The question of theory in education has always been a troubled one. This is partly because there is the strong belief that education is a thoroughly practical endeavour, which raises the question how much theory such an endeavour actually needs. Some arguments in relation to this are clear populist in that they rely on a simplistic opposition between theory and practice and on the assumption that practice is simply ‘practical’ and theory is, by definition, unpractical. It is already much more helpful to see that the theory of education and the practice of education are both practices and that both practices have a ‘reflective’ component and an ‘action’ component. In that way, the so-called ‘theory-practice’ problem because a matter of what meaningful communication between these two practices might entail.

It is important to be aware that this is not a new discussion in the field of education, but rather has been part of the educational conversation at least since education became established as a discipline or field in universities and institutes of higher education. The way the question poses itself does, however, change over time. And perhaps the strongest argument against theory in contemporary education stems from the idea that educational research should just focus on finding out ‘what works’ and providing educational practice with this information. The suggestion here is that the reflective engagement with educational practice should be (entirely) empirical rather than theoretical.

In addition to discussions about the possible roles of theory in educational research and educational practice, there are also important questions about the social organisation and institutional configuration of education and what this means for theory. One remarkable ‘split’ within the field of education is between those countries where education has established itself as an academic discipline amongst other disciplines (for example in the German-speaking world) and countries where education has established itself as an applied field which, for its theoretical ‘input,’ relies on ‘other’ (and some would say: real) academic disciplines (which is an influential configuration in the English-speaking world). This is for example the context within which the idea of the philosophy of education has emerged as a distinctive ‘approach’ next to, for example, the psychology and sociology of education. Yet the philosophy of education, as a form of ‘applied philosophy’ is very different from a field such as ‘Allgemeine Pädagogik’ or ‘Bildungs- und Erziehungstheorie’ in the German-speaking world.

These historical developments do not just matter in order to understand how the field of educational research and scholarship has developed differently in different contexts and settings. It also impacts the situation today, both with regard to the roles that theory plays or can play in the wider educational ‘conversation’ (the academic conversation, the policy field, and educational practice). And it impacts the particular engagements with theory that are considered to be important, relevant, or even necessary.

The ambition of this symposium is to bring together insights from a number of different countries, regions, and traditions around the theory question of education. It is partly an attempt to take stock of where theory is, particularly in the context of strong attempts to argue that educational research should be first and foremost empirical in nature and character. And it is partly an attempt to explore and reflect on possible ways forward for theory in educational research and educational practice.

**Selection** - Bellmann, J. (2017). Forwards to the Learning Sciences or Back to Pedagogy? Prospects of Education as an Academic Field. In H. Sæverot & T. Werler (Eds.), Pedagogikkens Språk: Kunnskapsformer i Pedagogikkvitenskap (pp. 104–117). Gyldendal Akademisk. - Biesta, G. (2011). Disciplines and Theory in the Academic Study of Education: A Comparative Analysis of the Anglo-American and Continental Construction of the Field. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2011.582255 - Dewey, J. (1929). The Sources of a Science of Education. Liveright. - Lagemann E.C. (2000). An Elusive Science. The Troubling History of Education Research. The University of Chicago Press. - Matthes, E. (2020). Aktualität der Geisteswissenschaftlichen Pädagogik [The Relevance of ›Geisteswissenschaftliche Pädagogik‹]. Vierteljahrsschrift für Wissenschaftliche Pädagogik, 96(2), 214–230. https://doi.org/10.30965/25890581-09602005 - Sæverot, H. (2021). How May Education be Organized to Safeguard its Autonomy? Educational Theory, 71(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12470 - Siegel, S. T., & Biesta, G. (2021). The Problem of Educational Theory. Policy Futures in Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103211032087 - Thoilliez, B. (2014). La Teoría de la Educación en España: diagnóstico, pronóstico y (posible) tratamiento. In, T. Rabazas Romero (Coord.) El conocimiento teórico de la educación en España. Evolución y consolidación (pp. 207-223). Madrid: Síntesis.