Search results

Educators are recognized as key agents of social change, responsible for shaping future citizens. Beyond imparting knowledge, teachers are crucial in addressing societal challenges such as sustainability, democracy and social equality. This study aims to investigate the attitudes of Jewish and Arab students toward democratic values and how they perceive their role as educators in a multicultural society.

This study explores the attitudes of majority and minority group students in an Israeli teacher training college towards realizing democratic values and promoting shared citizenship. The sample included 382 Jewish and Arab students, who answered a questionnaire about attitudes regarding education for democracy and shared society, and their perception of their role in promoting this education.

The investigation delves into students’ civic perceptions, shedding light on the moderate and pluralistic stances held by both Jewish and Arab students. They advocate for cross-cultural exposure and interaction, with Jewish students demonstrating slightly more moderate views than the prevailing norms in Israeli society. Interestingly, Jewish students exhibited a willingness to engage in discussions on conflictual topics, whereas Arab students tended to avoid them.

This study underscores the potential of teacher training colleges in shaping the upcoming generation of educators as advocates of tolerance, and democracy, and promoters of a shared society.

This research gains heightened relevance in a contemporary landscape where numerous nations, especially those comprising diverse cultures, grapple with surges of nationalism that threaten democratic values. Teacher training colleges hold the key to forging a more harmonious future by becoming beacons of transformative pedagogy. These institutions can shape a new generation of educators who are poised to catalyze authentic social change.

Changes in the financial services sector, brought about by new legislation and increased competition, have led to many institutions turning to marketing as a means of adjustment. Building societies, in particular, have been placed in a situation where the development of marketing is crucial to corporate performance. In this scenario, marketing information systems should serve to underpin and strengthen the marketing concept in its implementation phase. Suggests, via empirical evidence, that current strategies deployed by smaller building societies for the development of marketing information systems may actually fall short in terms of marketing intelligence.

We are experiencing a period of adaptation of our agri-food systems to the context of climate change, thus witnessing the incorporation of several more ecological and socially inclusive practices. In this sense, this chapter seeks to understand the role of civil society in promoting sustainable food systems based on Brazilian experiences over the last three decades. First, the role of civil society in the construction of new agroecological markets is discussed, bringing the experience of the consumer cooperative COOLMEIA, which started the construction of the first agroecological fair in Brazil, the Ecological Farmers Fair in Porto Alegre. Then the civil society activism engaged on establishment of the Human Right to Healthy and Adequate Food is discussed, highlighting the importance of social movements and civil society organisations in the construction of a democratic political system. At last, the trajectory of the civil society as actors participating in the formal instance of State governance through their performance in the National Council for Food Security and Nutrition – CONSEA, presenting the historical context, achievements and struggles. Finally, the chapter concludes with a section reviewing lessons learned and possible challenges for civil society participation in the debate on agri-food systems in the future.

Building societies developed in the second half of the 18th century when country people came flooding into the towns and cities to provide the workforce for the new factories. Faced with a lack of suitable housing in industrial centres, more enterprising and prosperous workers clubbed together to build their own homes. The first building society was established in Birmingham in 1775.

Despite profound differences, both the German Historical School and the critical theory of the Frankfurt School have in common a theoretical and cultural heritage in Central European traditions of social thought and philosophy. Although both schools often are perceived as quintessentially German traditions of economic and social research, their methodological presuppositions and critical intent diverge strongly. Since the objective of the Frankfurt School was to carry the theoretical critique initiated by Marx into the twentieth century, and since its members did so on a highly abstract level of theoretical criticism, the suggestion may be surprising that in terms of their respective research agendas, there was a common denominator between the German Historical School and the Frankfurt School critical theory. To be sure, as will become apparent, the common ground was rather tenuous and indirect. We must ask, then: in what respects did their theoretical and analytical foundations and orientations overlap? How did the German Historical School, as a nineteenth-century tradition of economic thinking, influence the development of the Frankfurt School?

The development of a knowledge society in the Arabian Gulf is a nested and contextualized process that relies upon the development of nation-specific knowledge economies and region-wide knowledge cultures. The role of internationally comparative education data and mass education systems in the Gulf as mechanisms for the development of knowledge economies, societies, and cultures are discussed and debated in relation to the unique contextual conditions countries operate within. The role of “big” data and mass education in creating expectations for achievement, accountability, and access is shown to significantly contribute to the development of knowledge societies by providing the infrastructure and capacity for sustainable change, which potentially leads to the institutionalization of knowledge acquisition, exchange, and creation in the Gulf and beyond.

The burden social theorists must be willing to accept, respond to, and act upon pertains to the difficulties that predictably accompany all efforts to convey to nontheorists the unwelcome fact of heteronomy – that as actors, we are not as autonomous as we were told and prefer to assume – and to spell out what heteronomy in the form in which it has been shaping the developmental trajectory of modern societies means for professional theorists. I introduce the concept of “vitacide,” designed to capture that termination of life is a potential vanishing point of the heteronomous processes that have been shaping modern societies continuing to accelerate and intensify in ways that prefigure our future, but not on our human or social terms. Heteronomy pointing toward vitacide should compel us as social theorists to consider critically both the constructive and destructive trajectory that social change appears to have been following for more than two centuries, irrespective of whether the resulting prospect is to our liking or not. In this context, the classical critical theorists of the early Frankfurt School, especially Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, pursued what turned out to be an evolving interest in rackets, the authoritarian personality, and the administered society – concepts that served as foils for delineating the kind of theoretical stance that is becoming more and more important as we are moving into an increasingly uncertain future.