This presentation reminds of the conceptual differences in using "culture" in the singular and using "cultures" in the plural when analysing and theorizing education. The focus is on the meaning of work and occupational culture(s) in vocationally oriented adult education, critical for research and policy discourses in German-speaking countries (Molzberger, 2024), but very influential across political and linguistic borders. Culture (sg) is a fuzzy term with inherent dualistic meanings, such as culture vs. civilisation. In 19th-century Germany, the representation of the Prussian ‘Kulturstaat’ (Bollenbeck, 1994; Casale, Molzberger 2025) legitimised a hegemonic strategy against ‘less developed’ countries and communities. Cultures (pl.) refer to practices that are shared collectively (Alkemeyer et al., 2018). In the German concept of Beruf, this collective dimension, as well as a certain normative dimension, is still inherent. Besides the ‘promise’ to find more in your work/labour than earning a living, Berufe (professions/occupations) are functional to the powerfully defined divisions of labour in reproducing society. In this sense, Wolf-Dietrich Greinert (2004) refered to respective models of work cultures (Arbeitskulturen). Work cultures understood as reciprocal actions of collectives are not necessarily formalised. For example, they often have their own languages (‘Berufssprache’ by practitioners and their jargon may differ from the technical language taught in VET). Work cultures were formed by but also exist independently from regulations and institutionalised VET-systems with their respective organisations, accountabilities and laws. As invisible institutions (Rosanvallon, 2024), they are built by collectives from below. In a disputed and contradictory world (Heikkinen et al. 2024) and as a non-deterministic concept, “culture” – as well as “Beruf” and “Bildung” – elude their methodisability.

Alkemeyer, Th., Bröckling, U., Peter, T. (Eds.). (2018). Jenseits der Person. Zur Subjektivierung von Kollektiven. Bielefeld: transcipt Verlag. Bollenbeck, G.: Bildung und Kultur. Glanz und Elend eines deutschen Deutungsmusters. Frankfurt a.M./Leipzig: Insel 1994 Bolder, A., Dobischat, R., Kutscha, G. & Reutter, G. (Eds.) (2012). Beruflichkeit zwischen institutionellem Wandel und biographischem Projekt. (pp. 7–23). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Casale, R., & Molzberger, G. (2025). On the studium generale as pars pro toto of the university and its amorphous transformations. Pedagogia oggi, 23(1), 26–33. Greinert, W.-D. (2004). European vocational training ‘systems’ - some thoughts on the theoretical context of their historical development. European Journal of Vocational Training 32. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/etv/Upload/Information_resources/Bookshop/399/32_en_greinert.pdf. Heikkinen, A., Lassnigg, L., & Molzberger, G. (2023). What crisis are we in actually? The (Nordic) Bildung Hype in Adult Education. In Ebner von Eschenbach, M., Käpplinger, B., Kondratjuk, M., Kraus, K. & Niemeyer, B. (Eds.). Re-Konstruktionen. Krisenthematisierungen in der Erwachsenenbildung (pp. 179–192). Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Molzberger, G. (2024). Kontroversen allgemeiner und beruflicher Bildung Erwachsener – Versuch über ein rhizomatisches Geflecht und eine doppelt zweigeteilte institutionelle Struktur. Debatte, 7(2), 138–149. Rosanvallon, P. (2024). Les institutions invisibles. Paris: Le Seuil.