Suchergebnisse

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.

Science as a social institution that has a great impact on the formation of human capital deserves special attention. Of particular importance in this context is the issue of disseminating scientific knowledge and increasing interest in science in general. The article discusses the dynamics of studying the issues of interaction between science and society. The purpose of the article is to present an overview of the main areas of sociological studies conducted by Russian researchers in the field of examining the interaction of science and society both at the federal and regional levels. The exploration of this problem is carried out by scientists from such fields of knowledge as sociology, psychology, philosophy, journalism, economics, etc. Basing on the analysis of sources, the author has revealed that sociological research in the field of studying the interaction between science and society is carried out in several main directions. These are, firstly, studies aimed at studying the level of literacy of the population. Secondly, the study of attitudes towards the scientific community. The author makes the conclusion that the main indicators of public interest in science can be the analysis of reading popular science literature, visiting popular science and special events. For example, "Science 0+", open scientific lectures, YouTube videos, etc.

Since 1945, there have been two waves of Anglo-American writing on Hegel's political thought. The first defended it against works portraying Hegel as an apologist of Prussian reaction and a theorist of totalitarian nationalism. The second presented Hegel as a civic humanist critic of liberalism in the tradition of Rousseau. The first suppressed elements of Hegel's thought that challenge liberalism's individualistic premises; the second downplayed Hegel's theism. This book recovers what was lost in each wave. It restores aspects of Hegel's political thought unsettling to liberal beliefs, yet that lead to a state more liberal than Locke's and Kant's, which retain authoritarian elements. It also scrutinizes Hegel's claim to have justified theism to rational insight, hence to have made it conformable to Enlightenment standards of admissible public discourse. And it seeks to show how, for Hegel, the wholeness unique to divinity is realizable among humans without concession or compromise and what role philosophy must play in its final achievement. Lastly, we are shown what form Hegel's philosophy can take in a world not yet prepared for his science. Here is Hegel's political thought undistorted

The Victorian period in Britain was an "age of reform." It is therefore not surprising that two of the era's most eminent intellects described themselves as reformers. Both William Whewell and John Stuart Mill believed that by reforming philosophy-including the philosophy of science-they could effect social and political change. But their divergent visions of this societal transformation led to a sustained and spirited controversy that covered morality, politics, science, and economics. Situating their debate within the larger context of Victorian society and its concerns, R

The practicum was conducted at the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI), located at Gen. Santos Ave., Bicutan, Taguig, Metro Manila from April 15 to May 17, 2013. FNRI, the principal research arm of the government in food and nutrition, is one of the research and development institutes of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST). The student conducted experiments on physico-chemical analyses of products and was given lectures on packaging, food safety and laboratory safety. Seminars on accelerated shelf-life testing of food products and applications of enzymes, as well as training on conducting review of related literature were attended. The student observed and assisted on sensory evaluations, vocabulary elicitation and focus group discussions on quantitative descriptive analysis (QDA) of products, and was able to perform food processing such as extrusion and noodle making during the practicum. The student was also given a chance to conduct her own research and discuss it among her colleagues and supervisors. Some problems were addressed and recommendations were suggested. The practicum had provided the student understanding and visualization of the work of a food technologist in a food industry and most importantly, had learned new skills and developed self confidence in accomplishing assigned tasks.

Kann Literatur als Medium des Rechts fungieren? Kathrin Becker diskutiert Kafkas und Hoffmanns dichterische Ansichten im Spiegel der philosophischen Perspektive Legendres. Die Ästhetik fungiert als Stützpfeiler der Normativität, so Pierre Legendre, sie ermöglicht die »Konstruktion der Gegenüberstellung mit der Welt«. Vor dem Hintergrund dieses Ansatzes sowie seines Textkonzepts wird hier die Hypothese von der rechtlichen Stimme der Literatur entwickelt. In einer kritischen Auseinandersetzung mit den Thesen Pierre Legendres sowie den Ansätzen der Recht und Literatur-Forschung widmet sich das vorliegende Buch der Frage, inwieweit sich die Literatur – als Wortbildkunstwerk –als reflektierendes, konstruierendes oder modifizierendes Medium der Normativität erweisen könnte.

New developments - scientific, technical, societal and political - influence not only the agenda for research but also research structures, resource requirements (human and otherwise), education and training programs and interfaces with partners and the users of research. They also have an impact on research funding and management and the way research is evaluated and monitored. This book deals with the business of doing research in Europe's public research and development organisations, with a particular focus on their strategic management challenges. It is the third e-book produced by EURAGRI and draws on contributions made at the 31st EURAGRI annual conference held in Dublin (Ireland) in September 2017.

The goals of open science are, broadly, to democratize access and to promote good research practices. Unfortunately, these goals fall short in several key ways, at the center of which are equity, diversity, and inclusivity (EDI) not only of the community, but of the fruits of their labors. Historically, the open science movement has been dominated by a narrow demographic with the access and support (institutional and otherwise) to time and resources they can spend on "open science" efforts. This monolithic culture has been furthered by (1) a gravitation of open science efforts on technical solutions and valuation of technical skills and (2) a reliance on computational resources that are inaccessible to a large proportion of the globe. While the community has become more diverse in the past few years, there is still a long way to go and the products of open science remain sequestered in the global North. Furthermore, EDI disparities have been highlighted by continuing socio-economic issues, recent increases in related scholarship, and the COVID-19 pandemic, revealing that our science isn't as open as it should be. From culture to reachability, accessibility, there remains a lot of room for improvement. Failure in achieving EDI goals, not only hinders science, but imposes clear limitations and biases in the voices around us and the knowledge we produce. Science benefits from diversity in perspectives, experiences, and beliefs, in addition to accessible tools and reproducible research practices. New ways of thinking, understanding and learning are needed, new ways of establishing inclusion as a culture is needed to encourage and include historically underrepresented people, without such practices open science would not be as open as it should be.

As an important part of the science and technology infrastructure platform of China, the Ministry of Science and Technology launched the Scientific Data Sharing Program in 2002. Twenty-four government agencies now participate in the Program. After five years of hard work, great progress has been achieved in the policy and legal framework, data standards, pilot projects, and international cooperation. By the end of 2005, one-third of the existing public-interest and basic scientific databases in China had been integrated and upgraded. By 2020, China is expected to build a more user-friendly scientific data management and sharing system, with 80 percent of scientific data available to the general public. In order to realize this objective, the emphases of the project are to perfect the policy and legislation system, improve the quality of data resources, expand and establish national scientific data centers, and strengthen international cooperation. It is believed that with the opening up of access to scientific data in China, the Program will play a bigger role in promoting science and national innovation.

Summary
From an attentive reading of the practitioner-driven literature, this essay questions the reasons why the dominant discourse on science diplomacy highlights practices based on international co-operation and the pursuit of shared interests but pays little attention to practices which are inspired by a spirit of competition. It advances hypotheses related to the professional profiles of those who built the definitions and shaped this discourse, and who are scientists. It underlines the need to provide a broader definition of science diplomacy, by recognising its double nature, both collaborative and competitive.

Catch up with any event you have missed.

The public event podcast series from UCL Political Science brings together the impressive range of policy makers, leading thinkers, practitioners, and academics who speak at our events.

Further information about upcoming events can be found via our website: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/political-science/political-science

We provide an overview of the rapidly evolving literature on shadow credit intermediation. The shadow banking system consists of a web of specialized financial institutions that conduct credit, maturity, and liquidity transformation without direct, explicit access to public backstops. The lack of such access to sources of government liquidity and credit backstops makes shadow banks inherently fragile. Much of shadow banking activities is intertwined with the operations of core regulated institutions such as bank holding companies and insurance companies, thus creating a source of systemic risk for the financial system at large. We review fundamental reasons for the existence of shadow banking, explain the functioning of shadow banking institutions and activities, discuss why shadow banks need to be regulated, and review the impact of recent reform efforts on shadow banking credit intermediation.

Public policy scholars have developed a number of theories of the policymaking process. Their work has come to define what some now refer to as the "policy theory" literature. Our task is to identify theoretical and empirical courses of study that will advance this research program. We limit ourselves to identifying an existing theory that already provides such an advance and discuss some of its theoretical benefits and empirical support. Specifically, we make the case that there exists a well‐developed theory of delegation that rivals what we deem to be the best of the existing policy theories. We also suggest that existing theoretical frameworks might benefit from incorporating delegation theory explicitly and conclude that policy research has much to contribute to the development and useful application of delegation models.