natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of August 2007 on improving the quality of teacher education identified the quality of teaching as a key factor in raising educational attainment levels and achieving the Lisbon goals.
Avgusta 2007 je Komisija v Sporočilu Svetu in Evropskemu parlamentu o izboljšanju kakovosti pri izobraževanju učiteljev prepoznala kakovost poučevanja kot najpomembnejši vzvod za zvišanje izobrazbene ravni in uresničitev lizbonskih ciljev.
It recognised that ‘as schools become more autonomous and open learning environments, teachers assume ever greater responsibility for the content, organisation and monitoring of the learning process, as well as for their own personal career-long professional development’.
Priznala je, da je »šola čedalje avtonomnejše in odprto učno okolje, zato imajo učitelji še večjo odgovornost za vsebino, organiziranje in nadziranje pouka, pa tudi za svoj poklicni strokovni razvoj.
In many countries, these new expectations have been accompanied by an increase in autonomy which allows teachers the flexibility to carry out their duties.
Mnoge evropske države so zato učiteljem povečale njihovo strokovno avtonomijo in jim omogočile prožnejše izpolnjevanje vse številnejših delovnih obveznosti.
Such autonomy often goes hand in hand with increased accountability – an accountability which is no longer based solely on teachers’ abilities to adhere to the institution’s operational procedures but also on the evaluation of their results.
Na novo pridobljena strokovna avtonomija je pogosto tesno povezana z večjo odgovornostjo. Učiteljeva odgovornost odslej ne temelji več samo na izpolnjevanju podrobnih navodil za delo, temveč je učitelj odgovoren tudi za vrednotenje rezultatov svojega dela.
One of the central priorities of the Slovenian presidency of the Council of the European Union during the first half of 2008 was to examine such issues more closely, as a prerequisite for the development of a creative and innovative atmosphere in schools.
Učiteljeva avtonomija, ta je temeljni pogoj za razvoj ustvarjalnosti in inovativnosti v šolah, je bila med slovenskim predsedovanjem Svetu Evropske unije v prvi polovici leta 2008 med pomembnejšimi prednostnimi temami.
The Slovenian presidency therefore asked for a Eurydice study that analyses how far recent changes in the teaching profession have extended the autonomy and educational responsibilities of teachers.
Slovensko predsedstvo je omrežje Eurydice zaprosilo za pripravo gradiva, v katerem bi preučili spreminjanje učiteljeve poklicne podobe v zadnjih letih, ko se je povečevala njegova avtonomija in z njo povezana poklicna odgovornost.
The report also represents a logical sequel to the discussion of school autonomy in the document School Autonomy in Europe, Policies and Measures completed by the Eurydice Network for the Portuguese EU presidency in the second half of 2007.
V pričujočem poročilu se nadaljuje razprava o avtonomiji šol, začeta z gradivom, pripravljenim za portugalsko predsedovanje v drugi polovici leta 2007 .
This publication therefore presents a comparative picture of the tasks teachers assume in the different countries and the autonomy they have to carry them out. I believe this new Eurydice study represents an important contribution to better understanding the changes in the role of teachers as key players in education.
Zato je treba imeti to publikacijo za primerjalni prikaz nalog učiteljev, ki jih imajo v različnih državah, in avtonomije, ki jo imajo za to, da jih izpeljejo.Verjamem, da bo ta Eurydicova raziskava pripomogla k boljšemu razumevanju spremenjene vloge učiteljev kot najpomembnejših igralcev v izobraževanju.
Commissioner for Education, Training, Culture and Youth
Komisar za izobraževanje, kulturo in mladino
Chapter 1: The Political Context and the Development of the Teaching Profession
Politični kontekst in razvoj učiteljskega poklica
Teaching responsibilities, school autonomy and decentralisation 1.2.
Pedagoške odgovornosti, šolska avtonomija in decentralizacija
Teaching responsibilities and a broader range of school social commitments
Odgovornosti učiteljev in uspešnost vzgojno-izobraževalnih sistemov
Chapter 2: Educational Provision and the Autonomy of Teachers
Izvajanje pouka in avtonomija učiteljev
Curricular content 2.2.
Metode poučevanja
Chapter 3: Working Time and Professional Duties
3. poglavje:
The place of teamwork
4. poglavje:
Chapter 4: Continuing Professional Development – Requirements and Opportunities
Stalni strokovni razvoj – zahteve in priložnosti
Measures to encourage teacher participation in CPD
Ukrepi za spodbujanje stalnega strokovnega razvoja učiteljev
Determining the status and working conditions of teachers: the supremacy of the trade unions and collective bargaining
Opredeljevanje položaja učiteljev in njihovih delovnih razmer: premoč sindikatov in kolektivnega pogajanja
Curricular reform: varied forms of teacher participation
Kurikularna reforma: različne oblike sodelovanja učiteljev
Other reforms of the education system: the search for balance between collective participation and individual involvement
Druge reforme izobraževalnega sistema: iskanje ravnotežja med kolektivnim in individualnim sodelovanjem
Levels of Autonomy and Responsibilities of Teachersin Europe
Ravni avtonomijein odgovornost učiteljev v Evropi
Chapter 6: Accountability and Incentives
6. poglavje:
An alternate individual and collective emphasis in evaluation 6.4.
Izmeničen individualni in kolektivni pomen evalvacije
Codes and Abbreviations
Oznake in kratice
The purpose of this study is to provide a comparative analysis of whether or not changes in the teaching profession have extended the autonomy and educational responsibilities of teachers.
V tem poročilu želimo s primerjalno analizo prikazati, ali so spremembe v učiteljskem poklicu razširile avtonomijo in odgovornost učiteljev ali ne.
The report consists of six chapters, an annexe and concludes with a synthesis.
Poročilo vsebuje šest poglavij, dodatek in sklepne ugotovitve s povzetkom.
Chapter 1 deals with the historical and institutional background of the education policies that have effectively placed new responsibilities on teachers.
Vprvem poglavju opisujemo zgodovinsko ozadje in pravne okvire izobraževalnih politik, ki so vodile k stalnemu širjenju učiteljevega dela.
The relationship between measures for school autonomy and the changing role of teachers is examined, as is the relationship between their broader range of responsibilities and efforts to improve the performance of education systems.
Proučili smo vplive sistemskih sprememb, ki so se nanašale na povečevanje šolske avtonomije in spreminjanje vloge učiteljev. Zanimal nas je odnos med učiteljevimi vse širšimi obveznostmi in prizadevanji za izboljšanje delovanja izobraževalnih sistemov.
The chapter then considers how the fresh demands facing schools in terms of social commitments (including the integration of pupils with special educational needs and provision for an increasingly mixed school population, etc.) may be a further reason why teachers are now entrusted with additional responsibilities.
Vprašali smo se, ali niso tudi nekatere dodatne naloge (na primer integracije otrok s posebnimi potrebami in poučevanje čedalje različnejše šolske populacije) pripomogle k temu, da imajo učitelji čedalje več odgovornosti.
Chapter 2 focuses on how the content of school curricula and teaching objectives are drawn up and the part teachers are expected to play in adapting them.
Vdrugem poglavju se osredinjamo na načrtovanje vsebin in ciljev v šolskih kurikulumih in ugotavljamo, kakšno vlogo imajo učitelji pri njihovi operacionalizaciji.
It goes on to discuss how far teachers are free, first, to determine the curricular content of compulsory and optional subjects; secondly, to decide which textbooks should be used to teach them; and thirdly, to adopt their own teaching methods and organise pupils into groups for learning activities.
Skušali smo raziskati, koliko svobode imajo učitelji pri opredeljevanju do nekaterih pomembnih strokovnih vprašanj: prvič, ali naj bo učenje določenega predmeta oziroma predmetnih vsebin za učence obvezno ali izbirno; drugič, katere predmete oziroma predmetna področja naj šola ponudi učencem in katere učbenike naj uporablja; in tretjič, ali lahko učitelj sam presodi, kako naj prilagodi metode poučevanja oziroma diferencira pouk.
The chapter also discusses the choice of criteria for the internal assessment of pupils.
V tem poglavju osvetljujemo tudi izbiro meril za notranje ocenjevanje znanja učencev.
Finally, it considers who takes responsibility for deciding whether pupils should repeat a year, and the part played by teachers in devising the content of examinations for certified qualifications.
Sprašujemo, kdo odloča o tem, kdaj učenci ponavljajo razred, in kakšno vlogo imajo učitelji pri opredeljevanju vsebin zaključnih izpitov, ki vplivajo na oceno v zaključnem spričevalu.
Chapter 3 reports on definitions of working time in employment contracts.
Vtretjem poglavju poročamo o predpisovanju delovnega časa učiteljev v pogodbah o zaposlitvi.
It also examines tasks that might be contractually required of teachers besides teaching, the preparation of lessons and the marking of work by pupils.
Zanima nas, katere naloge poleg neposrednega pedagoškega dela, priprave učnih ur in ocenjevanja šolskih nalog še zajemajo pogodbena razmerja.
In addition, it considers how far teachers are expected to take part in teamwork and whether legislation or guidelines exist specifically to promote teamwork related to particular activities.
Ugotoviti želimo, ali spada med učiteljeve obveznosti tudi skupinsko delo in v povezavi s katerimi obveznostmi.
Chapter 4 covers the requirements and opportunities associated with continuing professional development (CPD).
Četrto poglavje govori o obveznostih in priložnostih za stalni strokovni razvoj (SSR).
It examines the extent to which CPD is a professional obligation or an optional undertaking for teachers, and whether requirements in this area are regulated in terms of the time (in hours) spent annually on CPD.
Sprašujemo, ali je za učitelje SSR obvezen ali prostovoljen, ali je izobraževanje in usposabljanje časovno določeno, ali so predpisani dnevi ali ure, ko naj bi se učitelji udeleževali seminarjev.
Special consideration is given to whether the choice of CPD depends on a training plan to meet the priorities of national or local authorities, or whether the choice is left to schools.
Ugotoviti želimo, ali je izbira programov izobraževanja in usposabljanja prepuščena šolam ali morajo upoštevati nacionalno ali lokalno določene prednostne naloge.
Also briefly discussed are whether CPD is organised during working time and, if so, whether teachers require special permission to attend training and how their absence is managed.
Pregledali smo, ali se seminarji izvajajo v učiteljevem delovnem času, in če se, ali učitelji potrebujejo posebno dovoljenje za udeležbo in kako je urejeno nadomeščanje.
Finally, the chapter considers the level of authority responsible for administering funding for CPD and the incentives that may be offered teachers to take part in it.
Na koncu poglavja prikazujemo ravni upravljanja s finančnimi viri, namenjenimi SSR, in morebitne spodbude za udeležbo na seminarjih.
Chapter 5 deals with the contribution of teachers to the process of reform and educational innovation and examines whether teachers participate individually or collectively in reforms such as those concerned with their terms and working conditions, school curricula and teaching objectives in general.
Vpetem poglavju prikazujemo sodelovanje učiteljev pri snovanju šolskih reform in pedagoških novosti. Proučujemo, ali učitelji, bodisi posamezno ali skupinsko, sodelujejo pri pobudah, pripravah in sprejemanju sprememb, ki se nanašajo na njihove delovne razmere, šolski kurikulum in opredeljevanje splošnih učnih ciljev.
Chapter 6 covers the various measures concerned with accountability and evaluation, including resultsbased evaluation, and considers their individual and collective aspects.
Všestem poglavju raziskujemo različne ukrepe, povezane z odgovornostjo in evalvacijo, tudi evalvacijo rezultatov izobraževanja; pri tem upoštevamo individualno in skupinsko vpletenost učiteljev.
It also focuses on whether new duties have given rise to individual or collective incentives to motivate teachers in carrying them out.
Zanima nas, ali sodelovanje učiteljev pri evalvacijah spremljajo tudi morebitni motivacijski ukrepi, namenjeni nagrajevanju posameznih učiteljev ali vseh.
The study covers school education at ISCED levels 1 and 2.
Analiza se nanaša na obvezno izobraževanje v šolah na ravneh ISCED 1 in 2.
While it relates to public sector schools in all countries, the state-subsidised private sector is also taken into account in the case of Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands.
V analizi smo upoštevali samo šole, financirane iz javnih sredstev; poleg javnih šol smo upoštevali tudi subvencionirane zasebne šole v Belgiji, na Irskem in Nizozemskem, ker je v teh treh državah večina učencev vpisana v zasebne šole.
The reference year for data is 2006/07, but forthcoming reforms are also considered.
Podatki se nanašajo na Ravni šolsko leto 2006/07, kjer je bilo mogoče, pa smo upoštevali tudi morebitne potekajoče reforme.
All Eurydice network countries with the exception of Turkey are covered.
V analizo so vključene vse članice omrežja Eurydice, razen Turčije.
With respect to the methodology of this study, the Eurydice European Unit developed a guide to content in conjunction with the Slovenian Ministry of Education and Sport.
Vsebino je metodološko zasnovala Evropska enota Eurydice v sodelovanju s slovenskim Ministrstvom za šolstvo in šport.
To ensure that the information contained in the study is an accurate representation of national situations, a checking phase was held in April 2008.
Aprila 2008 je bila preverjena in potrjena v vseh sodelujočih državah.
All of the contributors to this study are acknowledged at the end of the volume.
Zahvala je ob koncu poročila.
The last two decades have been noteworthy for marked changes in the responsibilities assigned to teachers in the great majority of European countries.
V zadnjih dveh desetletjih se je v večini evropskih držav učiteljski poklic precej spremenil, predvsem v povezavi z opredeljevanjem obveznosti.
The teaching profession has changed conspicuously over the past 20 years. Aspects of this trend include greater autonomy in educational matters, enabling teachers to become more effectively involved in curriculum development; the acceptance of new day-to-day responsibilities (such as replacing absent colleagues, supervising new teachers, etc.); and the greater demands placed on teachers (in areas such as teamwork, time spent at school, or their involvement in drafting the school development plan or school curriculum, etc.).
Spremembe se kažejo v večji avtonomiji pri izobraževanju, kar učiteljem omogoča učinkovitejše sodelovanje pri razvijanju kurikuluma, prevzemanje novih vsakodnevnih dolžnosti (kot je nadomeščanje odsotnih sodelavcev, mentorstvo učiteljem začetnikom in drugih), in v širjenju obveznosti učiteljev (na področjih, kot so skupinsko delo, daljša navzočnost na šoli, sodelovanje pri pripravi delovnega načrta šole ali šolskega kurikuluma in drugih).
The original causes of these major changes, which in all countries have resulted in a greater workload for teachers, are many and often interrelated.
Razlogov za te pomembne spremembe, te so v vseh državah vplivale na povečanje učiteljeve delovne obremenitve, je več in so pogosto med seboj tesno povezani.
There is an apparent link, first, between the way in which the responsibilities of teachers have evolved and school autonomy in the broad sense, including financial and administrative autonomy, etc. (section 1). However, as will be explained further, this does not apply to all countries.
Zelo očitna je povezava med povečevanjem obveznosti učiteljev in naraščanjem šolske avtonomije v širšem smislu, tako finančne kot administrativne (glej 1. podpoglavje).Toda, kot bomo pojasnili v nadaljevanju, to ne velja za vse države.
In particular, in some countries with a long tradition of curricular autonomy, such as Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, or some which embarked on pioneering and ambitious policies in this area (1) in the 1980s, the relationship between the two trends is less clear.
Še posebej v nekaterih državah z dolgo tradicijo kurikularne avtonomije, kot so Belgija, Nizozemska in Združeno kraljestvo, ali nekaterih, ki so začele vpeljevati pionirske in ambiciozne politike11 v osemdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja, je razmerje med obema pojavoma manj jasno.
The more substantial responsibilities assigned to teachers may also be associated with efforts to improve the performance of education systems, often against the background of a ‘schools crisis’ triggered partly by the publication of results judged to be disappointing in standard national and international assessments (section 2).
Precej več odgovornosti učiteljev lahko povežemo tudi z napori za boljše delovanje izobraževalnih sistemov, ki so se pojavili kot odziv na tako imenovano »krizo šol«. Povzročila jo je objava rezultatov standardiziranega nacionalnega in mednarodnega preverjanja znanja; rezultati so javnost v nekaterih državah precej razočarali (2. podpoglavje).
Finally, the fresh demands placed on schools in terms of satisfying social needs (including the integration of pupils with special educational needs and providing for an increasingly mixed school population, etc.) are a further reason why teachers are now entrusted with new responsibilities of a social nature (section 3).
Tudi vse večje socialne potrebe, ki jih morajo šole po novem zadovoljevati (integracija učencev s posebnimi potrebami, skrb za vse bolj raznoliko šolsko populacijo in druge) so razlog za širitev učiteljevih družbenih odgovornosti (3. podpoglavje).
Teaching responsibilities, school autonomy and decentralisation
Pedagoške obveznosti, šolska avtonomija in decentralizacija
In the great majority of European countries, new responsibilities were originally assigned to teachers as a result of growing school autonomy and, more broadly speaking, to decentralisation.
V veliki večini evropskih držav sta na povečanje obveznosti učiteljev vplivali predvsem naraščajoča šolska avtonomija in decentralizacija.
While in most school systems – even the most centralised – teachers had already long been free to choose their teaching methods and materials (school textbooks, etc.), the reforms concerned with school autonomy, often coupled with decentralisation measures, now enabled them to become actively involved in devising school education plans.
Učitelji imajo že dolgo proste roke pri izbiri metod poučevanja in učnega gradiva (učbenikov in drugega) v večini šol, tudi v najbolj centraliziranih sistemih.
It is expected that this new-found autonomy and the freedom which in principle goes with it will lead teachers to develop their creativity and ability to innovate, while becoming more actively engaged and thus more motivated, and encourage more differentiated provision better suited to the heterogeneity of the school population that has occurred with ‘mass secondary education’ and comprehensive education.
Reforme, ki se nanašajo na šolsko avtonomijo in so pogosto povezane z decentralizacijo sistema, pa jim zdaj omogočajo tudi dejavno sodelovanje pri oblikovanju šolskih izobraževalnih načrtov. Pričakovati je mogoče, da bo na novo pridobljena avtonomija in z njo povezana svoboda delovanja spodbujala učitelje k razvijanju ustvarjalnosti in inovativnih zmožnosti.
Except in certain pioneering countries such as Finland, which from the 1980s embarked on an education policy anchored in a ‘culture of trust’, the majority of these policies for curricular autonomy gathered momentum in the 1990s.
Razen nekaterih pionirskih držav, kot je Finska, ki je že leta 1980 začela utemeljevati izobraževalno politiko na »kulturi zaupanja«, je večina evropskih politik začela širiti pedagoško avtonomijo v devetdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja.
This occurred, for example, in Estonia with the National Curriculum for Basic School, as well as in Spain with the 1990 LOGSE strengthened by the 2006 Education Act, in Iceland with the 1995 Compulsory School Act, in Lithuania with the 1992 'General Concept of Education' Act, or yet again in Slovenia with the major reform of 1996.
Tako je bilo v Estoniji (z Nacionalnim kurikulom za osnovno izobraževanje), v Španiji (LOGSE iz leta 1990, podkrepljen z Zakonom o izobraževanju iz leta 2006), na Islandiji (z Zakonom o obveznem šolanju iz leta 1995), v Litvi (z Zakonom o »Splošnem sistemu izobraževanja« iz leta 1992) in tudi v Sloveniji (z obsežno reformo iz leta 1996).
1) See the report Eurydice (2007) School Autonomy in Europe. Policies and measures.
1 Glej poročilo s portugalskega predsedovanja: School Autonomy in Europe: policies and measures (Šolska avtonomija v Evropi: politike in ukrepi), Eurydice 2007.
Figure 1.1: Dates of major reforms that have increased or decreased the autonomy of teachers (ISCED 1 and 2) between 1950 and 2008
Danska in Finska: Avtonomija se je uveljavljala postopoma, zato datumi niso določeni.Luksemburg (a): ISCED 1; (b): ISCED 2.
Chapter 1: The Political Context andthe Development ofthe Teaching Profession all countries that have long been centralised from an educational standpoint, new more flexible guides to teaching content have been introduced.
Prvo poglavje: Političnikontekstinrazvoj učiteljskega poklica bi omogočila šolam, da razvijejo svoje specifične »izobraževalne programe«, ki naj bi jih začele izvajati v šolskem letu 2007/08.
They have enabled teachers to contribute locally to the development of educational content.
Po usmeritvah so se zgledovali tudi v Luksemburgu.
That said, in 2007, the trend towards greater curricular autonomy has not been universally followed in all European countries.
Kot smo omenili že v letu 2007, usmeritev k širjenju pedagoške avtonomije niso upoštevale vse evropske države.
On the contrary, some of them have moved in the opposite direction.
Nekatere so se prav nasprotno odločile za omejevanje avtonomije ob hkratnem širjenju obveznosti.
Restrictions in autonomy and broadening of the responsibilities assumed by teachers are occurring both in countries in which educational provision has long been decentralised, as in Belgium (grant-aided private schools), the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and in those, such as Hungary, which followed broader policies in this respect from the 1990s onwards.
Take nasprotne težnje se pojavljajo tako v državah z dolgoletno tradicijo decentraliziranega sistema izobraževanja, npr. v Belgiji (v subvencioniranih zasebnih šolah), na Nizozemskem in v Združenem kraljestvu, pa tudi v takih, kot je Madžarska, kjer je bila decentralizacijska politika uveljavljena šele od devetdesetih let naprej.
These exceptions highlight the fact that greater curricular autonomy does not fully account for the increased responsibilities of teachers in all contexts.
Izjeme kažejo na to, da v vseh kontekstih širjenja učiteljevih odgovornosti ni mogoče pojasniti s širitvijo pedagoške avtonomije.
Thus in the three Communities of Belgium, the responsibilities of teachers were broadened overall, while the room for manoeuvre of schools and their administrative authorities or bodies, as education providers, was at the same time steadily limited by the development of standards specifying the aims of this provision.
V treh skupnostih v Belgiji so učiteljem povsod povečali obveznosti, hkrati pa postopoma zmanjševali manevrski prostor šol in njihovih upravnih organov (ki zagotavljajo delovanje šol), in sicer tako, da so uveljavili standarde in normative, s katerimi so podrobno opredelili namene izobraževanja.