Suchergebnisse

In recent decades, society has fundamentally changed; there are political changes affecting education and, consequently, demands on teachers' work change, as well as parents' and society's expectations of teachers. The main aim of this qualitative research is to map the changes in the conditions of teachers' work in the Czech Republic in the last thirty years according to the subjective perception of teachers-experts, i.e. respondents. The respondents are teachers who have been active in the profession for at least thirty years. All the respondents are women working as primary school teachers (Dáša, Lucie, Jana, Danka, Blanka, Dominika, Karolína).In the research we deal with the following areas: interpersonal relationships at the workplace, communication and cooperation with pupils' parents, and the teacher-pupil relationship.The most important results of this research are as follows. The respondents are aware of and perceive the decreasing authority of the teacher today. They point out that the teacher's authority has degraded in the eyes of pupils, parents, and society. The most widespread problem faced by teachers is the disruptive behavior of pupils, which may interfere with teaching.Moreover, today's teachers sometimes have to deal with parents who are completely uncritical of their children, whom they trust completely. When problems arise, these parents never see the root cause in their child but in other classmates or, most frequently, in the teacher. If a child receives a bad grade, these parents are willing to go to the teacher and try to find the error on their side rather than in their own children.

In recent decades, society has fundamentally changed; there are political changes affecting education and, consequently, demands on teachers' work change, as well as parents' and society's expectations of teachers. The main aim of this qualitative research is to map the changes in the conditions of teachers' work in the Czech Republic in the last thirty years according to the subjective perception of teachers-experts, i.e. respondents. The respondents are teachers who have been active in the profession for at least thirty years. All the respondents are women working as primary school teachers (Dáša, Lucie, Jana, Danka, Blanka, Dominika, Karolína).In the research we deal with the following areas: interpersonal relationships at the workplace, communication and cooperation with pupils' parents, and the teacher-pupil relationship.The most important results of this research are as follows. The respondents are aware of and perceive the decreasing authority of the teacher today. They point out that the teacher's authority has degraded in the eyes of pupils, parents, and society. The most widespread problem faced by teachers is the disruptive behavior of pupils, which may interfere with teaching.Moreover, today's teachers sometimes have to deal with parents who are completely uncritical of their children, whom they trust completely. When problems arise, these parents never see the root cause in their child but in other classmates or, most frequently, in the teacher. If a child receives a bad grade, these parents are willing to go to the teacher and try to find the error on their side rather than in their own children.

The article deals with work after the political transformation of 1989 in the light of contemporary literary accounts in the prose of Andrzej Stasiuk, Dawid Bieńkowski, Piotr Siemion, Daniel Odija, and others. The literary works are taken to contain records of personal and social problems, captured as objectivised experience of many individuals. An attempt is made to adapt the methodological proposals characteristic of the poetics of experience to selected approaches to work in contemporary literature. These approaches include: the shortage of work as the key element of social change, part-time work, physical work (often considered inferior and unfulfilling), work on a marketplace (as the release of subdued energy), the work of a small-business entrepreneur (along with bankruptcy as an inalienable element of the experience), and work connected with new forms of capitalist corporate context. The experience of work in the times of transformation, as it appears in literature, is presented in terms of failure, exclusion, exploitation, more than a mirage of careers – although the latter approach is also present, albeit often in the context of irony and parody. In the writers' view, the Polish reality after the transformation reveals a deep social disintegration, while individuals, forced to become self-reliant, do not always win when confronted with the new, capitalist reality. ; Autor zajmuje się doświadczeniem pracy w czasach transformacji ustrojowej po roku 1989 w świetle współczesnych świadectw literackich zawartych w prozie Andrzeja Stasiuka, Dawida Bieńkowskiego, Piotra Siemiona, Daniela Odii i innych. Utwory literackie traktuje jako zapis problemów jednostkowych i społecznych, ujętych w aspekcie obiektywizacji doświadczenia, będącego udziałem wielu jednostek. Propozycje metodologiczne, wypracowywane w ramach poetyki doświadczenia stara się zaadaptować do próby prześledzenia kilku wskazanych ujęć problematyzacji doświadczenia pracy w literaturze najnowszej. Do tych ujęć należą: ukazywanie braku pracy jako kluczowego kontekstu zmiany społecznej, następnie: praca dorywcza, fizyczna, ujmowana często jako praca wstydliwa, nieprzynosząca satysfakcji, praca bazarowa, ukazywana jako wyzwolenie tłumionej energii, praca drobnego biznesmena – wraz z bankructwem jako nieodłącznym elementem tego doświadczenia – oraz praca związana z nowymi formami kapitalistycznego korporacjonizmu.Doświadczenie pracy czasów transformacji w świetle ujęć literackich przedstawiane jest częściej w kategoriach klęski, wykluczenia, wyzysku niż mirażu karier, choć i takie ujęcia pojawiają się – jednak często w konwencjach ironicznoparodystycznych. Zdaniem pisarzy w polskiej rzeczywistości po przełomie ujawnia się głęboka dezintegracja społeczna, zaś jednostki, zdane na siebie, nie zawsze wychodzą zwycięsko w konfrontacji z nową, kapitalistyczną rzeczywistością.

The article discusses the condition of civil society in contemporary Serbia, with special emphasis on the relations between its representatives and the authorities (both at the local and state level). The main objective of the analyses is to answer the question of the position of the civil sector within Serbia's broadly understood political system. What role do both formal non-governmental organizations and grassroots non-institutionalized social movements play in this relatively young democracy? What is the attitude of the authorities to grassroots civil activities, which often manifest criticism towards the decisions and actions of those in power? These questions will constitute the central axis of my considerations in this article. The research problem indicated above is analysed on two essential levels. Firstly, the article discusses existing studies and research on the nature of civil society in Serbia and the ways in which it functions. Secondly, the author analyses the results of qualitative research carried out at the late 2018 and early 2019 among representatives of Serbian civil movements and organizations. The conclusions stemming from these analyses are presented in the final part of the article. The analyses carried out indicate the problems that face the civil sector in Serbia. First and foremost, one should draw attention to the authorities' rather negative view of the civil sector. What is also noteworthy is an extended network of connections of the authorities with the private sector as well as with right-wing, nationalist, pro-government organizations. These circumstances to a large extent hinder or even preclude dialogue (and further cooperation) between public and civil institutions.

Education for democratic citizenship (EDC) encompasses all educational practices aimed at preparing young people and adults for life in a democratic society and helping them become active, informed and responsible citizens. The changes that have taken place over the past 18 years in Poland have not bypassed the school evaluation system. The country has slowly passed from a system of "hard control" to one of "soft supervision," and its control functions have been strongly limited to make way for consultancy and support.Obviously it is now impossible to foresee the future of school evaluation – many educators agree that the 2006 law meant less bureaucracy, but some add that it might also mean more control and less school autonomy. Whether and when we will see new regulations in this field remains unclear now. It can only be hoped that bodies running the school (both local governments and other "owners" of the schools), independent of the Ministry, will in some places (if not everywhere) support an initiative for real quality assurance. Incentives, such as diplomas or quality badges, might also help teachers and schools take part in a "pilot" or "large -scale" programme of introducing quality assurance in Education for Democratic Citizenship.

Education for democratic citizenship (EDC) encompasses all educational practices aimed at preparing young people and adults for life in a democratic society and helping them become active, informed and responsible citizens. The changes that have taken place over the past 18 years in Poland have not bypassed the school evaluation system. The country has slowly passed from a system of "hard control" to one of "soft supervision," and its control functions have been strongly limited to make way for consultancy and support.Obviously it is now impossible to foresee the future of school evaluation – many educators agree that the 2006 law meant less bureaucracy, but some add that it might also mean more control and less school autonomy. Whether and when we will see new regulations in this field remains unclear now. It can only be hoped that bodies running the school (both local governments and other "owners" of the schools), independent of the Ministry, will in some places (if not everywhere) support an initiative for real quality assurance. Incentives, such as diplomas or quality badges, might also help teachers and schools take part in a "pilot" or "large -scale" programme of introducing quality assurance in Education for Democratic Citizenship.

The article presents the analysis of the relation between two concepts, namely cosmopolitan democracy and agonistic multipolar order, whose author is Chantal Mouffe, in the context of the dispute about the preferred shape of global democracy. Both approaches are presented in the literature as opposing. The main thesis of the present article is the possibility of connecting them, but according to dialectical principles. The point is not about a smooth consensus but about the fact that the contradictions between those views can be treated as a condition of their interweaving. To this aim, I use two theoretical concepts: of antagonistic cosmopolitanism by Tamara Caraus and of antagonistic global constitutionalism by Christof Royer. On this basis I claim that Mouffe's rejection of cosmopolitanism is not thoroughly coherent with her own assumptions. I acknowledge her argumentation that cosmopolitan democracy might lead to pluralism without antagonism but at the same time I suggest that Mouffe's postulate of the multipolar order can lead to pluralist antagonism without agonism. It is only the establishment of cosmopolitan institutions and rules that will allow for really agonistic and radically pluralized global politics, thanks to which it will be possible to solve the contemporary world problems effectively. For these reasons agonistic cosmopolitanism can be regarded as the most optimal variant of global democracy.

The paper gives W. Lenin's views upon the correlation of productive forces and production relations and the policy of the state. It consists of two part's. In the first one the role of economics in policy has been discussed. The problem has been handled in a historical approach. The works of W. Lenin on the capitalistic economy and the socialistic economy have been a starting point for a survey of the problem. After considering the subject, the authors of this paper came to the following conclusions: a) policy is a reflection of economics, b) policy represents basic economic class interests, c) policy generalizes economic phenomena and processes, which are reflected in the acts of the state and in the activities of social and political associations. The second part of this paper is concerned with the role of policy in relation to economics. An analysis of views proves that W. Lenin has formulated a principle that the rank of policy is higher than the rank of economics. One may state that although economics plays a decisive role in relation to policy, the latter is comparatively independent and plays an active role in relation to economics. ; Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016

Censorship has often been regarded as the archenemy of artists, thinkers and writers. But has this always been the case? This research paper proposes that censorship is not a total evil or adversarial force which thwarts and hinders twentieth-century writers, particularly those who were part of the artistic, aesthetic, philosophical and intellectual movement known as Modernism. Though the word "censor" originally means a Roman official who, in the past, had a duty to monitor access to writing, the agents of censorship – particularly those in the modern times – are not in every case overt and easy to identify. Though Modernist writers openly condemn censorship, many of them nevertheless take on the role of censors who not only condone but also undergo self--censorship or censorship of others. In many cases in Modernist literature, readership and literary production, the binary opposition of victim and victimiser, as well as of censored and censor, is questioned and challenged. This research paper offers an analysis of the ways in which Virginia Woolf (1882–1941), Allen Ginsberg (1926–1997), Czesław Miłosz (1911–2004) and Bohumil Hrabal (1914–1997) lived and wrote by negotiating with many forms of censorship ranging from state censorship, social censorship, political censorship, moral censorship to self-censorship. It is a study of the ways in which these writers problematise and render ambiguity to the seemingly clear-cut and mutually exclusive division between the oppressive censor and the oppressed writer. The selected writers not only criticise and compromise with censorship, but also thematise and translate it into their works. ; Censorship has often been regarded as the archenemy of artists, thinkers and writers. But has this always been the case? This research paper proposes that censorship is not a total evil or adversarial force which thwarts and hinders twentieth-century writers, particularly those who were part of the artistic, aesthetic, philosophical and intellectual movement known as Modernism. Though the word "censor" originally means a Roman official who, in the past, had a duty to monitor access to writing, the agents of censorship – particularly those in the modern times – are not in every case overt and easy to identify. Though Modernist writers openly condemn censorship, many of them nevertheless take on the role of censors who not only condone but also undergo self--censorship or censorship of others. In many cases in Modernist literature, readership and literary production, the binary opposition of victim and victimiser, as well as of censored and censor, is questioned and challenged. This research paper offers an analysis of the ways in which Virginia Woolf (1882–1941), Allen Ginsberg (1926–1997), Czesław Miłosz (1911–2004) and Bohumil Hrabal (1914–1997) lived and wrote by negotiating with many forms of censorship ranging from state censorship, social censorship, political censorship, moral censorship to self-censorship. It is a study of the ways in which these writers problematise and render ambiguity to the seemingly clear-cut and mutually exclusive division between the oppressive censor and the oppressed writer. The selected writers not only criticise and compromise with censorship, but also thematise and translate it into their works.

Public funds should play important role in rationalization of the social security system as they allow greater control over expenses redistribution and thus over changes in society. However, as the rule of parainsurance is not followed while creating public funds, one cannot hope for public support for fiscal burdens and for diminishing political influence on the tax collection for social expenses and social expenses itself. The lack of public support should not limit possibilities of using public funds to rationalize public finances, particularly social security.