In the last thirty years we witnessed to a number of relevant innovations and changes. Some of them belong to the information technology domain and parts of them were the reason why the IT domain became the ICT domain. In order to better understand problems and issues related to education and learning it is useful to outline some of the most relevant achievements and milestones in the technological domain. If we focus on the European approach to the spread of information technology termed in the '90ies "Information Society" we can find initiatives such as i2015 the EU policy framework for the information society and media for the 1 next decade and, at global level, the WSIS+10 a ten years activity aimed to draw the guidelines for an harmonious and fruitful development of the information society. It promotes the positive contribution that information and communication technologies can make to the economy, society and personal quality of life. Everyone experienced in "ICT based innovation" knows that "It is not only a matter of technology". Of course technology advances are one of the potential actors as in the case of the diffusion of personal computing or easy access to digital networking. Anyway different parameters are actively influencing e-Services success or failure: cultural aspects, organisational issues, bureaucracy and workflow, infrastructure and technology in general, user's habits, literacy, capacity, market models, interaction design or merely mind-set! Before looking in detail how all these aspects are impacting on education and learning let's take into account some additional relevant aspects.
The changing of content and forms of civil service training and education in the public sector is analysed in the article. In the modern society, the role of the public institution staff in the planning and implementation of the strategic activities of the institutions has increased dramatically. The personnel management content of "putting out the fires" no longer meets the needs of the modern organization. The development of the capacities of civil servants is one of the directions in state administrative reform as well as one of the main conditions for effective public sector activities. It is possible to say that the existing training of civil servants in Lithuania is more extensive, based on personal motivation. However the latter does not always coincide with institutional interests. The largest obstacle in effective civil servants training is insufficient capacity of the institutional personnel system of public administration. Although personnel units carry out the analysis of the needs of qualification training the functions of training process and career planning are implemented insufficiently. The staff of personnel management boards in state and municipal institutions is not adequate, and unable to carry mentioned functions while existing public administration institutions cannot administrate the processes of qualification assurance properly. ; Straipsnyje analizuojami valstybės viešosios politikos tikslai ir uždaviniai modernizuojant valstybės tarnybą bei personalo valdymo turinio ir formų pokyčiai. Išskirtinis dėmesys straipsnyje skiriamas viešojo sektoriaus personalo kvalifikacijos ugdymo poreikiams nustatyti, lavinimo proceso struktūrai tobulinti ir lavinimo institucijų ištekliams efektyviau panaudoti.
The article examines the current topical problems of modernization of the education system and the development of modern Russia in the context of globalization. There is substantiated the necessity of the correspondence of the reforms to the historical traditions of the country and the type of society. The authors support the assertion that the limit of the reforms degenerates. As a result, "the reform inevitably turns into its opposite, i.e., a kind of counter-reform". The authors develop methodological principles associated with the idea formulated above. The central idea is that the study of the limits of reforms has become very topical for ensuring Russia's national security. ; В статье исследуются актуальные проблемы модернизации системы образования и развития современной России в условиях глобализации. Обосновывается необходимость соответствия проводимых реформ историческим традициям страны и типу общества. Авторы присоединяются к утверждению о том, что лимит (предел) реформ вырождается. В результате «реформа неизбежно превращается в свою противоположность, т. е. в своеобразную контрреформу». Далее авторы развивают методологические установки, связанные с выше сформулированным тезисом. Центральным становится положение о том, что исследование пределов реформ является остроактуальным для обеспечения национальной безопасности России.
The president of Russian Federation in his annual message to Federal Assembly addressed the tasks of education of next generation and of training of human resources who will work in national economy. The article assesses trends of school and university education, political and economic aspects of interaction of employers and employees in the labor market, refers to some features of psychology and psychologics (a newly suggested term) of public consciousness and behavior. ; В очередном ежегодном послании Президента России Федеральному Собранию в едином ключе сформулированы задачи обучения и воспитания подрастающего поколения, показана острая необходимость ориентации всей системы образования на подготовку достойной трудовой смены в стенах общеобразовательной школы и высших профессиональных учебных заведениях. С этих позиций автор статьи оценивает тенденции развития школьного и вузовского образования, восстановление воспитательных функций, политические и экономические аспекты взаимодействия субъектов рынка и труда. В том числе касается некоторых особенностей психологии и психологики (новый термин) общественного сознания и общественного поведения.
в данной статье рассматриваются нормативно-правовые аспекты законодательного поля ; регулирующего физическую культуру и спорт ; в том числе в государственных образовательных организациях высшего образования. ; the article describes legal aspects of the legislative field regulating physical culture and sports ; including state educational institutions of higher education.
The purpose of the study is to analyze the main dysfunctions of the Russian premium institutes in the field of education and science, and to find out its leveling instruments, by examining the experience of foreign countries; to identify the basic requirements for the novitiate for state awards to employees of education and science in modern Russia in comparison with foreign countries. Methods. Neo institutional approach is used by the author. Methods involve comparative analysis, cross-national analysis, and classification. The original solution of tasks associated with the use of a single system-approach to the sociological study of state awards in the sphere of education and science, is extrapolated from institutional economics. Results. The basic approaches to the determination of the nature and functions of awards institutions in the field of education and science are considered; its relationship with other social, economic and political trends of contemporary politics in Russia is noted. The basic conditions of non-material motivation of workers of scientifically-educational area in modern Russia in comparison with other countries, including the post-Soviet territory states are defined. Both officially established rules and other requirements to candidates on reception of the state honourable distinctions, observed with the Soviet period are considered. The study identifies the main factors that influence the perception of the role of changes in modern society awards, offers solutions to the identified problems. Scientific novelty. The critical analysis of working rules of the Russian legislation regulating an order (procedures) of rewarding has allowed to reveal major disadvantages of the Russian institute of the state awards: opacity of estimated judgements considering the work of the applicant for the award; absence of accurate hierarchy of the state awards and quantity indicators at measurement of merits and results of activity; value of awards loss in the opinion of a society and separate citizens, etc. Ways of the solution of the revealed problems are offered. In particular, the author points out that it is necessary to create an incentive system intended not only for remote prospect (for example, upon reaching a pension age), but also for the current labour period; material remuneration should be a sufficient impulse for professionals and based on a recognition of achievements, first of all, by colleagues (of the same profession), not unauthorized people. It is necessary to work out quantity indicators for an estimation of activity of educators and academics. Introduction of the structured requirements to this activity is to make objective process of representation to the state awards and will generate professional work standards. Moreover, it is necessary to lower qualifications on presence of the certain experience and to remove some other restrictions for the state recognition. Practical significance. According to the author's analysis, the reduction of dysfunctions of the Russian premium institutes will allow to return retention feature in the sphere of education and sciences of the most valuable personnel; to involve «a fresh creative power» in the given field of work; to create reference points of professional growth for working teachers and scientists; to generate the potential workers concepts of high social value and the importance of professional work in an educational sphere and science ; Цели статьи – анализ основных дисфункций наградных институтов России в сфере образования и науки и поиск инструментов их нивелирования, в том числе на основе опыта зарубежных стран. Методика и методы. Автор использовал адаптированный из экономики неоинституциональный подход к решению рассматриваемой проблемы, методы сравнительного и кросс-национального анализа и классификации. Результаты. Представлены итоги социологического изучения системы государственных наград в сфере образования и науки. Определены основные условия нематериального поощрения работников научно-образовательной области в современной России в сравнении с другими странами, в том числе с государствами постсоветского пространства. Рассмотрены как официально установленные правила, так и иные требования к кандидатам на получение государственных знаков отличия, соблюдающиеся с советского периода. Перечислены функции наградных институтов и основные факторы, влияющие на восприятие наград в современном обществе. Научная новизна. Критический анализ действующих норм отечественного законодательства, регулирующих порядок (процедуры) награждения позволил выявить основные недостатки отечественного института государственных наград: размытость оценочных суждений при рассмотрении деяний претендента на награду, отсутствие четкой иерархии государственных наград и количественных показателей при измерении заслуг и результатов деятельности, утрату ценности наград в глазах общества и отдельных граждан и др. Предложены пути решения выявленных проблем. В частности, автор считает, что необходимо создание системы стимулов, рассчитанных не только на отдаленную перспективу (например, по достижении пенсионного возраста), но и на текущий трудовой период; причем вознаграждения должны быть достаточным импульсом для профессионалов и основываться на признании достижений в первую очередь коллегами (внутри самой профессии), а не посторонними. Нужна разработка количественных показателей для оценки деятельности работников образования и науки. Введение структурированных требований к деятельности сделает объективным процесс представления к государственным наградам и сформирует эталоны профессиональной деятельности. Следует снизить цензы по наличию определенного стажа и снять некоторые другие ограничения для государственных поощрений. Практическая значимость. Устранение дисфункций российских наградных институтов позволит вернуть им функцию удержания в сфере образования и науки наиболее ценных кадров, привлечь в данную область деятельности свежие творческие силы, создать ориентиры профессионального роста для работающих педагогов и ученых, сформировать в сознании потенциальных работников представления о высокой социальной ценности и значимости профессиональной деятельности в сфере образования и науки
The paper describes possible ways of using pedagogical system of continuous formation of creative thinking and development of creative abilities of students using intelligent means of the theory of inventive problem solving at schools to implement productively Federal State Educational Standard primary general education. The paper describes key features of the pedagogical system NFTM-TRIZ and the necessity of creating consultation centers on this methodology.
The article focuses on projects, which are managed by the EU in the field of education and training, recent changes to the EU policy in educational programmes. Erasmus+ unites programmes and actions in the field of education and training, fostering the EU added value in education and European dimension. It gives an insight into the concept of projects management in education, European legal regulations, specific European programmes in education and training.
Entrepreneurship, as one of today's most relevant competences, is widely discussed in the public space. Conditional novelty and popularity of the phenomenon is intriguing and engaging. Discussions regarding the content of the concept of entrepreneurship are carried out regularly at different levels, despite the fact that the definition of the said phenomenon is provided in general documents of the European Union. In the last decade, according to various laws and regulations, as well as scientific publications, entrepreneurship is considered as "general competence or competence relevant to all citizens of the rapidly developing countries and related to creativity, ingenuity, new ideas and their implementation; therefore, entrepreneurial education becomes particularly important in terms of implementation of social, technological and economic changes of various countries". The Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning17 sets out eight key competences important to the EU citizens (communication in the mother tongue; communication in foreign languages; mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology; digital competence; learning to learn; social and civic competences; sense of initiative and entrepreneurship; cultural awareness and expression), and entrepreneurship is one of them. Entrepreneurial education is particularly topical in the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy. [.]
Entrepreneurship, as one of today's most relevant competences, is widely discussed in the public space. Conditional novelty and popularity of the phenomenon is intriguing and engaging. Discussions regarding the content of the concept of entrepreneurship are carried out regularly at different levels, despite the fact that the definition of the said phenomenon is provided in general documents of the European Union. In the last decade, according to various laws and regulations, as well as scientific publications, entrepreneurship is considered as "general competence or competence relevant to all citizens of the rapidly developing countries and related to creativity, ingenuity, new ideas and their implementation; therefore, entrepreneurial education becomes particularly important in terms of implementation of social, technological and economic changes of various countries". The Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning17 sets out eight key competences important to the EU citizens (communication in the mother tongue; communication in foreign languages; mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology; digital competence; learning to learn; social and civic competences; sense of initiative and entrepreneurship; cultural awareness and expression), and entrepreneurship is one of them. Entrepreneurial education is particularly topical in the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy. [.]
The origin of the term švietimas may be found at the turn of the 18th century in the Age of Enlightenment. Most of society lived in hardship, poverty, and oppression with no political rights, lacking even a rudimentary education. In other words, society was in darkness and needed illumination. It is no wonder the era was called the Age of Enlightenment (the Lithuanian term švietimasis based on the word for light). It should be noted that the term enlightenment was used only figuratively to describe the age, while basic pedagogical terms in most of Europe emanated from the Latin word educare. Possibly the most salient event of the Age of Enlightenment in Lithuania was the establishment of the Commission for National Education in 1773. As in other European countries during the Age of Enlightenment, the term education was adopted. But in 1795 most of Lithuania was occupied by Tsarist Russia and Russian laws came into force. In 1802 Ministerstvo narodnogo prosveščenija (Enlightenment Ministry) was established in Russia using the term enlightenment instead of education, which was then copied in Lithuanian. This was a time of intense Russification, and the term švietimas became fixed, pushing out the word edukacija. We might agree with B. Bitinas (2011, 5), that the Tsarist occupation cut short the efforts to solidify the educare concept that was prevalent in Western Europe. More than a century later Lithuania declared its independence and the issue of basic Lithuanian terminology became very relevant. In 1935 S. Šalkauskis first used the word ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung to describe the object of the science of pedagogy. Later, when Lithuania was again occupied and isolated from Western Europe by the iron curtain of the USSR, the use of the term ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung was used more often. . This term became fixed in the 1981 textbook "Pedagogika" by B. Bitinas, V. Rajeckas, J. Vaitkevičius, and Z. Bajoriūnas. At the same time, as in all of the USSR, švietimas (prosveshchenije in Russian) was used as an administrative term. The situation changed in 1990 when Lithuania regained its independence. Although the term ugdymas was considered the equivalent of education/erziehung, this stance faltered in 2009 when TESE (The thesaurus for education systems in Europe) officially fixed the term švietimas as the translation of the English term education. From that time the term švietimas is used for education/erziehung when translating documents of the European Union. It should also be noted that in the last few decades the term edukacija is returning to the Lithuanian scholarly lexicon. This term is the most lucid equivalent of education/erziehung, which was formally anchored in Lithuania in 1773, but forgotten due to Russification. With it the concept of educare returns to Lithuania. Maybe the time has come to return to edukacija as the Lithuanian equivalent of education/erziehung and the object of educational science? The Ministry might be called Edukacijos ir Mokslo ministerija, and the term švietimas could retain its figurative meaning.
The origin of the term švietimas may be found at the turn of the 18th century in the Age of Enlightenment. Most of society lived in hardship, poverty, and oppression with no political rights, lacking even a rudimentary education. In other words, society was in darkness and needed illumination. It is no wonder the era was called the Age of Enlightenment (the Lithuanian term švietimasis based on the word for light). It should be noted that the term enlightenment was used only figuratively to describe the age, while basic pedagogical terms in most of Europe emanated from the Latin word educare. Possibly the most salient event of the Age of Enlightenment in Lithuania was the establishment of the Commission for National Education in 1773. As in other European countries during the Age of Enlightenment, the term education was adopted. But in 1795 most of Lithuania was occupied by Tsarist Russia and Russian laws came into force. In 1802 Ministerstvo narodnogo prosveščenija (Enlightenment Ministry) was established in Russia using the term enlightenment instead of education, which was then copied in Lithuanian. This was a time of intense Russification, and the term švietimas became fixed, pushing out the word edukacija. We might agree with B. Bitinas (2011, 5), that the Tsarist occupation cut short the efforts to solidify the educare concept that was prevalent in Western Europe. More than a century later Lithuania declared its independence and the issue of basic Lithuanian terminology became very relevant. In 1935 S. Šalkauskis first used the word ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung to describe the object of the science of pedagogy. Later, when Lithuania was again occupied and isolated from Western Europe by the iron curtain of the USSR, the use of the term ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung was used more often. . This term became fixed in the 1981 textbook "Pedagogika" by B. Bitinas, V. Rajeckas, J. Vaitkevičius, and Z. Bajoriūnas. At the same time, as in all of the USSR, švietimas (prosveshchenije in Russian) was used as an administrative term. The situation changed in 1990 when Lithuania regained its independence. Although the term ugdymas was considered the equivalent of education/erziehung, this stance faltered in 2009 when TESE (The thesaurus for education systems in Europe) officially fixed the term švietimas as the translation of the English term education. From that time the term švietimas is used for education/erziehung when translating documents of the European Union. It should also be noted that in the last few decades the term edukacija is returning to the Lithuanian scholarly lexicon. This term is the most lucid equivalent of education/erziehung, which was formally anchored in Lithuania in 1773, but forgotten due to Russification. With it the concept of educare returns to Lithuania. Maybe the time has come to return to edukacija as the Lithuanian equivalent of education/erziehung and the object of educational science? The Ministry might be called Edukacijos ir Mokslo ministerija, and the term švietimas could retain its figurative meaning.
The origin of the term švietimas may be found at the turn of the 18th century in the Age of Enlightenment. Most of society lived in hardship, poverty, and oppression with no political rights, lacking even a rudimentary education. In other words, society was in darkness and needed illumination. It is no wonder the era was called the Age of Enlightenment (the Lithuanian term švietimasis based on the word for light). It should be noted that the term enlightenment was used only figuratively to describe the age, while basic pedagogical terms in most of Europe emanated from the Latin word educare. Possibly the most salient event of the Age of Enlightenment in Lithuania was the establishment of the Commission for National Education in 1773. As in other European countries during the Age of Enlightenment, the term education was adopted. But in 1795 most of Lithuania was occupied by Tsarist Russia and Russian laws came into force. In 1802 Ministerstvo narodnogo prosveščenija (Enlightenment Ministry) was established in Russia using the term enlightenment instead of education, which was then copied in Lithuanian. This was a time of intense Russification, and the term švietimas became fixed, pushing out the word edukacija. We might agree with B. Bitinas (2011, 5), that the Tsarist occupation cut short the efforts to solidify the educare concept that was prevalent in Western Europe. More than a century later Lithuania declared its independence and the issue of basic Lithuanian terminology became very relevant. In 1935 S. Šalkauskis first used the word ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung to describe the object of the science of pedagogy. Later, when Lithuania was again occupied and isolated from Western Europe by the iron curtain of the USSR, the use of the term ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung was used more often. . This term became fixed in the 1981 textbook "Pedagogika" by B. Bitinas, V. Rajeckas, J. Vaitkevičius, and Z. Bajoriūnas. At the same time, as in all of the USSR, švietimas (prosveshchenije in Russian) was used as an administrative term. The situation changed in 1990 when Lithuania regained its independence. Although the term ugdymas was considered the equivalent of education/erziehung, this stance faltered in 2009 when TESE (The thesaurus for education systems in Europe) officially fixed the term švietimas as the translation of the English term education. From that time the term švietimas is used for education/erziehung when translating documents of the European Union. It should also be noted that in the last few decades the term edukacija is returning to the Lithuanian scholarly lexicon. This term is the most lucid equivalent of education/erziehung, which was formally anchored in Lithuania in 1773, but forgotten due to Russification. With it the concept of educare returns to Lithuania. Maybe the time has come to return to edukacija as the Lithuanian equivalent of education/erziehung and the object of educational science? The Ministry might be called Edukacijos ir Mokslo ministerija, and the term švietimas could retain its figurative meaning.
The origin of the term švietimas may be found at the turn of the 18th century in the Age of Enlightenment. Most of society lived in hardship, poverty, and oppression with no political rights, lacking even a rudimentary education. In other words, society was in darkness and needed illumination. It is no wonder the era was called the Age of Enlightenment (the Lithuanian term švietimasis based on the word for light). It should be noted that the term enlightenment was used only figuratively to describe the age, while basic pedagogical terms in most of Europe emanated from the Latin word educare. Possibly the most salient event of the Age of Enlightenment in Lithuania was the establishment of the Commission for National Education in 1773. As in other European countries during the Age of Enlightenment, the term education was adopted. But in 1795 most of Lithuania was occupied by Tsarist Russia and Russian laws came into force. In 1802 Ministerstvo narodnogo prosveščenija (Enlightenment Ministry) was established in Russia using the term enlightenment instead of education, which was then copied in Lithuanian. This was a time of intense Russification, and the term švietimas became fixed, pushing out the word edukacija. We might agree with B. Bitinas (2011, 5), that the Tsarist occupation cut short the efforts to solidify the educare concept that was prevalent in Western Europe. More than a century later Lithuania declared its independence and the issue of basic Lithuanian terminology became very relevant. In 1935 S. Šalkauskis first used the word ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung to describe the object of the science of pedagogy. Later, when Lithuania was again occupied and isolated from Western Europe by the iron curtain of the USSR, the use of the term ugdymas as the equivalent of education/erziehung was used more often. . This term became fixed in the 1981 textbook "Pedagogika" by B. Bitinas, V. Rajeckas, J. Vaitkevičius, and Z. Bajoriūnas. At the same time, as in all of the USSR, švietimas (prosveshchenije in Russian) was used as an administrative term. The situation changed in 1990 when Lithuania regained its independence. Although the term ugdymas was considered the equivalent of education/erziehung, this stance faltered in 2009 when TESE (The thesaurus for education systems in Europe) officially fixed the term švietimas as the translation of the English term education. From that time the term švietimas is used for education/erziehung when translating documents of the European Union. It should also be noted that in the last few decades the term edukacija is returning to the Lithuanian scholarly lexicon. This term is the most lucid equivalent of education/erziehung, which was formally anchored in Lithuania in 1773, but forgotten due to Russification. With it the concept of educare returns to Lithuania. Maybe the time has come to return to edukacija as the Lithuanian equivalent of education/erziehung and the object of educational science? The Ministry might be called Edukacijos ir Mokslo ministerija, and the term švietimas could retain its figurative meaning.
The topic relevance is justified by the mankind intention to protecting and reviving a native language as a process of saving a self-identity and an authentic culture, the modern tendencies on reducing globalization risks regarding the regional and minor languages, search for new effective ways to facilitate and develop them in the modern world. The paper deals with the modern language and education policy of Wales regarding the Welsh language with further adoption of the best practice. The basic methods of the current research are the contrastive analysis of the statutory acts of the government of Wales regarding the results achieved that allow bringing to light the main tendencies and evidences of Welsh in the education sphere of Wales, methods of analysis, synthesis, and systematization. The synthesis of the analysis results shows the trends and handicaps in the implementation process and facilitating the Welsh functional potential in the education system. The statistics analysis of
