3 resultados para Residential Homes
em Digital Peer Publishing
Resumo:
Speaking about professionals, working with children at child care homes in Lithuania, first of all we encounter a problem of terminology. This problem rises, because in various countries and languages we call these professionals differently. In Lithuania we call them ”aukletojai”. We also use the word ”aukletojas” when speaking about both professionals, working directly with children at kindergartens, and parents, as all parents are educators of their children. We suppose, that the word ”aukletojas” corresponds to the German “erzieher”, and “aukleti” to “erziehen”. Every “aukletojas” in Lithuania clearly realizes, that he is a pedagogue, because in this country every professional, involved in educational work with children – an ”aukletojas”, a teacher, a social pedagogue and a special pedagogue – is called a pedagogue. In this context it is essential to conceive that in Lithuania an ”educator” and a ”social pedagogue” are different pedagogical professions and that none of the ”aukletojas” identify himself as a social pedagogue.
Resumo:
Current public opinion about the residential care system in contemporary Russia is extremely negative. A majority of Russians, both citizens and professionals, consider that family placement is the best arrangement for orphaned children. The year 2007 was announced as the Year of the Child in Russia. The majority of officials interpreted it as the year of de-institutionalization of the residential care system for children in Russia. De-institutionalization is mostly identified as reform focused on family placement instead of placement in institutions. Vladimir Fridlyanov, the executive director of the Ministry of Science and Education, announced in May, 2007 that the government is going to transfer 120,000 children from institutions into families every year from 2007 until 2010 and reduce the number of residential care institutions by one-third (Nesterova 2007). But the likelihood of family placement is small, with the exception of the adoption of infants without serious pathologies, and the attempts of precipitant de-institutionalization (when children’s homes are closed and children are distributed among families) have failed (children were returned into children homes). According to the opinion of the Ministry, the key obstacle to effective de-institutionalization is the lack of professionals in adoption and foster care (Vazhdaeva 2006).
Resumo:
Grounded in group conflict theory and the defended neighborhoods thesis, this nationwide empirical study of cities and their residential segregation levels, examines the occurrence of hate crime using data on for all U.S. cities with populations over 95,000, and data compiled from the Uniform Crime Report for hate crime, in conjunction with 2000 census data. Hate crime is any illegal act motivated by pre-formed bias against, in this case, a person’s real or perceived race. This research asks: Do hate crime levels predict white/black segregation levels? How does hate crime predict different measures of white/black segregation? I use the dissimilarity index measure of segregation operationalized as a continuous, binary and ordinal variable, to explore whether hate crime predicts segregation of blacks from whites. In cities with higher rates of hate crime there was higher dissimilarity between whites and blacks, controlling for other factors. The segregation level was more likely to be “high” in a city where hate crime occurred. Blacks are continually multiply disadvantaged and distinctly affected by hate crime and residential segregation. Prior studies of residential segregation have focused almost exclusively on individual choice, residents’ lack of finances, or discriminatory actions that prevent racial minorities from moving, to explore the correlates of segregation. Notably absent from these studies are measures reflecting the level of hate crime occurring in cities. This study demonstrates the importance of considering hate crime and neighborhood conflict when contemplating the causes of residential segregation.