About teaching, leading and influencing the attitudes

About teaching, leading  and influencing the attitudes

In modern time teaching is not one direction operation, were teacher or lecturer just talks, and pupils or students just listen to the wise words, what that person says to them. In the modern version of a teaching and educating, the teacher is observing the pupils or students and try to find out their weaknesses and strengths. And then that would make possible to get involved in the wrong things, what that person makes. What are those "wrong things"?

One of the best ways to turn down the problems is to tune the attitudes about people for defending supporting the motivation of education. Good motivation and positive way to think that education would give something in the future would help to survive in the school. If a person thinks that everything is boring that attitude would turn everything else turn to boring. If the attitude to drugs and alcohol is positive that thing would turn very expensive career in some correlation system. Those things should always think when people start school. Young age is a very good time to fix the attitude problems and grow self-esteem.

And we must realize that we are ever ready. There is always something new to learn, and that thing what this way to think support is the lifetime learning. Self-advantage is always allowed, and those things, what people are learning might be paintings, dance some new sports. As well as some new language or way to make new computer programs. The learning can support own hobbies, work-life or both of them.

The wrong attitude is always the problem, what would create mode problems during the class, and if there are enough problems the entire school would go in the wrong direction. And in the worst case that causes the person chooses the career as the professional criminal. But the thing that the teacher notices the problematic attitude requires certain freedoms, what were unknown in the past.

The thing is that the freedom uncovers, what kind of people are belonging in the pupils or students social network, and what kind of things that person wants to talk. And if the pupil or student would believe in that person handling everything in the school better than a teacher, or even doesn't need the education, would that thing also uncovering in the freedom. Don't understand this thing wrong. The thing is the authorities must be followed, and teachers are the authority in the classroom. They must have power and authority to order things, and if those orders would not be followed the punishment must be given immediately.

But when we are meeting pupils, who think that they must not follow the rules, what the school has been given, we must compare this thing the situation, that somebody would come to the prison after the rough and long series of crimes. Those crimes might be overspeeding or stealing things or some more serious things. And in this case, the same things what those prisoners are thinking about orders can compare to the things, what pupils or students thinks about the orders.

Who told them, that everything that they do or think to do is accepted? Who told puṕil that the beginning of school day is free, and that person can choose does the school day begin in the eight, ten or half-past one afternoon? There are also things, that somebody believes that homework can be left undone, because of some hobbies, which is the wrong attitude, and those ideas need correction.

And then who told that every kind of behavior and cheating is allowed? Those things must find out, and the child must be taught that those things are not tolerated in regular life.  When we are thinking about situations, where pupils are making their own rules, we must understand that it's a very good way to find out about those children attitudes and expectations about school. But the authorities must be handled by critics. The thing is that every person, who is thinking to be auctorial should not think as that kind of person.

Or what would you think, if some alcoholic or dosser comes to use authority to a younger person because being elder is justifying that thing? That thing is called as criticism. We should teach youngsters, that they should understand that every elder person is not a "nice man" or "nice woman" at all. When we are thinking about education, and things what that thing is causing in the society, that thing transforms even the biggest leaders to the normal people, who also might make mistakes.

This is the thing, what Greek philosophers meant, what they were spoken about "stealing the fire from the Gods of Mount Olympus". Education makes people suspicious, and that is a bad thing for the authorities, what are arguments their way to use power as the term, that their way to operate is only the right way.

That kind of things is an interesting way to think, and when we are thinking about dictators, who are ruling their nations with an iron hand, we should ask them "who told that they are only possible choices for leading the nation"? Those things are really interesting aspects when we are thinking about the relations between education and power. The thing that everything comes from above the pupil or other person makes life easy.

But otherways that kind of things passivate people, who would not make a thing without separately giving orders. The thing in the absolute monarchy and dictatorship is that people would believe that they can live without thinking a thing, and without responsibility. And that thing is still visible in the ex-communist nations. The spontaneous way of making things is somehow missing in those countries, because of the bureaucracy.

And that thing influences still in the everyday life of those nations. If human must wait for command whenever something should be done, and if something has been done before that command would that cause that everything must be done again. That thing highlights the position of superiority but at the same time, the henchmen would be lost their will to spontaneous work. This is one way to see the complicated relationship between power and education.

What do you think, should the researchers read texts, what are supporting their own opinions or texts, what is introducing the opponent opinion?

What do you think, should the researchers read texts, what are supporting their own opinions or texts, what is introducing the opponent opinion?

To be or not to be that's the question, what we might ask again and again. And the result is that we can think this question about comfortable texts, that researcher is working, while this inmate reads some texts and looks the videos for finding sources for their own texts. That means that if we are using that point of view in our work, we might face another thing, and that is the texts, what the researcher makes are not always please those professionals.

But the purpose of that kind of action is that the researcher would find out the reason, why somebody is against their opinion. That little bit uncomfortable way to act is also uncovering the agenda of the opposite side. If the agenda is that they simply don't like the researcher's personality, that thing might be not a very scientific way to knock out the results, what researchers have found out.

There are many actors in the field of justice and in the rule of government, who are telling people, that they are willing to make compromises and discuss things. But at the same time, those actors would put the conditions, what other people are not willing or they cannot accept. Sometimes in those cases, those actors are willing to discuss things only if they are above the opposite side.

There are two versions to put the scientific results in the garbage, and the first one is to make a very popular blog or something like that and then simply level those results by claiming that the researcher is a joker when everybody laughs. And the other way is to get the better results of the investigations by using more effective and more modern tools for getting that data.