แปลภาษาอังกฤษเป็นไทย ออนไลน์ แปลภาษา แปลข้อความ แปลบทความ แปลเอกสาร แปลประโยคอังกฤษเป็นไทยทั้งประโยค แปลเอกสารภาษาอังกฤษเป็นภาษาไทยทั้งประโยค แปลประโยคอังกฤษเป็นไทย แปลอังกฤษ แปลไทย ฟรี [Translate] English to Thai Translation Translate Translator , ภาษาอังกฤษ มีใช้ในประเทศออสเตรเลีย แคนาดา ไอร์แลนด์ นิวซีแลนด์ สหราชอาณาจักร สหรัฐอเมริกา ไลบีเรีย เบลีซ แอฟริกาใต้ อินเดีย
My dissertation contributes to our empirical knowledge of the implementation and functioning of the Khrushchev-era education reforms. The research utilizes newly available archival information, which permits an in-depth focus on the path the reform followed in Moscow secondary schools from 1958 until 1964. 1 examine the reaction of parents, teachers, school officials, factory and enterprise directors, and pupils to the proposed reform. In essence, the regime sought to shift the emphasis in general secondary education from an academic bias to one that was more oriented to production training. The proposed reform sparked debate among pedagogues and parents as they questioned the extent to which production training should occur within the framework of general education. As the debates raged in school reports, and newspaper and journal articles, it soon became evident that the regime's hopes for rapid transformation of the education system were highly optimistic. As the reform progressed teachers, pedagogues and parents grew increasingly strident in expressing their antipathy to the reform, pointing to a substantial disconnect between the values promoted by the regime, and the desires of the general populace. The debates that surrounded education reform revealed a citizenry that had come to place a decided value on academically oriented education, and that sought to maintain that orientation in the face of the regime's plans to divert more pupils directly into the world of production. In a country where economic progress and competition against capitalist countries, and thus the need for workers, assumed primary Importance, the reaction of the populace was cause for special concern. The concern regarding the role of education in relation to economic development persisted after Khrushchev's ouster In 1964, and it remains a challenge for the present leadership in Russia, and indeed throughout the world.
แปลภาษาอังกฤษเป็นไทยออนไลน์แปลภาษาแปลข้อความแปลบทความแปลเอกสารแปลประโยคอังกฤษเป็นไทยทั้งประโยคแปลเอกสารภาษาอังกฤษเป็นภาษาไทยทั้งประโยคแปลประโยคอังกฤษเป็นไทยแปลอังกฤษแปลไทยฟรี [แปล] ภาษาอังกฤษเป็นไทยแปลแปลแปล ภาษาอังกฤษมีใช้ในประเทศออสเตรเลียแคนาดาไอร์แลนด์นิวซีแลนด์สหราชอาณาจักรสหรัฐอเมริกาไลบีเรียเบลีซแอฟริกาใต้อินเดียMy dissertation contributes to our empirical knowledge of the implementation and functioning of the Khrushchev-era education reforms. The research utilizes newly available archival information, which permits an in-depth focus on the path the reform followed in Moscow secondary schools from 1958 until 1964. 1 examine the reaction of parents, teachers, school officials, factory and enterprise directors, and pupils to the proposed reform. In essence, the regime sought to shift the emphasis in general secondary education from an academic bias to one that was more oriented to production training. The proposed reform sparked debate among pedagogues and parents as they questioned the extent to which production training should occur within the framework of general education. As the debates raged in school reports, and newspaper and journal articles, it soon became evident that the regime's hopes for rapid transformation of the education system were highly optimistic. As the reform progressed teachers, pedagogues and parents grew increasingly strident in expressing their antipathy to the reform, pointing to a substantial disconnect between the values promoted by the regime, and the desires of the general populace. The debates that surrounded education reform revealed a citizenry that had come to place a decided value on academically oriented education, and that sought to maintain that orientation in the face of the regime's plans to divert more pupils directly into the world of production. In a country where economic progress and competition against capitalist countries, and thus the need for workers, assumed primary Importance, the reaction of the populace was cause for special concern. The concern regarding the role of education in relation to economic development persisted after Khrushchev's ouster In 1964, and it remains a challenge for the present leadership in Russia, and indeed throughout the world.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
