Suchergebnisse

The School Leaders Attitude Towards Democratic Values One of the main problem of modern education – the school's democratization. The chiefs of the schools are important prompters of democratic process in schools, and their attitudes to democratic valuables have decisive influence for these valuables reclamation for all school's society. Sustaining experiential research materials, we can state, that the directors lack of theory knowledge about the democracy, they rarely visit seminars, in which there are ventilating democratic problems, they speak a little about democratic valuables and necessity to guide by them in ordinary life. The rare director has full democratical working school's vision. Showed up little differences between age groups and the place. The eldest (51-60 years) chiefs more acctive reach to liquidate theory gaps. The region's schoolmasters propagate more collaboration with mid institutional collaboration and cities' schoolmasters orient to school's inside life. Despite particular gaps, nevertheless we can state that the schoolmasters keep possitive attitudes to democratic valuables , because many of them know democratic valuables, collaborate wiht outside institutions, there is real autonomy in the schools, the teachers have enough liberty for self-expression , there is a good comunicational atmosphere and own schoolmasters think that leading by democratic valuables infuse inside pleasure.Therefore the process of democratization has evidence for successful activity. If we want to develop the director's attitudes it is necessary to look for their consolidation ways': so it is and the seminars development and the support of higher institutions, and all school's society active involvement in the democratic process.

The School Leaders Attitude Towards Democratic Values One of the main problem of modern education – the school's democratization. The chiefs of the schools are important prompters of democratic process in schools, and their attitudes to democratic valuables have decisive influence for these valuables reclamation for all school's society. Sustaining experiential research materials, we can state, that the directors lack of theory knowledge about the democracy, they rarely visit seminars, in which there are ventilating democratic problems, they speak a little about democratic valuables and necessity to guide by them in ordinary life. The rare director has full democratical working school's vision. Showed up little differences between age groups and the place. The eldest (51-60 years) chiefs more acctive reach to liquidate theory gaps. The region's schoolmasters propagate more collaboration with mid institutional collaboration and cities' schoolmasters orient to school's inside life. Despite particular gaps, nevertheless we can state that the schoolmasters keep possitive attitudes to democratic valuables , because many of them know democratic valuables, collaborate wiht outside institutions, there is real autonomy in the schools, the teachers have enough liberty for self-expression , there is a good comunicational atmosphere and own schoolmasters think that leading by democratic valuables infuse inside pleasure.Therefore the process of democratization has evidence for successful activity. If we want to develop the director's attitudes it is necessary to look for their consolidation ways': so it is and the seminars development and the support of higher institutions, and all school's society active involvement in the democratic process.

Realism has been the dominant international relations theory for nearly seven decades focusing almost exclusively on power politics among states, but throughout these years the mankind has passed major technological, societal and economic transitions that also had their impact on the political sphere, including international politics. In public discourse these transitions are usually associatied with the terms "information society" or "global information revolution", whereas political scientists from their part started to use such concepts as "informational (or soft) power", "information warfare", or "information security", refering to a qualitative change in the nature of these traditional variables in political analysis. This article focuses on power, the main variable in the (neo)realist perspective, thus revising the relevance of the theory itself in the context of the information revolution of the 21st century. Although national power resources and consequently international power politics have recently been transforming and taking new forms, mostly involving soft power instruments and the modernization of national economies and militaries, the fundamental (neo)realist assumptions about the competitive nature of international politics are still valid in the information age.

Realism has been the dominant international relations theory for nearly seven decades focusing almost exclusively on power politics among states, but throughout these years the mankind has passed major technological, societal and economic transitions that also had their impact on the political sphere, including international politics. In public discourse these transitions are usually associatied with the terms "information society" or "global information revolution", whereas political scientists from their part started to use such concepts as "informational (or soft) power", "information warfare", or "information security", refering to a qualitative change in the nature of these traditional variables in political analysis. This article focuses on power, the main variable in the (neo)realist perspective, thus revising the relevance of the theory itself in the context of the information revolution of the 21st century. Although national power resources and consequently international power politics have recently been transforming and taking new forms, mostly involving soft power instruments and the modernization of national economies and militaries, the fundamental (neo)realist assumptions about the competitive nature of international politics are still valid in the information age.

Realism has been the dominant international relations theory for nearly seven decades focusing almost exclusively on power politics among states, but throughout these years the mankind has passed major technological, societal and economic transitions that also had their impact on the political sphere, including international politics. In public discourse these transitions are usually associatied with the terms "information society" or "global information revolution", whereas political scientists from their part started to use such concepts as "informational (or soft) power", "information warfare", or "information security", refering to a qualitative change in the nature of these traditional variables in political analysis. This article focuses on power, the main variable in the (neo)realist perspective, thus revising the relevance of the theory itself in the context of the information revolution of the 21st century. Although national power resources and consequently international power politics have recently been transforming and taking new forms, mostly involving soft power instruments and the modernization of national economies and militaries, the fundamental (neo)realist assumptions about the competitive nature of international politics are still valid in the information age.

The article discusses general perception of philanthropy in public policy context analyzing the attitudes of civil servants and community leaders. Analysis of general philanthropy concept employs traditional and modern philanthropy dimensions; meanwhile philanthropic action is conceptualized in altruism vs. egoism perspective. Theoretical view is dwelling on insights of Herbet Simon, Elias L. Khalil, Patrick Rooney and Sarah Nathan, Jenny Harrow, etc. Some remarks on philanthropy policy traditions and legislation are made as well. The empirical evidence is dwelling on concept map of philanthropy perception among public policy actors: civil servants and community leaders.

The article discusses general perception of philanthropy in public policy context analyzing the attitudes of civil servants and community leaders. Analysis of general philanthropy concept employs traditional and modern philanthropy dimensions; meanwhile philanthropic action is conceptualized in altruism vs. egoism perspective. Theoretical view is dwelling on insights of Herbet Simon, Elias L. Khalil, Patrick Rooney and Sarah Nathan, Jenny Harrow, etc. Some remarks on philanthropy policy traditions and legislation are made as well. The empirical evidence is dwelling on concept map of philanthropy perception among public policy actors: civil servants and community leaders.

The article discusses general perception of philanthropy in public policy context analyzing the attitudes of civil servants and community leaders. Analysis of general philanthropy concept employs traditional and modern philanthropy dimensions; meanwhile philanthropic action is conceptualized in altruism vs. egoism perspective. Theoretical view is dwelling on insights of Herbet Simon, Elias L. Khalil, Patrick Rooney and Sarah Nathan, Jenny Harrow, etc. Some remarks on philanthropy policy traditions and legislation are made as well. The empirical evidence is dwelling on concept map of philanthropy perception among public policy actors: civil servants and community leaders.

The article discusses general perception of philanthropy in public policy context analyzing the attitudes of civil servants and community leaders. Analysis of general philanthropy concept employs traditional and modern philanthropy dimensions; meanwhile philanthropic action is conceptualized in altruism vs. egoism perspective. Theoretical view is dwelling on insights of Herbet Simon, Elias L. Khalil, Patrick Rooney and Sarah Nathan, Jenny Harrow, etc. Some remarks on philanthropy policy traditions and legislation are made as well. The empirical evidence is dwelling on concept map of philanthropy perception among public policy actors: civil servants and community leaders.