Резюме. This paper presents the results of a recent empirical research on the practical dimensions of social pedagogy in Bulgaria. The research is based on a discourse analysis of publications and academic documents which reflect relatively different practical aspects of socio-educational activities and events, seen not only as social steps and developments, but also as educational practices.
The information and data which were obtained and analysed show that seen as a specific type of social practice, social pedagogy is used as a sort of „umbrella concept“ comprising of several autonomous activities and practices in areas like education, social work or social control and correction. The results justify the expectation that social pedagogy and social work are interrelated but not identical. The research outcome also confirms the observation, that basic norms of society form an intrinsic part of the contents of education, which makes the interaction between human educability and sociability crucial and inevitable.

Ключови думи: social pedagogy, social education, social work, good practices

Introduction

For everyone interested in the interface between education and society at large the debate on the meaning and manifestations of social pedagogy is not new, and neither are its indisputable conceptual and practical achievements. Not accidentally, socio-pedagogical narrative invites comments from experts coming from different scientific and practical domains even from those with alternative perspectives.

As early as the 90-ties of the last century in Bulgaria we saw the first bold attempts for conceptualization of the nature of social pedagogy and its dimensions (N. Vladinska, N. Petrova-Dimotrova, G. Kolev, D. Tsvetkov, Iv. Karagyozov, M. Russeva). Among the current researchers of the subject in this country are authors with recognized expertise in areas such as philosophy of education (Tr. Popkochev), general pedagogy (D. Tsvetkov, L. Popov), methodology of educational research (G. Bijkov), philosophy and theory of education (Kl. Sapundjieva, N. Boyadjieva). The last 2–3 decades have even “raised” an authentic academic generation of „social pedagogues“, who focus on specific socio-pedagogical themes and problems and ignore the ontological aspects since social pedagogy was never unfamiliar to them. (R. Kuzzmanova-Kartalova, G. Mejandjiyska, T. Manasieva, S. Chavdarova-Kostova, M. Borisova, V. Boyanova, Vl. Gospodinov, G. Petrov).

In the context of a large number of recent publications the typical target of socioeducational support would be the so called socially disadvantaged and disabled children or adults (V. Boyanova, Vl. Gospodinov, M. Borisova, L. Todorova and others), groups with a- or antisocial thinking and behaviour (G. Petrov, E. Rangelova, T. Manasieva, B. Kriviradeva) or those/these with impeded social integration (Y. Totseva, Iv. Ivanov, S. Chavdarova-Kostova, S. Varbanova, V. Bojilova and others). Another specific area of interest are the existing challenges to social maturing, integration and development of people from all generations: children, adolescents and adults (D. Levterova, V. Bojilova, Vl. Gospodinov), as well as the challenges to civic education (L. Strakova, E. Vassileva, R. Vassileva, S. Tsvetanska) and to value formation and education (P. Kostova, L. Strakova, Y. Merdjanova).

A few authors pay little but in fact sufficient attention to “existential issues” of social pedagogy. At the same time they quite passionately dedicate themselves to practical projects and initiatives targeting the topical socio-educational priorities, fields and practices. Moreover, among them emerged the champions of the gradual separation of social pedagogy from the core pedagogical sciences and its approximation to the goals and tools of social work. In other words, now rarely social education and integration are understood as synonyms of educational tasks and practices, while more and more often they are associated with the essence and practices of the social work.

Of course, this trend is not accidental and has its both global and local explanation. Over the past several decades social work in this country has proven itself as a field of conceptual pursuits and explorations, while education somehow naturally became its solid partner. Moreover, among the experts in both areas here and abroad those who believe that social pedagogy as a practice is more “social” than “pedagogical” seem to be the majority.

In fact, such a standpoint does not sound revolutionary but without doubt is relevant even today since education has always been a proven and powerful instrument for our progress as a society. Bulgarian history is rich in examples of political and at the same time educational developments which have defined the directions of our societal development.

Such a defining and evolutionary role was played by the adoption of Christianity as the official national religion and the establishment of an autonomous Bulgarian archibishopry in medieval Bulgaria (864-870) (Bakalov & Koev, 2001).

A similar social impact was produced with the adoption and the dissemination of the Slavic-Bulgarian script and literacy (852–889), as well as with the creation and dissemination of the first Bulgarian history book at the dawn of Bulgarian Enlightenment (1762).

Similarly supportive and developmental was the functioning of the first Bulgarian religious and secular schools, as well as of the „chitalishta“ (local educational community centres) and the medieval cultural and educational societies. Thanks to their work during the times of the Bulgarian Renaissance while statehood was absent there occurred a cultural-enlightening revolution which further led to the success of the national liberation, spiritual autonomy and state independence.

The common thread uniting all these grand historical happenings is that underlying the societal shifts and changes they have brought, there was always a specific educational/pedagogical activity, initiative or practice. Currently, we are used to such a synergy between educational support and social dynamic.

Similar is the fate of social pedagogy exploring the interrelations between the social and the educational in manifold manifestations on both conceptual and practical level. Not being a conceptual or applied synonym of social work, social pedagogy adds to its promotion and success by contributing resources, methods and approaches of social significance. Notably, it is the education which, as a comprehensive social system and practice, is the real and effective partner to social policy and actions. Moreover, as a fundament of the relevant social model of knowledgebased economy through life-long learning, education is elevated to be a /the global philosophical paradigm of our “post industrial” time (P. Drucker).

All these relatively different approaches to the theory and practice of social pedagogy may be easily identified in the works and academic courses published over the last decade (Karagyosov & Russeva, 1996; Tsvetkov, 1996; Kolev, 2008; Kolev, 2010). The fact is that in the 90-ies of the last century the launch of the university course in Social Pedagogy was made, while we can still argue where and when exactly this academic discipline had been approbated.

What is remarkable in this case was, however, that this unique Bulgarian experience was accumulated through several alternative channels. Naturally, a central role in the process belonged to the official institutions and academic communities. In parallel and sometimes even in advance new ideas and solutions were introduced by NGOs, non formal groupings, international movements and networks, European programmes and projects.

These facts and trends have motivated the author to research and analyse sufficient information on the current practical manifestations of the socio-educational practice in Bulgaria. My interest was additionally stimulated by the insufficient volume of our own national studies, based on data, priorities and solutions approved in the practice.

In short, the aim of the present research is to outline the authentic practical dimensions of social pedagogy in Bulgaria, as a basis for further developing its conceptual frame and prospects as a scholarly discipline.

The research is guided by the following principal tasks:

– To collect, review and systemize accessible information data bases and carriers which outline the current applied dimensions of social pedagogy in Bulgaria after 2000;

– Based on the analyses of the gathered empirical information to outline the main trends and priorities in the current social pedagogy practice in Bulgaria;

– To forecast and project possible / needed directions and priorities for longterm sustainable development of theory and practice of social pedagogy.

The basic expectation is that on practical level as socio-pedagogical can be identified and described those activities and measures which combine to the greatest extent both the potential of educational and social work, and are not reduced to any of the two or to a third one.

The object of this analysis is a set of empirical data and documental artefacts representing the variety of authentic practical interactions between the social and educational dimensions.

The subject of the analysis is social pedagogy as a kind of applied social practice (reasonable/ good practice or targeted area).

Research Methodology

The research challenge in this case is the multidimensional nature and contradictory development of the social pedagogy as a theory and practice in this century. My opinion on the subject was presented to interested readers in several publications issued in 2005 (Nikolaeva, 2005). Over the years since then, as well as before, the multidimensional character of social pedagogy continues to provoke researchers at home and abroad. At the same time, some basic lines of consensus on the use of the term social pedagogy can be defined as follows:

– social pedagogy as a specific form of a comprehensive human practice and experience;

– social pedagogy as a science and / or a scientific direction;

– social pedagogy as an academic discipline and academic programme;

– social pedagogy as a professional activity and a field of competence (Nikolaeva, 2005).

These different aspects are connected by permanent systemic links (fig. 1) which however are prone to current influences and, as a consequence are rather dynamic i.e. changing in time, space and context.

For example, the balance between scientific and practical fields and approaches is influenced by actors and circumstances operating on both these levels. While in some cases, human practice is more creative and innovative (eg. with regard to the concept of inclusive education which in Bulgaria was initially introduced by the non government organizations), in other cases science and research precede practical experience (e.g. the introduction of the concept and the professional profile of „a social pedagogue“).

Of similar nature is the interface between the different concepts of social pedagogy. For example, the unfolding socio-educational knowledge has influenced only indirectly the image of social pedagogy as an academic course and degree. This influence is successfully empirically studied by Trayan Popkochev (Popkochev, 2010). The author’s starting point is that making social pedagogy an academic course implies the usage of different approaches and specific synergy models touching upon a broad spectrum of topics. (Popkochev, 2012: 195).

He quotes I.A. Lipinskiy (Lipinskiy, 2001), who distinguishes at least 4 different disciplinary paradigms in the formulation of the contents of the academic programmes in social pedagogy in Russia: pedagogical, sociological, socio-pedagogical and sociologic-pedagogical. From their own experience university professors know, that the thematic selection in a specific academic module is determined also by their individual philosophical.

In this sense the transforming of scientific knowledge into an academic one reflects both the systemic achievements of science as well as the needs and realities of practice. Later on will be seen how this refers to the existing master programmes as well as to the field of publication and research. Here a starting point for comparison and drawing of conclusions are points made in my earlier studies (Nikolaeva, 2008) and those of my fellow Bulgarian researchers (Bijkov, 2006; Sapunjieva, 2006; Popkochev, 2012; Vladinska & Petrova-Dimitrova, 1994; Kuzzmanova-Kartalova, 2006; Kuteva, 2010 etc.).

Gathering the necessary informative arrays and data was made possible through:

– Reviewing the faculty web pages and links where the official curriculum documents of social pedagogy degree programmes in this country are available1) ;

– Reviewing accessible library catalogues (mainly university libraries);

– Reviewing the accessible collections of conference papers in the area of pedagogy and social work, which include thematic section on social pedagogy2) ;

– Reviewing virtual social networks, blogs and forums including personal positions and comments on different themes related with social pedagogy as theory and practice.

The collected data were processed using the following methods:

– Documental and content-analysis of official documents for school and academic curriculum;

– Content-analysis of publications (and their keywords, if available);

– Comparative conceptual analysis of postings on social blogs and forums.

This research is based on data gathered from:

– 23 editions – books (13 conference books and 10 faculty yearbooks) and electronic editions (CDs, conference web sites), published by 6 faculties / 4 universities3) and 1 regional educational authorities (Varna region);

– Electronic catalogues of 2 university libraries (Sofia University „St. Kl. Ohridski“ and Plovdiv University „St. Paisii Hilendarski“4) );

– Official documents (study plans and qualification characteristics) of 8 Bulgarian universities and their 9 faculties with the bachelor and masters degree programmes in the area of social pedagogy.

In detail, the quantitative and qualitative parameters of all research data will be presented together with the discussion of the results. The data gathering and analysis were performed between March and June 2012.

Discussion

Social pedagogy as an area of specific practice, professional work and competence

The data from 2 types of documents were uses to study the authentic dimensions of social pedagogy as an area of specific practice, professional work and competence, namely:

– Qualification characteristics of social pedagogy bachelor and master degree programmes, including information about possible areas of professional work, positions and competences of the social pedagogues and the specialists who carry out socio-educational functions and tasks;

– A great volume – over 350 of still non-referred publications, included in conference collections, most of which present not only research, but also good practices and achievements.

The descriptions in the qualification characteristics of the acquired through the degree programmes professional knowledge, skills and competences are very broadly formulated and cover a large practical territory. The main ideas are very correctly outlined in the documents of the Faculty of Education at the Shumen University5) . Several basic benchmarks of the practical social-pedagogical work in Bulgaria can be identified in the documents namely:

– that the social-pedagogical practice presumes „the implementation of pedagogical, methodological and research activities in the educational space“;

– that in the social-pedagogical practice work „professionally qualified and mobile specialists possessing theoretical knowledge, skills and competences … with integrative and interdisciplinary nature“;

– that their work aims to provide support mostly to „individuals with marginalized, deviant and delinquent behaviour, to families, problem groups, people with disabilities“, but also to those „with special talents and gifts“, „who need special protection“, as well as to the institutions working with all the target groups;

– that social-pedagogical work is associated with the use of 3 basic types of methods and strategies: (1) „social-pedagogical intervention supporting instruction and education, (2) „rehabilitation, adaptation, integration and reintegration“, (3) professional and educational orientation“;

– that the professional competences of a social pedagogue cover a set of pedagogical practices: „pedagogic-psychological, analytic-diagnostic, corrective-rehabilitative, organizational-communicative, prognostic, social-preventive etc. “;

– that in fact the social pedagogues fulfil a wide number of activities and tasks: social-pedagogic, methodological, cultural-educative, corrective-developmental, organizational-communicative, cooperation and partnership activities with institutions working with children and adults, or with the specialized bodies6) .

The document emphasises on the professional fulfilment of the social pedagogue in two main areas: education and labour market.

In the qualifications description of the social pedagogue graduating from the Social pedagogy program at the Thracian University (Stara Zagora) are also outlined the possibilities for professional allocation in social institutions for children and adults, in educational and social centres where they can occupy administrative or expert positions (serving as specialists in the system of social assistance, social work etc.). Notably, in this document the orientation is more pro-social than proeducational/pro-pedagogical which contradicts the declared pedagogical direction of the modules in the study plan of the degree programme.

An interesting finding emerges from the qualifications description for graduates from the master programme „Social pedagogy and social work” at the same Thracian university (Stara Zagora). The name of the programme by combining social pedagogy“ with „social work“ already prompts certain conceptual bias in the spirit of the German tradition where social pedagogy is seen as specific section and practice of social work. Similar uses are identified also in the British isles where social pedagogy is still a newcomer. In the UK, for example, social pedagogy has to face the administrative measures and activities typical for the traditional social work in British context and offer a more tailored approach to every single client and case. It focuses on unfolding each person’s own potential for coping with problems by contrast to the financial and logistical support of traditional social work which only helped people survive physically and socially.

The Social pedagogy and social work master programme of the Thracian University is mainly focused on children and groups and individuals at both social and health risks. The necessity of cooperation and interaction among different interested institutions, of assuring high level of ICT implementation in the area as well as of exploratory and evaluative activities is underlined.

The conceptual content-analysis of the titles and keywords of non referred publications (Bulgarian papers in conference collection books) between 2000–2011 outlines 5 specific areas of interest:

– Theory and history of social pedagogy;

– Social challenges and target groups who provoke the search of new knowledge and experience in the area;

– Professional knowledge and competences related to the nature and the tasks of the social pedagogy;

– Implemented in Bulgaria intervention approaches and their typical actors; and

– Specific methods, services and environments of social-pedagogical work.

The challenges identified by researchers and practitioners in the practical field of social pedagogy can be divided in three groups according to the research findings:

– social development and adaptation as permanent universal processes which can be supported professionally and intentionally;

– social risks, factors and conditions which affect negatively the personal development and socialization;

– typical social deviations which require professional intervention (table 1).

To study the areas of social-pedagogical competences several criteria were applied.

The first criteria are based on their commitment with specific theoretical direction or discipline. Findings show that there are evidences for the study of three main type of professional competences applied in social-pedagogical practice namely pedagogical, social-pedagogical and managerial ones.

The group of pedagogical competences is identified through concepts such as educational knowledge, skills and experience (16), re-education (3) and self-education (1), development (5) and formation (13), prevention (19) and correction (1), instruction (5), pedagogical intervention (4), to educate (5), to motivate (2). The group of social-pedagogical competences was identified thru concepts like: skills and experience for establishment and keeping communication and interrelation (16) protection, support and defence of individuals and groups (9), skills and experience for integration (7) and intercultural education (2), consultation (2), non formal education (2), orientation (1), conflict resolution (1), socialization (6) and re-socialisation (3), social prevention(2), projecting (3) and adaptation (5), humanisation (1) and social education (2).

The managerial competences are associated with terms as organisation (5), planning (1), guiding (3) and management (3).

The second criteria for the evaluation of practical social-pedagogical competences reflect the specifics of the object (target groups) of intervention and its context.

According to target group specifics 60 items were identified such as: children in risk (15), homeless and neglected children (2), adult and elderly people (2), children and individuals with disabilities (12), children and families with problems (4), minorities (2), youth people (2), communities (6) and people with drug dependences (15) 7) .

According to their context only 5 publications were identified: penitentiary practice, child labour, family and family education, schools, social-pedagogical institutions.

The discourse analysis of the applied interventional approaches as well as of the defined intervention actors (experts) and objects (target groups) gives ground for the following conclusions:

– 7 types of conceptual approaches to social-pedagogical work are observed based on Bulgarian publications and studies, in particular: holistic approach, moral-cognitive approach, democratic approach (2), positive approach, integrative approach, confidential approach, and emotional intelligence stimulating approach. This is to say that only the last one mentioned is obviously associated with a merely psychological paradigm while the rest of the approaches reflect universal (as the holistic one), worldly (as the positive or the confidential approach) or social paradigms (such as the democracy and the integrative approach);

– According to the area of implementation, the detected approaches in socialpedagogical work are divided into 3 groups: the area of social education (14), the area of social integration and inclusion (4) and the area of social prevention (1).

– The typical target groups include: children and youth with drug dependencies (15), talented children (1), children with deviating behaviour (18), children with disabilities (11), school children (15), young people (2), women-victims of violence 91), marginalised groups – refugees, ethnic communities, religious groups (7), families/ parents and population in underdeveloped areas (1), elderly people (1);

The subjects of social-pedagogical work and activities (34) are individuals (foster families, pedagogues, volunteers, students) and institutions (schools, social institutions for children and youths, child protection bodies, local commissions, communities in small villages).

The most typical methods used in social-pedagogical work according to the publications (91) can be divided into 5 main groups:

– methods for diagnostic and evaluation (7);

– methods for prevention (14);

– methods for correction (3);

– methods for self-coping (10);

– methods for stimulation of individual capacity (28).

The social-pedagogical services rendered (38) form another important practical aspect of social pedagogy. According to the research these can be divided in 3 groups: services for social education and integration (28), services for prevention (5) and correction (7).

Together with methods and services, a special place among the tools of social pedagogy is given to the so called „ambiances” or environments (15). In this case it is accepted that given specific circumstances of space and environment can stimulate or inhibit individuals and groups. This is why in many cases social pedagogy functions are present during artistic and cultural-informative events (10), portfolios, time budget, new institutions (societies, clubs, offices, groupings etc.).

In summary, as a practice social pedagogy in a Bulgarian context comprises the three main directions described by D. Tsvetkov (Tsvetkov, 1996), namely:

– Social-civic education and integration;

– Societal-adaptive education and integration;

– Social-health education and integration (Tsvetkov, 1996: 12–13).

Regrettably, the nature of gathered empirical research data impedes drawing definite conclusions on the prevailing approach in a practical context. In seems that a balance is stricken between the proper pedagogical practices and those with a more global vision and impact.

Conclusions

Research data confirm that social pedagogy as a practice in its Bulgarian context is more likely to rely on pedagogical methods, technologies, processes and tools.

It was also confirmed that social pedagogy is the theory and practice of supporting all human beings, not only the disadvantaged and the disabled groups.

At the same time, in the area of social-pedagogical action there is a need for providing adequate support not only to social development (of everyone) and the prevention of social risks prevention (for some), but to social deviations and deficits, as well. This explains why the instruments of the pedagogy and social work are not sufficient and there is a need to use intervention models from other areas, e.g. social control and correction (table 2).

This is evidence that neither education nor social work can gain the privilege to be the unique practical fields of social pedagogy.

It is time to recognize it in this country like J. Schermaier did it in Germany (Schermaier, 2012) that social-pedagogical competence is a key one for different social areas and professions. These conclusions correspond with established traditions in other countries and regions where social pedagogy as academic course addresses a broad number of programmes and experts: „sociologists, pedagogues, sport pedagogues, humanitarians, crisis experts etc.“ (Popkochev, 2012). Its content designing is based on a complex of conceptual approaches and practical methods, services and environments, which combine element from pedagogical technologies and models with those from the area of the applied psychology and the social control. Even more, its practical dimensions are expanding also to the field of labour market and clinical practices by „boring“ approaches and techniques typical for the occupational and organizational psychology. This means that the practice and its autonomous areas are regulated with the support of knowledge and experience developed in the context of different sciences and their paradigms and systems.

It can be concluded that between practice and its academic (including disciplinary) discourse there exist a substantial divergence which has to be clearly recognized in order not to mix reality with discourse. The different overlapping meanings implied when using the term social pedagogy both at home and abroad are at the bottom of many conceptual „sufferings“ and practical impediments. In this respect the terminology of social pedagogy needs further enrichment and precision whereby practice and scientific abstraction are understood in clear terms.

In my view, seen as a practical activity, social pedagogy can act as a sort of „umbrella“ notion comprising specific activities and practices such as:

– Education (formal, non formal, informal);

– Social work done by institutions (especially in the area of labour market, childcare, protection of persons with disabilities, risk prevention and public health ;

– Social Systems and institutions for control and correction (preventive and corrective institutions, bodies and services).

In this context to consider social pedagogy as a synonym of social work is to misrepresent reality. This is why focusing the academic courses mainly on social work means limiting the possibilities for graduating students to find adequate and satisfactory professional realization.

REFERENCES

1. The corresponding web sites are under lined in the paper further.

2. Find the description of the reviewed web catalogues and conference books in application 1.

3. Sofia University is presented by three academic divisions: Faculty of Education, Faculty of pre-school and primary pedagogy, and Department of information and in-service teacher qualification.

4. The selection is based predominantly on the criteria for technical possibilities for free and fulltime (24h) online accessibility.

5. See the Shumen university web site- http://shu-bg.net/, 18.07.2012.

6. These findings are supported also by the comments of a graduated social pedagogue who shared his experience in the social networks. He applied for an appointment in a social-educational home for neglected children and orphans. During the interview he realizes that the head of institution expect to hire a person who is ready to serve not only as social pedagogue but also as a driver, security, system administrator, caterer etc. See: http://zymosis.blog.bg/lichnidnevnici/2012/03/05/realizaciia-na-visshoto-mi-mnogo-se-podtisnah.914934.

7. Taking into account that the analysed data are published in thematic collections (i.e. focused on working with drug abusers) no quantitative comparisons and evaluations between certain practices with children or adults can be made. There is more adequate in this case to focus on their typology.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Бакалов, Г. & Коев, Т. (2001). Християнски справочник. С.

Бижков, Г. (2006). Социалнопедагогическата работа в училище (сс. 27–42). В: Социална педагогика – история, теория, практика. С.

Василев, Г. (1994). За предмета на социалната педагогика. Педагогика, 6, 91.

Владинска, Н. & Петрова, Н. (1994). Науката социална педагогика – за нейния предмет и обект. Педагогика, 6, 80–89.

Карагьозов, Ив., Русева, М. (1996). Увод в социалната педагогика. Велико Търново: Слово.

Карагьозов, Кв., Русева, М. (1994). Увод в социалната педагогика. В. Търново: Слово.

Колев, Г. (1994). Социална педагогика. Избрани актуални проблеми, Медицина и физкултура. С.

Колев, Й. (2008). История на социалната педагогика. Благоевград.

Колев, Й. (2010). Класици на социалната педагогика. Благоевград.

Кутева В. (2010). Социалнопедагогически процес – особености и съдържание. Педагогически алманах.

Кутева, В. (2007). Социалното възпитание в контекста на социализацията. Педагогически алманах, 1–2, 37–46.

Кутева, В. (2008). Относно научния статус на социалната педагогика. Педагогически алманах, 7–32.

Липински, И. А. (2001). Понятийний апарат и парадигмыразвития социалньной педагогики. Педагогика, 10, 13–20.

Николаева, С. (2005). Европейската съдба насоциалнатапедагогика –между концептуалните различия и практическите принуди в миналото и днес. В: Научните изследвания в социалната работа. София: ГорексПрес.

Николаева, С. (2005). „Социалната педагогика“ – понятийни употреби и смислови граници. Педагогика, 11, 3–17.

Николаева, С. (2008). Неформално образование. Философии. Теории. Практики. Габрово: Екс-Прес.

Попкочев, Тр. (2012). Дисциплинарно отражение на Социалната педагогика в някои руски учебни програми. Съвременното образование: мисия и визии. Сборник с научни студии и статии. Благоевград: Университетско издателство „Неофит Рилски“.

Сапунджиева, Кл. (2006). Състояние и перспективи на социалната педагогика в България (сс. 27–42). Социална педагогика – история, теория, практика. С.

Цветков, Д. (1996). Основи на социалната педагогика, „Наско–1701“. С.

Josef Schermaier J., Zum Begriff Sozialpädagogik, In: https://www.sbg.ac.at/ erz/salzburger_beitraege/herbst99/schermaier_99_2_h.htmq, 18.07.2012.