Ulrich Oevermann's Attempt To Reconcile Theory With Practice

The question of the theory-practice relationship does belong to the most important question of social sciences as well as of theoretical philosophy. While in philosophy this relationship is tried to be answered from an epistemological perspective, in the social sciences this relationship is approached either from the logic of action theory or systems theories. The discourse on professionalisation is about the question of how forms of knowledge, communication and action can be objectified in the lifeworld, which is interwoven with dense expectations, made effective, i.e. used in the functional systems of society in a purpose-rational way without endangering the conditions of this order. This paper discusses the theory of professionalization developed by Ulrich Oevermann. This article aims to present and critically evaluate Oevermann's theory of professionalisation. Oevermann's approach shall be recalled to Parsons and Luhmann but still take the distinction between theory and practice as temporally state. After a discourse on Oevermann's understanding of routine/normal case and crisis/borderline case, this shall be done in the discussion of his theory of professionalization from its genesis and then linked to three foci of professional action. In this course, Oevermann's focus of theory and therapy as a working alliance will be particularly emphasized. This is followed by a discourse on Oevermann's notions of the need for professionalization and professionalizedness. Finally, the need for professionalization of the pedagogical and nursing professions will be considered from the perspective of Oevermann himself.

Ulrich Oevermann's Attempt To Reconcile Theory With Practice

The question of the theory-practice relationship does belong to the most important question of social sciences as well as of theoretical philosophy. While in philosophy this relationship is tried to be answered from an epistemological perspective, in the social sciences this relationship is approached either from the logic of action theory or systems theories. The discourse on professionalisation is about the question of how forms of knowledge, communication and action can be objectified in the lifeworld, which is interwoven with dense expectations, made effective, i.e. used in the functional systems of society in a purpose-rational way without endangering the conditions of this order. This paper discusses the theory of professionalization developed by Ulrich Oevermann. This article aims to present and critically evaluate Oevermann's theory of professionalisation. Oevermann's approach shall be recalled to Parsons and Luhmann but still take the distinction between theory and practice as temporally state. After a discourse on Oevermann's understanding of routine/normal case and crisis/borderline case, this shall be done in the discussion of his theory of professionalization from its genesis and then linked to three foci of professional action. In this course, Oevermann's focus of theory and therapy as a working alliance will be particularly emphasized. This is followed by a discourse on Oevermann's notions of the need for professionalization and professionalizedness. Finally, the need for professionalization of the pedagogical and nursing professions will be considered from the perspective of Oevermann himself.

___

  • Demir, Ali (2022): Talcott Parsons' Theory of Profession. In: Aslan, Yusuf (ed.): Bilim, Eğitim, Tarih, Toplum. S. 270-291. Ankara: Kalan Yayınları.
  • Durkheim, E. (1976). Die Regeln der soziologischen Methode. Vierte revidierte Auflage. Neuwied: Luchterhand.
  • Habermas, J. (1987 I). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Band 1: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Habermas, J. (1987 II). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Band 2: Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Habermas, J. (1991). Erläuterungen zur Diskursethik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Habermas, J. (1998). Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaates. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Habermas, J. (1991). Erläuterungen zur Diskursethik. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.
  • Kurtz, T. (2022). The End of the Profession as a Sociological Category? Systems-theoretical Remarks on the Relationship between Profession and Society. The American Sociologist 53, 265-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-021-09483-3
  • Luhmann, N. (1972). Funktionen und Folgen formaler Organisation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
  • Luhmann, N (1984). Soziale Systeme: Grundriss einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Luhmann, N (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Maiwald, K.-O. (2004a). Professionalisierung im modernen Berufssystem: Das Beispiel der Familienmediation. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
  • Maiwald, K.-O. (2004b). Die Anforderungen mediatorischer Konfliktbearbeitung. Versuche einer typologischen Bestimmung. Zeitschrift für Rechtsoziologie, 25 (2), 175-189
  • Oevermann, U. (1997). Theoretische Skizze einer revidierten Theorie professionalisierten Handelns. In: Helsper, W. & Combe, Arno (Hrsg.). Pädagogische Professionalität. Untersuchungen zum Typus pädagogischen Handelns. (S. 70-183). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Oevermann, U (2001). Strukturprobleme supervisorischer Praxis. Eine objektiv hermeneutische Sequenzanalyse zur Überprüfung der Professionalisierungstheorie. Frankfurt am Main: Humanities Online.
  • Oevermann, U (2002). Professionalisierungsbedürftigkeit und Professionalisiertheit pädagogischen Handelns. In: Kraul, M., Marotzki, W. & Schweppe, C. (Hrsg.). Biographie und Profession (S. 19–64). Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn.
  • Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. London: Routledge. URL:
  • Parsons, T & Shils, E. A. (ed.) (1962). Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Stichweh, R. (1987). Professionen und Disziplinen: Formen der Differenzierung zweier Systeme beruflichen Handelns in modernen Gesellschaften. In: Harney, K., Jütting, D. & Koring, B. (Hrsg.). Professionalisierung der Erwachsenenbildung. (S. 210-275). Frankfurt a.M./Bern: Peter Lang.
  • Stichweh, R. (1994). Wissenschaft, Universität, Professionen: soziologische Analysen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Stichweh, R. (1996). Professionen in einer funktional differenzierten Gesellschaft. In: Combe, A. & Heslper, W. (Hrsg.). Pädagogische Professionalität. Untersuchungen zum Typus pädagogischen Handelns. S.49-69. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Weber, M. (1985). Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre. Tübingen: Mohr.
  • Wernet, A. (2003). Pädagogische Permissivität. Schulische Sozialisation und pädagogisches Handeln jenseits der Professionalisierungsfrage [Pedagogical permissiveness. School socialization and pedagogical action beyond the professio5nalization question]. Opladen: Leske u. Budrich.