Education and socialization always 'take place' somewhere: in- and outside buildings, in private and public spaces, in particular communities, neighborhoods, cities or regional contexts. This symposium wishes to highlight this spatiality of education and socialization. Socio-ecological theories on education structure children and young people's life worlds into distinct ecological zones and sectors which all create particular educational challenges and experiences for the child. Bronfenbrenner's ecological framework for human development (1979) has been an important influence on this tradition of educational research. The representation of children's life worlds as a complex network of socially organized systems and subsystems turns education into an open-ended process with many influences that can only be partially managed by formal educational institutions. As a consequence, it is reasonable to state that space matters in education.
By 2050 two thirds of all people, including over a billion children, will live and grow up in cities (UNICEF, 2012). In contrast to the city as a dangerous, unhealthy and unsafe space, the rural appears as an alternative. This powerful anti-urban and romantic image of the rural is presented as an ideal, tranquil, safe and peaceful context for children to grow up in (Valentine, 1997). Part of this rural idyll dates back to Rousseau’s depiction of nature as an ideal context for the child to explore and develop its individuality (Rousseau, 1817). Instead of focusing on an educational analysis of the city, more and more cities choose to implement the rural image through green and ‘child friendly’ urban planning. Yet, the present debate still lacks a clear socio-spatial analysis of the city as an educational context.
Considering the idea that space matters in education, one can say that the city is not only a promoter, organizer and regulator of education, but also a cause of education in its own right (Bernet, 1990). The Education Cities Movement builds well on this idea (Lúcio and Neves, 2010). In a report from the international network on Educating Cities, Bernet (1990) made a threefold distinction between learning in and from the city, and learning the city. Learning in the city points at the territoriality of education: the city is seen as a spatial background that promotes (or hinders) particular types of learning, and as a gathering of educational facilities and environments. When one considers that it is also possible to learn the city and to learn from the city, it emerges as a learning experience, as a discourse that invites different kinds of reading and (re)writing, perception and appropriation; a learning experience that is contributed to, and shared by, child care professionals, educators, governmental actors and children.
The metaphor of the city as a curriculum affects the very idea of urbanism. Moving from a functional towards a communicative role, urbanism does not only design the context for education, but becomes educationally relevant in itself (Leach, 1997; Hertzberger, 2008). Structuring the everyday learning opportunities of citizens through spatial design and planning, the urban planner acquires a pedagogical role. While producing learning opportunities, urbanism exceeds the expertise and field of the urban planner and meets the field of social sciences. Hence, a socio-spatial dialogue between multiple scientific disciplines is needed. In this sense the city as a learning experience does not only address children and their fellow citizens, but academics as well.
The papers featured in this three-part symposium will promote a multidisciplinary and international discussion on what can be learned in and from urban spaces, as well as on how different stakeholders perceive the city as an educational space, taking into account pedagogical theories, existing concepts and intervention programs and the contribution of multiple scientific approaches.
