Search results

This paper aims to present a teaching approach to achieve the most personal support for students with different backgrounds and preferences in studying an Informatics course.

The presented methodology is based on the main principles of flexible and blended learning. The authors considered three main aspects: student’s background, the level of knowledge and the most suitable style of learning. At the beginning of the course, students were randomly divided into reference and test group. The test group students were continuously supported by different tools within an e-learning environment. The learning process for the reference group students was held in a traditional form.

The success of the experiment presented in this paper is demonstrated by comparing the results of the test group who were taught using the new strategy with the reference group who were taught in a common way. The statistical analysis shows that the test group students had better achievements compared to the reference group.

This presented study was carried out with non-IT first-year university students from social sciences, economics and technical faculties. Each year the number of students varied from 150 to 300.

Based on developed methodology, the model of individualization of the educational process in an e-environment was created and implemented in the course of Informatics in Tallinn University of Technology.

The chapter presents a mechanism of innovational development of cluster of the hospitality industry in the system of region's economic security, which formation takes place in the conditions of complex turbulent state of economy, which leads to crises of various scales and volumes. Cluster is treated as a platform that unifies efforts and partnership interactions between large, medium, and small business and synthesizes expectations of consumers on the basis of territorial concentration of readiness to care about a customer in the form of provision of the need: (1) selection and readiness of consumer to accept a specific complex service of the hospitality industry (with tourist service complexes); (2) movement (with transport complex); (3) accommodation (with hotel complex), (4) readiness for catering (with catering complex); (5) entertainment (with participation of complex of entertainment); (6) security (with security complex). The process of clustering leads to a new treatment of the notion of competition, development of capabilities to be a business partner, and finding advantages in generation of innovations together with intermediaries and neighbors.

Sustainability is a catch term for the different way of life required to counter the ills of the modern era. It encompasses new social and economic as well as ecological relationships. Sustainability theory is, by its nature, hopeful in envisioning an alternative corrective course of action. This volume deals with “the negative legacy problem” that confounds this optimism because we have so profoundly contaminated and altered the earth in lasting ways. Any effort to create a sustainable future will have to deal with this legacy. It is a huge and profound burden faced unevenly by people and non-humans today and that we have left for future generations (see Edelstein, 2006).

Four cast iron lions guard the charming Lions footbridge crossing St. Petersburg's Griboedov Canal. The first author strolled across the bridge on an August evening in 1998 with a Russian friend, Polina. The experience presents a parable for concluding this volume:As we crossed the bridge in the dark, we barely avoided stepping into a gaping hole in the deck half way across. A person could easily fall through. I reacted as a typical American, immediately taking responsibility for doing something about the problem, looking for some board to place over the hole or a barrier to warn pedestrians or someone to report the hazard to who would address it promptly. Polina indicated that no Russian would make such a fuss, and she could think of no one to report the hazard to who would respond. As we stood discussing this problem before two of the guardian lions, a group of drunken soldiers began to cross the bridge from the far side, arm in arm, singing loudly. Sure enough, one slipped through the hole and, but for his comrades holding his arms, he would have plunged into the canal. Surely they will report it, I said, but Polina was doubtful. She saw little chance for some protective action to fix the bridge or even to warn passers-by to beware. We went on our way mindful of the problem left behind. Perhaps a month after my return to the U.S., I received an email from Polina that she had gone to the bridge and, to her surprise, it was fixed. “Perhaps,” she wrote, “there is hope for Russia after all.”

In a seminal essay, Mumford (1963) argued that society is forced to adapt to the demands of the technological systems it chooses. He distinguished between what he called “Authoritarian” and “Democratic” technics. Societies choosing the former path select technological and energy systems that are high risk and therefore demand authoritarian, centralized, secretive and closed social controls. In contrast, the second low-risk path allows for decentralized, open, participatory and democratic control. The two directions, and thus the resulting social forms, could not be more contradictory.¹ Democratic technics, not Authoritarian, are necessary for a sustainable future.

Tatyana J. Andrushchenko is dean of the School of Psychology and Social Work, head of the Department of Social Work and professor of psychology at Volgograd State Pedagogical University. Dr. Andrushenko earned her Ph.D. in Psychology from the Russian Federation Education Academy, Institute of Psychology. Her primary work is in child development, counselling methods, interpersonal communication, and the evaluation of social psychological services. She has participated in exchange programs in Denmark, the Netherlands, and the US. tandr@vspu.ru

In this chapter we will look at some of the consequences of a sequence of nuclear disasters that occurred in the Southern Ural region of Russia beginning in the 1940s. Drawing upon the historical record, we document the steady increase in radiological contamination that resulted from a combination of accidents and a nuclear naivete that took nearly 60 years to outgrow. We will then analyze the dynamics of response to this contamination and health catastrophe. We will look at the population's reaction over the years, as well as the government's policy, or lack thereof, toward containing pollution, improving safety management, and protecting the health and environmental rights of the region's citizens. We will also compare the coping mechanisms of two different Russian cultures – that under the Soviet regime and that after perestroika – as a young democracy. Finally, we will examine the effects of social movements and community action, issues of community conflict, and the phenomenon of ecodisaster tourism.¹

Russia represents one of the world's most dangerous ecological risk zones. Yet, the risk is not evenly distributed within the country. Certain areas of Russia show a disproportionately heavy concentration of pollution and present an even higher ecological risk than the country as a whole. Making a major contribution to the list of areas at greatest risk are the “ZATO.” These unique “Closed Administrative Territorial Establishments” are Russian settlements or cities containing large nuclear enterprises; they are held in a state of extreme secrecy and security. Despite the end of the cold war, ZATO persist and their production activities continue to cause terrible damage to the environment and to the health of their residents. Additionally, the sites of closed former ZATO represent lasting ecological and health threats.