Growing international interest in approaches to social work focussing on human growth and development and including each social actor’s real freedoms to act, such as the capabilities approach, has fascinated BU Professor Emeritus, Jonathan Parker. In this new paper Parker and his German colleagues introduce a related, but internationally less well-known concept from German-language philosophy of education discourses,
Bildung, arguing that
Bildung represents a valuable additional framework that emphasises human growth and human flourishing.
The concept of Bildung has changed over time, with this paper charting development from its late enlightenment-period origins. Two particular variants are highlighted: the original 18th-century Bildung, which focussed on helping the individual reach a state of agency, and Mündigkeit (maturity), a late 20th-century critical theory-influenced Bildung, which focussed on the relationship between the growth of the individual and the society of which they are part. It is suggested that due to their shared tenets, both variants of Bildung can be seen a single concept, one with a strong conceptual closeness to the capabilities approach.
When applied to social work, Bildung suggests a shift away from thinking about the person in terms of utilities and outcomes, towards instead an understanding of a person’s humanness in their freedom to choose their own path and become the author of their own life. Parker and colleagues highlight four key elements of Bildung-informed social work: (1) the role of the social worker stimulating the service user’s dispositions in the context of their social environment; (2) shifting to a relationship-oriented practice, centring on direct work; (3) utilizing community settings in practice, and (4) the importance of refraining from using guidance, persuasion and coercion.
Congratulations!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Reference:
- Frampton, M., Friesenhahn, G. J., & Parker, J. (2024). Bildung, capabilities, human freedom and human flourishing: impulses for social work. Journal of Comparative Social Work, 19(1), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.31265/jcsw.v19i1.727