Then I was invited to the team of Ernst & Young and the Institute for Market Economics, which is commissioned by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education prepared a draft “Strategy for the development of higher education by 2020”.
All benefits, or benefits from the Social Insurance Fund, paid by the Agricultural Social Insurance Fund and also provide mundurowe.zobacz 4 changes in pensions in 2017. “Pension reform will not. Only minor changes to save the budget »Minimally 1000 zł for emerytaRząd also proposed that the minimum amount of pension, disability pension and family pension for total incapacity for work was increased from 882.56 zł to 1000 zł, which increased by 117.44 zł .See also: Privileges retirement: When should be compensated for their loss of? »President of the Social Insurance Institution for the DGP: Inheritance Foreign retired [INTERVIEW]» Rise lowest they also have other benefits – indexation will raise the amount of the social pension 741.35 zł to 840 zł, which is a increase of 98.65 zł. And the minimum pension due to partial inability to work will increase from 676.75 zł to 750 zł, it is about 73.25 zł. How rewind a tape? What is missing in the picture on the phone, the correct answer is a rope.
These tasks appear in tests for diagnosing intellectual maturity of children. These in turn are used, among others, when assessing school readiness reviews the student’s future. According to the researchers from the Institute for Educational Research multitude of tools should be changed. IBE announces the development of new methods. – In the psychological-pedagogical tools used in the last century – says Piotr Rycielski of IBE. In his opinion, they do not allow to properly assess a child’s development. He gives an example. – One of the known tools for the study of social competence contains the question: can you rewind the tape with the recording? – says Dr.
Rycielski. Children, for which the norm is to use MP3 or CD players may not know what’s going on. Educator from one clinic in Warsaw he adds that tests on the pictures appear, eg. Cars from the 60s Another problem is that the tools created long ago are the result obtained by the child to the reference group of the year, when the cassette was the norm. – The result achieved by a little child will tell us if you do not see him against their peers – says Radosław Cob with IBE. – With the older tools result achieved today by a child compared with a group of children who lived eg. 20 years ago. Obtained a false image and the result of a diagnostic error – he adds. Experts, however, point out that clinics operate differently.
Many of them compiles methods, adapting them to current conditions. One of the teachers emphasizes that while old smack the mouse tests, are decent, and the new tend to be worse. – We tested one of the new tools, in which the answer to the question, how do you deal with anger, above bulleted was the answer (providing a better maturity of the child) “I go to the computer or watch TV” than the answer “I play the game, which itself invent” . Or if repeated more than twice the response that “I’m going to parent” for solving any problems, the score dropped – says a teacher. Clinics experiencing a siege, because half a vintage 6-year-olds will be of compulsory school age: it is about children born between 1 January and 30 June 2008. Parents who wish to defer their compulsory education, must obtain an opinion from the clinic. Assessment psychologists have also help parents choose a younger group of six year olds (b. From 1 July to 31 December 2008.) To decide where to send the child. New tools for diagnosis will be ready in November 2014.
Magdalena Krawczyk-Radwan, President of the Foundation of Good Education. Source: Dziennik Gazeta Prawna life ideals of higher education as a subject of systematic reflection began to occupy the second week of study at the Interdepartmental Individual Studies in the Humanities at the University of Warsaw. Professor Jerzy Axer, founder and director of MISH, took me, in effect irrelevant coincidences, the international conference on liberal education, as both subject and object (or rather: exhibit) reflection – Warsaw MISH was one of the most important actors of the movement of liberal education Europe. Liberal education, despite its name in contemporary version derived from projects rather conservative, the idea of a broad formation (in the sense of education) general education, in dialogue with the great tradition of culture and literature. After returning I knew that I wanted to take as part of my studies at the MISH no history of Polish Jews, not the sociology of the city, not the philosophy of politics (as planned, coming to college), but the idea of the university, although it sounded vaguely.
I spent the next 10 years trying to locate the subject within the framework of academic disciplines and methodologies – with varying degrees of success, landing it in education, sociologists, educators in this, it is at the political philosophers, economists at it. Obudowywałam it a bit more research problems gripping, such as the structure and functioning of university rankings, the brand and the value of graduation, the educational boom and bubble in Poland. I remember the excitement of my first trip to the annual conference of the Consortium of Higher Education Researchers and the discovery of a fundamental, founding the study of higher education work Burton Clark, “The Higher Education System” – that, however, there is a community of scholars and concrete methodology in which I can enter (from the it’s been a good couple of years and we have in Poland a few major outbreaks of research on higher education). Besides MISH I was also a student, then a board member of the Collegium Invisibile – one of the network “invisible colleges”, outbreaks of reforming the universities behind the Iron Curtain assumed by the George Soros – which offered students the opportunity to authentic scientific work one on one with the professor, already during studies. We lived the ideals of liberal education, worked closely with the most serious Polish professors, hamletyzowaliśmy about his career choice and career (indeed chose a career in science ultimately only about half of the students of the Collegium of the time).
University of loved, we saw a place for themselves in the university and environmental Establishment in the future. Often, universities and formulated the criticism of the system. The most common concern of what others do, not us. My own PhD (University devoted rankings) stalled, partly because of the frustration that we all have around the real object of study, and I deal with only describing how others cultivate science, and that becomes the organizer of higher education rather than a scientist. Then I was invited to the team of Ernst & Young and the Institute for Market Economics, which is commissioned by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education prepared a draft “Strategy for the development of higher education by 2020”. It was a very educational experience, even though the project itself caused a lot of controversy, and then, and now (although compared to ultimately implemented reforms Minister Barbara Kudrycka was incomparably more radical ideologically). From today’s perspective, I appreciate the aspirations of our team (to describe the system of higher education by means of reliable data, design a comprehensive whole system), but I know now that we were wrong tool with the objectives of (a fetishization indicators), suffered the dogmatism and przedkładaliśmy accountability over autonomy.
Indicators are not everything I write these words, I just done another great debate under the slogan “What will be our Polish universities and science.” Returns the same discussions and arguments are part of a critical reflection on the university itself, and in this sense, a testament to his life. But you have to distinguish between criticism from inside and outside – the latter is an expression of calls for accountability in relation to the state and society. Settlement of this occurs in different ways depending on how we define the function of the university in the country. Both historically and today, these definitions (and rhetoric) is a lot, with different laying out accents between practicing learning and teaching – from taking care of the “soul” of the state by unfettered dealing with the search for the truth in the production of knowledge to the formation of citizens, training of personnel for the state and the labor market. Regardless of how eventually will spread accents, we have to find a balance between autonomy and accountability. The condition of good academic work is a certain level of autonomy, both within the scientific work and in the organization and management of the university.
The state provides the universities autonomy in their best interest, but from time to time checks whether the interest is actually preserved. In that case, assessing the quality of teaching and research, and above all its effects, is necessary. What this basically all but the most radical, participants agree to debates. There are two problems: how to evaluate and how the assessment is reflected in the fate of university units and employees. New Public Management policy always firmly instilled us an idea of public management by indicators, hence the temptation to every sector of the state, including universities, most comprehensively parameterized. The indicators seem to be objective, comparable, to monitor changes. In higher education seem to be a solution to the problem of deep internal differentiation – we tend to think of universities and best universities, while the landscape of Polish higher education consists of universities very good and very poor, large and small, public and private, those in which He cultivates a real science, and those that do not even forge.
Measures based on a quantitative assessment of the university today (rankings), units (parametric evaluation of the Committee for Evaluation of Research, KEJNA), employees (more units evaluate their employees sophisticated algorithms that take into account, among others, indexes Hirsch their publication). And very well – if not fetishize these tools and they remain one of the only methods of evaluation. Especially in the case of evaluation of scientific and scientific method of assessing the most important, it remains the gold standard of peer review, or as other professionals in the same field of work and assess the achievements of their colleagues. Peer review tool is of course also reviewed pay someone to do your assignment australia, which is the primary means of quality assurance of scientific texts. Famous embarrassments system of reviewing (the type of thing Sokal – when the physicist Alan Sokal put in a reviewed Social Text text considered by them as absurd, but operating jargon and concepts feminizing social criticism) for at least twenty years systematically inflamed red-academic, but still within it not invented anything better, because it is difficult for the proposal to recognize the systematic use of ideas of social control and evaluation of texts without any fortifications published on the internet. Referring to the indicators, you need to constantly keep in mind trap: not that we judge what is important, but what is easily measured (remember the classic phrase from William Bruce Cameron – wrongly attributed to Einstein: “Not everything that gives the count , counts. not everything that counts can be counted “). Also, as repeatedly shown, measures bibliometric (ie, for the publication of specific individuals, “included” in the evaluation of specific individuals) different function depending on the field, subject, language – which does not receive moreover equity general idea that the measure of the quality of work of the scientific is its response, so that it requires a different operacjonalizacji.zobacz also amendment to the law on higher education: Positive rating study without specifying profile »Training Matrix: List of absurdities in schools lengthens» Diet amended the provision in the law on higher education »the teacher’s right to teach religion ? The decision of the bishop does not appeal »The dispute over the Kudrycka Let’s look at the current debate on higher education.
On its main actors: environmental reformers, environmental eccentrics, neo-liberal dogmatists, defenders of the ancien regime, “outraged”, and finally the concerned citizens who formulate their demands from the outside to the university. The dispute concerns mainly the so-called assessment. reform Kudrycka (changing the system of financing universities and individuals, increase the share of grants, which means competition, concentration of the financing of the statutory units “flagship” – for this purpose expanded state general assessment system, open competitions for the posts of scientific studies “on request” of the economy, exchange indefinite hiring researchers on fixed-term contracts). Let’s look at the main axes of the dispute. Grants. The main aim was to be more competition, promote quality, improve the productivity of scientists.
Also: clear and transparent rules which had to make the academic career to become more transparent and accessible to young scientists will count less corporate systems. I am a big supporter of the system grant, as long as decisions are made competent bodies environmental (as is the case KEJNA, if he can be to fault, the fact that teams sit mostly scientists more ‘competitively oriented, “who are increasingly advocating this mechanism) , assessments are made public, there are appeal mechanisms. Also, if grant funding does not unduly constrain statutory funding (it can also be competition, but in the long term). Bieżączka and shortness of breath competitions are deadly for the proper reflective learning style of work. Bureaucratisation. Too often, allegations of bureaucratization cover failure in preparing the documentation (project documentation and the competition is a skill like any other and only partly owing to outsource this work to people from the use of research, even if they exist, are available and fit), laziness and poor work organization. However, the documentation arrives (especially in European competitions and in connection with the European procedures as syllabuses in the National Qualifications Framework).
You have to brave verification – the documentation we really need, or standardization of forms and procedures is really necessary and what they should do scientists themselves, and in which areas they could use support (here mention a fantastic help, which I happened to receive the Service Office of Research at UW). The Bologna process. It’s been enough time to critically analyze the experience of the Bologna process – not only in Poland but throughout Europe. For years I thought that the problem is not with the same principles of the Bologna process – harmonization of studies in Europe, among others, by the widespread introduction of a system of three-year undergraduate and two-year master’s, but by mechanical introduction of this change in Poland. Today, I think I was wrong – the Bologna process has brought more losses than benefits, rolling model of education within individual disciplines.