Suchergebnisse

National audience ; Les inégalités sociales de santé sont le fruit « d'une injustice sociale qui tue à grande échelle », les réduire est un impératif éthique. Tel était le leitmotiv du rapport de l'OMS sur les déterminants sociaux en décembre 2008. Les ISS se construisent en lien avec le degré de cohésion sociale et de l'organisation de la société. Ainsi d'une question de « santé », la présence et les effets des ISS deviennent avant tout une question « sociale ». Leur réduction ne peut se cantonner aux seules politiques et aux seuls acteurs de santé, mais doit aussi interpeller et mobiliser l'ensemble du corps social (institutions, associations, structures éducatives, sociales, culturelles,…). Tout en se référant aux stratégies développées et connaissances acquises, les places de l'éducation, de l'éducation pour la santé et de la promotion de la santé seront réinterrogées dans le domaine de la réduction des ISS.

National audience ; Les inégalités sociales de santé sont le fruit « d'une injustice sociale qui tue à grande échelle », les réduire est un impératif éthique. Tel était le leitmotiv du rapport de l'OMS sur les déterminants sociaux en décembre 2008. Les ISS se construisent en lien avec le degré de cohésion sociale et de l'organisation de la société. Ainsi d'une question de « santé », la présence et les effets des ISS deviennent avant tout une question « sociale ». Leur réduction ne peut se cantonner aux seules politiques et aux seuls acteurs de santé, mais doit aussi interpeller et mobiliser l'ensemble du corps social (institutions, associations, structures éducatives, sociales, culturelles,…). Tout en se référant aux stratégies développées et connaissances acquises, les places de l'éducation, de l'éducation pour la santé et de la promotion de la santé seront réinterrogées dans le domaine de la réduction des ISS.

This report presents the findings of a survey conducted by the Erasmus+ KA3 project EVOLVE (www.evolve-erasmus.eu) on the awareness and use of Virtual Exchange (VE) in Higher Education across Europe, primarily on the basis of data from universities belonging to the Coimbra Group and SGroup university networks.VE is an educational practice based on sustained, technology-enabled communication and interaction between individuals or groups of learners from geographically separated and/or different cultural backgrounds. This type of online collaborative learning, which can be either in the form of class-to-class exchanges supported by university teachers or in the form of group exchanges facilitated by external exchange providers, is promoted by the EU as a tool for inclusion and to offer more young people an international experience. It also links up with institutional strategies and policies of 'internationalisation at home' and internationalising the curriculum. Finally, it is regarded as a tool to enhance students' employability in terms of transversal skills which employers seek, including foreign language proficiency and intercultural competence, and digital and collaboration skills.Our study found that VE is not yet widely known as educational practice by key stakeholders in implementation, such as educators, educational supporters, internationalisation officers and policy officers and managers. Policy officers and managers show a slightly higher degree of awareness, but this may partly be due to the fact that they associate VE with virtual mobility or online learning more generally.VE is not yet used on a large scale by respondents in our sample. The main disciplines where it is implemented and understood are in Education; Arts and Humanities (especially languages); and Social sciences, journalism and information. Implementation, however, is not restricted to these areas and covers most other disciplines distinguished by our study.Support, when it is provided, is normally in the form of technical and pedagogical assistance; institutional recognition and incentives appear to be generally lacking; and data about inclusion at course or curriculum level by allocation of credits, incorporation in course descriptions and reservation of class time are inconclusive due to the small number of participants reporting on this. Finally, VE is not yet widely referenced in strategies and policies for eLearning, professional development and internationalisation, but a group of 10 to 15 universities appear to be moving towards further integration at strategic and policy levels.Conversely, the potential of VE for educational innovation, skills development and internationalisation are widely acknowledged. More specifically, educators and educational supporters rate VE highly as a tool for teaching and learning innovation, development of intercultural competence, language and digital skills, as well as subscribing to its role in teacher professional development. Overall stakeholders also highly rank its potential for internationalisation, linking it to educational as well as economic benefits.In response to the alleged benefit of VE as a low-cost solution to internationalisation, we point out that VE is not an activity that bears no cost at all. Learning to use it, running and maintaining it requires structural training and support facilities, for which institutional policies and infrastructures are generally not yet in place. In view of the unique characteristics of each exchange, it is not a tool that is easily standardised as a one-stop solution for all.It is promising to see that there is substantial interest from each of the stakeholder groups to learn more about VE by participating in training. Training programmes such as those offered through EVOLVE and Erasmus+ Virtual Exchange respond to this need. Through follow-up studies and interviews in institutions seeking to implement VE, we will try to find out more about factors of success and failure in this promising field of educational innovation and share these with the community at large in future publications.

The papers in this volume, presenting a stimulating appraisal of graduate education in America, were delivered during the seventy-fifth anniversary celebration of the Graduate School of the University of Pennsylvania. Contributors: John P. Gillin, Max Black, S. S. Wilks, Howard Mumford Jones, Charles Frankel, Leo Gershoy, Henri Peyre, Pendleton Herring, Whitney J. Oates, Daniel H. H. Ingalls, Donald Young

Invited Key-note speaker Conference ; International audience ; We call values that which founds a judgment (good or bad, important or not, right or wrong, true or false, beautiful or ugly, expensive or cheap, .). After giving some definitions, this paper analyzes the values that are identifiable inside science, and then inside science education. The value of science comes from its economical and political importance, but science seeks the truth by observing important values: a scientist must be honest, modest, always critical, rejecting any dogmatism and any fraud, but also creative, imaginative and able to work collectively. Nevertheless, a scientist is a human being with emotions and ideologies often interfering with his/her work and results. Some examples are discussed. Science must be separated from religion but the values of science and those of ethics overlap (bio-ethics, citizen values). UNESCO promotes Education for All, even if there are still important inequalities among countries. The values of science education are analyzed, and developed furtheron the example of ESD (Education for a Sustainable Development). They are then analyzed in some images of science textbooks, showing implicit ideologies linked to the scientific messages. They are also identified through different pedagogical styles. The analysis of teachers' conceptions, through an international survey covering more than 8 000 teachers, reveals deep differences among countries, as well as opposite systems of values, in interaction with social practices and actual or out-dated scientific knowledge, illustrating the KVP model as is also the case throughout this paper.

Invited Key-note speaker Conference ; International audience ; We call values that which founds a judgment (good or bad, important or not, right or wrong, true or false, beautiful or ugly, expensive or cheap, .). After giving some definitions, this paper analyzes the values that are identifiable inside science, and then inside science education. The value of science comes from its economical and political importance, but science seeks the truth by observing important values: a scientist must be honest, modest, always critical, rejecting any dogmatism and any fraud, but also creative, imaginative and able to work collectively. Nevertheless, a scientist is a human being with emotions and ideologies often interfering with his/her work and results. Some examples are discussed. Science must be separated from religion but the values of science and those of ethics overlap (bio-ethics, citizen values). UNESCO promotes Education for All, even if there are still important inequalities among countries. The values of science education are analyzed, and developed furtheron the example of ESD (Education for a Sustainable Development). They are then analyzed in some images of science textbooks, showing implicit ideologies linked to the scientific messages. They are also identified through different pedagogical styles. The analysis of teachers' conceptions, through an international survey covering more than 8 000 teachers, reveals deep differences among countries, as well as opposite systems of values, in interaction with social practices and actual or out-dated scientific knowledge, illustrating the KVP model as is also the case throughout this paper.

International audience ; This paper reports on a study of how students' reasoning about socioscientific issues is framed by three dynamics: societal structures, agency and how trust and security issues are handled. Examples from gene technology were used as the forum for interviews with 13 Swedish high-school students (year 11, age 17-18). A grid based on modalities from the societal structures described by Giddens was used to structure the analysis. The results illustrate how the participating students used both modalities for 'Legitimation' and 'Domination' to justify positions that accept or reject new technology. The analysis also showed how norms and knowledge can be used to justify opposing positions in relation to building trust in science and technology, or in democratic decisions expected to favour personal norms. Here, students accepted or rejected the authority of experts based on perceptions of the knowledge base that the authority was seen to be anchored in. Difficulty in discerning between material risks (reduced safety) and immaterial risks (loss of norms) was also found. These outcomes are used to draw attention to the educational challenges associated with students' using knowledge claims (Domination) to support norms (Legitimation) and how this is related to the development of a sense of agency in terms of sharing norms with experts or with laymen.

This interdisciplinary volume explores the relationship between history and a range of disciplines in the humanities and social sciences: economics, political science, political theory, international relations, sociology, philosophy, law, literature and anthropology. The relevance of historical approaches within these disciplines has shifted over the centuries. Many of them, like law and economics, originally depended on self-consciously historical procedures. These included the marshalling of evidence from past experience, philological techniques and source criticism. Between the late nineteenth and the middle of the twentieth century, the influence of new methods of research, many indebted to models favoured by the natural sciences, such as statistical, analytical or empirical approaches, secured an expanding intellectual authority while the hegemony of historical methods declined in relative terms. In the aftermath of this change, the essays collected in History in the Humanities and Social Sciences reflect from a variety of angles on the relevance of historical concerns to representative disciplines as they are configured today.