Government policy on science education in Uganda: a glass ceiling for women's access to higher education

The paper assesses the Ugandan policy on science education and its implications for girls’ access to higher education. The rationale behind this policy was to build capacity in the field of science in Uganda. Consequently, science subjects were made compulsory in schools, and 75% of the Government scholarships to public universities made science based. We demonstrate that this has created a “glass ceiling”: it has put girls at a disadvantage by reinstating the former status quo, where access to higher education favoured boys. This is because Ugandan society (at home and in school) discourages girls’ pursuit of the sciences. In addition, the policy was prematurely implemented with no adequate preparation for girls to take science based courses. Using content analysis, this study found that the policy was not guided by inclusion and/or equity principles to which Uganda committed as a signatory more than two decades ago, to the World Conference of Education for All (EFA) held in Jomtein, Thailand. These principles advocate removing obstacles to learning, and embracing diversity in education so that every learner is included

Upravlyaemaya preemstvennost ('Managed Succession')

???????? ???????? 2007–2008 ??. ???????? ??? ?????? ????????? ??????????????? ? ???????, ????????? ?????????? ?????? ? ???. ??? ???? ??????????? ?????? ??????? ??????? ?? ??????????????? ? ?????????????? ???????????, ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????????? ?????? ? ???? ???????????. ?? ?????? ??????????? ????????, «????? ??????????????? – ???? ?? ??????? ?????????? ??????, ? ??????? ????-???? ??? ??????????????? ?????????????? ??????? ?????? ?? ????? ??????????? “????????? ??????”. ??????, ????? ??????????????? – ????? ???????? ??? ??????????»1. ?????? ?????? «????????? ??????» ??????, ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ????????? ?????????? ?????????, ???????????? ?????????? ???????. ? ?????? ??????????? ????? ??????? ???????, ???? ????????? ????????????? ?????? ?????? ??????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????? ??????? ???????? ????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ????

Russian Neo-Revisionism

A revisionist state would seek to challenge the existing balance of power in the system and threaten the foundations of the system itself. This does not apply to contemporary Russia. It seeks to enhance its status within the existing framework of international society. Russian neo-revisionism does not attempt to create new rules or to advance an alternative model of the international system but to ensure the universal and consistent application of existing norms. Russia’s neo-revisionism represents a critique of western practices in defence of the universal proclaimed principles. It is not the principles of international law and governance that Russia condemns but the practices that accompany their implementation. This reflected Russia’s broader perception in the post-Cold War era that it was locked into a strategic stalemate, and that the country was forced into a politics of resistance. This has taken many forms, including the creation of an anti-hegemonic alignment with China and others. For Moscow, it was the West that had become revisionist, not Russia. Although the implementation of applicable norms was patchy, Russia did not repudiate them. In its relations with the European Union, Russia’s neo-revisionist stance means that it was unable to become simply the passive recipient of EU norms, and instead tried to become a co-creator of Europe’s destiny. The struggle is not only over contested norms, but also over who has the prerogative to claim their norms as universal. However, it was precisely at the level of practices that there was least room for compromise, and thus Russian neo-revisionism became another form of the impasse, and only intensified tensions between Russia and the Atlantic system

The Death of Europe? Continental Fates after Ukraine

The unravelling of the post-Cold War security order in Europe was both cause and consequence of the crisis in Ukraine. The crisis was a symptom of the three-fold failure to achieve the aspirations to create a ‘Europe whole and free’ enunciated by the Charter of Paris in 1990, the drift in the European Union's behaviour from normative to geopolitical concerns, and the failure to institutionalize some form of pan-continental unity. The structural failure to create a framework for normative and geopolitical pluralism on the continent meant that Russia was excluded from the new European order. No mode of reconciliation was found between the Brussels-centred wider Europe and various ideas for greater European continental unification. Russia's relations with the EU became increasingly tense in the context of the Eastern Partnership and the Association Agreement with Ukraine. The EU and the Atlantic alliance moved towards a more hermetic and universal form of Atlanticism. Although there remain profound differences between the EU and its trans-Atlantic partner and tensions between member states, the new Atlanticism threatens to subvert the EU's own normative principles. At the same time, Russia moved from a relatively complaisant approach to Atlanticism towards a more critical neo-revisionism, although it does not challenge the legal or normative intellectual foundations of international order. This raises the question of whether we can speak of the ‘death of Europe’ as a project intended to transcend the logic of conflict on the continent

The End of the Revolution: Mimetic Theory, Axiological Violence, and the Possibility of Dialogical Transcendence

An exploration of the application of Rene Girard's mimetic theory to contemporary new Cold War politics and international relations, suggesting a typology of political behaviours. The current explosion in mimetic violence is the ground for the Second Cold war. The article explores alternative forms of interactions, called political dialogism, which may offer a way out of the intensification of axiological violence. Instead of the political practise of revolution, the article suggests a politics of transcendence

The Putin Paradox

The Putin phenomenon is a response to the challenges facing Russia, but it is also the outcome of the complex reaction between the man and the system. Putin reflects the contradictions and paradoxes of contemporary Russia, but he is also a unique leader who is both more and less than the country that he rules. He is more, because of the extraordinary powers vested in the presidency by the December 1993 constitution. The president is designated as the ‘guarantor of the constitution’ (Art. 80.2), suggesting that they stand outside of the constitution in order to protect it, a paradox of power that cuts through the whole system. This helps explain the emergence from the very early days of a self-designated power system focused on the presidency but not limited to it, which effectively claimed supervisory or tutelary rights over the management of public affairs. The administrative regime derives its power and legitimacy from the constitution, but it is not effectively constrained by it. A ‘dual state’ emerged in which administrative and democratic rationality are entwined. This is why it is misleading to call Russia an ‘autocracy’. The authoritarian features are rooted in a non-democratic technocratic appeal to the pursuit of the public good. The priority under Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s was economic and political reform, and then under Putin from 2000 as economic development, state sovereignty, national unity and international status. Putin’s ability to articulate an agenda of progress, although in contrast to the Soviet years no longer embedded in a coherent vision of the future, helps explain his extraordinary and enduring popularity, which with some ups and downs has been maintained at levels far exceeding those normally found in liberal democracies

KONSEP PENGEMBANGAN KEBIASAAN BELAJAR di ERA INDUSTRI 4.0

As a guidance and counseling teacher, of course, has the task of helping students overcome these problems by identifying learning problems experienced by students, analyzing these problems appropriately, offering learning style solutions or solutions to students solving these learning problems. The point is that students are able to be independent in learning. The results of research conducted by researchers using the DCM questionnaire (Checklist of Problems) to 31 students of class X IIK 2 in MAN 3 Bantul get the highest problem is the problem of study habits. In the aspect of the problem of study habits, the highest item that becomes a problem is irregular learning time, if learning is often sleepy, studying only at night, studying when there are tests, and often feeling lazy to learn. Bk teachers need to make a description of what needs are given to students, how their goals, alternative service and what kind of evaluation to be given to students. Based on the results of the study it has been presented that it is known that students need help providing effective tutoring services that can affect the learning habits of students of class X IIK. &nbsp

Problems of Usage Labelling in English Lexicography

Landau (1991: 217) stipulates that 'usage refers to any or all uses of language'. It is the study of good, correct, or standard uses of language as distinguished from bad, incorrect, and nonstandard uses of language. Usage may also include the study of any limitations on the method ofuse, whether geographic, social or temporal. Basically it alerts users that certain terms should not be uncritically employed in communication. This article discusses the treatment of usage in English lexicography. It analyses the labelling practices in six monolingual English dictionaries namely: the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary (OALD), the Macmillan English Dictionary (MED), the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (LDOCE), the Cambridge International Dictionary of English (CIDE), the World Book Dictionary (WBD) and the New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (NSOED). Discrepancies in the contextual usage labelling in the dictionaries were established and are discussed

The Soviet collapse: Contradictions and neo-modernisation

AbstractOver two decades have passed since the dissolution of the communist system and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 yet there is still no consensus over the causes and consequences of these epochal (and distinct) events. As for the causes, it is easy to assume that the fall was ‘over-determined’, with an endless array of factors. It behoves the scholar to try to establish a hierarchy of causality, which is itself a methodological exercise in heuristics. However, the arbitrary prioritisation of one factor over another is equally a hermeneutic trap that needs to be avoided. Following an examination of the various ‘why’ factors, we focus on ‘what’ exactly happened at the end of the Soviet period. We examine the issue through the prism of reformulated theories of modernisation. The Soviet system was a sui generis approach to modernisation, but the great paradox was that the system did not apply this ideology to itself. By attempting to stand outside the processes which it unleashed, both society and system entered a cycle of stagnation. The idea of neo-modernisation, above all the idea that societies are challenged to come to terms with the ‘civilisation of modernity’, each in their own way, provides a key to developments. In the end the Soviet approach to this challenge failed, and the reasons for this need to be examined, but the challenge overall remains for post-communist Russia

Is Putin an Ism?

The Putin phenomenon represents a complex and dynamic interaction between the character of the man, his policies and leadership style. After over two decades in office, we can ask whether there is such a thing as ‘Putinism’, and if so, what are its main features? What are the criteria to be considered an ‘ism’? At the minimum, it requires some sort of ‘grand strategy’ that underpins policy in domestic and foreign policy, and which unites the two. A grand strategy is defined as some deep structure in domestic and foreign policy that transcends individual leaders and which has some overarching purpose. Putinism in this paper is considered a ‘passive revolution’, allowing a profound transformation to take place in society while the polity remains relatively static. One of the main criticisms levelled against Putin is that he is brilliant at tactics, above all in factional maneuvering, but lacks an over-arching vision of where Russia should go. This paper assesses whether Putin is ultimately an ephemeral phenomenon, or whether the era with which his name is associated will endure in history as a distinctive style of rule