Dalibor Svoboda

The statistic must be incorrect when only counting participants who submitted their biography. At Czech and Slovakian Forum there are so far four active participants but because they did not submit any biography (lack of knowledge of English or lack of confidence prevented them to do that) they are not included in the statistic. Isn’t that a pity? The amount of active participants is far larger and in respect of origin far more exotic than we actually know about if we only use the biography details to make a statistic.

Efter att på nytt har läst Davids och Anders inlägg kommer jag inte ifrån känslan att vi här och där i våra inlägg blandar ”äpple och päron”. Ibland tycker jag mig kunna utläsa ett ställningstagande att betyg och kunskap hör ihop. Dvs. om vi gör trovärdiga utvärderingssystem leder dessa till bättre strukturerad undervisning som leder till betyg som mäter ganska så exakt kunskaper vilket i sin tur leder till att eleverna har dessa kunskaper. Både Anders och David har varit på det här spåret i sina inlägg. Denna åsikt besvarar tydligt min fråga som gick ut på om det finns koppling mellan betyg och kunskap. En följdfråga kanske är dock ändå på sin plats. Handlar den betygsatta kunskapen om livslångkunskap eller om kunskap vid utvärderingstillfällena? Ibland tycker jag mig kunna utläsa att de kunskaper (och de höga betygen som hör till) som eleverna har med sig från gymnasieskolan är inte så mycket värda och högskolelärarna måste anstränga sig för att ”unlearn” studenter p.g.a. att det inte finns några objektiva kunskaper (och följaktligen inte heller några objektiva betyg?). David som tar fram denna tanke kanske vill säga att det är viktigare med inställning till lärande än faktapluggande. En följdfråga borde då vara om detta undersökande sätt är vettig i varje skolämne t.ex för att gå till mitt gamla exempel om det är lämpligt vad gäller inlärning av tyska språket? Det finns också en beskrivning i Davids inlägg där betyg ses som ett politisk kommenderat ställningstagande fullständigt bortkopplat från kunskaperna. Och eftersom betygen är meningslösa (åtminstone skillnaden mellan betygen IG och G) borde man då följa de politiska anvisningarna och sudda ut I framför G. Hur skulle jag vilja att ”min” skola såg ut? Jag önskar en skola där nyfikenhet och glädje råder. Jag önskar en skola där kunskapen står i förgrunden och betygen i bakgrunden (eller är helt avskaffade). Är en sådan skola möjlig i dagens värld?

1. When I click on the link it led me to the Resources which contain four sublevels which look like this: Directory Desription will be added later. Virtual School newsletters Teaching History Online is published by Spartacus Educational in association with the History Department of the Virtual School. The newsletter includes news, reviews of websites and articles on using ICT in the history classroom. Notices in Brief These items are collected and published by members of the History department. The list is updated every month, so visit this page regularly for new ideas. Articles on History, Education and ICT This section contains articles about ICT and pedagogy. Some articles are about ICT and history teaching. If you would like to have your article published here please contact: dalibor@fredrika.se All articles are published as I wrote a moment ago …….. The rest of the problems you mentioned shall I resend to Chui Hsia immediately for investigation. 2. If you clearly indicate what of yours works should be moved from your pages to the new one I can try to do this piece by piece over a longer period of time. It’s probably my task because I’m co-ordinator (until december!) of these things. Right now I do have little time because schools in Sweden start to go on for summer holiday. This is a hectic time. I do believe than I August there should be possibility to start removal of the most important material to our new page from your old pages.

1. I do think that web editor Chui Hsia is not alone when the publishing rules are discussed in Brussels office. I guess that Anne Gilleran and others from the management team are deciding guidance for and policy of Virtual school and its departments together. I assumed (maybe wrongly) that they are her superiors. I do believe that Juan Carlos proposal of placing the same material at two websites simultaneously is the solution. After creating it the content or it’s most important parts could be move to History departmental or for that matter elsewhere else. Or is this procedure time consuming in excess? 2. I ask Chui Hsia where are the material we moved to the new site at the meeting in Gothenburg. I especially ask for Articles I was working with. She sent me to http://www.eun.org/ww/en/pub/virtual_schoo...y/resources.htm The Resources contains four sublevel headlines (I didn’t ask for Directory??) and Articles are uploaded. Your Newsletters are published too. It seems to me that she alone wants to create sublevels in the sections which are still empty and then publish our work under them. What kind of sublevel headlines do you want to have in the sections you are responsible for?

It’s unwise for us to have two parallel debates going on. Chui Hsia, the editor of Virtual school/ History department is not part of this network and subsequently not reading your comments and suggestions which you publish at Educational Forum. (Do you think that she should be a part? If you answer yes, please do inform me why do you think so ……) The letters from Chui Hsia are forwarded to all of you when they contain important information about the webbing of the History department new site. So was also done with a letter which among others information contained outlines of Virtual School publications policy. Are you reading all her mails carefully? If you do you can immediately confront her with arguments against by answering her mails. Again, I do feel that arguing against her and her writings (and her superior’s ideas) on this site is slightly farfetched. I wrote previously that I do consider it to be not completely without problems to publish all her letters at Educational Forum (which is open to anyone) because she either asks me not to do so or because they are only of importance to the members of History department. I do believe that we should have some discipline towards Virtual school/ History department as long as we agree to be a part of the network. By that I mean that we should obey Virtual school/History department rules. Or do you have another opinion? Which in that case?

Answer to my e-mail sent yesterday to Anne Gilleran and Chui Hsia. Dear Dalibor, It seems that you and the group had a very productive time despite the frustrations. The new CMS is very stable, but like all such systems it has constraints and this takes getting used to. I am sorry about our servers I too was working over the weekend and experienced the same frustrations. I really appreciate all the work that each one of you do for the Virtual School. We will try to get the logins for you as soon as possible. Best regards Anne

Content of the letter I sent to Anne Gilleran and Chui Hsia a few moments ago: The Hist.dep. meeting in Gothenburg went very well. Most of the time did we work with Content Manager System moving articles and other materials from old site to the new one. Some members discovered different technical problems which we are describing in the minutes from the meeting. I hope that these problems will be eliminated fast. Today I tried to continue the work at the new Hist.dep. site but I was not let in. Is the CMS system down? For how long period of time? When will the members of VS departments obtain their own logging authorization? It should be done fairly soon. After all the management of Virtual School intentions are to have this new site running during month of May. Dalibor

Yesterday I upploded at the webpage all articles about education and ICT. I did create a new sublevel at Resources called "Articles" where these are placed. Today I will do the same with "Notices".

Virtual school front page http://vs.eun.org/eun.org2/eun/en/index_vs.cfm does show right now five departments which are partricipating in Olympic Games project. The department of History is taking part in the project by looking at the history of Olympic games starting with a description of Ancient Greece Olympic Games. The members of the History department are also writting about different modern Olympic games, biographies of athletes, descriptions and discussions of political events which sometimes mixed with the games. There are also texts about the background to the Olympic Games, and lists of the modern Summer, Winter and Paralympic Games. All this could be find at: http://vs.eun.org/eun.org2/eun/en/vs-histo...ang=en&ov=33159 School classes, teachers and other sports enthusiasts are invited to take part in this project. Your participation will make a difference!

Det är kanske detta vi borde diskutera. Vad är det egentligen man kan göra med datorerna i klassrummet, tillsammans med eleverna? Bortsett från de exempel du har räknat fram. Tillhör du också till de som inte har en aning eller har du fått insikter och praktiska erfarenheter som ger svar på ditt eget påstående? Kan du dela med dig?

Jag har trasslat till det en aning i mitt inledande inlägg. Gett uttryck för två olika ställningstagande samtidigt. Och när sedan David Richardsons inlägg kom, skruvade jag bara på mig vid genomläsningen. Jag ville väl inte diskutera grunderna för hur olika typer av prov, för att fått bättre underlag för betygsättning, skulle konstrueras. Jag ville väl diskutera det problematiska förhållande som råder mellan kunskap och betyg. Jag inser till fullo att den sista meningen i mitt första inlägg: ”Är betygsystemet bra som det fungerar idag eller var de gamla betygen bättre?” inbjuder ändå just till att diskutera olika betygssystem och alla varianter av olika prov och tester. Det har nu David Richardson och Anders gjort med sina utmärkta inlägg. Det finns helt enkelt olika inlärnings- och betygsvägar att vandra för att säkerställa elevernas ( de duktiga elevernas?) väg mot … ja, vad 1) bra kunskap, eller 2) bra betyg, eller 3) i förläggningen bra liv? Förmodligen är det så att man inte skulle träna om man inte hade hopp om att vinna en medalj. Eller skulle man ändå träna just för att göra något åt sitt välbefinnande? Likadant, drömmer jag om, borde det vara i skolan. Man är väl ute efter kunskap inte efter betyg? Ja, är man det? Och det är här den andra delen av mitt inlägg kommer fram: ”Vad tjänar det då till att eleven är godkänd i tyska när han saknar förmåga att öppna mun och prata tyska under sin vistelse i Tyskland?” ” Är inte då ett skriftligt omdöme ett bättre sätt att värdera kunskaper hos eleverna? Eller skulle det räcka med ett utvecklingssamtal i närvaro av föräldrar? Skulle eleverna anstränga sig mindre då? Anstränga sig vad gäller vad? Bra betyg eller bra kunskaper? Hänger kunskaper och betyg ihop? På vilket sätt i så fall?” Jag som lärare kan efter alla dessa år inte förlikas med tanken på att den behållna kunskap, de färdigheter eleverna borde ha förvärvat i skolan är så liten. “Det finns också en viss "pliktskyldig" tacksamhet för den historiska kunskap man uppnått (men tråkigt nog så glömmer man det mesta ganska snart...).” inlägg av Anders, 2 maj. Tänk om sjukhusen botade oss sjuka med samma resultat som vi åstadkommer inom utbildningssystemet!? Det är ju ett faktum att många elever med godkända betyg har inom sig lite av godkända kunskaper. Nu nalkas den tid då eleverna sätter på sig studentmässor och viftar glatt med avgångsbetyg, medan vi lärare som står bredvid med ett snett leende, vet vad verkligheten bakom är. Och i denna del av debatten, den som handlar om den förmedlande och mottagna och behållna kunskapen tror jag att vi är snett ute om vi tror att bättre konstruerade prov (som ger bättre underlag för betygsättning) skulle säkerställa bättre kunskaper och färdigheter hos elever. Eller har jag fel?

Ordförande i Ansvarskommittén Mats Svegfors tycker i artikeln ”Lärargnället är ibland fullständigt obegripligt” publicerad i Skolvärlden den 16 april 2004 följande: ”Som alla föräldrar undrar jag vart det nyfikna barnet tog vägen och varifrån kom den trötta skolungen.” Skändligen misslyckad tycker Mats Svegfors att skolan är på att ta hänsyn till de olika förutsättningar som eleverna har – skillnader i begåvning, mognad och språkkunskaper. Enligt honom försöker skolan fortfarande klippa alla efter samma karott, även om karotten inte passar. ”Den teoretiska undervisningen på gymnasiet är ett helvete för många elever. Om och om igen får de höra att de inte duger. Det är en fruktansvärd start att ge unga människor.” Vad tycker du som läser detta i frågan?

Ordförande i Ansvarskommittén Mats Svegfors tycker i artikeln ”Lärargnället är ibland fullständigt obegripligt” publicerad i Skolvärlden den 16 april 2004 följande: ”Jag är personligen övertygad om att datorerna kommer att vända upp och ner på skolan som vi känner den. Men skolan är delvis kvar i 1100-talet när Parisuniversitetet inrättades. Det är föreläsningstänkande, katederundervisning, högläsning och innantill-lärning.” Mats Svegfors tycker att det är konstigt att det ändå inte hänt mer på orådet ”inlärning via dator” då så många datorprojekten har avlöst varandra under de senaste femton åren. Vad tycker du som läser detta i frågan?

My contribution was slightly off the subject …. When I reread the postings I of course discovered that there would be no library with old peoples memories. Instead the plans are for creating possibilities for students to ask questions and get answers ...... . Sorry. As David wrote: This applies even more for my students who on top of that do not have English as the native language.

cd mckie Posted on Apr 21 2004, 12:58 PM Given what occurred in Sweden last September (euro referendum and the assassination of Anna Lindt), it is hardly surprising that Goran Persson has refused to grant a referendum on the proposed constitution. The referendum on the future European Unions constitution in Sweden wouldn’t at all be a referendum on this issue but on the underlying issue “should Sweden be a part of European union in the future?”. If the wish of Swedish people is not to be a part of European union this should be clearly stated prior the "new" referendums and not be a hidden issue as it was one of the hidden issues when recently voting for or against euro. Swedish people already voted once on the question to belong or not belong a part of European Union and this issue was settled then in favour of becoming a member. It’s frustrating that opponents of European Union should use all the subsequent referendums and the proposals for referendum to try again and again to settle anew the question already settled. Did the Swedish people have a chance of referendum when a new constitution of Sweden was decided? Of course they didn’t. These kinds of questions are dealt best inside the ordinary and extraordinary parliamentary sessions. And no one at that time did feel that this approach was undemocratic.

I think that The Second World War project, as its outlined here on The Educational Forum is a good initiative. My old uncle still lives and has vivid memory of his teenage period, which was during the War in Mähren (a part of Czech protectorate). He speaks a good German and I believe that he would be willing to contribute to whatever place at this forum. Nevertheless what will be an outcome of the project? A library of memories? Placed at your Spartacus site? I find it more and more difficult to engage my students in taking any educational interest in such kinds of libraries. They often lack the patience to read through it and furthermore they are not enough skilled to read this kind of stories in foreign language. On the other hand they like to produce this kind interviews and subsequent story telling based on them themselves. Even if they do not have a great skill at doing that they are most often very proud about the results. Will there be any possibility for the student’s active participation? How will that be organized?

Občas obdržím „mail“ kde mě odesílatel popíše argumenty k tomu anebo onomu příspěvku z „České a Slovenské části fóra“. Jsou to vždy promyšlené a dobře zformulované myšlenky, chyba pouze je, že si je mohu přečíst pouze já. Čím to je, že vedle debaty na fóru se vede vedlejší debata s pomoci mailů? Jestli se někomu nepodařilo zaregistrovat se do fóra mohu jej okamžitě zaregistrovat sám. Moje e-mailová adresa je: dalibor@fredrika.se Anebo leží za tímto fenoménem něco jiného? Co tedy?

Naše škola se přestavuje. Jedna její půlka je již přestavená a začalo se v ní vyučovat po zimních prázdninách. Ta přestavěná půlka vypadá fantasticky. Třídy neexistují. Žáci pobývají dohromady se svými učitely v prostorách určených pro ně a pro učitelský kolektiv, který se o ně stará a učí je. Každý takový prostor je vybaven asi kolem třiceti počítači. Žáci se pohybují volně ve svém prostoru „v honbě“ za „svými znalostmi“, učitelé je uvádějí do pedagogických tématů a potom také povzbuzují. A též opravují s pomocí rozhovorů výsledky a získané znalosti. Funguje to? Já nevím, právě moje půlka skoly ještě přestavěná není. Ale jsem zvědavý na to až tenhle způsob výuky sám budu moci vyzkoušet. V ůnoru 2005!

1. Your evaluation of the Soviets Red Army’s war on and subsequent ten years long occupation of Afghanistan surprised me a lot. Do you have this kind of view of the Russian´s Chechenya war of today too? That woman there actually do better living now or that Russians engage in “building roads, suppressing the drugs trade” etc.? Nevertheless yours somehow not altogether negative view of Afghan war suggests that you do have ability to see that some wars and some occupations actually could have better results than others. Is our disagreement only about which kind of war it is? You seem to favour socialist wars …… 2. I do disagree with Gandhi. I do believe that most of the people would rather live in the free and democratic societies (as emigrations flows daily show when people of all kinds “vote by feets” rather than casting ballots in manipulated elections at home) than in political “mess” which is as you quoted Gandhi accepted on the ground that it’s domestic made “mess”. History did many times clearly show that this kind of political ”mess” is not for the benefit of the people but for the rich and powerful click which often actually do not represent people. Furthermore these political “mess” must often be repaired at high cost by outside forces in the end or by costly, endless and largely ineffective foreign aid paid by outsiders. Doesn’t situation in Liberia of today, Rwanda of yesterday and Khmer Rouge republic of seventies clearly show this? And how much will the human cost of accepting Mughabi´s homemade "mess" in Zimbabwe be in the near future? After all we do live in a globalized world today where not single one dictator should have a possibility to hide the fact that he is tormenting its own people. So how to prevent the Castro’s Cuba? Or Kim Il Jong´s North Korea? Or Saddam´s Iraq? By voting in the United Nations? And hoping for the best? Sometimes it worked mostly it did not.

Do you recognize any differences between the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan between 1979 - 1989 and the present situation when USA’s and other nation’s soldiers are staying in this country? If you do, you have answered the question you asked me to answer. (I do not think that Iraq is so much different than Afghanistan of today is when viewing the “occupation”.)

One of the weaknesses with “democracy” is that undemocratic forces can win democratic election in order to abolish the democracy directly afterwards. This is very frustrating but if democratic forces try to prevent it they are immediately accused of being undemocratic themselves. This situation is basically “Catch 22” moment. Dictatorial ideologies like Communism and Nazism mastered this situation at the outmost during 20th century. Should this situation be prevented somehow? I believe that it should. You probably believe that it shouldn´t.

I would rather to be naive when believing that America is fighting for democracy than comparing the situation after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein to the Nazi Germany´s occupation of France. Wasn’t it a minister in Gerhard Schroeder government who compared Bush to Hitler at the beginning of the Iraq war? What a low level of debate! When America together with NATO alliance bombed Serbia to force Milosevic from power (despite the Russians opposition which didn’t permit vote casting in Security Council … do we recognize the situation!?) most of the Europeans were satisfied. Finally the democratization process could be started after eight nasty years of suppressions, torture, rapes, humiliation and killings. Ironically no one bothered that the Serbian infrastructure was flattened with the earth. No one did discuss the lack of a distinct support from the United Nation. No one bothered that the Kosovo Albans are not at all democratically minded. And no one is discussing the return of Milosevic Nationalist into the government of Kostunica today. Quite a few of us are happy that Americans succeeded to bomb the Serbians into democracy. Despite the Serbians unwillingness. How differently is not the Iraq question dealt with despite similarities? Is it maybe so that as long the USA does serve Europe’s political expectations and preferences Europeans can settle for that? I think that one of the divisions between debaters about Iraq was along these lines: 1) the current situation, which some accepted and others criticized 2) The United Nations vote for overthrowing Saddam Hussein from power by a coalition resembling the coalition Bush the Elder built up 1990-1991. 3) continuation of the situation as it was during the last decade The 2) alternative would have a greater legitimacy but obviously lead to the same result as the first alternative. I do not see how a larger coalition could prevent all the nasty future scenarios described by some postings. The cruel bomb attack of the United Nations office killing Sergio Viera de Mello on 19th of August clearly indicates that. So what option was left? Doing nothing? (Despite the pressing needs to deal with many problems in the Middle East at the same time! See my contributions at the thread “Blair Doctrine”) Both two previous postings describe with impatience and fervour the injustices done by the capitalist America during the last fifty years of the last century. Gentlemen, wasn’t that a period called the Cold War? Were the Americans playing it alone during this period? What did have the counterpart in this war on its conscience? I often wonder how selective arguments could be chosen when arguing people try to prove the point. When talking about Halliburton of today why not also talk about Shell of yesterday? When Americas Vietnam comes up why not also discuss the French Vietnam (and pssst! Algeria ……not to be forgotten) When preaching about American “colonialism” why not also talk about Portuguese atrocities in Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau and Angola? And atrocities committed by the rest of Europeans colonisators! Debaters in Europe are today crying “catch the villain” when European colonial powers have been villains for over two hundred years. Or how about the “magnificent” invasion of the Suez 1956! What were you after at that time, Brits and Frenchmen? Oil too? I was eight years then so one can’t say that it was a long time ago when it’s still in the living memory of a person. After all most of the nasty problems the world today deals with in Asia, Middle East and Africa are products of British cruel and greedy colonial policy in these parts of the world. Iraq is no exception of that.

I do not know what Nazi Germany was trying exactly to impose on France and Frenchmen 1940, besides conquering the old foe; but it was for sure not democracy. As far as I can see Mahmood Elahi is just plainly talking about how democracy was once installed in the profoundly undemocratic country, Japan. And so are also politicians within "the coalition of willing", waging today war on Saddam’s Iraq, talking. Don’t you think that democracy is worth fighting for? After all in the European two last senseless 20th century conflicts the words “saving the world for democracy” was endlessly used by the winning side politicians as the reason to offer lives of millions of young man together with millions of innocent civilians. Nevertheless as it had been said in one of the previous posting the outcome of the Iraq fighting could, contrary the desire for democracy, be establishment of undemocratic Shia government. These things did happen before. The First World War sowed the seeds of Communism and Nazism, while the Second World War left millions imprisoned in their own countries which switched under the guidance of Soviet Union on the path of building “workers paradise”. Does all this mean that we should not try to fight for democracy anymore?

Letters to the Editor. (The Wall Street Journal. Europe. Tuesday, April 6, 2004) Stay in Iraq Until the Job is Done. “The April 2 feature “Heart of Darkness” by Christopher Hitchens makes some important points about human nature. Anyone visiting Japan today is likely to wonder how these smiling, bowing, courteous, gentle people could have behaved with such unspeakable brutality as they did during World War II? The Japanese were not inherently cruel and bestial but they were brought up in a culture of brutality during the war. General Tojo and his officers taught their soldiers the moral code of the Nazis, extolled brutality and called humane behaviour criminal softness. The officers treated their men with extreme cruelty who in turn were indoctrinated to treat those in their charge with the same inhumanity. Oppressed minions always want to kick someone to feel relieved. The Japanese troops were no different. Their most savage behaviour was reserved for prisoners of war who were systematically tortured and murdered. Similarly, most Iraqis were brought up in an atmosphere of extreme cruelty during Saddam´s reign of terror. Max Vad der Stoel, the former United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human rights in Iraq, told the U.N. that the brutality of the Iraqi regime was”of an exceptionally grave character – so grave that it has few parallels in the years that have passed since the Second World War”. This was a regime that would gouge out the eyes of children to force confession from their parents. This was a regime that would crush all the bones in the feet of a two-year-old girl to force her mother to divulge her father’s whereabouts. The atrocities in Fallujah show that many ordinary Iraqis, like Japanese soldiers, have been thoroughly dehumanized by Saddam´s odious rule. This is the natural outcome from living long under a brutal regime. The Japanese were cured of their bestiality by democratic institutions imposed by the Americans who stayed long enough to see these institutions take root. The same should be done in Iraq.” Mahmood Elahi Ottawa I did not change a word of Mahmood Elahi´s writing. Just underlined what I think is a good answer to your question. I hope he will not be angry with me on ground I quote him without asking for his permission.

Ano, bylo by zajímavé vědět kolik asi švédských knížek je přeložených do češtiny a obráceně. Ví někdo spontálně o některé oblíbené švédské knížce? V třicátých letech byl Karel Čapek navrhován pro Nobelovu cenu, kterou však nikdy nedostal. Jeho knihy se v té době překládaly do švédštiny a ješte dodnes je Čapek zde uznáván „kulturní elitou“. Anebo Ivan Klíma byl a stále je překládán. A snad i čten. A samozřejmě to samé platí o Milanu Kunderovi.