Social Pedagogy: An Approach Without Fixed Recipes

A historical and theoretical reconstruction of the specificity and peculiarity of the discipline of social pedagogy, as it has developed in Denmark. Social pedagogy takes its departure from the idea that the individual person and the community are complementary but at the same time opposed to each other, so the task of social pedagogy is rebalancing the dynamics between the two. Social pedagogy is also characterised as a discipline with three dimensions: a practical dimension, a theoretical dimension and a professional dimension. The professional’s task is neither to apply theory in practice nor to uphold the usual practice; it is to mediate between theory and practice. The specificity of the discipline gives rise to particular challenges and dilemmas that theorists make understandable and transparent and practitioners have to deal with. A big challenge for social pedagogy is the quest for evidence-based methods that overrides the specificity of the social pedagogical approach. Balancing different forms of knowledge implies that programmes and methods are used as inspiration that can be contained in a social pedagogical approach

‘Does My Haltung Look Big In This?”: The Use of Social Pedagogical Theory for the Development of Ethical and Value Led Practice

The aim of this article is to set out how the use of social pedagogical Haltung can support the exploration of values and how this informs and shapes a practitioner’s direct work. Haltung is a German concept that has no direct English translation but means ‘mind set’, ‘ethos’ or ‘attitude’ (Eichsteller, 2010) and relates to an individual’s value base. Mührel’s (2008, cited in Eichsteller, 2010), sets out that a social pedagogical Haltung is based on the two concepts of empathic understanding and regard. This paper argues that the use of a social pedagogical Haltung gives practitioners a philosophical framework to support the reflection of core values and ethics held on a personal level. It also supports an understanding of how these influence practitioners and students when using ‘self’ in relationship based practice. The understanding of Haltung is important but for social pedagogical practice to be undertaken it also has to be demonstrated by actions. The reflective activity Values Alive in Practice, set out in this article, provides a tool for social workers, practitioners and students to critically explore their own values and practice and make more meaningful connections between their Haltung and their behaviours demonstrated in their everyday work. In the UK, values and standards for social work practice are set out by British Association of Social Work and Social Work England. Arguably, these have, at times, been reduced to a checklist for students and practitioners and can lack more in depth and explicit links to practice. The analysis of practice is more likely to focus on the skills and abilities of practitioners rather than the value base that underpins these. Whilst the understanding and key application of core knowledge and skills is essential for competent social work practice (Forrester et al., 2019), this article argues that it must also be supported and shaped by ethical principles. This article seeks to explore how social workers can be supported to adopt value led approaches to complex work within an outcome focussed culture

Neurostimulation, doping, and the spirit of sport

There is increasing interest in using neuro-stimulation devices to achieve an ergogenic effect in elite athletes. Although the World Anti-Doping Authority (WADA) does not currently prohibit neuro-stimulation techniques, a number of researchers have called on WADA to consider its position on this issue. Focusing on trans-cranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as a case study of an imminent so-called ‘neuro-doping’ intervention, we argue that the emerging evidence suggests that tDCS may meet WADA’s own criteria (pertaining to safety, performance-enhancing effect, and incompatibility with the ‘spirit of sport’) for a method’s inclusion on its list of prohibited substances and methods. We begin by surveying WADA’s general approach to doping, and highlight important limitations to the current evidence base regarding the performance-enhancing effect of pharmacological doping substances. We then review the current evidence base for the safety and efficacy of tDCS, and argue that despite significant shortcomings, it may be sufficient for WADA to consider prohibiting tDCS, in light of the comparable flaws in the evidence base for pharmacological doping substances. In the second half of the paper, we argue that the question of whether WADA ought to ban tDCS turns significantly on the question of whether it is compatible with the ‘spirit of sport’ criterion. We critique some of the previously published positions on this, and advocate our own sport-specific and application-specific approach. Despite these arguments, we finally conclude by suggesting that tDCS ought to be monitored rather than prohibited due to compelling non-ideal considerations