Suchergebnisse

After WW II, the great clash between the concepts of a largely private market based world, and a world of centrist socialism seemed to have been won by the forces of State Socialism in a variety of forms from the total absolute centrist dictatorship in the Soviet Union and China to more moderate versions such as those in Sweden, France, Italy or India.The leadership in both China and India both believed that centrist authority and control was vital in managing their vast, chaotic countries, and both felt that this centrist control should be exercised by a small self chosen elite. In China, that elite took the form of a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictatorship under Mao Zedong, who could only see the world in terms of enormous revolutionary conflict.In India, the elite were more benign and not as militant. Power was held as a matter of "right" by a combination of Socialist theorists and economists and high caste Brahmins who never doubted their own correctness. [1] This elitism led to a set of negative attitudes about the education of the masses, some of which still persist. First, starting with the period of British rule, education of any kind was simply not seen as a role of governments, except possibly at the lowest levels, and this attitude was shared by the British themselves and by the senior figures in Indian government and society.

Hidden and unhidden normativity in Social science education and History education are being intensively researched and criticized in both educational scientific and media discourses (Gatto 2002). In addition, they are extensively discussed in teacher education and concealed or explicated in education policies and curricula for these school subjects. These discussions are further, to more or less extent, related to civic and citizenship education, as well as to political discourses more generally (e.g. Papastephanou, 2007; Hedtke, Zimenkova & Hippe, 2008 in previous issues of JSSE). Not only do political actors at macro level try to provide for citizen formation with help of Social science education and History education . A multitude of other actors at regional and local level – be it non-governmental, religious or economic actors, or parents – bring their own agendas and normative stances into the school subjects of Social science education and History Education. The term "hidden curricula" and the idea of (hidden) normativity are further associated with national and supra national policy agendas and grand cultural narratives. However, local and regional specifics that are intimately connected to the normatively laden conceptions of citizenship education and learning inside and outside of school, we argue, can and should be provided increased attention in research. In this special issue, two school subjects are highlighted: Social science education and History education. The very idea of normativity of Social science education and History education is being evaluated quite differently in different national educational settings and subject didactic traditions. It encompasses the whole range from being considered as allowable and wishful in order to reach some central moral, political or other normative goals of society to absolute ban and resolute absence of any substantive or normative qualification of social science and history teachers as professionals (for the German discussion, cf. Besand et al., 2011). This special issue of the JSSE, entitled (Hidden) Normativity in Social Science Education and History Education brings together empirical, methodological and theoretical contributions that in one way or the other elaborate on normativity in Social science education and History education. Central questions addressed in the call are: How is normativity visible and formed within Social science education and History education? How can these processes be approached empirically? Is there something wrong with normativity, and if so why? Which role does normativity play for social science teachers and history teachers in their profession? The authors in this issue have created vital responses to these questions, suggesting new comparative methodologies and opening up innovative areas of empirical research in more or less theoretical framings. The following specific approaches to research on normativity in Social science education and History education are embraced by the authors: - Normativity is stressed as a phenomenon indisputably related to Social science education and History education. But the modes of normativity, its explicitness, direction, strength and actors alter. Education policy and practice are deeply entwined, and processes of normative change come to the fore in critical and constructive investigations of central concepts in these school subjects, at different school levels and over time. Out of different theoretical and methodological approaches, the authors demonstrate convincingly the necessity to consider different sources of empirical material in order not only to map and describe different facets of normativity in Social science education and History education. But also to make a case for the complexity involved in the intermingling of hidden and unhidden normativity in the everyday practice of teaching and learning of these school subjects. - Focusing different forms of knowledge and conceptual uses in policy and practice in Social science education and History education (at mainly upper secondary level) allow for approaching normativity not only as a matter of detecting where it is situated in these school subjects and why this is so. It also contributes to the development of relevant subject specific methodological frameworks that may be considered key for the development of this field of research. - Sociological and other educational theories and methods deriving from social sciences are being use innovatively by the authors. In doing so, we argue, they open up for a widening of the scope as regards the meaning and importance of theoretically underpinned comparative approaches to the research field of subject didactics. - By stressing critical concepts and conceptual uses in Social science education and History education, the intimate connection between these subjects and their assigned task to see to citizenship learning and social formation emerges. ; Guest Editors' introductory text to the theme issue (Hidden) Normativity in Social Science Education and History Education.

The framework for professional education in recreation developed primarily from recommendations of national conferences on the subject. The trend is for increasing emphasis on broad general foundations in humanities and social sciences with opportunities for specialization in various aspects—hospital, industry, municipal, administration—to be centered in the upper division and graduate levels. Problems are: supply of potential leaders, organizational pat terns, accreditation, institutional roles, professional standards. Needs are: more evaluation, more research, higher standards. Suggested guidelines are: coopera tive effort, flexibility in approach, balanced offerings, and reflection of the needs of the profession and society.

The British government white paper, Excellence in Schools & the subsequent report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship, Education for Citizenship, recommend that schools educate pupils in citizenship & democracy. This recommendation is considered in the context of reasons why there has traditionally been no formal or well-articulated political education in schools. Among these reasons a pervasive antipathy to politics & to government is identified as one of the most powerful. This antipathy is expressed from the left & the right wings of the political spectrum, & the "critical" opposition to both, as well as from interests such as those defending professional & personal autonomy. These arguments imply that "politics" is optional, not a set of practices & institutions with which individuals must be familiar. It is argued that this proposition cannot be valid. Adapted from the source document.