A Review on the Advances in Socially Oriented Education

Abstract

An academic focus on Socially Oriented Education (SOE) has been proposed to accomplish the call of the United Nations to transform educational systems due to the dynamics of contemporary society. This work aims to map the SOE-related literature, providing an overview of the 21st-century approaches to answer the questions: (i) How is SOE defined, and what other concepts are related to it? (ii) Are there any theories involved in developing SOE? (iii) What would be the different study areas that involve SOE? SOE has been used in the academic literature to refer to educational approaches that prioritize social and ethical development, civic engagement, and social justice. Now, it should expand its reach to address pressing issues such as climate change and inequality. It should also shift toward a more student-centered approach, emphasizing student agency and empowerment. SOE should prioritize promoting intercultural competence and preparing students for a globalized world. Technology can be integrated with state-owned enterprises to create innovative learning experiences. The main function of SOE is to solve current societal problems using education as a powerful tool for transformation. There is still much to learn about the effectiveness of SOE, and future research could help advance this field.

1. Introduction

Since the late XIX century, social pedagogy envisioned connecting academic missions with sociopolitical interests [1]. It was thought that by the XXI century, professionals would already be experts in sociotechnical systems that interrelate engineering, science, economics, and the public good and that education would be innovative, interdisciplinary, and have social and behavioral considerations [2]. Nonetheless, today, the same proposal is still in progress: “As in the past, we must be aware that technological progress is not enough and social policies [in education] must be developed” [3].

In the Vision Statement on Transforming Education, declared in the Report on the 2022 Transforming Education Summit convened by the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, an urgent call is made for the transformation of educative systems toward new ecosystems and approaches that prepare society to overcome crises that threaten our collective future—climate change, poverty, inequalities, cultural and political polarization, lack of trust, and conflict [4]. The report from the International Commission on the Futures of Education published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) proposes a new social contract for education to fully realize its transformative potential based on human rights and the principles of non-discrimination, social justice, respect for life, human dignity, and cultural diversity [5]. The above is based on the emerging disruptions and transformations that generate an uncertain future for humanity and point toward pedagogies of cooperation and solidarity in which teachers and students form communities of seekers and builders of knowledge [5].

To answer the question: What technological and social policies are necessary to transform education systems toward new ecosystems? In previous work, we mentioned the need to focus education on social needs with interdisciplinary pedagogical actions focused on social justice awareness and sustainability competencies (works not cited for anonymity purposes). We used the concept of Socially Oriented Education (SOE) when reflecting on the actions of universities that should be implemented to diminish the social and educational divides revealed and highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic [6]. Our investigation has yet to explore the distinct actions that educational institutions are currently implementing regarding the concept of SOE. It is imperative to scrutinize the specific measures these institutions are taking to integrate the concept of SOE and the extent of their implementation.

To our knowledge, no single document in the literature defined SOE before or used this concept to frame an educational pedagogy. Therefore, a literature review was considered necessary to obtain ideas and guidance on incorporating socially oriented approaches into pedagogical practice and identify gaps in knowledge and areas where further research is needed. The result may inspire researchers to carry out new studies using the concept to address social issues that can be solved with education under this new perspective.

In this narrative review, we document the different meanings, theories, research lines, concepts, and practices that aim to solve contemporary social problems with education. This work aims to map the SOE-related literature, providing an overview of the 21st-century approaches to drafting the state-of-the-art SOE. The research questions that we look to answer are:

(i)

How is SOE defined, and what other concepts are related to it?

(ii)

Are there any theories involved in developing SOE?

(iii)

What would be the different study areas that involve SOE?

2. Materials and Methods

This is a narrative review. Narrative reviews discuss important topics from a theoretical point of view and are considered an important educational tool [7]. Narrative reviews deepen the understanding of a certain research area, report advances in an existing research field, and identify knowledge gaps on the latest interventions available [8]. These reviews take a less formal approach than systematic reviews since they do not require more rigorous aspects and characteristics or quality assessment [7,9].

This review used the PCC (Population, Concept, and Context) framework to scope the literature [10].

Table 1. The framework of the literature scoping review on Socially Oriented Education.

PCC Element	Explanation
Population	Universities, schools, or any educational institute
Concept	SOE or education-oriented to society issues
Context	Theoretical aspects or problems and challenges of 21st century

includes a description of the PCC elements included in this review.

This review was conducted from January to March 2022, following a scoping search using relevant databases. In the first round, only “socially oriented education” was used as a keyword to search all documents in the database search engine. The browsers used in this review were Scopus, Science Direct, MDPI, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. To increase the number of documents found, in a second round, the words “socially”, “oriented” and “education” were investigated in the title, abstract, and keywords fields. Information on the hits obtained is presented in

Table 2. Queries used for each database and hits obtained from each database (2000–2021).

Source (Query)	First Round (“Socially Oriented Education”)	Second Round (Socially AND Oriented AND Education)
Scopus	4	511
Science Direct	2	474
MDPI	2	183
Web of Science	6	874
Google Scholar	152	-
Total	166	2042

.

Then, the entries were screened using the inclusion criteria: (a) English language, (b) type of publication including journal articles, reviews, and proceedings, and (c) studies focused on any educational topics regarding theory or different aspects oriented to society. The exclusion criteria were (a) non-English language, (b) another type of publication such as theses, reports, or web pages, and (c) studies mentioning keywords with no emphasis on education.

The number of documents meeting the language and type of publication criteria was 991, while the number of documents meeting the focus and accessibility criteria was 402. After screening and removing duplicates, 101 documents were left for consideration. Some studies were removed after reading the document deeply. This revision was performed by all authors simultaneously, which included dividing the databases among the authors, charting how any of the queries used in this review were used in the selected documents, and identifying the outcomes or what the authors of each document intended to inform. The procedure followed for this revision can be observed in Figure 1.

The final list with 77 documents is provided in the Supplementary Materials (Table S1), as well as the geographical distribution of the authors conducting such works. The results of this review are synthesized in tables and arranged in the sub-sections that constitute the Section 3. The present investigation is presented in narrative style. Some references, for example, from previous years, web pages, or reports, are added only to support conceptual ideas. The following section is structured according to the emergent topics found in the identified literature regarding SOE.

3. Results

In the social, cultural, and scientific context, pedagogical teaching tends to support society’s demands at a specific time and in a specific space [11]. Nowadays, education needs a disruptive approach to allow social transformation [12]. Studies have found that contextualized educational programs supporting students’ professional values and desires create a social impact [13,14,15]. The arrangement of life’s values (family, security, peace, equality, respect, justice, harmony, curiosity, and self-discipline) and potential threats (water, economy, climate, health, infrastructure, families, innovation, security, globalization, heritage, technology, and culture) have been correlated with knowledge and research engagement [16]. This balancing pattern demands the creation of flexible and relevant learning content linked to real-life problems to exploit students’ talents and educate responsible global citizens [17]. Changing and extending curricula to adapt to changes in the mobile world and toward a socially inherited education are trends that significantly impact the vision of future education [18].

Some universities have implemented social orientation into their academic programs and initiatives to promote social responsibility and community engagement among their students. For example, Stanford University’s Haas Center for Public Service offers a range of programs and courses that promote community engagement and social responsibility (https://haas.stanford.edu/, accessed on 4 July 2022). Students can participate in service-learning projects, community-based research, and leadership development programs that address social issues and promote social justice. Columbia University’s Office of Civic Engagement oversees various programs and initiatives that promote community service, civic engagement, and social justice (https://www.columbia.edu/content/civic-engagement accessed on 4 July 2022, ibidem). These include service-learning courses, community-based research projects, and advocacy and activism programs that help students develop the skills and knowledge needed to effect social change. The University of Michigan’s Edward Ginsberg Center offers a range of programs and resources that encourage students to engage in community service and social justice initiatives (https://ginsberg.umich.edu/ accessed on 4 July 2022, ibidem). Students can participate in service-learning courses, volunteer programs, and civic engagement projects that address various social issues. However, the effectiveness of these approaches may depend on various factors, such as the quality of implementation, the cultural context, and the needs and characteristics of the students. Therefore, further research is needed to understand the potential benefits and limitations of SOE approaches fully.

3.1. Definition and Origin of SOE

Socially Oriented Education (SOE) has been used in the academic literature to refer to educational approaches prioritizing social and ethical development, civic engagement, and social justice. As observed in the Supplementary Materials, concepts related to SOE have been studied more during the last years, starting from 2017 (Figure S1). It is worth mentioning that it is not possible to distinguish a geographic or economic development pattern that could determine the greatest number of publications on SOE in the world. The data are presented in Figure S2 of the Supplementary Materials.

From all the literature reviewed in this work, only twelve documents textually mentioned the concept of “socially oriented education” (

Table 3. Context of the mentions of “Socially-Oriented Education” in the literature from 2000 to 2022.

Context	Ref.
This work alludes to Thailand healers, who take advantage of patient interaction to educate them about the mind–body relationship. To do this, they use SOE as a promotional means to increase awareness of environmentally friendly methods and traditional elements of the culture.	[19]
This work uses the term SOE to refer to the screening strategy for a virus associated with infectious dermatitis in children with signs of myelopathy and their families to prevent the spread of the virus in endemic areas.	[20]
This work refers to SOE in recommending a nurse plan to support at-risk families and reduce expenditures on abuse cases of sick and healthy children.	[21]
In this work, the beginning of the cybernetic era (technology-reality relationship) in education was criticized because it would reinforce, at the expense of SOE, the role of competitive and achievement-based education.	[22]
The authors conducted an experiment in which primary school teachers were surveyed about teaching an organ donation topic to primary school children. Only 17% of respondents stated that the subject was part of normal SOE, while the rest indicated that parents should be explicitly informed before the teaching lesson.	[23]
This work clearly and explicitly emphasizes that SOE is the engine of social change, given direct and indirect empirical evidence that correlates pro-social education with the cultivation of pro-social environmental behavior.	[24]
According to this work, during the last century, there was an aversion toward SOE (referred to as adult education) since it was a threat to individualism, which in turn was key to capitalism and democracy of the time (“learning for earning”).	[25]
Focusing on the characteristics of the association of young people in criminal groups, this work mentions the need for SOE as a society-building process due to each country’s multinational and multicultural features in a globalized world.	[26]
According to this work, providing quality SOE indicates a university’s social responsibility, which “ensures rational interaction with all subjects of the educational, scientific and economic activities”.	[27]
This is an editorial article in a particular issue, which refers to a book in which a distinction between technologically oriented education and SOE in computer-oriented fields was attempted and should be balanced.	[28]

).

These definitions frame SOE as an engine for social change and a society-building process. It is accompanied by multidisciplinary technological solutions to empower students in their social version, dealing with social issues such as violence, immigration, or poverty [18,29]. Other studies describe different approaches related to SOE.

Table 4. Concepts related to SOE that were found in this literature review.

Concepts	Ref.
Prosocial education, pro-environmental education, soft-skill developments, social-emotional learning, collaborative or cooperative learning, whole-child education, service-learning, civic education, character education, moral education, multicultural education, global education, cosmopolitan education	[24]
Community-based education	[30]
People-oriented education, sustainable development strategy, social and environmental educational goals, lifelong education	[31]
Transformative education, social change, sustainability	[32]
Lifelong learning	[32,33,34]
Socially responsible role of knowledge, sustainable development-oriented universities	[35]
New environmental learning	[36]
Future-oriented competencies	[37]
Geodesign	[38]
Health literacy education	[39]
Culturally relevant education, global citizenship education, social-justice orientation	[40,41]
Socio-scientific framework in science education	[42]
Education through a science teaching approach	[43]
Pro-socially oriented education	[44]
Social innovation for education	[18]
Socially oriented student learning	[27]
Socially oriented observations, social–ecological systems, informed decision-making	[39]
Socially oriented classroom, socially just and equitable classroom	[45]
STEM-literate citizenship	[46]
Quality-oriented education, even-handed education, equitable education	[34]
Normative–ecological, altruistic, biospheric, and eco-centric education, future relevance behavior	[47]

is a list of terms extracted from the reviewed sources.

From here, we should mention that SOE is an approach to education that emphasizes developing social skills and values in addition to academic knowledge. It recognizes that education is not only about imparting knowledge but also about preparing individuals to become responsible and engaged members of society.

Socially Oriented Education (SOE) can be traced to different educational movements and philosophies. However, Service Learning (SL), which appeared in the ’80s [48], could be considered its roots. SL comprises many disciplines and has transversal and vertical capacities [49,50]. It comes with many Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [51], thus adding essential inputs to the SOE framework. The SL perspective emphasizes integrating academic learning and community service to promote civic engagement and social responsibility. SOE draws on this perspective to provide students with opportunities to engage in meaningful and relevant community service activities linked to their academic learning.

However, in a world of consumerism, thinking and consumption patterns must be considered to promote active citizenship and stimulate educational responsibility [52]. Stakeholders’ demand for knowledge, competencies, and skills must also be developed by SOE [24,31,53,54]. Functional-oriented and future-scaffolding skills and competencies are essential to make learning relevant in the personal, social, professional, and scientific spaces [37,55].

A set of approaches to skill development in the SOE literature is shown in

Table 5. Approaches for competencies and skill development toward SOE.

Approaches	Ref.
Active learning (i.e., experiential, problem-based, challenge-based, service, context-based, and t-learning)	[42,56,57,58]
Virtual reality, augmented reality, and blockchain technologies	[59,60]
MOOCs, embedded and video platforms	[18,61,62]
Gamification and Serious Games	[63,64]
Informal education and social projects	[31,53]

.

Some approaches are related to classroom learning, but others have a reach-out effect, such as digital platforms and informal education.

In this sense, we recognize the input of digital technologies to develop SOE skills. It is inconceivable to realize that teachers may not possess the digital competence necessary to approach teaching with digital technologies [40]. Faculty perceptions are an inevitable influencing factor in the development of students’ learning [42,65]. Thus, there should be a more significant investment in the training of teachers in digital technologies. Faculty, parents, and policymakers in university development programs are also a means of helping to break cultural traditions and raise awareness of lifelong learning [33,45] to avoid the exacerbation of social class academic disparities and achievement gaps [66].

In sum, SOE promotes social cohesion and mutual respect by fostering a sense of community and encouraging universities’ active participation in community service and civic engagement. It involves collaborative and experiential learning activities that encourage students to work together and engage with real-world issues. Examples of SOE include service-learning programs, multicultural education, and character education programs. These programs promote social responsibility, cultural awareness, and ethical behavior among students. Overall, SOE seeks to produce individuals who are both knowledgeable and socially and ethically responsible.

3.2. Theories Involved in the Development of SOE

The theoretical foundations of SOE draw from various fields of study, including education, sociology, psychology, and philosophy. Based on the literature survey in this work, the key theoretical perspectives underpinning SOE are constructivism, humanist and social justice theory, the end of activity theory, the goal-congruity theory, and the stakeholder theory.

First, constructivism (knowledge is not absorbed, it is created through experience) is the newest framework theory of education. This theory suggests that students, aware of the human dimension and its connection with culture, contrast or adjust what they have learned when confronting reality [67]. Constructivism is an ideal reflection of today’s Western beliefs in a world of changing interests and choices and living conditions becoming more and more adverse [68]. In constructivism, teachers must teach with socio-transformative actions [69], serving as guides and facilitators, but not dispensers, and designing a mix of learning activities ranging from teaching–learning sessions to highly structured exploratory activities that should be contextual, authentic, experiential, and self-regulated [70,71].

Beyond constructivism, there is the humanist theory and the social justice theory [42], which pursue social engagement and led researchers to come up with the activity theory, postulating that there are three domains of education: social (cooperative learning, social values, socio-scientific decision-making), personal (intellectual character, attitude, communication skills), and natural (research skills), where science is merely the vehicle for learning [43]. The last end of the activity theory is to enable students, as adults, to play a responsible role within society with their social values, functional skills, and relevant public understanding of science and technology and the application of their abilities beyond the classroom [43].

The last is also in agreement with the goal-congruity theory. This theory states that students choose hard sciences under the associative sense of social orientation with innovation and progress. This is due to their need for essential satisfaction from helping others indirectly or directly, thus ensuring economic growth while combating problems of contemporary society [72]. Some researchers have observed that since women have more social interest than men, who are more interested in working with things, if the importance of SOE were emphasized using these theories, there would be more women in areas where they are underrepresented [72,73].

Finally, there is the stakeholder theory. Shifting emphasis toward society-oriented educational purposes in the context of increasing international competition is in vogue [33]. Actions toward social responsibility and sustainable development influence student satisfaction, achieving advantages over competitors [74]. Stakeholder participatory action research, a collaborative method for developing education, may help universities with this task [60], especially when considering their social purpose in the community and developing anti-crisis policies during emergencies, such as COVID-19 [27].

To summarize, constructivism, humanism, and social justice are key theories associated with SOE. These theories emphasize the role of the learner in constructing their own understanding of the world, the inherent worth and dignity of every human being, and the idea that society should be structured to ensure fairness and equity for all. From here, SOE should imply that learners actively engage with new information and use their knowledge and experiences to create meaning, promote the development of the whole person, including their social and emotional well-being, promote inclusive classrooms, challenge biases and stereotypes, and address systemic inequalities. In turn, SOE should allow learners to apply their knowledge and skills to real-world problems, as the activity and stakeholder theories propose, while fostering a sense of civic responsibility and social awareness.

3.3. Different SOE Study Areas

In the 21st century, many supranational organizations became related to education, such as the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, and the International Monetary Fund. Some are more oriented to society, such as the OECD, UNESCO, and UNICEF. The discourse of these organizations around education is strongly related to the new knowledge-based economy, mentioning the universal and public principles of education and marking social inclusion and economic participation guidelines in education [75]. Active learners and critical thinkers are required in this education version [46]. Education’s intrinsic and instrumental principles must serve to create more inclusive and fair societies [76,77]. In this literature review, we found some study areas that cope with the principles of SOE, such as social entrepreneurship, environmental education, multiculturalism, digital and media literacy, healthcare education, and Science–Technology–Engineering–Mathematic (STEM) education.

3.3.1. Social Entrepreneurship

SOE overlaps with social entrepreneurship, which is defined by [15] as “creative and innovative strategies that have been designed by students, professors, and practitioners within colleges and universities with the intent of solving a wide range of societal problems”. Starting in the 1900s, the application of entrepreneurial principles in higher education began to encompass socially oriented phenomena. Social entrepreneurism research may include education, poverty, health, and unemployment [15,78]. In this field, studies connecting social and environmental sensitivity with a profit-oriented logic present a knowledge gap in the motivational drivers of social entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial resilience [78,79].

Socially responsible universities seek economic and social efficiency, adopting governance methods and tools to improve relations with all their stakeholders and improve education quality. The role of universities is to face the challenge of creating and distributing socially relevant knowledge in advance to transform society sustainably [80]. There are guidelines that universities today can adopt to be sustainable and socially responsible (e.g., the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System, Quacquarelli Symonds Stars, and Times Higher Education Impact Rankings) [27].

3.3.2. Environmental Education

Environmental education promotes knowledge and awareness of environmental issues and encourages students to take action to address environmental challenges. This can include hands-on learning experiences, outdoor education, and service-learning projects addressing environmental issues. In this field, SOE studies are shaped by the regulations on the responsible use of resources [47]. Some proposals use “norm-oriented interpretation learning” and “open-didactic exploration” as processes for developing educational material. In this sense, sociocultural factors influence human behavior in the context of action, hinting at what is socially acceptable or unacceptable and affecting the way of living and learning. This activation model, through norms, carries out a motivation-assessment process of current behavior, emphasizing the virtuous circle between society and knowledge [47].

SOE also can be a tool for a more sustainable life. An example of how people’s values and life experiences, including education, condition their actions is the study by [81]. This study surveyed 3222 people from five European countries about their preferences in future sustainable scenarios. Significant differences in importance according to socioeconomic backgrounds and the values of respondents were found. People above 35 years old, those less educated, and those with the lowest household income were less supportive of all scenarios. Fritz & Koch’s [82] work also validates a link between specific characteristics at the individual level and support for climate policies, such as higher education, sociocultural profession, going to moderate left parties and green parties. Escoz-Roldán et al. [83] show that the sociocultural context influences the solutions proposed for the problem of climate change and water. They evaluated the response of 1709 university students from three different territorial contexts and concluded that the available scientific information and the ideological orientation generate significant differences in water care. The authors suggest modifying the curriculum to train pupils in issues related to climate change so that they can make decisions about their lifestyle based on knowledge.

3.3.3. Multiculturalism

In the SOE literature, social contexts play an important role. Since the launch of the SDGs, SDG number 4, Quality Education [84,85], brought a claim for an educational culture “that increases openness and accessibility for all students” [86]. Indigenous and Arctic communities are examples of this context. In this respect, both communities’ knowledge, acquired through tradition and the forms of empirical (observation and practice) and contemporary (science and skills) knowledge, is necessary to meet today’s challenges [39,87]. Different worldviews and alternative, sustainability-oriented pedagogies must be incorporated into the modern education systems [88].

Other differentiators that could be significant predictors of the nature and environmental worldview of higher education are gender and age. Compared with males, females are more likely to take account of the needs of others, have higher levels of socialization, and be more socially responsible [89]. Young people in low-income countries need help to afford to be socially oriented. They are more economically oriented. Hence, their social actions are more of a win–win type to satisfy the needs of their family members.

Meanwhile, in developed countries, older adults perceive more social problems, and by not having family responsibilities, they become more socially oriented [90]. The same happens with educational levels. In this assumption, older women with university educations are the ones who generate more socially oriented companies. Similar results were found by [44], including political orientation as one more element that promotes a prosocial attitude.

3.3.4. Digital and Media Literacy

Media literacy education aims to develop critical thinking skills and awareness of media messages and their influence on individuals and society. This can include analyzing media content for bias, propaganda, and misinformation and developing media production skills to create media that promotes positive social change. In a digital era of an intensified flow of ideas, people, and capital, SOE may comprise improving the attitudes of young people toward older adults [91], informing about social responsibility [92], reducing the effects of the adult education instrumentalist approach [25], reducing the spread of hate on social networks [93], and even reaching mind decolonization [94].

3.3.5. Healthcare Education

In healthcare and medical education, technical competence has been prioritized at the expense of patient care, and medical sociology has been marginalized to status and prestige. Values such as achievement, power, and security, against values such as universalism (tolerance, and environmental and social justice), benevolence, and tradition (respect), reflect the conciliation needed between higher education and society [95]. Studies that repair society and patients’ (and medical students’) trust in medicine must be carried out, and community-engaged medical interdisciplinary education may flatten medical institutions’ hierarchies and power dynamics [95]. Education for health literacy is used for this purpose [65]. This type of education can combat misinformation in health due to the amount of information society is exposed to [96].

An example of SOE intervention in this field is the work by Senteio [30], which uses smartphones to teach African American diabetic elders about health monitoring apps. Community education sessions based on self-efficacy and self-management were used to treat their illness. The study proved to be potentially scalable, recommending intergenerational technology promotion and knowledge transfer to different populations [30]. Community pharmacies can also be a means to offer patients education on the use of certain medications and therapies, to empower them in the treatment of diseases and healthy habits, and to provide them with information on medical services in rural areas [97]. Another example of health literacy education, which we witnessed during the COVID-19 health crisis, is audio–visual dissemination on digital platforms, such as YouTube, which offers a variety of information on the advance of the pandemic [61]. In this respect, usefulness, understandability, and relevance affect the perceived quality of information. At the same time, the perceived reliability of the source can be affected by expertise and authority [96].

3.3.6. STEM Education

Although STEM education is also linked with SOE, only some efforts have provided empirical evidence of specific interventions; there is a historical gap between education and social issues. Terms such as social justice and social inequality are seldom known in STEM [98]. Instead, STEM majors frequently focused on solving first-world problems, regardless of marginalized groups [99]. This lead the American Society of Mechanical Engineering to recommend that “creativity, invention, thinking outside the box, and innovation should be part of engineering education” to better respond to the needs of a rapidly changing economy and technology [69,100].

More recently, engineering education has been identified as a powerful tool to prepare professionals to produce solutions for the sustainable development of society. Even the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) has included social elements in student outcomes, which prepare graduates to enter professional practice from a holistic perspective [101]. In their work, Persano Adorno et al. [62] introduce Bio-Inspired STEM topics for engaging young generations (BioS4U). This innovation project aims to bridge the gap between STEM curricula and the needs of Generation Z students. These students are more connected and careful regarding the environment, social issues, and social and psycho-physical well-being [17]. In the same direction, Bibri [102] and Steinitz [38] raise questions on economic, social, and quality of life trade-offs when studying socially-oriented smart cities and Geodesign, respectively, concluding, however, that the change in educational practice to cope with the challenges of the next 30 years is not occurring as fast as it should be [38].

4. Discussion

This work shows that SOE is a concept used in educational literature under the premise that new educational approaches must respond to current challenges and positively transform society. Many social situations must be addressed with educational strategies. More and more educational researchers focus on studying educational strategies that develop competencies to face real challenges that bring students closer to real situations and make them more competitive. However, economic pressures tend to force the leaders of educational institutions to be market-oriented. Also, national culture and contexts significantly influence attitudes toward education [34,103]. To cope with these barriers, new, scalable, and transferable approaches for transforming universities as agents of cultural change must be made concrete and possible [35,41]. As reviewed, this education process must take the school outside the school. In this regard, innovative lifelong learning initiatives are needed [32].

According to the reviewed literature, some knowledge gaps and opportunity areas in subjects that can be studied under the umbrella of SOE are (i) motivational studies on social entrepreneurship that include environmental and economic aspects, (ii) study of the effect of incorporating alternative pedagogies (with cultural roots) into modern educational systems, (iii) studies designed to restore society’s trust in medicine and technology transfer to alternative audiences (diverse and intergenerational), and (iv) studies on the inclusion of social aspects in STEM topics.

In this work, we considered a variety of sources without judging their contextual viewpoints, and it has no bias regarding an external funding source influencing the findings [104]. However, as this is a narrative review, some limitations on the coverage of this review may arise. Since it is in our interest to expeditiously communicate what our conceptualization of SOE involves, the delimitation of the topics evaluated in each document may have potential biases. For example, the definition and discussion of skills to develop in SOE or digital tools are not broad or exhaustive since they were not the review’s objective. Furthermore, this review did not add other topics, such as Education 4.0 and its interface with SOE. As with any other approach to education, some criticism may arise regarding SOE’s lack of standardization, overemphasis on values and beliefs, and ideological bias. A lack of standardization can make scaling SOE programs across multiple schools or districts difficult. Too much emphasis on values can lead to a lack of rigor in the classroom and may not adequately prepare students for college or the workforce. Critics may argue that SOE can be ideologically biased and promote a particular political or social agenda. Concerns about ideological and political bias can be problematic if it leads to indoctrination or censorship of alternative viewpoints (which is not the purpose of this work). Furthermore, universities and faculty may be reluctant to change, have limited resources, or have difficulties in effectively assessing SOE. Therefore, a systematic review of these and other subtopics related to this review is recommended and necessary. In conclusion, SOE is an evolving field, and there are many directions it could take in the future.

SOE has traditionally focused on issues such as social justice, diversity, and community engagement. However, as global issues such as climate change and inequality become more pressing, socially oriented education could also expand its focus to address them. SOE could also shift towards a more student-centered approach, emphasizing student agency and empowerment. This could involve giving students more control over their own learning, encouraging them to act on social issues they care about, and involving them in decision-making processes within the school. SOE could emphasize fostering cross-cultural competence and preparing students for a globalized world. This could involve incorporating multicultural perspectives into the curriculum, providing opportunities for international exchange programs, and promoting global citizenship. As technology becomes increasingly ubiquitous in education, there is potential to integrate SOE with technology to create new learning experiences. For example, virtual and augmented reality, online and blended learning, artificial intelligence and machine learning, social media, digital platforms, and gamification.

There is still much to learn about the effectiveness of SOE, and future research could help to advance the field. This could involve conducting longitudinal studies to track its long-term effects on students, exploring the best practices for implementing SOE in different contexts, and developing new assessment tools to measure its outcomes. By continuing to innovate and explore new directions, SOE can play a vital role in preparing students for the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.

5. Implications of the Work

In this work, we present a draft definition of SOE. Although the concepts related to SOE are widely distributed around the globe, we found that the early vision of education being innovative, interdisciplinary, and socially oriented has not yet been fully realized in the XXI century. The persistence of this vision indicates a gap between educational ideals and their implementation. Furthermore, the lack of a standardized definition of SOE suggests room for further development and clarification of the concept. Still, new approaches can be constructed from the framework of the theories mentioned in this work. We hope this work will interest the educational community and generate discussion around what is considered SOE and its application in the classroom and outside of it.