need of cooperation of both disciplines. According to

him, they have a common object of interest (a person), subject (social activity in a social

environment), humanistic approach (human assistance). As has been already stated, even though,

both disciplines have similar roots, social work has earned an individual position, as verified by

Tokárová. According to her (2008), a certain autonomy of both fields manifests itself as follows:

Social work as a scientific discipline is based on social policy, while social pedagogy on educational

policies, and in a same time there exists a certain bond between them. Social pedagogy is rooted in

educational science and social work is connected to the wide range of scientific disciplines.

We therefore believe that the optimal approach regarding the development of both disciplines is the

third one. The situation in the Czech republic, as has been already mentioned above, however, is

different, and only further development will show what direction it will take. To clarify the third point

of view, we can state that both disciplines have essentially the same functions, similar professional

paradigm, but also its own autonomy. For example, in an object of their interest and operation. The

concept of social pedagogy in our country, unlike social work, considers alongside specific population

categories, minorities, basically the entire population.

Intensive studies and scientific reflection of socio-educational reality led, by Levická (2002), to

adoption of definitions of both disciplines and to consideration of the following facts:

1. Social pedagogy is an individual pedagogical discipline (that is understood as a discipline

oriented on help in life) which aims, in a system of complex care, to provide help for children,

youth, and adults in different types of an environment by finding optimal forms of help and by

compensating various deficits.

2. The basic methods of social pedagogues, used in practice, include pedagogical methods.

3. Social pedagogy includes mainly educational activities.

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 65

4. Social work grew out of the real need of society to handle socially difficult situation of its

members, it is society's responses to undesirable social phenomena.

5. Social work abroad is characterized by the advance theory of social work, and in most

countries it is accepted as a separate profession.

6. Identification with the assertion that the social work is using teaching methodologies.

If the aim of social work is to help the client to understand their own situation, to adapt to the

changed conditions, to acquire new skills, to take an active part of a community life, then a social

worker aims to achieve an optimum degree of harmony between the client’s needs, rights,

requirements and his or her real possibilities that are significantly influenced by the client's

environment. In real life it means that social work intentionally uses pedagogical methods in order to

help individuals to prepare to take an adequate role in a society (focusing on socialization), and in

order to help to manage and cope with significant changes in their lives.

In contrast, the social pedagogue is preparing individuals for their entry into the widest social

environment, is equipping him with an arsenal of required knowledge and skills the individual needs

in order to be fully capable of social integration in its broadest sense. This pedagogical effort is

nowadays focused more on acquiring a certain amount of skills, so called social skills, especially

problem solving skills, civic engagement, or critical thinking competence, solidarity thinking and

acting, and the development of individual skills so they contribute to the comprehensive

development of an individual as a social being. It offers help in the form of education and social

education for individual age groups, not only by methodical processes, but also by appropriate

organizational forms. Social pedagogy is a meaningful response to the requirement of permanent

renewal and expansion of knowledge and skills of individuals so as to maintain their full social

functioning and quality of life.

Differences and the autonomy of both fields can be, therefore, seen especially, depending on the

angle of view, from the epistemological perspective. And even if this perspective was very close, it is

always better to have two view points than only one.

It is evident that some differences can be found in a theoretical definition of both disciplines:

1. Firstly, “definition of the situation.” While social work is mainly focused on solving adverse

social events, a situation that has already occurred, the social pedagogy is focused more on

prevention.

2. Consequently, the second difference, described as “specification of the target population.”

Social pedagogy focuses on the entire population that is lead, by it, to a healthy lifestyle,

whereas social work has its target population “that has been already filtered”. “The filter” is

represented by a certain socially problematic situation.

3. The third difference arises from the “tools” used by both disciplines. Social pedagogy uses

social education as a tool for leading clients to optimal personality development and a healthy

lifestyle. And education in general is defined as deliberate process of personality formation.

Social work focuses more on changing the behaviour of individuals than on changing their

personality. Different view, therefore, concerns the ambition of the complexity of achieved

change (Janebová & Bartáková, 2001).

Social pedagogy, unlike social work, devotes significantly greater effort to preventative work with so

called “healthy and non-problematic” individuals, contributing to the development of a healthy

lifestyle and to the quality of life. It also helps individuals in terms of secondary prevention. It is

therefore clear that the goals of both disciplines partly overlap mainly in secondary and tertiary

prevention. Social work as well as social pedagogy focuses on helping risk individuals. From the

above mentioned, is clear that the optics of social work is mainly “practical” oriented, focused on the

goal. Formal object of social work is a “change of unfavourable social situation.” View of the material

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 66

object of social work, a relationship of an individual and a society, is a view through a deviation from

the norm, through deviance. The view of social pedagogy is little different. It has no need to view

relationship of a man and a society via the filter of social deviance. It is interested in this relationship

in the long term, with the aim of optimal personality development and formation of a healthy

lifestyle.

Social pedagogy and social work have, undoubtedly, similar functions. The convergence theory of

social work and social pedagogy represents so called “demilitarized zone” between militant

supporters of Social Work and opponents of social pedagogy on the one side, and conservative social

pedagogues, who are highlighting differences between social work and social pedagogy, on the other

side (Ondrejkovič, 2000).

Sachße (1987) cites three reasons for pedagogization of social work:

- The clientele of of social work has changed: It does not include only minority groups of society,

but it aims at a wider population.

- The differences between educational institutions and institutions of social work are

increasingly diminishing.

- Methods, principles and measures of social work are increasingly resembling educational

methods.

Pedagogization of social work is desirable, especially, in the area of social prevention, namely in

drop-in centers for children and youth, social activation services for families with children, and social

rehabilitation services. These facilities are, by the law, included in the group of social prevention

services and their primary target group are mainly children and youngsters. An Act No. 108/2006

Coll. (2006) defines activities that form a group of mandatory offered activities, these being:

- Educational and motivational activities.

- Activities mediating contacts with a social environment.

- Social therapeutic activities.

- Assistance with asserting rights, justified interests and dealing with personal matters.

As is evident from the Act itself the main target group of these services are children and youth.

Activities mentioned are educational, training, and motivational activities. The field of training and

educational activities is in competence of social pedagogue, whose professional contribution may be

a welcomed enrichment to the area.

“Regarding the actual work with clients, in the spirit of this law, I believe that the current concept of

social work is designed for working with clients, who have at least a minimal ability to define their

social needs. If the client is recognized as being inneed he or she is offered a range of services, from

which they themselves select the services they want to use. In cases where the client is a child the

situation is complicated by the fact that the very process of negotiating the form of help is for the

child very demanding and sometimes may even be in disagreement with the child’s understanding of

the world. The model of service provision to children should be based on the concept of social

pedagogy, because it better reflects the needs of children clients than the concept of social work,

which is more suitable for the work with adult clients” (Caltová Hepnarová, 2009, p. 82).

A similar situation occurs in the case of facilities for children requiring immediate assistance. These

facilities are governed by The Act No. 359/1999 Coll. (1999), and fall under the Ministry of Labour

and Social Affairs. Their main objective is to provide protection and assistance to vulnerable children

for the necessary period of time (usually a few weeks or months). They fulfill, to the certain extent,

the objectives of school facilities, for example children's homes. By the law, facilities for children

requiring immediate assistance have to provide, among other things, educational care. Legislation

governing school facilities (e.g. children's homes) establishes the level of professional competence of

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 67

the pedagogical staff, the same is not true in the case of facilities for children requiring immediate

assistance. The same situation is at schools. Social work is there also discussed. For example, Hopf

states that social work at school should act preventively and help students and teachers with

overcoming critical situations, and it should also define the objectives and tasks of social work at

school. According to Hopf (2001), social work at school should:

- Prevent deviation in the behaviour of pupils in schools.

- Promote social competence of children and youth by targeted events and offers.

- Mediate the youth free time activities outside the school and their activities within the school

environment.

- Look after groups of pupils with the consent of pupils and teachers.

- Alert the parents of socially handicapped pupils if they have the need of assistance or support

means.

Even though Hopf (2001) speaks about social work (in German concept), it is clear that he means in

fact social pedagogy.

4 Social work and social pedagogy in practice

Even with a different concept in theory, approaches of social pedagogy and social work mingle in

practice. Social Work provides assistance primarily in the material area, while social pedagogy in

social and educational area. The work of Lukas (1979), but also some other works (Bakošová, 2006;

Kraus, 2001, 1996; Ondrejkovič, 2000) show mingling themes and areas of practice of both

disciplines. A brief comment regarding those themes follows.

Lukas states that in the approach, which stresses social work aspects and suppresses aspects of social

pedagogy, interest in work with older people used to be found. Today, however, even this is not true.

In foreign countries, and also, recently, in our retirement homes, animators and moderators of free

time are trying to fulfil seniors' free time with meaningful activities. This effort clearly is a

pedagogical activity. The two approaches, in the concept of this work, can be found in two areas. An

area determining social benefits can be viewed as explicitly social work oriented, and an influence of

free time of children and youth can be seen as a purely pedagogical activity (for example in children

houses). There are areas where the social pedagogical aspects of social activities directly interferes

with social work. It is prominent in a work with youth and children. Work of social assistant and

curator is a matter of social work as well as of social pedagogy.

Some specifics of both approaches can be illustrated by a concrete example (Janebová & Bartáková,

2001). Let´s imagine a young unemployed Gipsy with primary education, addicted to heroin. What

can be offered by every area of practical activities? The aim is to create a social change towards full

integration into society. While social work is primarily focused on basic needs and physiological

needs, social pedagogy is focused more on the highest needs (meta-needs), for example personal

fulfilment. An area where both disciplines meet is the area of higher psychological needs.

Some difference is manifested in the ambitions of both professions. While social work approaches

the client pragmatically in order to, at least, diminish the risks associated with their behaviour, social

pedagogy aims to change the personality of the client. In this sense, social work operates with a

wider variety of deviant behaviour and therefore aims at wider range of goals. An objective of social

work can be “a very small change” as is for example a usage of a sterile needle or a change of the

way of drug intake from injection to inhalation. Social pedagogy demands more from the clients, it

aims to influence them so as to be able to live in a given society.

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 68

An important factor of social pedagogy is also working with the clients even after they have

overcome their problems (heroin abuse, unemployment, and social exclusion) in a sense of

supporting the development of free, fulfilled, happy life style within the standards of society.

At this point it is possible to identify another significant difference between the two approaches. In

social work a strong emphasis is on termination, an end of work with the client. Among other things,

this is due to contracts. There is an increasing tendency to sign a contracts with the client, defining

goals of the work with the client, means to achieve those objectives, and their evaluation criteria, on

what principles will the achievement of those goals be controlled. A fulfilment of those objectives

relatively clearly determines the end of work with the client.

An accurate term to describe a process happening within social pedagogy is social education. But this

is a term that appears also in social work, even in official documents. Let us take The Educational

Standards of Social Work within which it is commonly spoken about. The problem being that it is not

defined. It's just a typical activity of the Czech social worker. It is probably one of following activities:

“providing social help (including a range of professional activities from counselling through therapy

and training to management, negotiation, and representation), aiming at improving of client’s

psychosocial functioning; better use of different client’s sources from intra-psychic and interpersonal

to social sources; causing a social change that is beneficial to the client in the social environment”

(Tomeš et al., 1997, p. 29).

Pedagogical Dictionary defines social education as a development of social skills of an individual. Its

aim is to equip students with knowledge, skills, habits and attitudes that are necessary for their life in

a society with other people (Průcha, Walterová, & Mareš, 2013). The objective of social education in

social work is to ensure that the client no longer needs an assistance of a social worker, he or she is

able to manage their own problems. Moreover the clients will no longer get themselves into any

problems in general. Social education in the context of social pedagogy assumes a focus of an

individual on relationships, on moral profile and social activity. A term “personality and social

development” is also used (Kraus, 2014, p. 66).

5 Conclusion

The analysis of paradigms of both fields confirmed our starting hypothesis that the basic paradigm is

essentially homogeneous. It is desirable to build up the identity of our scientific disciplines and

professions, and also to mutually benefit from learned findings. In The Czech Republic, however,

social work, as was already mentioned, ignores social pedagogy. It is obvious that the process of

finding the boundaries between social work and social pedagogy is happening more in theoretical

level than in practical level. The situation in practice is different from the theory. Members of both

professions are often meeting the same clients in similar situations and are often using similar

methods to meet the same goals. Sometimes they even compete for the same jobs. In this sense,

they are sometimes rather competitors.

The fact that in our country, social pedagogue as a profession has no legislative basis, is partially

compensated by the fact that it is entirely legitimate for graduates in Social Pedagogy to find an

employment within the department of Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (under the Act on

Pedagogical Staff of 2004), and in the field of social work (under the Act on Social Services of 2006).

References

Act No. 108/2006 Coll., on social services. (2006). Retrieved

https://portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/zakon.jsp?page=0&nr=108~2F2006&rpp=15#seznam

from

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 69

Act No. 359/1999 Coll., on the social and legal protection of children. (1999). Retrieved from

https://portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/zakonPar.jsp?idBiblio=48272&nr=359~2F1999&rpp=15#local

-content

Bakošová, Z. (2006). Sociálna pedagogika jako životná pomoc. Bratislava: FFUK.

Bon, C. (2009). Social pedagogy in France. In J. Kornbeck, & R. Rosendal Jensen (Eds.), The diversity of

social pedagogy in Europe: Vol. VII: Studies in comparative social pedagogies and international

social work and social policy (pp. 34–45). Bremen: Europäisher Hochschulverlag.

doi:10.1080/13691457.2012.750501

Brągiel, J. (2001). Miejsce pracy socjalnej w polskiej pedagogike spolecznej. In Socialia 2001, Sociální

práce a ostatní společenskovědní discipliny (pp. 9–12). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.

Braches-Chyrek, R., & Süncker, H. (2009). Will social pedagogy disappear in Germany? In J. Kornbeck,

& R. Rosendal Jensen (Eds.), The diversity of social pedagogy in Europe: Vol. VII: Studies in

comparative social pedagogies and international social work and social policy (pp. 169–189).

Bremen: Europäisher Hochschulverlag. doi:10.1080/13691457.2012.750501

Caltová Hepnarová, G. (2009). Uplatnění sociálního pedagoga v sociálních službách. In Sociální

pedagogika ve střední Evropě, současný stav a perspektivy (pp. 81–88). Brno: IMS.

Cameron, C., & Moos, P. (Eds.). (2011). Social pedagogy and working with children and young people:

Where care and education meet. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

doi:10.1080/0312407X.2013.809676

DuBois, B., & Miley, K. K. (1992). Social work: An empowering profession. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Eriksson, L., & Markström, A.-M. (2004). Interpreting the concept of social pedagogy. In A.

Gustavsson, H.-E. Hermansson, & J. Hämäläinen (Eds.), Perspectives and theory in social

pedagogy (pp. 9–23). Göteborg: Daidalos. doi:10.1080/13691450601143864

Eriksson, L., & Markström, A.-M. (2009). Social pedagogy in a Swedishcontext. In J. Kornbeck, & R.

Rosendal Jensen (Eds.), The diversity of social pedagogy in Europe: Vol. VII: Studies in

comparative social pedagogies and international social work and social policy (pp. 46–64).

Bremen: Europäisher Hochschulverlag. doi:10.1080/13691457.2012.750501

Erler, M. (1993). Soziale Arbeit. München: Juventa Verlag.

Hämäläinen, J. (1989). Social pedagogy as a meta-theory of social work education. International

Journal of Social Work, 32(2), 117–128. doi:10.1177/002087288903200206

Hämäläinen, J. (2003). Developing social pedagogy as an academic discipline. In A. Gustavsson, H.-E.

Hermansson, & J. Hämäläinen (Eds.), Perspectives and theory in social pedagogy (pp. 133–153).

Göteborg: Daidalos. doi:10.1080/13691450601143864

Hochstrasser, F. (1991). Sociálna pedagogika vo Švajčiarsku. Vychováteĺ, 2, 21–22.

Hopf, A. (2001). Sociální pedagogika ve škole. Praha: PdF UK.

Hroncová, J., Hudecová, A., & Matulayová, T. (2001). Sociálna pedagogika a sociálna práca. Bánská

Bystrica: PF UMB.

Huppertz, N., & Schinzler, E. (1995). Grundfragen der Pädagogik. Koln-Munchen: Stam Verlag.

International Journal of Social Pedagogy (2016, February 4). Them pra social pedagogy, centre for

understanding social pedagogy, UCL Institute of Education. Retrieved from

http://www.internationaljournalofsocialpedagogy.com

Janebová, R., & Bartáková, A. (2001). Sociální práce a sociální pedagogika v kontextu teorie a praxe:

symbionti nebo konkurenti? In Socialia 2001. Sociální práce a ostatní společenskovědní

disciplíny (pp. 60–68). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 70

Kantowicz, E. (2013). Pedagogika (w) pracy socjalnej. Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu

Warminsko-Mazurskiego.

Kappl, M. (2008). Vývojové modely sociální práce a jejich metafory. In Sborník z konference V.

Hradecké dny sociální práce: Posuzování životní situace v sociální práci (pp. 44–58). Hradec

Králové: Gaudeamus.

Knotová, D. (2004). Jaká je současná sociální pedagogika? In Konstituování sociální pedagogiky jako

vědního oboru (pp. 368–376). Brno: IMS.

Kratochvílová, E. (2001). Pedagogika voľného času, sociálna pedagogika a sociálna práca.

Pedagogická revue, 53(5), 415–423.

Kraus, B. (1996). Pohled na současnou sociální pedagogiku. Pedagogika, 46(2), 117–124.

Kraus, B. (2001). Vztah sociální práce a sociální pedagogiky. In Sociália 2001. Sociální práce a ostatní

společenskovědní disciplíny (pp. 60–68). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.

Kraus, B. (2014). Základy sociální pedagogiky. Praha: Portál.

Kraus, B., & Poláčková, V. (Eds.). (2001). Člověk – prostředí – výchova: K otázkám sociální pedagogiky.

Brno: Paido.

Kuhn, T. S. (1997). Struktura vědeckých revolucí. Praha: Oikúmené.

Leliūgienė, I. (2003). Socialinė pedagogika: vadovėlis. Kaunas: Technologija.

Leliūgienė, I., Giedraitienė, E., & Rupšienė, L. (2006). Socialinių darbuotojų/socialinių pedagogų

rengimas Lietuvoje [Training Social Workers/Social Pedagogues in Lithuania]. Pedagogika,

4(83), 64–73.

Levická, J. (2002). Teoretické aspekty sociálnej práce. Trnava: FZaSP TU.

Lipskij, I. A. (2004). Socialnaja pedagogika. Moskva: Sfera.

Lukas, H. (1979). Sozialpädagogik – Sozialarbeitwissenschaft. Berlin: Verlag Solker Spiess.

Madsen, B. (2006). Sosialpedagogikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Marynowicz-Hetka, E. (2008) Pedagogika spoleczna i prácasocjalna – analizazwiazkóv z punktu

widzeniaspoleczno-pedagogicznego. In Sociálna pedagogika, sociálna práca a sociálna

andragogika – aktuálne otázky teorie a praxe (pp. 15–22). Prešov: FF.

Mollenhauer, K. (1966). Zur Bestimmung von Sozialpädagogik und Sozialarbeit in der Gegenwart.

Wienheim: Beltz Verlag.

Navrátil, P. (1998). Sociální práce jako sociální konstrukce. Sociologický časopis, 34(1), 37–50.

Nikitin, B. A. (Ed.). (2002). Socialnaja pedagogika. Moskva: Vlados.

Noack, W. (2001). Sozialpädagogik. Einlehrbuch. Freiburgim Breisgau: Lambertus.

Ondrejkovič, P. (2000). Príspevok k otázkam vzťahov sociálnej pedagogiky a sociálnej práce.

Pedagogika, L(2), 181–192.

Ondrejkovič, P. (2004). Poznámky ku konštituovaniu sociálnej pedagogiky jako vedy. In Konstituování

sociální pedagogiky jako vědeckého oboru (pp. 78–87). Brno: IMS.

Payne, M. (1997). Modern social work theory. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire and London:

Mamillan Press LTD.

Petrie, P. (2001). The potential of pedagogy/education for work in the children’s sector in the UK.

Social Work in Europe, 8(3), 23–26.

Kraus & Hoferková / The Relationship of Social Pedagogy and Social Work 71

Petrie, P., & Cameron, C. (2009). Importing social pedagogy? In J. Kornbeck, & R. Rosendal Jensen

(Eds.), The diversity of social pedagogy in Europe: Vol. VII: Studies in comparative social

pedagogies and international social work and social policy (pp. 145–168). Bremen: Europäisher

Hochschulverlag. doi:10.1080/13691457.2012.750501

Pfeiffer, R. (1994). Sozialarbeit und sozialpädagogik in handlungsteoretischer perspektive. Pädagogik

und Schulalltag, (2), 225–230.

Pilch, T., & Lepalczyk, I. (1995). Pedagogika spoleczna. Warszawa: Źak.

Průcha, J., Walterová, E., & Mareš, J. (2013). Pedagogický slovník. Praha: Portál.

Radziewicz-Winnicki, A. (2008). Pedagogika spoleczna w obliczu realiów codziennośti. Warszawa:

Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne.

Sachße, CH. (1987). Die pädagogisierung der gesellschaft und die professionalisierung der

sozialarbeit. In S. Müller, Handlungskompetenz in der Sozialarbeit/Sozialpädagogik II. Bielefeld:

AJZ Druck Verlag.

Schilling, J. (1999). Sociálna práca. Hlavné smery vývoja sociánej pedagogiky a sociálnej práce.

Trnava: TU.

Strieženec, Š. (2000). Vzťah sociálnej práce a sociálnej pedagogiky. In Z. Bakošová (Ed.), Súčasný stav

sociálnej pedagogiky na Slovensku. Zborník referátov z vedeckej konferencie s medzinárodnou

účasťou konanej v dňoch 2. 2. – 3. 2. 2000 v Bratislave. Bratislava: FFUK.

Szmagalski, S. J. (2010). Czy pedagogika społeczna przyjmie się w Wielkiej Brytanii? Tradycje i nowe

tendencje w brytyjskiej pracy socjalnej. In M. Ciczkowska-Giedziun, E. T. Kantowicz, & B.

Chrostowska (Eds.), Szkoły polskiej pedagogiki społecznej wobec nowych wyzwań .Polska

pedagogika społeczna na początku XXI wieku. Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski, Wydział

Stosowanych Nauk Społecznych i Resocjalizacji.

Tokárová, A. (2008). Sociálna práca ako vedná disciplína. In Sociálna pedagogika, sociálna práca a

sociálna andragogika – aktuálne otázky teorie a praxe (pp. 15–22). Prešov: FF.

Tokárová, A. (Ed.). (2003). Sociálna práca. Prešov: Akcent print.

Tomeš, I. (Ed.). (1997). Vzdělávací standardy v sociální práci. Praha: Sociopress/Socioklub.

Vaitkevicius, J. (1995). Socialinės pedagogikos pagrindai: vadovėlis aukštosioms mokykloms. Vilnius:

Egalda.

Wagner, A. (1998). Debata o pracy socjalnej/pedagogice spolecznej – reprezentujeme homogeniczny

czy heterogeniczny paradygmat naukowy. In E. Marynowicz–Hetka (Ed.), Pedagogika

szpoleczna jako disciplína akademicka (pp. 455–462). Lódž: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu.