Přehledová studie shrnuje dosavadní stav poznání v oblasti, která je sice veřejnosti známa už dlouho, ale exaktní výzkum probíhá teprve třicet let. Nevhodným chováním učitele se rozumí chování, které nepřekračuje hranice zákona, ale interferuje s výukou, a tím narušuje vztahy mezi učitelem a žáky a zhoršuje učení žáků. Studie upozorňuje na dvě výzkumné tradice, které se rozvíjely souběžně: v bývalých socialistických státech pod označením didaktogenie, v západní Evropě, USA a Japonsku pod označením nevhodné chování učitele. Studie předkládá čtyři psychologické teorie, které se snaží vysvětlit příčiny učitelova nevhodného chování: teorii kauzální atribuce, teorii vnímané vlastní zdatnosti učitele (self-efficacy), teorii interakčního chování učitele a teorii uplatňování učitelovy moci. Ve studii jsou dále diskutovány možnosti diagnostiky učitelova nevhodného chování a shrnuty výsledky šestnácti deskriptivně-analytických výzkumů realizovaných v této oblasti.
The paper aims 1. to draw attention to the situation in the Czech Republic, where universities „produce“ tens of PhD graduates every year and are little interested in their future; 2. to clarify the term „postdoc“ and introduce research studies that deal with this group of university graduates; 3. to present some information about PhD graduates in the field of educational sciences in the Czech Republic; 4. to discuss the Czech context that influences the employment of postdocs; 5. to summarize findings from abroad about systematic work with postdocs. In the first part we describe the current situation in the Czech Republic and abroad. In the second part we introduce the research study about the number of successful graduates from educational sciences doctoral programmes. The third part focuses on the Czech context that influences the employment of postdocs. The fourth part summarizes the experience from other countries considering systematic work with postdocs. In our research study we found that 549 people successfully completed a doctoral programme in educational sciences in 1999–2011. Systematic work with postdocs has been initiated at three universities (Charles University, Masaryk University, Palackého University) but is at its outset. From the above mentioned it follows that in the Czech context it will be necessary to monitor where postdocs work, to what degree they focus on research, and what their career path looks like. Besides this, it will be crucial (based on experience from abroad) to devise a system that will allow postdocs to follow various paths when it comes to broadening their knowledge and improving their skills.
The study informs the reader about how to write a quality review, which would summarize the current knowledge of the selected research topic. The aim of this study is to present a typology of review studies, to characterize various functions performed by diff erent types of review studies; to show how to proceed in the selection of topics, at the preparation of supporting documents, and at the actual writing a review. The first part presents 11 types of review studies, both the generally known and the less known ones. The second part is a brief overview of the genres that do not belong to the category of review studies. The third part characterizes diff erent functions that are fulfilled by the reviews (the review studies may facilitate understanding of the presented research, they are beneficial to the study´s author, to the development of the field or to other researchers). The fourth section of the text looks closer at the problems faced by the author when choosing the topic for the review study, and off ers possible solutions. The fifth part summarizes the procedures for preparation of documents for a review study (literature research, reduction of the initial selected works, critical reading, text analysis, creation of review tables). The sixth section provides advice on how to proceed in the actual writing a review. Where appropriate, in addition to recommendations on how to proceed, typical mistakes are mentioned that should be avoided by the author. In developed countries, there are three types of materials teaching students and young scientists how to write a review study. These guidelines can be found on the University website (usually within s called Writing Centres) or are available as journal articles on this topic or there are more comprehensive guides. So far, there has not been such a set of guidelines available in the Czech Republic. The present overview tries to fill this gap. Apart from general advice and guidelines, it is completed with some practical examples.
This overview study summarizes the current psychological knowledge about subjective time as a peculiar dimension of human life. The opening part presents the five stages of explorations in subjective time between the 19th century psycholog y and today. Next, four basic psychological concepts of subjective time (time as the sequence of events, time as duration, time as perspective and, finally, the contextual concept of time) are explained. Part three comments on the peculiarities of lived time (boundaries between past, present and the future and instances of subjective violation of the course of time). Part four of the study summarizes the diagnostic procedures enabling to observe the subjective perception, living and assessment of time (quantitative and qualitative approaches). Part of the explanation is examples referring to pedagogical applications of the psychological knowledge about subjective time.
This validation study deals with verification of the Czech version of CASSS. The questionnaire comprises 60 items. Students assess the frequency of each event described by an item and its importance. The research was realized on a sample of 274 grade 6 to 9 students and yielded similar psychometric properties as the original American version of CASSS (2000). The factor analysis identified five-factor structure corresponding to the variables of parents, teacher, classmates, best friend, and people in school. Factor loadings ranged from 0.31 to 0.87 (compared with 0.52 to 0.81 in the original version) within each of the five components. The identified structure explains approximately 48 % of variance. Reliability estimated using Cronbach alpha was computed for each subscale (parents, teacher, classmates, best friend, and people in school). The coefficients ranged from 0.84 to 0.93 (compared with 0.92 to 0.95 in the original version). Cronbach alpha for the whole questionnaire is 0.95 (compared with 0.96 in the original version). The method can be used within the conditions of Czech schools to determine the actual state of individuals and groups, individual counselling and evaluation of intervention effects.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.